Remembering a Friend

I wrote this blog post a few years ago, and felt it should be shared again today …

* * *

Libby_01My roommate Mike would come home at the end of the day, and inevitably he would talk about Libby, a beautiful godly young woman from church. She was different, and he was intent on winning her heart. And doing it the right way. She was worth it.

He regularly met with Libby’s father, who knew of Mike’s interest in his daughter. They would go out for breakfast and study Scripture together. In time, Mike earned the father’s trust, and he gave his blessing for Mike to court his 20-year-old daughter.

Mike was the first man Libby had ever dated. Their courtship was marked by a purity and passion and tenderness rare even among Christians.

The most innocent among us, children, recognized something special in Libby, and they loved her for it. Her wedding party in March 2003 included seven flower girls and a junior bridesmaid, and she was given a wedding shower attended by 20 friends under 10 years old.

My new bride and I had a lot in common with Mike and Libby. We attended the same small group at church, we served together on the church’s worship team, Libby and my wife were both pregnant with their first babies, and we all shared a love for the Lord.

I remember one particular small group meeting. I remember that Libby was sitting next to Mike on a couch, Mike stroking her hair lovingly. The group leader asked us what we were thankful for. When it came to Libby’s turn, her response was a simple, yet profound one: Heaven.

Libby_02A few days later, Mike and Libby went out of town to celebrate their first wedding anniversary. The weather on the way back was miserable and stormy. There was some skidding. There was another truck. There was a crash. And in an instant, Libby and her preborn baby Sam had moved out of this life and into that place for which Libby was most thankful: Heaven.

It’s been eight years to the day that Libby left us. Nothing has ever affected me more than her death. Not my bout with cancer. Not my two broken engagements. Nothing. For weeks I’d find myself at work weeping over my desk, considering the tragedy of such a beautiful life cut short. I’d lie in bed at night weeping, thinking how Mike must have felt, having been at the wheel when he lost control of the truck. I lost more tears in those weeks than in my previous 35 years combined.

I still listen to a recording of Libby’s funeral from time to time. And every time I do, I’m once again moved by the loss experienced by Mike and by her family. But I’m also convicted. I’m convicted by the way Libby lived her life faithfully for the Lord. I’m convicted by her purity and child-like love for the Lord, and for the way she shared that love with those around her.

A year before her death, Libby providentially recorded a “scratch” vocal track for a song my band was working on. The song, written by a friend of ours, speaks of her love for our church. You can listen to that song, sung by Libby, here. A key line in the song, “I’m pointed toward heaven just knowing you,” is true of Libby’s life.

Libby_03Near the end of Libby’s funeral, after a number of friends had recounted their memories of Libby’s life, choking back tears Mike said, “You guys are looking at a lucky man. All the stories that you’ve heard this morning are about my wife. And I got to be married to her.”

He continued, “Almost one year after we were married, Libby received not just promises, but the fulfillment of them. The great and loving God who had created her, the personification of beauty, summoned her to Himself with this divine accolade: ‘Well done, thou good and faithful servant. Enter into the joy of your Master.’ Now, Libby — my wife, Chris and Suzie’s youngest daughter, Jennifer and Christopher’s sister, and many of your friend — is standing before that feast. She is receiving love unparalleled. And it is only that that offers me consolation. Because who would have thought a year ago that I would be doing this? Who would have thought that our fairy tale story would end so quickly? I didn’t. I love Libby Anne. And I am so glad that we had that year together, and that we have eternity to look forward to.”

Libby’s favorite song, by Chris Rice, was sung at the close of her funeral. “And with your final heartbeat, you kiss the world goodbye, and go in peace and laugh on glory’s side. Fly to Jesus. Fly to Jesus. Fly to Jesus and live.” Fly to Jesus and live, truly.

Libby remains an inspiration for me, though she and her little boy have been dancing with the Lord for eight years now. May the remainder of my days look more like the days Libby lived: with purity, joy, and a sweet love for the Lord that lingers like costly perfume.

I wish you could have known my friend Libby.

