Becoming a Christian is like a Copernican revolution

There are a few "aha" moments in this...

Are Christians obliged to tithe (1) ?

Does Scripture mandate the tithe? Are we obliged to give the LORD a tenth of all our income? Clearly the tithe was mandatory in the Old Testament era but what about for us New Covenant believers? My answer is yes and to explain why, bear with me a moment as we take the cross-country route as we consider the first instance in Scripture when the tithe is mentioned.

The first Scriptural mention of the tithe is in the book of Genesis (ch. 14). There Abraham overpowers and subdues the pagan kings who had overcome and captured Lot. Whilst returning home with the booty, Abraham meets the mysterious Melchizedek who serves him bread and wine (the first communion meal?)  and in return, Abraham gives Melchizedek a tithe of the plunder he had won. What does all this have to do with the New Covenant believer paying the tithe? Well in the book of Hebrews Christ's priesthood is described as being in the likeness of Melchizedek:

                          you are a priest forever, 

                           after the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7:15-17). 

In other words, Melchizedek's ministry and priesthood was a type and foreshadowing of Christ priesthood. What therefore Melchizedek did over 3 millenia ago in Palestine, Christ fulfilled and superseded by his priesthood. Thus if Abraham offered a tenth of his increase to a type of Christ (Melchizedek) how much more does the real deal - Jesus Christ - deserve a tenth of our increase? But there is more. Abraham is not a mere incidental character in the biblical narrative. Apart from his peculiar interactions with the Triune God (e.g. Genesis 18) we also have the special relationship he enjoyed with God, being one of a handful of people described as God's friend. Additionally the Apostle Paul calls him our father in the faith (Romans 4 and Galatians 3). All this should lead us to see Abraham as a prototype believer and someone who's life is to emulated in those things which honoured the of which giving the tithe is one such example (others being bringing up our children in the faith, husbands behaving like lords of their households, incredibly generous hospitality to strangers and so on but I digress). The point is this: Abraham is presented as an example in Scripture for us to follow and we his children are to walk in his ways, setting aside a tenth of our increase for the 'greater' Melchizedek, the Prince of Peace and High Priest over God's Kingdom. This is a sure way to enjoy the LORD's favour and blessing (Malachi 3:8-12)

Prayer for our dark times

God our creator, who in the beginning

commanded the light to shine out of darkness: 

we pray that the light of the glorious gospel of Christ 

may dispel the darkness of ignorance and unbelief, 

shine into the hearts of all your people, 

and reveal the knowledge of your glory 

in the face of Jesus Christ our Lord, 

who is alive and reigns with you, 

in the unity of the Holy Spirit, 

one God, now and for ever. 

Amen.

[Collect for Epiphany 4]

Cameron is not the problem, the Church is

David Cameron is not the problem. Now don't get me wrong David Cameron is a problem but he is not the problem. Rather he is the manifestation of a much bigger problem and if we in the UK are unhappy and distressed about today's same sex marriage vote in the commons, then let's step back and think of what the cause and source of our diabolical abominations is.

If I had just one take home point for this post, it would be this: bad results come from bad actions which come from bad thinking which come from bad beliefs. Simply put, the reason we had today's vote in Parliament, was because the Church in the UK is in a dire state.

Let's consider this first by thinking of an everyday example. Consider a piece of graffiti in your local park. If you were trying to get to the bottom of such a nuisance problem, who/what would you blame? The graffiti paints? Of course not. The graffiti paints were just a mere tool in the hands of a messed-up perpetrator. So then is the problem young Timmy, who decided to scribble in bright colours, "Tom is gay"? Well in a sense yes but why did crazy Timmy decide to scribble the insult in the first place? Well it came from his thinking; he thought, this would be a good idea and instead of believing what his parents have always told him (that you should never to be rude to others, especially not in public) he believed his mates instead who said to him "go on Timmy, it'll be a laugh"

So now, let's apply this to the today's deplorable and ultimately futile attempt to redefine marriage. Is the problem David Cameron? Well not really - he is just one man and he is not a Fascist dictator (well not yet anyway) and anyway he didn't get to be PM all by himself (you can thank devious Mr Clegg for that). But are the feckless Lib Dems (and short sighted Tories) to blame for helping Cameron to Number 10? No their decision to support Mr Slippery was informed by their thinking which ultimately came from their beliefs. In short, our problem is not simply our Prime Minister or the House of Commons but our beliefs.

