Greed is Hidden Inside All of Us

In one of the most exposing and devastating paragraphs I have ever read, Tim Keller comments on greed and how it "hides itself from the victim." In Counterfeit Gods: The Empty Promises of Money, Sex, and Power, and the Only Hope that Matters, p. 52-3:

Why can't anyone in the grip of greed see it? The counterfeit god of of money uses powerful sociological and psychological dynamics. Everyone tends to live in a particular socioeconomic bracket. Once you are able to live in a particular neighborhood, send your children to its schools, and participate in its social life, you will find yourself surrounded by quite a number of people who have more money than you. You don't compare yourself to the rest of the world, you compare yourself to those in your bracket. The human heart always wants to justify itself and this is one of the easiest ways. You say, "I don't live as well as him or her or them. My means are modest compared to theirs." You can reason and think like that no matter how lavish you are living. As a result, Americans think of themselves as middle class, and only 2 percent call themselves "upper class." But the rest of the world is not fooled. When people visit here from other parts of the globe, they are staggered to see the level of materialistic comfort that the majority of Americans have come to view as necessity.

Why Does No Earthly Experience Satisfy?

C.S. Lewis, in Mere Christianity:

If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world [something supernatural and eternal].

How to Repent and Castigate the Media at the Same Time

Tiger Woods, under immense scrutiny and insane media attention since the Thanksgiving indecent, has released a statement. If he wrote it, I applaud him.

I have let my family down and I regret those transgressions with all of my heart. I have not been true to my values and the behavior my family deserves. I am not without faults and I am far short of perfect. I am dealing with my behavior and personal failings behind closed doors with my family. Those feelings should be shared by us alone.

Although I am a well-known person and have made my career as a professional athlete, I have been dismayed to realize the full extent of what tabloid scrutiny really means. For the last week, my family and I have been hounded to expose intimate details of our personal lives. The stories in particular that physical violence played any role in the car accident were utterly false and malicious. Elin has always done more to support our family and shown more grace than anyone could possibly expect.

But no matter how intense curiosity about public figures can be, there is an important and deep principle at stake which is the right to some simple, human measure of privacy. I realize there are some who don't share my view on that. But for me, the virtue of privacy is one that must be protected in matters that are intimate and within one's own family. Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn't have to mean public confessions.

Whatever regrets I have about letting my family down have been shared with and felt by us alone. I have given this a lot of reflection and thought and I believe that there is a point at which I must stick to that principle even though it's difficult.

I will strive to be a better person and the husband and father that my family deserves. For all of those who have supported me over the years, I offer my profound apology.

1. Open with repentance, end with repentance. Perfect.

2. Yes, even though you are the most famous athlete on earth, your "sins," as you rightly call them, are no business of ours. They are the business of your wife, your family, your church (let's hope you have one) and, most importantly, God.

3. "Personal sins should not require press releases and problems within a family shouldn't have to mean public confessions." Wow. So well said.

On a side note, what we're viewing is quite rare. Woods had made it to the top. Has is the life so many of us pine for. And yet, even that was not enough for him. Jeremiah 2:13:

For my people have committed two evils:

they have forsaken me,

the fountain of living waters,

and hewed out cisterns for themselves,

broken cisterns that can hold no water.

Sin Always Seeks Its Ultimate Outcome

John Owen, in Overcoming Sin and Temptation, p. 53:

Every unclean thought or glance would be adultery if it could; every covetous desire would be oppression, every thought of unbelief would be atheism, might it grow to its [ultimate outcome].

Tim Keller on Idolatry | Update: Excerpt

Keller was recently interviewed by CT on his new book Counterfeit Gods: The Empty Promises of Money, Sex, and Power, and the Only Hope that Matters. The most interesting section of the interview (emphasis mine):

How do we get rid of idols?

I confess that I don't say much about that. Practicing spiritual disciplines is another book. I do say that analyzing and recognizing an idol is a step away from its power over you. You also have to have a heck of a prayer life. That prayer life can't just be petitioning. There has to be encounter, experience, and genuine joy. You have to have Jesus Christ increasingly capture your affections.

Is it necessary to suffer disappointment before seeing that idols don't satisfy?

