Here’s a brief reflection of his from that time. It speaks to the necessity of presenting the Gospel in every sermon. Because a young Spurgeon might be in your midst at any time.

“One man preached Divine sovereignty but what was that sublime truth to a poor sinner who wished to know what he must do to be saved. There was another admirable man who always preached about the law, but what was the use of ploughing up ground that needed to be sown. Another was a practical teacher…but it was very much like a commanding officer teaching the maneuvers of war to a set of men without feet…what I wanted to know was ‘How can I get my sins forgiven?’ and they never told me that.”

From “Spurgeon” by Dallimore

Random reflection for the morning.  What else?

“Christ, the apostles and the leaders of the early church considered the teaching about the Christian way of life to be the norm for Christians. They viewed the didache not as a distant ideal but as something that ordinary people would actually live out. Conversion meant new behavior. “By this it may be seen who are the children of the devil: whoever does not do what is right is not from God, nor he who does not love his brother” (1 John 3:10). “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7:20).

The early church was not perfect. But the early Christians followed the Christian way of life sufficiently well that their distinctiveness – along with their bold announcement of the gospel – brought to them almost three centuries of persecution in the Roman empire, and at the same time helped to attract thousands of men and women to Christ, even though commitment to Him could end in martyrdom.

In our own day it cannot be said that Christians in the West are following the teaching of Christ in a way that makes them particularly distinct. At a time when Western societies are swinging away from Christian values, Christians’ lives are generally failing to become more clearly distinguishable. Rather, as a society becomes less Christian, so do Christians’ own patterns life.”

This way of life is what is in view when Christians speak of “holiness” in the context of a human life.

What are your thoughts about the above comment? Is he right? What is the core of the problem? How ought we solve the problem?

Over Christmas break I became aware of “The Daniel Diet” which purports to be “God’s prescription for your health”* Rick Warren is even endorsing this diet all over national media. The diet is “based on” Daniel 1. That is, it loosely cherry picks a few rough concepts from an approximation of a possible reading of one verse in that chapter. It also totally ignores that Daniel and his men were FATTER than everyone else after their “diet” (See: Daniel 1:15)**. Okay, I’m done. There is so much to laugh about with the “theological” premise of The Daniel Plan I could write a series.

Now, the Daniel Plan may in fact be an excellent diet plan! It may help you become healthier and lose weight! It just has nothing to do with Daniel, or the Bible, and I resent people peddling God’s word. So here’s my alternative offering, call it my New Year’s Resolution.

I call it The Jonathan Edwards Diet, and I base it on my word-for-word cherry picking of a few of The Resolutions of Jonathan Edwards. Here is it, in the words of Edwards himself:

1. Resolved, that I will do whatsoever I think to be most to God’s glory, and my own good, profit and pleasure, in the whole of my duration, without any consideration of the time, whether now, or never so many myriad’s of ages hence. Resolved to do whatever I think to be my duty and most for the good and advantage of mankind in general. Resolved to do this, whatever difficulties I meet with, how many and how great soever.

4. Resolved, never to do any manner of thing, whether in soul or body, less or more, but what tends to the glory of God; nor be, nor suffer it, if I can avoid it.

6. Resolved, to live with all my might, while I do live.

20. Resolved, to maintain the strictest temperance in eating and drinking.

28. Resolved, to study the Scriptures so steadily, constantly and frequently, as that I may find, and plainly perceive myself to grow in the knowledge of the same.

40. Resolved, to inquire every night, before I go to bed, whether I have acted in the best way I possibly could, with respect to eating and drinking.

56. Resolved, never to give over, nor in the least to slacken my fight with my corruptions, however unsuccessful I may be.

And a final principle pulled from an entry in his diary.

By a sparingness in diet, and eating as much as may be what is light and easy of digestion, I shall doubtless be able to think more clearly, and shall gain time; 1. By lengthening out my life; 2. Shall need less time for digestion, after meals; 3. Shall be able to study more closely, without injury to my health; 4. Shall need less time for sleep; 5. Shall more seldom be troubled with the head-ache. (Works, I, xxxv)

Try applying these for a year and see where they get you. Edwards had a purpose for his diet: to maximize his effectiveness at God’s calling on his life. At this, history proves, he was imminently successful.

* The sad fact that people are looking for “Christian diets” or think that there might be a secret “diet code” hidden in the text of the scripture, or are so unfamiliar with the scriptures as to think that God prescribes a certain set of foods to Christians*** is grieving to me, whence this article.

