Vacation - a relaxing time so far.

I'm enjoying a rare "staycation" this week. Usually when I take a vacation, it means travelling somewhere. Those times are enjoyable too, but there is something particularly relaxing about having some time off at home.

But, it's not as though we've been idle. So far this week we've gone bowling and ice-skating, played at "Bouncing Bears" (an indoor playground for kids), and visited the Iditarod museum. Robyn and I left the kids with Gran and Papa one night and had a nice dinner together. And tomorrow we're having a large group of people over for Thanksgiving.

But it's been a lot of fun to spend more time with the kids as usual, and to have my parents visiting. Here are some pictures from the last couple of days.

This is Moriah's first day of ice-skating. We figure kids growing up in Alaska ought to learn how to ice-skate.

Meredith has come a long way since she first started ice-skating.

I'm also proud of the way Maggie has improved.

The same goes for Sander.

Gran and Papa Paul with the kids at the entrance of the Iditarod Headquarters.

Sunday recap, and the first day of vacation

Yesterday was a particularly busy Lord's Day. I taught the adult Sunday School class in the morning before the service. The passage was Genesis 9:18-29, which includes the famous - or infamous? - verse in which Noah curses Canaan to be a "servant of servants" for his father Ham's sin. Incredibly, this verse was often used to defend the slavery of blacks, on the supposition that Ham's descendants included black Africans. This is a good example of an abuse of Scripture, and thankfully this interpretation has long been discredited.

The morning service was special for a couple of reasons. First, a new family formally became members of the church with their profession of faith. Second, I had the honor of baptizing two little girls. One was the baby of the family we had just received as members, and the other was our very own Monica. What a privilege it is to apply the sign and seal of God's covenant promises to the children of God's people! Some people were surprised at how much water I applied to their heads. I used a handful of water for each word, "Father," "Son," and "Spirit." So, the babies got fairly doused. But, as the water signifies the washing away of our sins by the grace of God, why not use a lot of it?

Here is a picture of the two girls. Monica is the one sleeping!

After having company over in the afternoon, I then preached at the evening service. By the end of the evening, I was exhausted. But today was the first day of a week-long vacation. I've been looking forward to this week off for a while now. I can use the break. Here is a picture of our family after the morning service.

Moriah's baptism, and a rat

Tomorrow I have the great privilege to baptize our fifth child, Monica. Not only is it a blessing to have Monica receive the sign and seal of God's covenant mercies, but it is a great honor to be the one to administer the sacrament to her.

The only other child of ours that I personally baptized was Moriah, our fourth. That was in 2007, when I was still serving as the pastor of Grace Presbyterian Church (OPC) in Norman, Oklahoma. Here I am holding Moriah, with elder Dave by our side.

The baptism itself went well enough, but I'm afraid the the day will always be remembered for something far less auspicious. It was the day the rat appeared at church.

After the service was over, some of the kids were playing in the dining hall behind the sanctuary when they saw the grey rodent scurrying across the floor. The kids were besides themselves with excitement. They were not afraid, mind you, just delighted to see a rat running around dining hall. I grabbed a broom with every intent to kill it. But the children would have nothing of it. At first I ignored their protests, but then I figured the spectacle of my bludgeoning a little furry creature to death could create a scene so unpleasant I would soon regret it. So, I opted for a more palatable way to deal with the rat. With help from others, I managed to trap the little rodent it in an empty garbage can. We then drove it out to a field and let it go.

I hope nothing like that happens tomorrow. I'd like to remember the day Monica was baptized simply as the day Monica was baptized.

Here is the little creature who got far better treatment than he deserved.

"Where is your treasure?"

Every year at this time, as I'm thinking about my message the Sunday before Thanksgiving, I recall the sermon I heard many years ago that pricked my conscience and increased my desire to learn more about the Christian faith.

It was 1992, and I was living in Lexington, Kentucky, where I was wrapping up a master's degree at the University of Kentucky (I still root for the Wildcats in basketball). I was 23 years old and not a believer at the time. But God was at work on my heart. I started to take a real interest in Christianity, remembering some of the Christian friends I had in college and wanting to know more about their faith in God (I recognized they had something within that I lacked). So, out of the blue, with no invitation or encouragement from anyone, I up and visited a local Presbyterian church. I was disappointed in the message, though. Even though I knew next to nothing about Bible, I recognized something wasn't right about the sermon. It didn't scratch where I itched.

