I have started reading Timothy Keller's book The Prodigal God which I was recently given. The book is a re-examination of the parable of the prodigal son and he makes a good case for spending more time understanding the elder brother, who never went wild, along with the prodigal son. He provides a different look at the father as well, whose extreme love was 'prodigal' in its excess, as is God's love. Along the way he makes some comments about how Jesus attracted sinners and rebels while repelling and alienating the religious community. He comments that while Jesus attracted the irreligious and offended the religious, our churches today do not have this effect. 'The licentious and liberated or the broken and marginal avoid church' he points out. 'That can only mean one thing. If the preaching of our ministers and the practice of our parishioners do not have the same effect on people that Jesus had, then we must not be declaring the same message that Jesus did' he goes on to say. This raises the issue of what is the purpose of church services.
His implication is that organized church services should be aimed at attracting the irreligious, the marginal, the rebels, the alienated. Much of the 'seeker sensitive' movement has agreed with this approach, as does the 'emerging church' effort. I disagree.
Church services are not aimed at attracting unbelievers; they are aimed at worship by believers. Jesus did not reach out to the irreligious and sinners in His time of worship. As best I can tell, though, His worship was mostly either alone or at the temple, so I don't know that our conept of worship is all that great either. However, worship is not outreach. The sinners and irreligious were attracted to Jesus during his public conversations with his opponents or during his 'hands on' ministry times (healing, feeding, having one on one conversations, at dinner, etc), not during temple worship. To try to aim worship services at the irreligious is to deny believers a time of group worship and encouragement. Seeking to have teaching times that reach the unbelievers is a valid thing to do, but it should not replace group worship for believers.
Our church states that 'worship is our number one ministry priority' in its statement of core values. I personally think that discipleship should be our number one overall ministry priority, but worship is indeed the number one priority for public worship services. Our attraction to the irreligious should be in our 'hands on' ministry time (feeding the poor, helping the helpless, etc) and in events that raise issues in the public square, as Jesus did. Confusing the attraction of the irreligious to the active work of Christ with attracting them to worship services does worship a serious disservice.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Monday, July 6, 2009
Velvet Elvis, Discipleship and Truth
I just finished reading Velvet Elvis by Rob Bell, who is a pastor in Michigan. I generally liked the book, though the style of it interfered with the message for me at times. The writing is a hybrid between a Powerpoint(r) presentation and prose, with lots of 'bullet points' (sentence fragments standing alone without a paragraph) mixed with paragraphs. It is something like reading half of a dialogue. While this was distracting, much of the content was good as I seek to understand the disconnect between my generation and my children's generation. I read in the paper last week that there is a bigger 'generation gap' now than at any time since the 60's. It certainly seems that way in church, so I hope to gain some insight into that over time.
I liked Velvet Elvis much better than Blue Like Jazz. The latter seemed to me much more existential, making comments about how Christianity can be experienced but not understood, that 'truth means much more than accuracy', that the 'mystery' of the Orthodox church was 'cool' just because it was different. The overall tone of Blue Like Jazz struck me as very existential, as if he had given up on the concept of truth as anything other than personal experience.
Velvet Elvis, while the style was neither fish nor fowl, was more truth-oriented. The book was worth the price (or more, since I got it at a discount book warehouse in Pigeon Forge for about three bucks) for the chapter on discipleship. I suppose you could call it a chapter; maybe it was a Powerpoint section. In any case, it was about discipleship. That chapter gives a terrific overview of how rabbis of Jesus' day had followers, how they were the best-of-the-best from the Torah schools, how the rabbi did not accept just anyone to be a disciple, and so on. This gave both a great context for what it meant in that culture to be a disciple, and how Jesus also made discipleship into a new thing, gave it new life, by calling as his disciples a group of men that would not have made the cut into the discipleship groups of the other rabbis of the time. Frequently in the book, Bell puts this kind of context around his point, illuminating how understanding the culture of the time changes how we understand many of the teachings of Jesus. He includes information about a place known as 'the Gates of Hell' in Casesarea Phillipi, and that the god Pan was worshiped there in obscene ways, and that His declaration that His church would be build on a different rock and the Gates of Hell would not stand against it was a reference to that place and that kind of worship. We usually miss that connection, even though we may have seen pictures of that place, as I have. The great grace of discipleship is that the Christ, the ultimate rabbi, thinks we can be like Him, and that we can carry on His teaching and ministry, even if we could not make the cut for the other rabbis.
