Soma

This morning, I was reading CNN’s article on the closure of the Bay Bridge (a story I’m fascinated by as a native of the Bay Area), and there was one sentence that stuck out to me:

Crews working on the bridge are replacing four steel rods, one of which failed and caused two rods to fall onto the bridge’s deck…Vibrations in the rods, affected by strong winds, caused the break.

In the article, this additional information is then provided:

The pieces that fell, which include a cross beam, came from a section that was repaired during Labor Day weekend, when crews worked almost around the clock to fix a crack.

If nothing sticks out to you, reread the two quotes and then ask yourself this question: “What caused the break?”  The article explicitly states that it was vibrations as a result of the wind that caused the break in the bridge.  Did a hurricane sweep through the Bay Area that we were unaware of?  Did a tornado sweep across the Bay, slamming into the bridge?  “No,” you say, “but there were some fairly strong winds in the Bay Area over the last week.”  But, are those winds what caused the break?

When building the bridge, engineers were paid millions of dollars to make sure that fairly strong winds could not break the bridge that would eventually carry upwards of 250,000 cars a day.  Over the past number of decades workers, engineers, and inspectors have been paid millions of dollars to assure that the bridge is kept up and repaired when needed.  The pieces (the article seems to say) just happened to fall from the same section where workers had (in a rush mind you) repaired a crack less than two months ago.  But none of the inspectors, or engineers, or repair men should lose any sleep over the incident…because it was the wind that caused the break.

To be honest with you, I don’t really care about the bridge or the article.  I’m sure (or I’m at least optimistically hoping) that all the appropriate people are taking the incident on the Bay Bridge seriously, but it was the wording of the article that stuck out to me because it is the exact kind of wording we use when discussing issues of the heart.

Your kids cause you to be angry, stress causes you to retreat to your sins of escapism, uncertainty causes you to be anxious, a less than ideal circumstance causes you to covet…just like the “vibrations in the rods, affected by strong winds, caused the break” in the Bay Bridge.

Just as the real issue in the Bay Bridge was a weakened structure and insufficient repairs, not the wind…so the real issue in your life that causes you to sin is not your kids, stress, uncertainty, or any other circumstance…the real issue is in your heart.

It would be absurd to leave the Bay Bridge as it is and hope that the wind doesn’t come back, or to build some sort of gigantic wall to shield the bridge from the wind…ultimately, the problem is in the structure of the bridge, and it needs to be fixed.  Similarly, it would be absurd to try to avoid circumstances in life that are not ideal or try to figure out a way (using boundaries or any other mechanism) to shield yourself from the affects of living in a fallen world…ultimately, the problem is in your heart, and it needs to be fixed.

Praise God that He sent Jesus Christ in the flesh and has given us the gift of His Spirit for this exact reason.  He wants to forgive, heal, mend, sanctify and purify our hearts so that He may truly deal with the problems that are causing damage in our lives.  But it all starts by recognizing that the problem is not outside of us, but inside of us.  We are not made to sin by circumstances and people outside of us, but we sin because we are broken sinners (forgiven and sanctified by grace).  It starts by remembering, the wind is not the problem.

Al Mohler seems to think that it might be. But, he still concludes that it is a horrible act of ingratitude to not celebrate it as our culture does.  The great conclusion he draws is that Mother’s Day isn’t necesarilly bad…it’s just no where near enough of a celebration, particularly for those mothers who take their Biblical calling and responsibility seriously.  The result is far more than sentimentism.  Here’s some excerpts:

There is nothing wrong about sentiment in itself, but there is something pornographic about the bathos of sentimentalism that this observance produces — a sentimentalism so often devoid of content.

The Christian vision of motherhood is more about courage and faithfulness than about sentimentalism.  The mothers of the Bible are a tough lot.  Jochebed put her baby in a floating ark of bulrushes, defying the order of Pharaoh that all Hebrew male children be put to death.  Rachel, mother to Joseph and Benjamin, died giving birth to Benjamin.  Hannah promised her son to God, and presented Samuel as a young boy for service in the House of the Lord.  Mary, the mother of Jesus, risked shame and disgrace to bear the Savior, and to provide all Christians with a model of brave and unflinching obedience.  She was there when Jesus Christ was crucified.  As Simeon had told her just after the birth of Christ, “Behold this child is appointed for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is opposed (and a sword will pierce through your own soul also), so that thoughts from many hearts may be revealed.” [Luke 2:34-35]

This leads him to the conclusion that:

Mother’s Day is a bad idea because it subverts the reality of faithful mothering and robs faithful mothers of their true glory.  Mothers deserving of honor are handed cards and taken to lunch, when songs of praise should instead be offered to the glory of God.  Undeserving mothers, who abdicate their true responsibility, are honored just because they are mothers.  Children, young and old, who ignore and dishonor their mothers by word and by life throughout the year, assuage their guilt by making a big deal of Mother’s Day.