A friend in school then invited me to a church he attended on Sunday mornings. I don't remember for sure, but I think it was a Presbyterian church as well. However, unlike the first church I attended, the preacher spoke as though he had a message from God to deliver. I don't remember much of the sermon, but I think the general theme was thanksgiving. What I do remember very clearly was him saying, on the basis of Matthew 6:21, "Where your treasure is, there your heart is also. Where is your treasure?" This last question drilled right into my heart. I couldn't stop asking myself, "where is my treasure, after all?" I knew it wasn't in heaven, and that that wasn't right.

Within a few months' time, after more study and after hearing more good preaching (though at a different church, because I soon moved from Kentucky to Missouri), I became a believer in Christ. As I think about that Sunday, though, I am struck by a couple of things. First, it is fascinating to me that of all he said in the sermon, it was one simple question that took hold in my heart. It wasn't even the gospel itself, but a word that spoke to my conscience and was instrumental in leading me to accept the gospel. Every sermon should center on Christ and the gospel, of course, but God may take one truth or one question and use it to speak to a sinner's heart. Second, I am reminded by the power of preaching. I don't think reading the same words would have had the same effect. There is just no replacement for the preaching of God's Word.

Gran and Papa Paul's visit

Today my parents, a.k.a. "Gran and Papa Paul", arrived today from Missoula for a ten-day visit. Their visits are a win-win-win situation for all involved: they get to spend some time with the grandkids, the grandkids get to spend some time with them, and Robyn and I get spend some time together.

Here they are yukkin' it up at the airport:

A thought on Romans 8:18-25, and dipnetting

I just finished preparing a sermon on Romans 8:18-25. In the course of thinking and writing, dipnetting - of all things! - came to mind. "Dipnetting" is catching salmon by extending a large net into the river. Alaskans have the privilege to dipnet on a few different rivers during the summer. The purpose is not so much the sport of catching the fish, although it's a blast, but to stock the freezer for the winter months.

After a very productive day of dipnetting last summer, we gave thanks to God for his bounty. And, we marveled at the way God, through the natural workings of his creation, provides such an abundance to meet our needs. While all of this is true, my passage in Romans brings another thought to mind.

According to Paul, creation, because of man's sin, has been "subjected to futility" (Romans 8:20). The apostle was thinking of the curse God put on the earth after Adam and Eve's sin, that the ground would not readily yield its fruit for mankind. Rather, "cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;...by the sweat of your face you shall eat bread..." (Genesis 3:17-19).

In the light of these verses, perhaps our success at dipnetting that day also should have reminded us that such tremendous bounty is the exception, not the rule. Usually, the earth yields its fruit, whether its grain or fish, only after much painful toil. How many places in the world are there in which you can catch dozens of large, delicious fish in a hour or two simply by scooping them out of the water? Precious few, I would guess. No doubt our success was a great blessing from God. But it was an exception to the way things usually are; it was the exception that proves the rule, and the curse. Most of the time, creation yields its fruit only with great difficulty.

And this brings to mind a not-too-serious question, but one which may concern many Alaskans: will there be dipnetting in the new creation? I say yes, on the basis of John 21. The Lord, in his resurrection body, commanded his disciples to cast his net on the side of the boat. The haul? 153 fish, "large fish" to be precise. Need I say more?    

John Murray on Romans (with a baby picture to boot)

At the Sunday evening services, I've been preaching through the book of Romans. Unlike my preparation for the morning sermon, which is far more comprehensive and thus takes much more time, I'm relying almost entirely on one commentary. And that is John Murray's The Epistle to the Romans.

In my opinion, this is a great commentary for several reasons. First, Murray writes so clearly. He makes it very easy to follow his reasoning, thought for thought, as he considers the meaning of any given verse or phrase. He's also succinct. It seems most newer, scholarly commentaries spend more time commenting on other commentaries than the text itself. To some extent, Murray does so as well, but always in a helpful way. I get the sense that he's writing to the pastor or interested layman, and not to the scholarly guild.