He also directly addressed a question that has been on my mind: why so many kids who grow up in a Christian home and a sound church leave the faith when they leave for college. He suggests that one possibility is that they may have been taught that Christianity encompasses all that is really true, that all the truth in the secular world is suspect. Especially if they also went to a Christian school they may have gotten this idea. Then they find out that there is some truth out there in the world but are not prepared for the reality that all truth is God's truth. This can appear like a refutation of the faith they grew up with. It is an interesting thought, though probably not the only reason for this falling away of many at college. This emphasis on truth was much more palatable to me than the existentialism of Blue Like Jazz.
There is quite a lot in the book that still left me feeling the generation gap. His reference to being in a punk rock band while also a pastor is one example of that. The wedding at the lake for his friends who wanted it to be 'spiritual' but not 'Christian' was another example. At times he was a bit New Age-y, but he still managed to hold on to the concept of truth. 'If it is true, then it isn't new' he says at one point. Exactly!
I liked Velvet Elvis much better than Blue Like Jazz. The latter seemed to me much more existential, making comments about how Christianity can be experienced but not understood, that 'truth means much more than accuracy', that the 'mystery' of the Orthodox church was 'cool' just because it was different. The overall tone of Blue Like Jazz struck me as very existential, as if he had given up on the concept of truth as anything other than personal experience.
Velvet Elvis, while the style was neither fish nor fowl, was more truth-oriented. The book was worth the price (or more, since I got it at a discount book warehouse in Pigeon Forge for about three bucks) for the chapter on discipleship. I suppose you could call it a chapter; maybe it was a Powerpoint section. In any case, it was about discipleship. That chapter gives a terrific overview of how rabbis of Jesus' day had followers, how they were the best-of-the-best from the Torah schools, how the rabbi did not accept just anyone to be a disciple, and so on. This gave both a great context for what it meant in that culture to be a disciple, and how Jesus also made discipleship into a new thing, gave it new life, by calling as his disciples a group of men that would not have made the cut into the discipleship groups of the other rabbis of the time. Frequently in the book, Bell puts this kind of context around his point, illuminating how understanding the culture of the time changes how we understand many of the teachings of Jesus. He includes information about a place known as 'the Gates of Hell' in Casesarea Phillipi, and that the god Pan was worshiped there in obscene ways, and that His declaration that His church would be build on a different rock and the Gates of Hell would not stand against it was a reference to that place and that kind of worship. We usually miss that connection, even though we may have seen pictures of that place, as I have. The great grace of discipleship is that the Christ, the ultimate rabbi, thinks we can be like Him, and that we can carry on His teaching and ministry, even if we could not make the cut for the other rabbis.
He also directly addressed a question that has been on my mind: why so many kids who grow up in a Christian home and a sound church leave the faith when they leave for college. He suggests that one possibility is that they may have been taught that Christianity encompasses all that is really true, that all the truth in the secular world is suspect. Especially if they also went to a Christian school they may have gotten this idea. Then they find out that there is some truth out there in the world but are not prepared for the reality that all truth is God's truth. This can appear like a refutation of the faith they grew up with. It is an interesting thought, though probably not the only reason for this falling away of many at college. This emphasis on truth was much more palatable to me than the existentialism of Blue Like Jazz.
There is quite a lot in the book that still left me feeling the generation gap. His reference to being in a punk rock band while also a pastor is one example of that. The wedding at the lake for his friends who wanted it to be 'spiritual' but not 'Christian' was another example. At times he was a bit New Age-y, but he still managed to hold on to the concept of truth. 'If it is true, then it isn't new' he says at one point. Exactly!
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Senior Week, Leadership, and Love
We have been going through a downsizing at work and the folks who took the voluntary severance package just finished their last week on the job. Many of them were near retirement and the package gave them enough incentive to go ahead and move into retirement now. With so many senior folks leaving, this past week has reminded me of high school days when the seniors were getting ready to graduate. Deja’ vu all over again, as Yogi would say. In addition, my daughter turned 20 and so for the first time in 16 years we have no teenagers in the house. That passage out of the teen years also made me think of the milestones and passages in life. It was a strange sort of week in that way.