I fear you may be right. I don't want that to be true. Very often it's much stronger than disappointment. It's hard for me to look at a young person and know what their idols are, because usually something has to happen in their life to frustrate them for them to see that something has inordinate power over them. No one learned about their idols by being told about them.

What's your next project?

A book on suffering, which I'm hoping will be out next November. I'm planning to draw more on being a pastor than being an apologist. I'm trying to write a book every year during this last part of my career.

Whole thang.

UPDATE:

Read an excerpt of Counterfeit Gods.

New Tim Keller Book: Introduction

Here, for free.

Let Your Repentance be a Growing Habit

Addendum to this post, J.C. Ryle:

Let your repentance be a growing habit, your faith an increasing faith, your holiness a progressive holiness, your victory over the world a more decided victory, your love to the brethren a more hearty love, your watchfulness over yourself a more jealous watchfulness.

How Often Do I Fast, Weep and Mourn for My Own Sin?

From a friend's blog, a reflection on Joel 2:12:

From what I understand about Joel, he has received word from the Lord to plead with the Jews to repent and return to the Lord. He warns of impending judgments from the Lord in response to their sin.

Joel 2:12 reads:

Therefore, also now, says the Lord, turn and keep on coming to Me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning [until every hindrance is removed and the broken fellowship is restored.]

A commentary by Matthew Henry suggests:

Our business therefore on earth must especially be, to secure an interest in our Lord Jesus Christ; and we should seek to be weaned from objects which will soon be torn from all who now make idols of them. There must be outward expressions of sorrow and shame, fasting, weeping, and mourning; tears for trouble must be turned into tears for the sin that caused it. But rending the garments would be vain, except their hearts were rent by abasement and self-abhorrence; by sorrow for their sins, and separation from them.

I began to wonder about my own life. What objects in my life have I made into idols? Are my tears over my own sin or for how now I'm left to deal with the affects of my sin? How often do I fast, weep and mourn for my own sin? How do I rend my heart?

I recognize that Jesus has taken sin away from me by His death on the cross but shouldn't that make me more aware of my own sin? Shouldn't I understand the cost He paid to save me from spending an eternity away from God? Sometimes I wonder if I truly understand it all.

God calls to people all over the world to turn and keep coming to Him with their entire heart. He wants "every hindrance removed" which means that nothing stands in the way of surrendering our life to Him. His greatest desire for us is to have our "broken fellowship" with Him restored.

Spot on. Or, as Martin Luther said, "The whole life of believers should be repentance."

The Prosperity Gospel Promises Far Too Little

Al Mohler, in response to a NYT article reporting on the events of a 9000 person "Prosperity Gospel" conference:

Prosperity theology is a False Gospel. Its message is unbiblical and its promises fail. God never assures his people of material abundance or physical health. Instead, Christians are promised the riches of Christ, the gift of eternal life, and the assurance of glory in the eternal presence of the living God.

In the end, the biggest problem with prosperity theology is not that it promises too much, but that it promises far too little. The Gospel of Jesus Christ offers salvation from sin, not a platform for earthly prosperity. While we should seek to understand what drives so many into this movement, we must never for a moment fail to see its message for what it is -- a false and failed gospel.

Whole thing.

WSJ Quotes of the Day

Must read Robert George on gay marriage:

Some insist that the Supreme Court must invalidate traditional marriage laws because “rights” are at stake. But as in Roe, they are forced to peddle a strained and contentious reading of the Constitution—one whose dubiousness would undermine any ruling’s legitimacy.

Lawyers challenging traditional marriage laws liken their cause to Loving v. Virginia (which invalidated laws against interracial marriages), insinuating that conjugal-marriage supporters are bigots. This is ludicrous and offensive, and no one should hesitate to say so.

The definition of marriage was not at stake in Loving. Everyone agreed that interracial marriages were marriages. Racists just wanted to ban them as part of the evil regime of white supremacy that the equal protection clause was designed to destroy.