** Yes, yes, I realize that “fatter” probably meant “healthier” and was probably more attractive in that culture, but you see my point.

*** God did restrict certain foods from the historic ancient nation of Israel, but this instruction is now obsolete

That’s the best my mind can do with today’s events at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut with an hour’s reflection. This post is one way I’m trying to process it all.

Politicians are posturing. Parents are weeping. The self-righteous are cursing.

My friends (and myself) are asking things like: “How could this happen?” “Who could do such a thing?” Some are asking “Where was God?”

That’s a hard question that I won’t offer a tidy theological answer to. Yes, He allowed this to happen. Yes, He saw this coming. But it gets complicated, very quickly.

I think what is biting us hardest is that this is the reality we live in. A world where we are capable of doing this to each other.

We live in a world shattered by sin. We ourselves are personally infected with the fruit of our rebellion against our good, wise, loving Creator. The world is not all right. No, we won’t all be able to “just get along”. No laws will ever fully restrain the horror we are capable of. Thank God that they do currently, in whatever form laws take, restrain us from fully expressing our evil against each other.

These events are a bitter reminder of our brokenness that we try to medicate, shop, eat, and entertain ourselves into forgetting.

This is why we need the Advent season. The season where we acknowledge the dark, hard, sad realities of life. The season where we eagerly await the arrival of our Savior to forever wipe sin and suffering out. It is why we sing:

O Come, O Come, Emmanuel.
And ransom captive Israel
That mourns in lonely exile here Until the Son of God appear.

And

No more let sin and sorrow grow
No thorns infest the ground
He comes to make His blessings flow
Far as the curse is found.

So don’t waste this tragedy. Reflect on your own sin that in (perhaps smaller ways) likewise murders and steals. Acknowledge that this world is not as it should be. And recognize that a savior is coming, though He is not here yet. Wait with hope that one day every wrong shall be righted, justice will be done, and every tear wiped away. Perhaps most importantly for now: join His people as they seek to do His work in bringing about small glimpses of Heaven on Earth in the here and now, pushing back the darkness, nursing the sick, bringing comfort to the wounded, far as The Curse is found.

This recounting of the story is dear to me, and I hope it will be a blessing to you as well. I also have a few brief reflections after the story.

SILENT NIGHT, PEACEFUL DAY, A Christmas story

When the last of the late afternoon twilight had faded, there was an unfamiliar silence. Only the wisp of the gentle breeze and the crackling of a frozen twig falling into the snow could be heard. The men hesitated with a pensive if not fearful curiosity. The constant shooting and the barrage of machine gun fire and the constant pounding of heavy artillery which had been with them for the three weeks prior at least gave them a sense of the distance and direction of the enemy around them. The quiet meant change, but gave no indications of what. “Are the Nazi soldiers altering positions under the veil of darkness? Are they advancing or retrenching? Are they entrapping or encircling us?” these foot soldiers were asking.

One of the men of the platoon moments earlier had said, “Listen they are not shooting any more.” Then every body stopped shooting, and in the quiet, wondered.

They observed, and they listened. Just as Fred Heerema, First Lieutenant and the commander of the unit, was about to send out some scouts, a tremendous Christmas tree lit up on the nearby hill. Weary, but amazed and hopeful, the American infantrymen observed for a moment. From the other hill echoed a chorus of “Silent Night”. The limited German learned in intensive language training, aided by the familiar tunes, translated the words of several Christmas carols and hymns in the lieutenant’s mind. Filled with this moment of joy which the season, to this point had not provided, one of the more ingenious men of the American camp rigged up a Christmas tree of sorts from spare materials, wire and shrubs. A rapidly growing blaze of their campfire helped illuminate the huge tree the German soldiers had decorated. Then everyone on both sides joined in the singing. Even though it was Christmas Eve, they remained cautious and ready, but still there was a kind of relaxation and tranquillity. Soon after that, the Americans and the Germans, just a short distance from each other, partied.

All was quiet Christmas day. With the enemy all around, one’s guard can never be down. Still it was a time for reflection. Most of the day, they rested and shared stories of their homes and families. They spent some of their time repairing gloves and socks and other personal equipment necessary for the weather. For part of the day, some of the men celebrated this Christmas by reading from their thin, brownish Gideon copy of the Psalms and the four gospels which they carried with them. Fred carried his in a leather wallet-like folder. Also in the folder was a picture of a young Jesus, probably the twelve year old Jesus at the temple. On the back of that picture was written, “Psalm 103 is very dear to me. Hope you read it often, Fred. [signed] Mother.”