Of course, some younger folks who were considering a new direction in their life also left. One of those was a man who had worked in my team as a project leader and is moving to Canada to join his new bride. They were married shortly before this severance package was announced. He is from India, though he spent much of his teen years in Canada, and he met his wife on the internet via a match-making/dating service for Asian Indians. She lives in Canada. Since marriages in India are traditionally arranged marriages, that approach seems to fit. He is an avid reader, so I am giving him a copy of The Four Loves by C. S. Lewis as he leaves and begins his new life with his new bride. I suspect that those from cultures of arranged marriages have fewer unrealistic expectations about romantic love than those from cultures like America, so the message that ‘Eros makes promises that she cannot keep’ may not be as desperately needed in his case as it is in America, but I suspect he has lived here and in Canada long enough to have been corrupted by our culture.
That our culture desperately needs this message was made clear yet again this past week by the news of the Argentina affair carried on by Governor Sanford of South Carolina. While the press rarely gets anything right, the comments that have been in print about how he felt that this woman was his soul mate, that this is about love, and so on indicates that he certainly does not yet understand about Eros and her promises. There has been such an ongoing stream of these types of revelations among governors, presidential candidates, preachers, and others in power that I am beginning to wonder if there are other lessons here as well. So many of these ‘leaders’ have such enormous egos that it seems to me that we have a cultural problem in not being able to tell the difference between egotism and leadership. So many of our ‘leaders’ appear to be leading when they are mostly just serving their own ego. They seem to do the same in their relationships with women, serving their own ego and thinking they can talk their way out of anything. And so many women, for their part, seem to prefer this fast talking, outgoing, self-serving type, often choosing them over men who are more introverted but also more reliable and less self-centered. While the ability to communicate is important, it is not enough. For my part, I will take depth and integrity over skillful rhetoric any day. It seems to me that many women, like the electorate, do not recognize the difference between leadership and egotism either. It should not be a surprise that so many have swooned over the words of Obama regardless of his lack of having ever done anything of consequence and regardless of his arrogance. That seems to be the concept our culture has of leadership.
Meanwhile Gov. Sanford clearly still has lessons to learn. Perhaps I should have sent him a copy of The Four Loves too.
Of course, some younger folks who were considering a new direction in their life also left. One of those was a man who had worked in my team as a project leader and is moving to Canada to join his new bride. They were married shortly before this severance package was announced. He is from India, though he spent much of his teen years in Canada, and he met his wife on the internet via a match-making/dating service for Asian Indians. She lives in Canada. Since marriages in India are traditionally arranged marriages, that approach seems to fit. He is an avid reader, so I am giving him a copy of The Four Loves by C. S. Lewis as he leaves and begins his new life with his new bride. I suspect that those from cultures of arranged marriages have fewer unrealistic expectations about romantic love than those from cultures like America, so the message that ‘Eros makes promises that she cannot keep’ may not be as desperately needed in his case as it is in America, but I suspect he has lived here and in Canada long enough to have been corrupted by our culture.
That our culture desperately needs this message was made clear yet again this past week by the news of the Argentina affair carried on by Governor Sanford of South Carolina. While the press rarely gets anything right, the comments that have been in print about how he felt that this woman was his soul mate, that this is about love, and so on indicates that he certainly does not yet understand about Eros and her promises. There has been such an ongoing stream of these types of revelations among governors, presidential candidates, preachers, and others in power that I am beginning to wonder if there are other lessons here as well. So many of these ‘leaders’ have such enormous egos that it seems to me that we have a cultural problem in not being able to tell the difference between egotism and leadership. So many of our ‘leaders’ appear to be leading when they are mostly just serving their own ego. They seem to do the same in their relationships with women, serving their own ego and thinking they can talk their way out of anything. And so many women, for their part, seem to prefer this fast talking, outgoing, self-serving type, often choosing them over men who are more introverted but also more reliable and less self-centered. While the ability to communicate is important, it is not enough. For my part, I will take depth and integrity over skillful rhetoric any day. It seems to me that many women, like the electorate, do not recognize the difference between leadership and egotism either. It should not be a surprise that so many have swooned over the words of Obama regardless of his lack of having ever done anything of consequence and regardless of his arrogance. That seems to be the concept our culture has of leadership.
