Practical Religion: IV. Prayer (2) A habit of prayer is one of the surest marks of a true Christian

Regardless of what our backgrounds are and regardless of whether we are extroverts or introverts we all are given the spirit of dependence on our Father at conversion.  The following are summary thoughts from Ryle’s section on prayer in which he states that “a habit of prayer is one of the surest marks of a true Christian.”

From the moment there is any life and reality about their religion, they pray.  Just as the first sign of life in an infant when born into the world, is the act of breathing, so the first act of men and women when they are born again, is praying.

This is one of the common marks of all the elect of God: “They cry unto Him day and night.” (Luke 18:1)  It is as much a part of their new nature to pray, as it is of a child to cry.  A review of those saints in scripture, whom we have recorded for our benefit, shows that a main characteristic of the godly is that “they call on the Father” that “they call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.”  The recorded history of the wicked is that “they call not upon the Lord.” (1 Peter 1:17; 1 Cor. 1:2; Psalm 14:4)

If we were to read about the lives of Christians, who have been on earth since the Bible days, we would find that they all had one thing in common: They have all been men of prayer.  Rich or poor, learned and unlearned, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Baptist or Independent All have this commonality about them.  They all prayed!  When we study the reports of Missionary Societies in our own times we see with joy heathen men and women are receiving the Gospel in various parts of the globe.  There are conversions in Africa, in New Zealand, in Eastern Asia, and in America. The people converted are naturally unlike one another in every respect.  But one striking thing we observe at all of the Missionary stations.  The converted people always pray!

We don’t deny that a man may pray without heart, and without sincerity.  We don’t for a moment pretend to say that the mere fact of a person praying proves anything about his soul.  As in every part of religion, so also in this, there is plenty of deception and hypocrisy. But this we are saying – that not praying is a clear proof that a man is not yet a true Christian. He cannot really feel his sins. He cannot love God.  He cannot feel himself a debtor to Christ. He cannot long after holiness. He cannot desire heaven. He may boast confidently of election, grace, faith, hope and knowledge, and deceive ignorant people. But rest assured it is all vain talk if he does not pray.

Ryle continues by stating that a real work of the Spirit, a habit of hearty private prayer is one of the most satisfactory experiences that can be named.  A man may preach from false motives, and write books and make fine speeches and seem diligent in good works yet be a Judas Iscariot.  But a man seldom goes into his closet, and pours out his soul before God in secret unless he is in earnest. The Lord Himself set His stamp on prayer as the best proof of a true conversion.  When He sent Ananias to Saul in Damascus, He gave him no other evidence of his change of heart than this — “…for behold, he is praying.” (Acts 9:11)

Your views of doctrine may be correct. Your love for Protestantism may be warm and unmistakable. But still this may be nothing more than head knowledge and party spirit. The great point is this – whether you can speak to God as well as speak about God.

~Mark

…was the punch line of just one of the many emasculating commercials that themed the Super Bowl experience this year.  My stomach was beginning to turn this week as a result of these ads and then I got this forward:

11 PEOPLE ON A ROPE

Eleven people were hanging on a rope under a helicopter.  10 men and 1 woman.  The rope was not strong enough to carry them all so they decided that one had to leave, because otherwise they were all going to fall.  They weren’t able to choose that person, until the woman gave a very touching speech.  She said that she would voluntarily let go of the rope, because, as a woman, she was used to giving up everything for her husband and kids or for men in general, and was used to always making sacrifices with little in return.  As soon as she finished her speech, all the men started clapping . . . . . .SEND THIS EMAIL TO AN INTELLIGENT WOMAN, SO THAT SHE HAS SOMETHING TO SMILE ABOUT TODAY !!!!!  I Just Did!!!

 Now I’m ready to vomit! 

 As Dr. Kevin Leman writes in What a Difference a Daddy Makes, “On today’s television shows, kids won’t see men of responsibility.  They won’t view husbands and wives who respect each other…They’re far more likely to see a stupid, clueless dad whom everybody puts up with and who is recognized as the family joke.  It is insidious for kids to see dads play the butt of every silly line in nightly sitcoms…The National Fatherhood Initiative reviewed prime-time programming on the ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, and WB networks during the late autumn of 1998.  They found that fathers are central, recurring characters on only 15 of 102 network comedies or dramas, and only 4 of these programs portray the dad as both competent and caring.  This means that slightly less than 4 percent of prime-time shows give an accurate portrayal of what a father should be.”

Christian women, I would hope we all can agree with how appalling this male-bashing trend is, but let us not be too quick to point the finger!  Before we do that, we need to take a healthy look at our very own church, family and heart.  We may not openly display such egregious error as in the sentiment behind the email forward, but traces of the same heart sin (Gen. 3:16) may still be looming close by.  Do we allow our husbands to lead?  Are we waiting to say “I told you so” when they fail?  Do we directly belittle our husbands to their face or behind their back to our “girlfriends?”  Do we begrudgingly sacrifice for them and our children (praise God our Savior’s sacrifice was not so, Matt. 20:28)?  The list goes on, but my point is being made. 