Although, after admitting that he still celebrated his wife, mom and mother-in-law in typical fassion yesterday, Mohler concludes with a great insight.

So much for avoiding sentimentality.  Let’s just make certain that there is more to Mother’s Day than sentiment.  The mothers we should honor are those who raise children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, who honor their marriages and live faithfully, who teach and nurture and discipline by the Bible.  These are mothers who defy the spirit of the age, protect their children from danger, maintain godly discipline and order in the home, and feed their children the pure milk of God’s Word.

If nothing else, I hope that this post provides me an opportunity to honor my wife and mother-in-law in that way, for they are both women as Mohler has described (as was my own beloved mother).  They are women who display courage, grit, sacrifice, discipline, love and passion in a way unknown to the world around them.  And both I and my children will never fully understand the grandeur of their role or their sacrifice.  Praise and glory be to God for mothers like Lara and her mother Karol, as with everything He does, He deserves the credit and we reap the benefits.

Now, you may be getting tired of all of the election hype (I mean your pastor won’t even stop talking about it on his blog).  But, I feel like we have a unique opportunity to address the quesitons our society puts in front of us and particularly some of the idols of our hearts in this volatile election season.  For this reason, I’d love it if you took a look at this video of John Piper.  Piper seems torn and without a clear cut decision on the best decision in this presidential election, and because of that I identify with him.  He also seems like an imperfect man, just trying to stay faithful to God as he thinks these things through, and because of that I identify with him.  Finally, he seems like a pastor who is more concerned about the hearts of his people than about the outcome of the election, and because of that I identify with him.  Take a look, I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Maybe my last two posts contradict each other…I don’t think they do, but I’m just trying to figure this out too.

HT: Matt Kleinhans

For those of you going to the Men’s Retreat, take 3 minutes and watch this clip from Pinocchio…you’ll understand why later.

A question came to mind lately, that I couldn’t quite kick without looking into:

As a Bible-believing, Christian woman, is it Biblically permissible for a woman (like Sarah Palin) to hold the highest office (or even second-highest) in the country?

The question sounds absolutely rediculous!  In fact, I have probably offended 90% of you simply by asking it.  My bet is that your gut reaction to that question goes something like this: “Of course it’s permissible!  Who even asks that kind of a question?!  Where do you think we are, the South in the 1950’s?”

But, a reaction like that exposes an authority that may exist in your life that you have (unintentionally) placed above the authority of Scripture.  You see, the place of women in the world/workplace/home is a very sensitive issue in our culture.  It’s sensitive because we have come from a culture that was degrading to women (one that at one point would not even let them vote).  But, our unwillingness to quesiton a cultural norm because of its “sensitive” cultural nature can expose the reality in our hearts that “the way the world is” may in a lot of ways be an authority that puts parameters on what we will and will not allow Scripture to speak to in our lives.

As a result of this “sensitivity” and the forward push of feminism, our culture has not simply sought for equality in essence, but has flown past that ideal and vigorously pursues equality in role.

The truth is, equality in role (Biblically speaking) is an afront to, and abdication of, the responsibilities God has called us to as both men and women.  As Christians, we call this viewpoint “Complimentarian.”  Basically, it means that men and women were both created in the image of God and are equal before his eyes, but that he has called men and women to different roles in the home and in the church by design.

Many of us claim to a Biblical view of manhood and womanhood, but we are (again!) oftentimes more impacted by the culture we live in than we will ever admit.

I’m not saying that taking a look at the Biblical data ought to make us change our mind about the suitability of a gifted, eloquent woman like Sarah Palin for elected office, but I am saying that it ought to drive us back to Scripture to make sure that the worldview from which we are making decisions is actually Biblically determined.

If you believe that it is blatantly obvious that Sarah Palin (or any woman!) should be encouraged and celebrated as they pursue the opportunity to potentially run our country, do you have any idea where to go in Scripture to demonstrate why that ought to be the case.  (Again, my point is not that it’s not necesarrily there, but that you may not actually know whether or not it is!)

If this is a question that you would like to think more about, there is a series of blogs by David Kotter that may get your wheels turning a bit.  Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4.  These are definitely written for an audience that is not a West LA 20/30-something, but I like the discussion that they engender.  Because if you’re not at least willing to ask the question, the authority that Scripture has in your life may be a lot less than you’d like to believe.