They were all well trained and conditioned soldiers recently attached to the 95th Division which was assigned to the Third Army under General Patton. As reinforcements shipped to the continent after the D-Day invasion, most in this platoon had only seen their first front line combat early in December when they battled for and gained the bridgehead at Saarlautern. The bridge had been captured intact! From then on, in that cold and snowy December, in an area just south of the where the “Battle of the Bulge” was unfolding, they were immersed in intense combat against the heavily fortified Siegfried defenses of the Nazi army, fighting to gain ground yard by yard, pillbox by pillbox, fighting hand to hand at times. Casualties were many. A week after encountering this stiff defensive line, the young lieutenant, a basketball standout whose college days had been interrupted by this war, had the most important athletic event of his life when as accounted for in a cablegram later received by his parents:

“While reconnoitering near a strongly held enemy pillbox in Saarlautern-Ruden a scout of First Lieutenant Heerema’s platoon fell, seriously wounded, near the door of the fortification. Unhesitatingly, First Lieutenant Heerema ran out into a hail of machine gun and rifle bullets and carried the wounded man to safety, a distance of 60 yards.”

Another cablegram message informed his parents that just one week later Fred himself had been wounded, but remained in action.

They were engaged in this vicious confrontation with the Nazi’s the entire month of December 1944….

…except for that one blessed, blessed Christmas day.

At exactly midnight, as Christmas came to a close, the tree lights went off and the guns again began to roar.

For the first time in this winter-laden month, the skies had cleared, and in the ensuing days, the superior Allied air corps flew once again, aiding advances of the Third Army to Bastogne to re-supply the garrison of Americans there. The 95th advanced to the Ardennes area to join in the Battle of the Bulge, and then to other battles in Belgium, Holland, the Rhineland, and finally into Germany.

This story is passed on to Lieutenant Heerema’s grandchildren and great grandchildren, most who never knew him.

Fred’s mother, Jeneke Heerema had expressed her hope that he would read Psalm 103 often.

“As a father has compassion on his children,
so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him;
for he knows how we are formed,
he remembers that we are dust.

As for man, his days are like grass,
he flourishes like a flower of the field;
the wind blows over it and it is gone,
and its place remembers it no more.

But from everlasting to everlasting
the Lord’s love is with those who fear him,
and his righteousness with their children’s children”

Psalm 103, vs. 13-17

In passing this story to Fred’s grandchildren, most who never knew him, a message was found from grandmother Jeneke whom most her grandchildren never knew. She died on April 29. 1945 while Fred was still in the midst of the final stages of the war. “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him.”

Wishes of peace to all in this Christmas season and always…

by Polly Heerema as told to Jim

I remember reading the story when originally published and being impressed by the writing and being glad that it was recorded, but tonight, as I read it for the first time in years, I wept. Being a parent now, the mother’s urging her son (my grandfather) to keep Psalm 103 close, rings loud to me now, as does verse 17 itself: “But from everlasting to everlasting the Lord’s love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children’s children.” Because my grandfather feared the Lord, and my father fears the Lord, and raised me in the faith, I am that child’s child.

Both of my grandfathers are war heroes, and the brief mention of how Grandpa Fred won a purple heart and bronze star for heroism is stirring. Knowing that he did not have a medal in mind, but rather his fellow soldier in mind is incredible.

I am amazed at the beautiful power of Christ’s impact on the world, that can stop even warring nations from firing at one another for a day, bringing a ray of light into the dark and broken world. Truly the words from “O Come O Come Emmanuel” came true for a moment: “O come, Desire of Nations, and bind in one the hearts of all mankind. Bid thou our sad divisions cease, and be thyself our King of Peace.”

And thanks to my hero, Dad, for recording this.

The disparate opinions on “who to vote for” held by good, trustworthy, and faith-filled brothers, including several major christian thought leaders (Billy Graham, Randy Alcorn, R.C. Sproul Jr., Ray Comfort, and others) makes this point evident: There is no crystal-clear direction on who to vote for outline in scripture. Scriptural principle applies, yes, but I’ve heard many different formulations of how those principles apply. This leads me to this conclusion: who to vote for is primarily a matter of conscience. And so primarily we ought to lead our brothers and sisters to vote with a clear conscience, however that might shake out for them as individuals.