2012
03/07
CATEGORY
Christian Community
7 comments

Communication Sandwich

Well Done

I appreciate the dynamic conversations we’ve have on the blog. The breadth of perspectives is thought-provoking, pushing us to think beyond our Christian assumptions.

I’ve got a suggestion on how to improve the discussion even more: Use the “sandwich” technique. Here’s how it works.

When you find yourself disagreeing with either the original post or one of the comments, first find some common ground, something you agree with. When you write your comment, start by affirming the person you’re responding to. Then state your disagreement, trying to do so without impugning the person. Finally, end with affirmation. So you’ve got an affirmation-disagreement-affirmation sandwich.

Here’s an example.

“I appreciate, James, how you make Scripture a priority, how you look to it for truth, and how you are really wrestling with its meaning here. I have to disagree, though, on your interpretation: That verse is more an invitation to marry than a command to do so. Such an interpretation speaks of the Lord’s grace, and not so much of His being a dictator. See what I mean? Anyway, I look forward to the ensuing discussion!”

By using this technique, the person you’re interacting with doesn’t feel like you’re dismissing them out of hand, but that you’re indeed interested in understanding them and furthering a conversation. And so the discussion continues, perhaps with one or both sides being able to improve their understanding of an issue.

I’ve found this technique very helpful in my marriage. If I sense a bit of “attitude” in my wife’s response to someone, I might first let her know that I can see how difficult the situation is, that the other person truly has done or said something offensive. And then I encourage her to consider how her heart is reacting; perhaps it’s a bit too harsh or judgmental. And then I try to again affirm that resisting such a negative attitude is hard work, and that I understand why she might find herself grumbling.

What do you think? Is it do-able? Or is it merely psychobabble? I personally think it’s very helpful, and do hope to see more of it used around the blog. Thanks for thinking about it with me!

  

Badly Done

I’m finding the conversations on this blog to too-easily spiral into ad hominem attacks and close-mindedness. And, frankly, that gets old.

I might post a provocative blog, and then within moments someone finds one little thing that they disagree with. They may agree with 95 percent of it, but they knee-jerk against the precious nugget they’ve unearthed that they find emphatically unacceptable. Like I’m supposed to congratulate them on their insightful discovery of my incompetence and heresy!

And so they jump right in: “Ted, you ignorant slug. Your exegesis is repulsive, your allowing heretical comments to be published is irresponsible, your mandating pet ownership is intolerable, and your use of the term “sandwich” is insensitive to those who don’t like sandwiches. Badly done, Ted. Badly done.”

And the conversation is poisoned.

The next comment may either pile on with “this is just creepy talk” or may rebuke the first comment with “you’re a communist, and probably not even a Christian.”

Soon we’re talking about the relationship between honey bees and Marx, and how so-and-so is a Hitleresque mud baby. And I just feel like deleting the entire thread, turning off comments on the blog altogether, and even shutting down the blog.

I remember one post I’d written over on Boundless, in which I expressed my passionate admiration for an aspect of God’s creation. And, predictably, the very first comment was a downer. It began “I cannot stand …” and ended with “we have some theological differences.” That is not the way to win someone over to your position.

Instead, Suzanne that person should have just sat on her hands and bit her tongue, allowing those who appreciate the Lord’s kindness to relish the moment.

Your communication doesn’t have to be this way. You could try just a bit harder to say something nice once in a while, rather than always hunt for the negative. You could count to 10 before pressing the “post” button and count to 20 before entering in those hard-to-read letters on the confirmation page.

So I implore you: Shape up or I’ll ban all of you. I mean it.

2012
02/19
CATEGORY
Uncategorized
Write comment

“Worship Leader”?

I hear the term all the time, but it still makes me scratch my head in puzzlement.

Of course, those who use the term “Worship Leader” are referring to the person who directs the music during a church service.

But is such a term accurate? Is it biblical?

(I wanted to add, “Or is it propagating heretical notions about the proper role of music and the meaning of “worship” in the life of believers”? But I won’t. Just feels overly snarky.)

I’ve already argued that it’s imprecise to call the singing portion of a church service “worship.” So maybe there’s a better term than “Worship Leader” for the person who facilitates that portion of the service.