How does all this relate to the homosexual marriage debate? Let me mention something that might look like I'm changing the subject but which in fact is central to this issue. Earlier today I looked at the sermon archives of some of the big London Anglican churches trying to find out how many sermons had been preached on the topic of divorce in recent years. Here are some findings:

All Souls Langham Place - less than 10

St Helen's Bishopgate - less than 10

Dundonald - less than 10

HTB - less than 30

So of the thousands of sermons preached in leading London churches over the past decade, less than 50 touched on this important issue addressed severally in both the Old and New Testaments and which is major pastoral issue in our society. What's the point of all this? My tentative guess from this sketchy survey is that UK churches (especially those that are loudest in proclaiming that they are bible believing/word centred) are not all that big on speaking up for marriage by tackling one of it's most aggressive enemies, divorce. If my analysis is correct, then arguably we Christians have played a big part in advancing the contemporary decadent morality by our insipid defence of marriage and in our embracing of the culture's views e.g. that cohabitation and divorce are ok. Thus given such a degradation and distortion of marriage which we Christians have tacitly endorsed, isn't it the case that many homosexuals (and the culture at large) have rightly concluded that it is not they who have changed but rather marriage itself?

Think for example of the symbolic white dress that is worn by many a bride - how many sexually active 'Christian' couples have made a bad joke of this traditional image of purity? How many couples have considered the wedding dress as a merely beautiful garment long before homosexuals tried to make optional a wedding dress of any sort? Many Christians in line with the surrounding culture have embraced a highly individualistic and egalitarian view of marriage with the resultant flailing commitment to childbearing, to traditional gender duties, and even (permanently) to spouse. That homosexuals now therefore want this strange new thing which marriage has become should surprise no one. We Christians have played a major role in fanning the flame of wickedness which now engulfs our depraved society.

What is the solution to this mess? The Church needs to pick up her mantle again as the herald (and incarnation) of Truth and Grace. The reformation our society badly needs has to start in our own House by first, repenting of our own evil and malaise and second, by exhorting Christians to live out of sacrificial and life-long marriages. This - and only this - is the hope for our nation. Kyrie Eleison

Christians should have good manners

The person with the excellent manners may not necessarily be a Christian. But the Christian should have excellent manners.

HT: Femina

Cremation v Burial - which is more biblical?

As an Anglican clergyman, I do a fair amount of funerals (about 1/month) and every so often the thought crosses my mind - between a cremation and burial which is more biblical? Here is a brief answer to where my mind currently stands. Given how the heroes of the Faith were treated at death, we Christians ought to lean towards preferring burials over cremations. A few examples of those who were buried at death are: Rachel (Gen. 35:19-20), Joseph (Gen. 50:25; Exod. 13:19; Josh. 24:32), Aaron (Deut. 10:6), Moses (Deut. 34:5-8), Joshua (Josh. 24:30), Samuel (1 Sam. 25:1), David (1 Kgs. 2:10), John the Baptist (Matt. 14:12), Lazarus (John 11:17-18), Stephen (Acts 8:2), and, of course, Jesus Christ (John 19:38-42). In fact we can assume that the list of OT saints buried is much longer than the above, given how the Apostle John introduces Jesus' burial as being done in accordance with Jewish burial customs (John 19:40) i.e. it was the custom of the Jews to bury their dead. The point is this, even though Scripture nowhere gives an explicit command as to how we are treat our bodies post-death, it however gives us numerous examples of how the godly took special care to ensure their bodies were buried. This I think is partly because of the high dignity with which Scripture views the human body, coupled with the firm hope that the OT and NT believers have in the resurrection from the dead. In other words, going for a burial is a statement about the immense value of the deceased's body as well as an expression of the Christian hope that those in-Christ will be raised imperishable one day. Burials therefore are a way for the 'sleeping' Christian to proclaim God's powerful gospel, even when they are 6 feet down under!

Friday Fun: level headed deacon

Via: The Sacred Sandwich