A deeper issue effecting the rhetoric around the voting issue this year is a conflict in ethical philosophies. This might get a little technical, but hear me out. There are two opposing philosophical foundations being espoused by believers that I’m hearing: Deontological ethics (in my opinion, the correct stance), and Pragmatic ethics. (Thank you to R.C. Sproul, Jr. for giving me these words to communicate my thought.)

The first revolves around acting in a way that is right, because it is right, without regard for imagined/foreseen potential consequences. The second tries to guess at how the chess game will play out given a certain course of action. Phrased this way, I think you can see why I hold the first view.

I want to encourage people toward the deontological stance (probably without using the word), and discourage them from the second. Our God is on His throne and He does all He pleases. There is no human authority except that which is appointed by God. In his mind man plans his way, but the Lord directs His steps.

He has revealed to us certain definitions of right and wrong, good and evil, justice and injustice, and we are to act accordingly.

This is why I reject the foundation that says “vote for the lesser of two evils”. We are in a system where we are not forced to vote for either evil, we have other options, including abstention. The only arguments I’ve heard against this come from a pragmatic ethics-based standpoint, which I reject. I am to act according to God’s revealed will and command, not according to my judgement of how doing so will play out practically. The only weakness in this position is my fallible understanding of His will and command.

Practically how will this shake out?

• I happen to think the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Amendments are pretty well-formed pieces of law. Will the candidate submit himself, and guide the legislative and executive branches to submit themselves to the rule of that law? Or will they continue to play fast and loose with it, twisting and bending and ignoring it’s laws as is fitting to their political careers?
• Will the candidate do all in his power to defend all human life? Neither major party candidate holds a position that will. This is the biggest issue for me.
• Will the candidate do all in their power to implement a just taxation system, or will they continue to play the game and tweak the rules in their favor?
• Will the candidate do all in their power to ensure that privately owned property is not stolen or unjustly transferred away from the owner, or will they continue to implement programs that redistribute wealth and inhibit the liberty of property owners to use their property as they see fit?
• et cetera

So, there it is, and all that said, my conscience might be that of the weaker brother in this case, so please help edify me if that is the case.

I will not vote for Barack Obama. My rationale is simple: he holds a vastly different ideology on what government should be than I do. VASTLY different. So that part is easy. I don’t need to take time to line the items out. Read the conservative punch-list of complaints against him. You’ll get the idea.

The problem is, I don’t think I can vote for Romney either. For lots of reasons. Lining them out here would be irrelevant to my point, and it would cause many (who have already done so) to try and convince me that the wise thing to do is compromise my convictions. Sorry. I cannot do that “..for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen.” Martin Luther.

Apparently, from the reaction I get to this thought when I express it, I will be single handedly responsible for Barack Obama’s re-election. “A vote against Romney is a vote for Obama.” I’m sorry, but I reject that idea. My personal vote for president (as opposed to congress) actually counts for very little, unless I am someone of influence, and thus sway masses upon masses with my choice. My job, along with yours, is to vote my conscience, and to make a lot of noise about why.

If I can sway a few folks to be able to vote with a clear conscience, rather than feel trapped into casting a vote for someone they are not comfortable with, all the better.

(And yes, yes, that discomfort should come from an informed understanding of the issues.)

So, unless something changes in the next couple weeks, I’ll likely be making an infinitesimally small blip on the third party circuit, making a non-maintream candidate’s percentage rise by a completely unnoticeable amount, in part as an objection to the way the RNC is being run, as evidenced by the candidates put forward in the last two years.

I am glad that in my system I am not forced to cast my lot in with candidates who have policies I detest.

So to you, I say, get all the facts you can. Shut off the news and read the candidates’s Web sites. Check their facts. Do you homework on world history, economics, philosophy, and theology.

Christians: pray, read your Bibles, seek direction, reject the idea that you must toe a particular party line, believe in the absolute meticulous sovereignty and care of God, believe in the Holy Spirit who guides us, and go vote as your conscience leads you.

I’m curious to see the outcome. Soon, we will know whom God has chosen to be the next leader of the United States.

Right?

Two things happened recently that convinced me to take the App.net plunge. First, they changed their pricing scheme, lowering the bar to entry. I can try it for a month for $5, rather than having to commit $50. Brilliant. What made me move however, was the Netbot app by Tapbots. I collect Tapbots apps. Yes this is backwards, but I have the feeling I’m not alone.

24 hours in App.net snapped me back into social media reality (heh…) It reminded me that I’m doing Twitter wrong. In fact, I’m doing Facebook wrong too.