Maybe Scripture can provide a better term. Let’s scan the most musical pages of the Bible, the Psalms.

Psalm 4 labels this person the “choirmaster,” or “Chief Musician,” or “director of music.” Psalm 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 31, 36, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 … oh, and most of the rest of the Psalms … identify the person leading the music with this same term.

Searching through various translations of the Bible, I see that the term “Worship Leader” never once appears in Scripture. Only terms like “chief musician” and “director of music.”

A tangential problem I have with the term “Worship Leader,” besides its being unsubstantiated by Scripture, is who is associated by it. Why is the person behind the music stand a “Worship Leader,” while the person behind the pulpit a mere preacher? Aren’t both contributing to the worship service? Aren’t both inviting us to engage the Lord?

Yes, we all love music. It usually resonates with us with more emotionally than preaching, or other elements in a worship service. Music feels more spiritual. It feels more worshipful. But that’s no reason to equate “music” with “worship.” And that’s no reason to reserve the term “worship leader” for the person holding the guitar.

2011
08/26
CATEGORY
Worship
10 comments

What Makes for Good Worship?

I’ve been serving in my church’s worship team regularly for the past few months. We have five services each weekend, so I can’t help but think about the songs I’m playing on stage. I’ve found myself wondering how we on the worship team might best serve those in the congregation, not only with our performance, but more importantly with the selection of songs.

This morning I came across a stellar blog post that helps me better understand the significance of song selection. If you’re involved on your worship team, I’d strongly encourage you to take some time to read it. In How to Evaluate Songs for Congregational Worship Phil Simpson provides 19 comprehensive criteria that song leaders should consider as they select music for their church’s services. Let me highlight the ones that resonated most with me:

1. Are the words man-centered or God-centered? Do they exalt and extol the wonders of the Triune God, or do simply talk about one’s experience?

2. Similarly, are the songs about God, or about worship? Do they speak more about what I will do (“I will worship, I will praise You, I will lift my hands”), or do they speak about who God is (God, you are…)? Tim Challies calls the former ‘songs of procrastination‘ — focusing on acts of worship that we intend to do, but telling us nothing of the God to Whom the worship is due.

3. [A]re the words to the song cohesive? Do they go somewhere, and do they tie together related ideas? Or, are they instead a string of unrelated “glory phrases”?

5. Are the songs instructive? Do they teach us something about God’s character, His actions, or His plan of Redemption? According to Colossians 3:16, we are to “Let the word of Christ dwell in (us) richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in (our) hearts to the Lord”. So, songs to be sung to the Lord, AND instructive to one another? But aren’t these two aims contradictory? Should a song be sung to one another, or to the Lord? According to this verse, it’s not “either/or”, but “both/and”! The words of a song should inform our understanding of Who God is and what He’s done; the awareness of the truths learned should not lead us to cold contemplation, but should result in warm, heartfelt worship.

6. Are the songs cross-centered? Many of our songs should reflect the goal of God’s redemptive plan for all of history. This should never cease as a reason for us to sing and worship. In fact, Revelation 5 tells us that, in heaven, even then, we will not get over the cross. It’s not, “the cross was in the past; what do you have for me now?”; rather, the substitutionary death of our Savior for our sins should be the theme of our worship now, just as it will be for all of eternity: “And they sang a new song, saying, ‘Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation’ ” (see also v. 12). Even in eternity, we will not get over the cross!

7. Do the songs exalt the character and actions of God?

18. It may be a good idea to select songs on a weekly basis which underscore truths related to the sermon, or to a certain theme (a particular attribute of God, for example), rather than a loose association of multiple songs (although the latter can be done, and still have the result of good, God-honoring worship service, since a broad spectrum of God’s excellencies have been paraded before the people to admire in aggregate).

I could go on and excerpt Phil’s entire post, but instead I’ll just encourage you to click over there and read the full thing.