Opponents of racist laws in Loving did not question the idea, deeply embodied in our law and its shaping philosophical tradition, of marriage as a union that takes its distinctive character from being founded, unlike other friendships, on bodily unity of the kind that sometimes generates new life. This unity is why marriage, in our legal tradition, is consummated only by acts that are generative in kind. Such acts unite husband and wife at the most fundamental level and thus legally consummate marriage whether or not they are generative in effect, and even when conception is not sought.

Of course, marital intercourse often does produce babies, and marriage is the form of relationship that is uniquely apt for childrearing (which is why, unlike baptisms and bar mitzvahs, it is a matter of vital public concern). But as a comprehensive sharing of life—an emotional and biological union—marriage has value in itself and not merely as a means to procreation. This explains why our law has historically permitted annulment of marriage for non-consummation, but not for infertility; and why acts of sodomy, even between legally wed spouses, have never been recognized as consummating marriages.

Only this understanding makes sense of all the norms—annulability for non-consummation, the pledge of permanence, monogamy, sexual exclusivity—that shape marriage as we know it and that our law reflects. And only this view can explain why the state should regulate marriage (as opposed to ordinary friendships) at all—to make it more likely that, wherever possible, children are reared in the context of the bond between the parents whose sexual union gave them life.

*************

On the 'Cash for Clunkers' program:

What the clunker policy really proves is that Americans aren’t stupid and will let some other taxpayer buy them a free lunch if given the chance.

Idolatry Fail

Or, Isaiah 2:18: "And the idols shall utterly pass away."

HT: AN

Swearing and the Gospel

I posted yesterday Derek Webb's new song "What Matters More." It is surely provocative and has me and countless others thinking. That will make any artist smile. However, I did say that there were two questions about the song that should be asked:

1. Should you ever, as a blood-bought believer, use a word that society has deemed impolite and vulgar to make a point?

2. Is the song itself a helpful rebuke to the legalism that is so rampant in the church today?

On Swearing: It's in the Bible Too

With respect to the first question, the immediate inclination of my heart says that there really is no need to swear when regular old words, if used with deftness and creativity, will do just fine. But then I think about the scriptures, and especially the prophets. To get their message across they wielded the strongest language imaginable. Take Ezekiel 23:20-21 for example:

There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. So you longed for the lewdness of your youth, when in Egypt your bosom was caressed and your young breasts fondled.

Ezekiel's point, if you missed it, is that Israel is sinful. She dismissed God and worshiped idols like a whore worships her lover. Ezekiel believed that the only thing that would waken Israel from her licentious slumber was stirring, offensive language. Of course he could have said it another way. But he decided that the regular rhetoric wouldn't to the trick. And God, if you didn't notice, was cool with that.

So is Webb a prophet? And is he warranted in his use of that four letter word? I'll let you decide.

On Contrasting: Make Sure the Contrast is Actually There

The second question, it seems, is more important.

Denny Burk, whom I really respect, reflects on Webb's tune:

The song lampoons Christians who are more concerned about the moral status of homosexuality than they are about the tragedy of world hunger. Webb argues that “what matters most” is the “50,000 people who are dyin’ today” (presumably of hunger, if the 50k number indeed comes from Tony Campolo). Thus the lyrics seem to suggest that the remedy to Pharisaical moralizing about homosexuality is greater attention to relieving human suffering....I would suggest, however, that the best remedy to Pharisaical moralizing is the gospel.

Burk gets the answer right, but the problem wrong.

It seems to me that the song is not about those who do sacrificial service but about exposing legalism. Webb's point in bringing up those who do sacrificial service is not to say that legalists would be better off if they served sacrificially (though they might). Rather, he makes the comparison between the two types of people because it makes the legalist look so obviously immoral. No one would deny this. His song resonates with us because we are a relatively compassionate people. Of course it is much worse to say “Gay people are going to hell!” than to try and save those 50k people who die every day. The latter, in our culture, is morally superior to the other. So I would disagree with Burk insofar as he thinks that Webb is saying that the legalist’s legalism will be ameliorated by serving sacrificially. Webb would probably say a lot of things are morally superior to bashing gays. But, as least as this song is concerned, Webb thinks that what will make legalists stand out as morally inferior will be to pit them up against those who serve sacrificially.