Twitter: Wha… What Happened??

When I first signed up for Twitter I loved it. I had 15 people that I was following and who followed me back. I cared what they were all doing, and they all (except for Gavin and Celly) cared what I was doing. When we were at SXSW 2007, where Twitter really broke out (I think?) among the geek crowd, it was perfect. That was Twitter’s heyday for me.

The signal-to-noise ration was strong. There was very little clutter. The conversation was meaningful. (Maybe I’m glorifying the past?)

Fast forward to today: I’m following 900 people and companies and services. There is so much noise I can’t keep up with any of it in any meaningful way. When I do take the time to try and catch up, I waste time.

I’m changing that, starting today.

Taking Back Twitter

There are many many helpful, edifying things to be heard on Twitter. Many things that really will help you with your career, your personal life, your spiritual life. I can argue that the last 4 years of my career have been largely due to engagement on Twitter.

But, there is also a mountain of meaningless drivel there.

Who are the 500 (300? 100? 50?) most important voices I want in my head? Who do I really need to be paying attention to? This is a question I am now going to seek to answer.

I am going to unfollow way more than half of the people I’m currently following. Don’t take it too personally. I’m seeking highly concentrated input. I will still engage the community. If you mention me, I will reply. If you request a follow so you can DM me, I probably will.

Also, Facebook

At some point along the line, I adopted the stance “I will friend you on Facebook only if we have met in real life.” Except for the 2 or 3… HUNDRED times I’ve violated that. 2000 friends later, I have a hard time keeping up with people I care for. People with whom I have an actual relationship (virtually or in real-space). I’m going to change that too. I’m going scorched earth on my Facebook “friends” and companies I “like.” In fact, I’m thinking about starting from scratch, family and immediate friends only, and building from there. Yikes.

Wherefore App.net?

Privacy! Ownership of your content! They won’t sell my behaviors to advertisers!

Nope. None of that. I really don’t care as much about that on Twitter or Facebook as I probably should. I’m getting something for free, because they are showing me ads. I’d rather those ads be relevant. I have nothing to hide (I don’t think?).

Simply put, App.net is quieter. Like the executive lounge in a hotel or airport. It’s easier to get work done there. Several of the people I care most about are there. I will probably end up paying for my team to be there too if they want. Not everyone is there. I expect most will be sooner than later, like Twitter in the early days. I expect it will grow, again like Twitter. But unlike Twitter, it will never grow to the hundreds of millions, babbling incomprehensibly.

Why? Because there is an entry fee. There is some commitment required. This will restrain growth in positive ways, while still allowing for the app to progress. Twitter and Facebook need volume to sell ads against. App.net doesn’t. This will work.

So here goes nothing.

I commend this book to every believer, unreservedly, but allow me to pick a nit on a point I think he misses slightly. (Perhaps I am misunderstanding him or he has clarified elsewhere.)

In commenting on “worship in spirit and truth”, he says that “unless the heart is plugged in, there’s no electricity for worship.” And quotes John Piper: “Where feelings for God are dead, worship is dead.”

But then he goes on and draws this curious dichotomy:

So we must worship in both spirit and truth, with both heart and head, with both emotions and thought. If we worship too much just by spirit we will be mushy and soft on the truth, worshiping according to feelings. That can lead anywhere from a sleepy tolerance of anything in worship at one extreme to uncontrollable spiritual wildfire on the other. But if we worship by truth without spirit, then our worship will be taut, grim, and icily predictable.

Wrong. Worship “by truth without spirit” (as if that were possible) is not worship. It is dead, re-read the Piper quote. (Actually read Matthew 15:8 where Jesus quotes Isaiah 29:13).

I appreciate the caution against emotionalism, a needed warning in our age, but oh! How I long for (true) spiritual wildfire to be the thing that marks our church!

I contend that it is impossible to worship “too much just by spirit”, but rather the danger is in worshiping without truth. (Which is perhaps what he means when he says “just by spirit”.)

My proposal: ground yourself firmly in the truth and pour on the affectional gasoline! Behold the magnificence of God’s revelation in the scriptures and gasp in wonder! Close your eyes around tears of joy! Lose yourself in the bliss of gratitude that you, a wretched enemy of God, were reconciled by the blood of God’s only son!

You cannot worship too much in spirit. Worship without spirit, no matter how full of truth, is no worship at all. And worship without truth, no matter how spirited, is no worship at all.

Worship in blazing spirit, and rock-solid truth.