I look forward to the day when we sing fewer songs in the church that culminate with “me above all” or that procrastinate our engagement with the Lord. I look forward to the day when we sing more about the Lord than about our feelings or our “acts of worship.” I look forward to singing more songs that explore the rich truths of our faith in a fresh and relevant way, that draw my focus to the terrible and wonderful and efficacious cross of Christ, that expand my appreciation for the One who founded all of creation and who is exalted as Lord of all.

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2006, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2011
08/25
CATEGORY
Christian Community
Music
Worship
1 comment

Music ≠ Worship

In an effort to get my point across with a splash, I’m going to be hyperbolic:

  • Singing a hymn at church is not worship.
  • Playing guitar at small group is not worship.
  • Humming along to a song in your car is not worship.
  • Raising your hands on Sunday morning is not worship.
  • What the band does on stage is not worship.

These may be expressions of worship, but the worship itself takes place at the heart level. It’s my heart’s response to relationship with my Creator. It’s something I do “in spirit and in truth.” No sound waves are involved.

Without something taking place in the heart, the hymn and guitar and song and hands and band are simply noisy gongs or clanging cymbals, signifying nothing.

When our hearts worship the Lord — that is, when our wills are aligned with His, when we humbly concur with His judgments, when we are grateful for His lovingkindness, when we are overwhelmed with His holiness — then we might express this worship with our bodies.

We may give money to the local church or serve at a crisis pregnancy center. We may work diligently, even when the boss is not around. We may say no to extramarital sexual activity. We may ask forgiveness, and extend forgiveness.

These are all everyday expressions what’s going on in our hearts, all expressions of worship.

Or we may sing a song, we may strum a guitar, we may hum, we may raise our hands, we may rock with the band. But again, those activities are not necessarily worship: They’re merely symptoms of the worship that occurs within us toward God.

* * *

So now I’m left wondering: If heart-level worship is behind all the activities of our Christian lives, if our work and our giving and our purity and our singing can be expressions of worship, why can’t our attitude — that mediator between our hearts and our actions — sometimes look the same from activity to activity?

For example, if my God-honoring hard work is punctuated by moments of light-heartedness with co-workers, why can’t an appropriate amount of light-heartedness be present when I’m with co-church attendees? Why do I have to express worship in such a “reverential” way in the church sanctuary, while I’m free to express my heart’s worship in a more “conversational” or “relational” way in other areas of my life?

The next time I’m singing in church, I’ll resist the urge to furrow my brow in concentration, I’ll resist the urge to have a pained “I’m worshiping” look on my face, I’ll resist the urge to work so hard to invoke the Spirit who is always among us.

Instead, I’ll simply enjoy the music and resonate with the lyrics, worshiping my Savior in the same everyday way that I worship Him while cooking a meal for friends or doing dishes with my wife.

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2009, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2011
06/17
CATEGORY
Music
Worship
Write comment

Worship: What’s The Point?

I need to say at the outset that “worship” includes any reverent engagement with, or response to, the Lord. It can include acts of service, financial giving, working, eating, writing blog posts … and singing. Bob Kauflin does a fine job further defining worship on his blog, WorshipMatters.

In the context of this blog post, I’ll use the term “worship” to mean songs we sing either about God or to God.

So what is the “purpose” of such worship?

I think there are several, but I’d put at the top that worship music should instill sound doctrine. “Whoa!” you might be thinking. “That sounds dry!”

But it’s not dry. Sound doctrine serves to inform us of who God is and what He’s done, as well as who we are in Him. Such engagements with the glorious truth about God invigorate us, helping our hearts resonate with His and spurring us to respond with gratefulness. How can pondering the wonder of God and what He’s done be dry? How can exploring the rich truth of the wondrous and efficacious cross be anything but thrilling?

Is there biblical support for such a position? I think so. Consider Colossians 3:16:

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.

Singing is spoken of in context of “teaching” and “admonishing” (which can be thought of as “correcting,” in the sense of reinforcing correct, or sound, doctrine). The result of such singing is heart-felt thankfulness to God.

