Valerie is a 42-year-old, single, Reformed Christian lady who lives in Baltimore. She doesn't remember a time
before she knew and loved Jesus, but she does remember accepting John Calvin into her heart in March of 2000.
Valerie is a member of Christ Reformed Evangelical Church in Annapolis.
Though her career aspiration is to be a housewife, Valerie has not yet found anyone suitable who wishes to hire
her for employment in that field (or, more properly, anyone suitable has not found her), so in the meantime she
earns her daily bread working in communications -- editing, writing, print design and website management.
'Cheer up! You're worse off than you think!'
I've been thinking about something the late Jack Miller used to say to people who were down on themselves: "Cheer up! You're worse off than you think!" We look at the sin we can see in ourselves, and we are overwhelmed by it, but we don't know the half of it. Our deceitful and desperately wicked hearts can't discern, as God can, all of the wrong motivations, thoughts, words and deeds we manage to produce on a daily basis. We can't get that good a perspective on ourselves and we can't see that clearly.
But the blood of Jesus covers it all -- what we see and what we don't see, what we consciously repent of and what we are reluctant to let go of, what we quickly forsake and what we struggle with for decades, what we know to be sin and what we falsely think to be righteousness. The Lord not only sees it all, He sees it all gone -- all washed away in that precious flow.
We need to stop bewailing how rotten we are. Our bewailing skills aren't equal to the task, anyway. And we need to cheer up in light of the knowledge that we are under perfect grace. When we get stuck looking at and being overwhelmed by all that needs to be repented of, we need first and foremost to repent of paying so much attention to it. It is not true, noble, just, pure, lovely, of good report, virtuous or praiseworthy. "My sin is always before me," said David (Ps. 51:3), but "I have set the Lord always before me" (Ps. 16:8). We need to quit rubbernecking at the car wrecks in our lives, and set our faces toward the Lord's glory. It's really a much pleasanter sight. Makes you wonder why we're so reluctant to focus on it!
Posted by Valerie (Kyriosity) at 12:37 PM
At the moment, I'm hard at work trying to figure out what the relationship is between Sonship and Federal Vision.
Perhaps after this all blows over, we can modify Jack's comment: "Cheer up, we're stupider than we think!"
P.S. I was encouraged to hear that some churches practice "low bar" communion. :)
On October 6, 2007 7:47 PMValerie (Kyriosity)wrote... Sonship and FV? Well...there's very little organic relationship as far as who is/was into them, from what I can tell. As I recall, Sonship was pretty big into Luther's take on Galatians, and FV isn't, and Sonship also emphasizes double imputation, whereas at least some of the FV guys are questioning whether Scripture teaches the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Of course there are likenesses -- both have provoked freaked-out cries of heresy, and I know proponents of both who are really great people. :-P
On October 6, 2007 8:33 PMAngiewrote... Just for the record, I've not heard of any FV'er denying that the Scriptures teach the imputation of Christ's righteousness--I believe the issue is regarding the role of Christ's active and passive obedience in justification.
On October 6, 2007 8:49 PMValerie (Kyriosity)wrote... Which goes to show how much I understand about FV...and about Reformed theology in general, I guess, 'cuz I thought those things were pretty much the same thing. So just ignore me, Jeff! :-P
On October 6, 2007 10:13 PMJeff Caglewrote... No, no... my preliminary take was similar to yours: that the hard line of FV against imputation of active obedience, and against Luther's formulations in general, would lead them to be very negative about Sonship.
Which is too bad, because the latter has been very fruitful pastorally (in my life, at least).
I'm still scratching my head over the nature of the FV debate, and the *really* vicious tone used. ACK!
Be careful how you judge the tone of the debate. You're coming into it when it's in full swing. I know you're not a Strong Rhetoric kind of guy (unless you've undergone a radical personality change in the past few years), so everybody's rhetoric might sound alike to you, but be careful to distinguish a vigorous defense (something St. Paul, for instance, engaged in) from a vicious attack. And be careful to discern humor, too. For instance, that "lumpy anabaptist" title wasn't rude, it was cheerfully provocative. :-)
Still and all, I remember the days living with several teenage boys in the same house, and I know how easy it is for roles to be played ... the angry lout, the sly provocateur. So I don't give people a pass just because they "sound nice." Sometimes the "nice" ones are trying to maneuver the angry ones into blowing up.
In the case of the Wilson quote, being hyperbolically provocative to people you've never met is ... well ... rude? Offensive? Some other word? Pick a word, some word that means "You (Doug) don't know me and have no right to label me."
I've been following Wilson's rhetoric for a while, on and off, ever since Trey Miller signed me up to receive Credenda. And for all of his good points, he rubs me the wrong way.
On October 8, 2007 8:34 AMValerie (Kyriosity)wrote... Yeah, that's how a lot of folks seem to react to Pastor Wilson. Can't say I get it...I find him consistently encouraging, challenging and delightful. I hear the good-humored affection in what you read as unjust labeling. I'm confident that when he says "lumpy anabaptist," he is describing not only others, to himself of not many years ago. I don't see any unkindness in it. Try laughing along and maybe the joke will start to seem funnier. ;-)