So, when did we lose our first love (Rev. 2:1-7) so that he (and He) was no longer enough in our lives?  Only you can answer that question for yourself, but I believe that the correlation I mentioned between our relationship with God and our relationship with our husbands is vital.  Any rebellion towards or loss of contentment with our earthly husbands can be ultimately traced to a rebellion towards and loss of contentment with our Heavenly One.  Ephesians 5:22-33 is just one of the many examples God gives us in His word of this parallel.  

In a recent correspondence regarding these issues with my Christian mentor (my mother) she says, “That’s how far we’ve come from any kind of sane viewpoint about WOMEN and SUBMISSION.  REBELLION is so the norm that if a WOMAN isn’t RESISTING HER HUSBAND, we feel faintly ashamed for HER….Women simply will not be pinned down and admit how wrong we are to want to control men.  “Enough” will never be “enough” for us until we submit to the Lordship of Christ and that of our Husbands.”  

In response to me she said, “Thanks for not being “embarrassed to OBEY the GOSPEL,” …and for “saying it AND LIVING IT out loud!!”  IT is THE POWER  (Romans 1:16).”

Women, may we all live and breathe that same power…and may we never be ashamed!   

-Heidi

P.S.  Please forward this message to all women so that they will have something to smile about, not just today, but for all eternity.

We found this interview and thought we’d pass it along:  http://pastorron7.wordpress.com/2010/02/03/drew-brees-christian-faith/

We did not have a favorite to win last night, as we liked both teams.

Nate sledding with Hannah

Nate sledding with Noah

ALL:  Let’s see those snow pics!  Here are a few of your fearless leader who was even more fearless on the slopes this past weekend!  -Heidi

The Shack – Impressions

27 Jan 2010, by Tim Keller

Over the holidays I read a good (and devastating) review of William P. (Paul) Young’s The Shack in the most recent print edition of Books and Culture: A Christian Review (Jan/Feb 2010.)  It was a reminder that I was one of the last people on the planet not to have read the book. So I did. So why write a blog post about it? It had sold 7.2 million copies in a little over 2 years, by June of 2009. With those kinds of numbers, the book will certainly exert some influence over the popular religious imagination. So it warrants a response. This is not a review, but just some impressions:

At the heart of the book is a noble effort — to help modern people understand why God allows suffering, using a narrative form. The argument Young makes at various parts of the book is this. First, this world’s evil and suffering is the result of our abuse of free will. Second, God has not prevented evil in order to accomplish some glorious, greater good that humans cannot now understand. Third, when we stay bitter at God for a particular tragedy we put ourselves in the seat of the ‘Judge of the world and God’, and we are unqualified for such a job. Fourth, we must get an ‘eternal perspective’ and see all God’s people in joy in his presence forever. (The father in the story is given a vision of his deceased daughter living in the joy of Christ’s presence, and it heals his grief.) This is all rather standard, orthodox, pastoral theology (though it’s a bit too heavy on the ‘free-will defense’).  It is so accessible to readers because of its narrative form. I have heard many reports of semi-believers and non-believers claiming that this book gave them an answer to their biggest objections to faith in God.

However, sprinkled throughout the book, Young’s story undermines a number of traditional Christian doctrines. Many have gotten involved in debates about Young’s theological beliefs, and I have my own strong concerns. But here is my main problem with the book. Anyone who is strongly influenced by the imaginative world of The Shack will be totally unprepared for the far more multi-dimensional and complex God that you actually meet when you read the Bible. In the prophets the reader will find a God who is constantly condemning and vowing judgment on his enemies, while the Persons of the Triune-God of The Shack repeatedly deny that sin is any offense to them. The reader of Psalm 119 is filled with delight at God’s statutes, decrees, and laws, yet the God of The Shack insists that he doesn’t give us any rules or even have any expectations of human beings. All he wants is relationship. The reader of the lives of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Isaiah will learn that the holiness of God makes his immediate presence dangerous or fatal to us. Someone may counter (as Young seems to do, on p.192) that because of Jesus, God is now only a God of love, making all talk of holiness, wrath, and law obsolete. But when John, one of Jesus’ closest friends, long after the crucifixion sees the risen Christ in person on the isle of Patmos, John ‘fell at his feet as dead.’ (Rev.1:17.) The Shack effectively deconstructs the holiness and transcendence of God. It is simply not there. In its place is unconditional love, period. The God of The Shack has none of the balance and complexity of the Biblical God. Half a God is not God at all.

There is another modern text that sought to convey the character of God through story. It also tried to ‘embody’ the Biblical doctrine of God in an imaginative way that conveyed the heart of the Biblical message. That story contained a Christ-figure named Aslan. Unlike the author of The Shack, however, C.S. Lewis was always at pains to maintain the Biblical tension between the divine love and his overwhelming holiness and splendor. In the introduction to his book The Problem of Pain, Lewis cited the example from the children’s text The Wind in the Willows where two characters, Rat and Mole approach divinity.

“Afraid?” murmured the Rat, his eyes shining with unutterable love. “Afraid? of Him? O, never, never. And yet — and yet — O Mole, I am afraid.”

Lewis sought to get this across at many places through his Narnia tales. One of the most memorable is the description of Aslan.

“Safe?…Who said anything about safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”

That’s better.

I received an anonymous message about our small group.  Very interesting.

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/5975989