As Bob Kauflin acknowledges, “exploring objective truth about God” isn’t the only purpose of worship songs. The lyrics can also be subjective or reflective, words that allow us opportunities to confess our emotional response to who the Lord is and what He’s done. Elsewhere he suggests that we sing for the following three reasons:

  • We sing to remember God’s word.
  • We sing to respond to God’s grace.
  • We sing to reflect God’s glory.

So what’s the purpose of worship music? Why do you worship God in song? And if you’re a “worship leader,” how might a better grasp of the purpose of worship aid you as you select songs for your congregation or small group to sing this week?

HT: Ted Slater

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2007, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2011
06/17
CATEGORY
Music
Worship
Write comment

The Cross: Crucial in Worship

I love songs about the cross of Christ. There is no greater mystery, nothing that inspires more wonder, than the crucifixion of our Lord. It was the greatest act of both love and hate ever portrayed. It’s a manifestation of both the stratospheric height of God’s mercy and the grimy depth of our sin.

Paul boasted in but one thing: the cross. The hosts of heaven include Jesus’ death in their continuous expression of praise, day and night. My sin, as the old hymn goes, not in part but the whole, is nailed to the cross and I bear it no more. We are reconciled to God through the cross of Christ.

You could ponder the cross for a lifetime and never fully explore its depth and significance. It’s both simple and complex. It’s seen as both foolishness and the pinnacle of wisdom. It illustrates both divine compassion and divine wrath. Christ the all-powerful was crucified in weakness. It’s both glorious and shameful. It shows us both God’s fierce anger and His lovingkindness.

So if the cross is central to our faith, and will be throughout eternity, why is it so little referenced in the songs we sing at church?

In his article “The Cross: Crucial in Worship,” Director of Worship Development for Sovereign Grace Ministries Bob Kauflin explains that that Jesus’ atoning work on the cross is our very means of access. It makes our worship acceptable. It’s the object of our adoration.

If you’re a worship leader, please consider what Bob writes in this article. If you’re not a worship leader, please take some time to read through it and wrestle with it. I find my faith fueled when I ponder the points of the article. I think yours will be as well.

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2007, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2011
06/17
CATEGORY
Music
Worship
Write comment

“Worship” is a Transitive Verb

What’s wrong with the following sentences?

    “I threw.”
    “The boy washed.”
    “She picked up.”

What’s wrong is that the verbs are transitive verbs, and require a “direct object.” Those sentences omitted this “object.” The following sentences are correct:

    “I threw the ball.”
    “The boy washed his bicycle.”
    “She picked up the penny.”

Now, what’s wrong with the following sentence?

    “Here I am to worship.”

Again, what’s wrong is that “worship” is a transitive verb, and therefore requires an “object.” In this case, the object is God:

    “Here I am to worship You.”

This is meaningful, because instead of focusing on the action — worshiping — we should focus on the object — God. Using correct grammar facilitates this right focus.

OK, there are two possible ways we can go from here:

  1. We can become critical of people and songs that omit the “object” in sentences that require one.
  2. We can focus on the “object” of our worship, rather than on the act of worshiping.

I’m doing my best to go down path #2.

(FWIW, I love the song “Here I Am to Worship” by Tim Hughes, and find myself quietly adding “You” to the end of that phrase when I sing it in church.)

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2007, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2011
06/17
CATEGORY
Music
Worship
Write comment

Worship Music: For God or For Us?

I honestly see worship music primarily as a gift from God to us. It’s more of a blessing to us, for our edification and joy, than an offering to God or as “spiritual warfare.” It is more about receiving from the Lord than about giving to Him.

This is reinforced in Colossians 3:16: “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” That verse indicates that the singing serves to teach and admonish the singer and those around them, to build up their faith and therefore their joy and love.

I recently came across a sermon by John Piper on “The Inner Essence of Worship.” Among other things, he points out that it is fine to seek happiness in God during times of singing worship:

There are millions of Christians who have absorbed a popular ethic that says it is morally defective to seek our happiness, even in God. This is absolutely deadly for authentic worship. To the degree that this ethic flourishes, to that degree worship dies. Because the inner essence of worship is satisfaction in God, experiencing God as gain.