On the other hand, what he seems to have done, unwittingly, is made a comparison that proves, ultimately, to be untrue. Though he doesn’t realize it, he has contrasted being self-righteous in one way with being self-righteous in another way. Though on the surface it seems as though serving sacrificially is morally superior to bashing gays, outside of the gospel, serving sacrificially is itself based in self-righteousness. And self-righteousness is a heinous act in God’s eyes whether it is done through legalism or relativism because it is based not on the work of Christ, but on your own concerted effort. So Webb, I would argue, tries to make a contrast that is not actually there.

The only true and helpful comparison could have been legalism as compared to the gospel. That is the only thing that exposes self-righteousness at its root and begins to change hearts. It changes hearts by showing legalists that we are all one in Christ Jesus. We are all sinners saved by grace, not by our works. And the same goes for those who serve the 50,000. When their self-righteousness is confronted with the gospel, they serve not because it makes them right with God or makes them good people, but because serving is the outcropping of what Jesus did for them at the cross.

Two I AM's

Self-righteousness is believing I AM.

The gospel is believing IN and ON the I AM.

Insane MJ Quote of the Day

Cornel West of Princeton (!), cited by John Kaas:

It's almost like a crucifixion, in terms of the cross you have to bear. We reap the fruits of the resurrection, in terms of the power that emanates from [Jackson's] sacrifice. He sacrificed his childhood because he loved us so. He didn't just entertain us, he sustained us.

HT: JT

Also on MJ's worship, Krauthammer (not insane):

Well, soldiers die dignified, sacrificial lives, and they are not celebrities. I think the pathology here is the celebrity culture, which is why you have the media coverage.

We haven't seen anything like this outpouring of sentiment since Princess Diana, and at the time of her death, you had to ask yourself, what did she accomplish? What exactly had she done?

Winston Churchill got a third of a million at his funeral; she got 10 times as much. He saved the Western civilization; she wore clothes nicely. And Jackson was sort of the apotheosis of that here in America...She was never accused, Princess Diana, of the monstrous deeds that Michael Jackson was, [nor] some of the less monstrous of which he admitted to. That was whitewashed away on account of his celebrity.

And I think that is the feeling of unease people have, the adulation and the worship a man who had a tragic and deeply flawed life.

Your Suffering as the Center of the Universe

Carl Trueman, writing on those who rely, in debate, on how they feel, rather than on what the substance of the debate actually is, which usually results in their getting offended:

The idiom of pain and suffering places the individual at the centre of the universe and makes him or her the measure of all things. In other words, it panders to the idolatry of fallen human nature. Suddenly, it is my experience, my feelings, my pain, which are the most important things. Sure, I have never known what it is like to see my loved ones gassed and cremated at Auschwitz, but I can be a victim too: I have lost my job, or been sworn at while driving, or had my opinions belittled in a blog somewhere. I don't know the pain of those who have really suffered - but my own trivial discomforts are just as important because I am me, I am the centre of the universe as I know it, and I deserve to feel good about myself. To deprive me of this is simply cruel.

The whole thing is wonderfully dry, biting and true.

Substitution

Tim Keller:

Sin is us substituting ourselves for God.
Salvation is God substituting himself for us.

Sanford Cheated Because He Had No Chest

Chuck Colson. on Why Gov. Sanford cheated:

We humans, you see, have an infinite capacity for self-rationalization. We reason that we can give in to those seemingly minor temptations—say an emotional attraction to a co-worker, or just one drink at the party—because we think we know the boundaries. We think our reason can keep us safe.

The problem is, as C. S. Lewis wrote in his timeless essay, “Men Without Chests,” that our reason is no match for the passions of the flesh. Lewis put it this way: Our stomachs (that is our appetites) can’t be controlled by our minds (that is, reason). Something else has to come in to play—and that is the spirited element, or our chests, as he called it. It’s our will being trained to do what is right and just.

Nearly every grave moral failure begins with a small sin. Because there comes a time, after we toy with sin, when one pull of the flesh causes us to cross the line, to disengage from reason, and to follow our appetites wherever they may lead.

And, I’m afraid, this is especially easy today. We’re told we can have it all, that we can be free to pursue any pleasure. Our wills are not trained to do what is good, but to do what pleases us. Many of us have become, as Lewis said, men without chests.