Meanwhile Gov. Sanford clearly still has lessons to learn. Perhaps I should have sent him a copy of The Four Loves too.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Father's Day and Sustainability
It was Father's Day this past Sunday and it was good to be with extended family and children on that day. With the bankruptcy of GM and the talk of needing 'greener' cars, the high price of oil this past year, the debates about wind and nuclear power, climate change, and so on sustainability is all very much top of mind as well. However, still this few days after Father's Day I am thinking and wondering more about the sustainability of fatherhood in our culture. Perhaps it is bigger than that, an issue of moral sustainability.
In the news today Governor Sanford admitted he had been missing the past week due to an affair with a woman in Argentina. A few days ago Senator Ensign admitted to an affair with a staff member and gave up leadership roles. Both are conservative Republicans, the party less reputed for supporting such behavior. Of course, many in both parties have had the same problem, as does culture in general. Something like 40% of all children are now born out of wedlock in the U.S. , up to 70% among African Americans. The family itself is looking to be not very sustainable, regardless of what happens to Father's Day.
I heard in a sermon recently that something like 60% of kids who are active in church youth programs leave the church entirely when they graduate from high school and go off to college. These are not all kids, these are the ones that show up regularly and participate. This is clearly an unsustainable approach to building the next generation of Christians.
The Southern Baptist Convention is meeting this week in Louisville, KY, and the news there is glum; church membership and baptisms are falling. If the rate continues, the denomination will be half its current size in another 30 years or so. Unsustainable.
All of this is symptomatic to me of moral unsustainability. Someone has said that we are living on the fumes of prior generations morals, our own moral gas tanks having long since gone empty. The results seem to support that. We attempt to honor Father's Day while abandoning marriage and leaving our children with no father in the home. We think marriage is only about our own personal satisfaction so we cannot distinguish between so-called 'gay marriage' and the real thing. We do not live our faith daily so our children run away from the church at the first opportunity.
Rev. Johnny Hunt at the SBC Convention says we need revival. That is true, but it doesn't go far enough. We need to be actually living the faith, having it as our own. We need to be fueled with our own personal walk with God, not trying to live on the fumes left from the faith of prior generations. Nothing else will ever be sustainable.
In the news today Governor Sanford admitted he had been missing the past week due to an affair with a woman in Argentina. A few days ago Senator Ensign admitted to an affair with a staff member and gave up leadership roles. Both are conservative Republicans, the party less reputed for supporting such behavior. Of course, many in both parties have had the same problem, as does culture in general. Something like 40% of all children are now born out of wedlock in the U.S. , up to 70% among African Americans. The family itself is looking to be not very sustainable, regardless of what happens to Father's Day.
I heard in a sermon recently that something like 60% of kids who are active in church youth programs leave the church entirely when they graduate from high school and go off to college. These are not all kids, these are the ones that show up regularly and participate. This is clearly an unsustainable approach to building the next generation of Christians.
The Southern Baptist Convention is meeting this week in Louisville, KY, and the news there is glum; church membership and baptisms are falling. If the rate continues, the denomination will be half its current size in another 30 years or so. Unsustainable.
All of this is symptomatic to me of moral unsustainability. Someone has said that we are living on the fumes of prior generations morals, our own moral gas tanks having long since gone empty. The results seem to support that. We attempt to honor Father's Day while abandoning marriage and leaving our children with no father in the home. We think marriage is only about our own personal satisfaction so we cannot distinguish between so-called 'gay marriage' and the real thing. We do not live our faith daily so our children run away from the church at the first opportunity.
Rev. Johnny Hunt at the SBC Convention says we need revival. That is true, but it doesn't go far enough. We need to be actually living the faith, having it as our own. We need to be fueled with our own personal walk with God, not trying to live on the fumes left from the faith of prior generations. Nothing else will ever be sustainable.
Monday, June 15, 2009
The Private, the Secret, the Intimate
The sermon yesterday at our church, one in a series about family life, was about sexuality and its proper role. Much of the sermon was about the current problems with internet pornography and how that is destroying many families. It may well be the biggest sin problem within the church. The fact that an addiction to internet pornography can be idulged in 'secret' is part of the problem, since many are lured into it thinking that it will always remain a secret, not realizing how indulging in this secret sin will eventually destroy their marriage or lead them to other less secret sins with prostitutes, underage partners, or other crimes.
Besides being a troubling reminder of how sexuality continues to be a point of vulnerability for most men and many women, it also made me think about the role of the secret things in life and how pornography turns that role on its head.