Therefore I say to you that the basic attitude of worship on Sunday morning is not to come with your hands full to give to God, but with your hands empty, to receive from God. And what you receive in worship is God, not entertainment. You ought to come hungry for God. Come saying, “As a deer pants for the flowing springs, so my soul pants for thee, O God.” God is mightily honored when a people know that they will die of hunger and thirst unless they have God.

Recovering the rightness and indispensability of pursuing our satisfaction in God will go a long way to restoring authenticity and power of worship.

What might happen if worship music is more about “our gift to Him” than “His gift to us”?

If the focus shifts onto our giving to God, one result I have seen again and again is that subtly it is not God that remains at the center but the quality of our giving. Are we singing worthily of the Lord? Are our instrumentalists playing with quality fitting a gift to the Lord? Is the preaching a suitable offering to the Lord? And little by little the focus shifts off the utter indispensability of the Lord himself onto the quality of our performances. And we even start to define excellence and power in worship in terms of the technical distinction of our artistic acts.

Reflecting on our Lord’s character, and the overwhelmingly merciful things He’s done for us, is a gift to us. It moves our hearts toward His, which is heavenly joy.

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2008, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2011
06/17
CATEGORY
Music
Worship
Write comment

A Theory of Creation

Most of us are fairly familiar with theories of evolution. The basic premise is that the variety of life around us resulted from one common ancestor, that over the course of millions of years, genetic change and natural selection have given us rats and pigs and boys.

Please allow me present a particular theory of creation that I’m drawn to: the “orchard” model.

I first came across this theory in Jonathan Sarfati‘s Refuting Evolution. He’s made this book available online; chapter 2 is where he explains this model most clearly.

This theory concurs with the Scriptural account of God creating various “kinds” of organisms, each which reproduced “according to its kind.” Sarfati writes, “Each of these kinds was created with a vast amount of information. There was enough variety in the information in the original creatures so their descendants could adapt to a wide variety of environments.”

The theory goes on to posit that over the course of many generations, as a result of The Fall, genetic information deteriorated and the offspring that were “fittest” for a particular environment “survived.” That resulted in genetic variation within each “kind” of organism (note that we’re not talking “species” here, but the larger category of “kind”).

So we have finches and vultures, beagles and bulldogs, rats and mice, chimpanzees and orangutans, Aboriginals and Pygmies.

Let me copy-paste a very helpful excerpt from the chapter, a portion that differentiates the theory of evolution and a “caricature of creationism” with this “orchard” model.

Figure 1: The evolutionary “tree” which postulates that all today’s species are descended from the one common ancestor (which itself evolved from non-living chemicals). This is what evolution is really all about.

Figure 2: The alleged creationist “lawn” this represents the caricature of creationism presented by Teaching about Evolution—the Genesis “kinds” were the same as today’s species.

Figure 3: The true creationist “orchard” diversity has occurred with time within the original Genesis “kinds” (creationists often call them baramin, from Hebrew bara = create, and min = kind). Much of the evidence of variation presented by Teaching about Evolution refutes only the straw-man version of creationism in Figure 2, but fits the true creationist “orchard” model perfectly well.

If you find this as fascinating as I did, I’d encourage you to check out chapter 2 of Sarfati’s book, and perhaps the rest of the book as well.

I remember the first time I came across this theory. It wasn’t like anything I’d ever heard before, but it made sense. It seemed consistent with the Scriptural account of creation (which I have to add presents itself as historical, rather than myth or metaphor). It also seemed consistent with evidence unearthed by the scientific community. It was as though all the puzzle pieces just came together.

I’ve never been satisfied with the simplistic model put out by some creationists that God made everything “this way” and nothing’s changed, that there is absolutely no genetic drift. I’m also dissatisfied with the evolutionists’ theory that “all this” resulted from cycles of death and an increase of beneficial genetic information over time, a theory that diminishes the Creator/Designer as irrelevant.

This theory, the “orchard” model, just makes sense to me. I appreciate Jonathan Sarfati’s bringing it to my attention.

From the BoundlessLine blog.
Copyright 2008, Focus on the Family.
Used by permission.

2010
10/07
CATEGORY
Worldview
1 comment