Whole thing.

Thank God I Don't Have Cable Today

I thought this morning, "Thank God I don't have cable anymore." I thought that because I know what is transpiring right now on nearly every channel. Tributes. Music videos. Incessant coverage of FF and MJ. Yes, MJ was especially inspiring to so many of us. I can't tell you how many times I watched the making of the Thriller video, or how many zippers my pants had in 1986, or why I actually thought it was cool to have a single, sparkly glove. But as inspiring and "iconic" as MJ was, we all know he was all too human as well. Tim Keller (via C.S. Lewis) talks about hell as a place where our narcissism grows without restraint. Citizens of hell will pour worth into idols to infinite levels, not unlike drug addicts. And that, most would agree, is hell. MJ seemed to have begun that process early. So why spend so much time reflecting on him?

Jonah Goldberg writes:

Sure, I liked the Jackson Five. I liked Thriller, too, when I was a teenager. Michael Jackson was an “icon” for me too.

But let’s pause for a moment on that word “icon.” It seemed the consensus adjective for the news networks. NBC ran a special on two “American Icons” – Fawcett and Jackson. Every cable network (including Fox, for the record) used the word “icon” to describe him as if this was some sort of safe harbor, a word everyone could agree on. “Love him or hate him,” the implied logic went, “he was an ‘icon.’”

Yes, well, maybe so. But that doesn’t let you off the hook. Even though the term sounds neutral, it isn’t. An icon, technically speaking, is a religious symbol deserving of reverence and adoration. The networks may not have intended to use the word that way, but they certainly showed an unseemly amount of reverence and adoration for the man.

I think part of it is the narcissism of our celebrity culture. Here was a guy so many of “us” read about in People magazine for so long. His passing, therefore, isn’t a loss in the sorrowful sense of the word, but in the selfish one. It’s a loss of an interesting subject, a creature to gossip about and to fill a few minutes on E or Entertainment Tonight.

He says well what I feel. For sure, Fox News' incessant coverage is not as much about him as it is them. And my fear is that dwelling on it along with them will lead to the same outcome for me.

Goldberg concludes:

If anything, Michael Jackson’s life, not his death, was tragic.

Every year at the Oscars they show a montage of people who died over the previous year. Invariably, the audience only applauds for the really famous people. This has always offended me. Not necessarily because the famous people don’t deserve praise but because it’s so clear that the audience is clapping for the fame. Michael Jackson had many accomplishments. But the press is sanctifying him because he was famous, deservedly so to be sure, but not because he was good. So much of the coverage seems to miss this fundamental point, as if being famous made him good.

I feel sympathy for Jackson’s family and friends who understandably mourn him. But I can't bring myself to mourn him any more than I mourn the random dead I read about in the paper everyday. Indeed, I confess to mourning him less.

Every channel says this is a sad day for America. I agree. But not for the same reasons.

I thought fondly about MJ and his impact on my early life for a few minutes yesterday. That is enough for me. I will be much happier going to a friend's memorial service today, dwelling on his life and how he made it his aim to trust on and point to Jesus. Much better than cable I say.

Driscoll on Idolatry

A few quotes from his most recent talk at a major conference for pastors on idolatry:

Taking a good thing and making it a God thing, that's a bad thing.

As Martin Luther has said, if you don't follow the first two commandments, you can't follow the following eight.

If you want to know what you treasure, think about what you would grab if your house was on fire.

Husbands, if you want to destroy your wife, make her an idol, deify her. Watch her crumble under your unmet expectations.

Sin is Ungodly Exaggeration

Ed Welch, in When People Are Big and God Is Small, p. 100-101:

To make sin even more difficult to see, it often rides on the back of many good things. For example, work is a good thing, but sin can take it and exalt it to the point where it rules us. We become workaholics who say we are doing it for the kids, but we are really doing it for ourselves. What about financial planning? Isn't it wise to establish a nest egg for the future? This, too, is a good thing, but it can grow to ruling proportions and we forsake generosity. Most sins are ungodly exaggerations of things that are good. As a result, we can supply proof texts to justify our behavior long after it has become idolatrous.