In years past it seems to me that I heard more sermons and discussion about how our secret, private life exists to empower our public life. This idea, that the role of prayer, meditation, and marital sexuality provide a foundation of strength to help us resist the temptations of public life, is a powerful concept that I think deserves more attention. At the same time, in parallel to this idea of a private life that strengthens you, was a parallel idea that if you instead had a private life of secret sin you could be sure that it would find you out. In fact, this came up in a family discussion recently, whether that quote 'Be sure your sin will find you out' was in the Bible or just was a saying , so we looked it up and it is in Numbers 32:23, telling the Israelites that if they did not do as the Lord commanded then they should be sure that their sin would find them out. Of course many of the Proverbs talk about this as well in regard to sexual sin and failure to learn the Law among other things. Our private failures eventually become public, even if we are not running for public office.
Today we instead treat the private portions of our lives as the area where we alone should be god. We insist that these are 'victimless crimes' rather than self-destructive behaviors. As the movie Fireproof pointed out, porn plays a role in the failure of many marriages now. Pastoral counselors confirm that they find it to be an issue when counseling marriage problems. Just as we seem as a society to be less and less willing to defer gratification until later (via saving money, for instance) we also seem not to recognize that there are behaviors with penalties that arrive later. There is such a thing as postponed penalties as well as deferred gratification.
Yet the private, the secret, the intimate can provide strength instead of weakness in its proper role. Marriage provides times for both sexual self-control and times for fulfillment that should strengthen our character and provide the fulfillment needed to resist temptation. Similarly, private devotions can provide the knowledge and strength to withstand spiritual deception. Secret sin like porn takes that which should enable our lives and instead undermines it.
Someone pointed out to me many years ago that porn is basically a lie. It is a lie in many ways: the airbrushed photos of 'perfect' bodies, the implants and other surguries to make 'perfect' bodies, the false implication of seductresses who are always available for pleasure, in addition to the lies that it is victimless, that it is just normal, that no one will know, that sex should be just for pleasure and nothing else. These are all lies. But in addition to telling us lies, porn turns our secret life which should be a source of strength into a source of weakness.
Besides being a troubling reminder of how sexuality continues to be a point of vulnerability for most men and many women, it also made me think about the role of the secret things in life and how pornography turns that role on its head.
In years past it seems to me that I heard more sermons and discussion about how our secret, private life exists to empower our public life. This idea, that the role of prayer, meditation, and marital sexuality provide a foundation of strength to help us resist the temptations of public life, is a powerful concept that I think deserves more attention. At the same time, in parallel to this idea of a private life that strengthens you, was a parallel idea that if you instead had a private life of secret sin you could be sure that it would find you out. In fact, this came up in a family discussion recently, whether that quote 'Be sure your sin will find you out' was in the Bible or just was a saying , so we looked it up and it is in Numbers 32:23, telling the Israelites that if they did not do as the Lord commanded then they should be sure that their sin would find them out. Of course many of the Proverbs talk about this as well in regard to sexual sin and failure to learn the Law among other things. Our private failures eventually become public, even if we are not running for public office.
Today we instead treat the private portions of our lives as the area where we alone should be god. We insist that these are 'victimless crimes' rather than self-destructive behaviors. As the movie Fireproof pointed out, porn plays a role in the failure of many marriages now. Pastoral counselors confirm that they find it to be an issue when counseling marriage problems. Just as we seem as a society to be less and less willing to defer gratification until later (via saving money, for instance) we also seem not to recognize that there are behaviors with penalties that arrive later. There is such a thing as postponed penalties as well as deferred gratification.
Yet the private, the secret, the intimate can provide strength instead of weakness in its proper role. Marriage provides times for both sexual self-control and times for fulfillment that should strengthen our character and provide the fulfillment needed to resist temptation. Similarly, private devotions can provide the knowledge and strength to withstand spiritual deception. Secret sin like porn takes that which should enable our lives and instead undermines it.
Someone pointed out to me many years ago that porn is basically a lie. It is a lie in many ways: the airbrushed photos of 'perfect' bodies, the implants and other surguries to make 'perfect' bodies, the false implication of seductresses who are always available for pleasure, in addition to the lies that it is victimless, that it is just normal, that no one will know, that sex should be just for pleasure and nothing else. These are all lies. But in addition to telling us lies, porn turns our secret life which should be a source of strength into a source of weakness.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Time for Remembrance
June is always a major time of remembrance at our house with birthdays and wedding anniversaries. This week in the news were some other major remembrances as the 65th anniversary of the D-Day invasion of Europe in WW2 was highlighted by President Obama's visit to that site. Since my dad went ashore there a day or two after the initial landing and went through a number of battles all the way to Berlin, D-Day is one that I always remember (also because of my wife's birthday!). This same week was also the 20th anniversary of the Tianenmen Square protests in China, causing us to reflect on the many changes that have taken place in China since that sad time.
This year is also the 25th anniversary of the death of Francis Schaeffer. It is hard to believe it has been that long. As I reviewed his book Genesis in Space and Time this week I was reminded again how very much his writing impacted the way I view the world, especially how I view the culture we live in. His writing on abortion, the arts, movies, literature, politics, and sexuality all caused to me to think more critically about how these things either reflect or deny Christianity. He more than anyone else I have read made me understand what it means to have a Christian 'worldview'.
One comment that I noticed more in this re-visit of his book than I did at the time was his comment that the church is by-and-large a middle-class institution in the western world, appealing to neither workers not intellectuals very much. That is quite unlike in Jesus' time or in other parts of the world like Africa, where the poor and working folks are the predominant members of Christian churches. Certainly as I was growing up the poor and the workers were all that I knew of the church, since that is where I was. As our prosperity has grown, we somehow have lost touch with the poor this country. I am not exactly sure how or what it means, but it is a concern.
As for the intellectuals, I think that they have always been a very small part of the church. Just as with the rich, I think they find it harder than the poor to view anyone but themselves as being in control, including God. Perhaps I should say 'we' instead of 'they'. It is a good time to remember my roots and not get too impressed by my own prosperity and education, which are enormous blessings that I should be more thankful for.
This year is also the 25th anniversary of the death of Francis Schaeffer. It is hard to believe it has been that long. As I reviewed his book Genesis in Space and Time this week I was reminded again how very much his writing impacted the way I view the world, especially how I view the culture we live in. His writing on abortion, the arts, movies, literature, politics, and sexuality all caused to me to think more critically about how these things either reflect or deny Christianity. He more than anyone else I have read made me understand what it means to have a Christian 'worldview'.
One comment that I noticed more in this re-visit of his book than I did at the time was his comment that the church is by-and-large a middle-class institution in the western world, appealing to neither workers not intellectuals very much. That is quite unlike in Jesus' time or in other parts of the world like Africa, where the poor and working folks are the predominant members of Christian churches. Certainly as I was growing up the poor and the workers were all that I knew of the church, since that is where I was. As our prosperity has grown, we somehow have lost touch with the poor this country. I am not exactly sure how or what it means, but it is a concern.
As for the intellectuals, I think that they have always been a very small part of the church. Just as with the rich, I think they find it harder than the poor to view anyone but themselves as being in control, including God. Perhaps I should say 'we' instead of 'they'. It is a good time to remember my roots and not get too impressed by my own prosperity and education, which are enormous blessings that I should be more thankful for.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Poetry
I have little patience for poetry. Most of what passes for poetry these days, and for art in general, seems to me to be mostly a rejection of the idea of art and poetry, rejecting form and structure as much as possible. In many cases, it rejects the very concept of truth rather than giving an insight into truth. Yet in the latest issue of First Things a poem caught my attention. That is hard to do. They publish some poetry in every issue, and most of it is really quite bad, but every year or so one will catch my attention. This one is quoted in full below (so it is obviously short). It is entitled 'I Did Not Come to Call the Righteous' and listsMatthew 9:9-13 in the subtitle. Here it is:
We ninety-nine obedient sheep:
we workers hired at dawn's first peep;
we faithful sons who strive to please;
forsaking prodigalities;
we virgins who take pains to keep;
our lamps lit, even in our sleep;
we law-abiding Pharisees;
we wince at gospels such as these.
-Julie Stoner
The allusions to so many various passages of Scripture, and the gathering of them together so succinctly, caught my attention. Being a person who values doing things right, following the rules, it pokes me in a place I need to poked every so often. Art should do that: give you a view of reality, of truth, that you need to see but often don't. My thanks to Julie Stoner for this reminder of the truth!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)