Maybe most importantly of all, he seems to strike the perfect balance between a rigorous exegesis of the text at hand, with a sensitivity to, and respect for, the Bible's teaching as a whole. Again, modern commentaries often fail to do this, even those written by evangelical scholars. They tend to isolate the text under consideration from the rest of Scripture. It's as though it's wrong to bring any other biblical teaching to bear upon a given text or verse in order to help clarify its meaning. But no one who takes the Scripture to be God's Word actually reads the Bible in this fragmented way. No doubt the fact that Murray was both a exegete and a systematic theologian enabled him to strike this right balance.

In any case, it's been a blessing to work through Romans with Murray as my teacher.

Now, here is the picture of Monica. As you can see, it was taken just a few minutes ago right as I was about to start this blog. This is one of the few pictures we have of her smiling!

Sunday night recap

This is a real quick rundown on the day. Robyn and I have been watching the HBO miniseries John Adams on DVD on Sunday nights, and I want to catch as much of the movie as we can before it gets too late.

Today was quite cold. Tonight the temperature at the church was minus 8. But one thing I love about Alaska is that very rarely does the weather keep people at home. Whether it's bitter cold or driving snow, Alaskans just go about their daily routines. So we had the usual attendance at church.

Today we formally bid farewell to a special family who is moving to Jordan (the country, not the small town in eastern Montana where my dad was born!). They will be missed, especially by our children who have gotten to be good friends with their kids.

In Sunday School we discussed God's covenant with Noah (Gen. 8:20-9:17). We were reminded of how profound the difference is between the world view of one who accepts the Scripture as God's Word, and one who does not. For example, Genesis 9:6 grounds capital punishment for murder in the truth that man is created in the image of God. If a person does not regard Genesis as speaking with any sort of authority in regards to a contemporary issue like the death penalty, and if he does not believe man is made in God's image, then he may object to the idea of capital punishment. He may do this on the grounds that it is just another form of killing, or that it doesn't "work" (i.e., it does not deter other would-be murderers), or for some other reason. But if a Christian enters into debate with him on this issue, they will simply talk past each other because the real issue is not the death penalty itself but the authority and veracity of Scripture.

This holds true for a whole host of other hot-button issues, including abortion, homosexual marriage, and population control. Just below the surface in so many of these controversial subjects are two profoundly different, even antithetical, understandings of God, man and the world.

So much for a short rundown. I preached from Matthew 21 this morning, on the parable of the tenants, and from Romans 8:12-17 this evening, on our being children of God and joint-heirs with Christ by virtue of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Now - movie time!

Snapshots from the day

If it's really true that a picture is worth a thousand words, below are a few thousand words' worth of pictures from today.

Since snow is on the ground, I now do my running indoors. There's a great indoor track just five minutes from our house that is inexpensive and never crowded. It's located in what used to be called the "Multi-Use Sports Complex" (an uninspiring name, to say the least), but is now known as the Curtis D. Menard Memorial Sports Center. Here is the plaque at the entrance of the facility. Recognize any familiar names on it?

On Friday afternoons I often make this local coffee shop my "office". For some reason, whether it is the background noise, or the change of scenery, or - most likely - the caffeine, I'm able to be quite productive here. It's called "Pandemonium".

In front of the coffee shop is this giant wooden, saddled salmon. Where else but in Alaska can you ride a salmon?

And speaking of pandemonium, here are a couple of shots from home. This one is of three eager catechumens, barely able to contain their joy at learning the Westminster Shorter Catechism with dad.

Finally, here is a picture of Sander being, well, Sander. Robyn and I wondered, did he get this way because of too little attention, or because of too much attention?

The majesty of God

I've begun the second volume of Herman Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics, "God and Creation." Bavinck begins by discussing the incomprehensibility of God, the teaching that we can never have an exhaustive knowledge of God. He is infinite, we are finite. He is eternal, we are time-bound. He is the Creator, we are the creatures. By virtue of God's transcendence and radical distinctness from all that we are and know as finite creatures (i.e., his divine majesty), complete comprehension of him is impossible. Yet, because God has revealed himself to us, we can still have genuine (but not total) knowledge of him. Though Scripture says, "Behold, God is great, and we know him not; the number of his years is unsearchable" (Job 36:16), we also read, "And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent" (John 17:3).

After showing how Christian theology, including that of the Reformation, had always maintained this doctrine of God's ineffable majesty, Bavinck notes that over time the stress fell more on knowing the will of God rather than on the knowledge of God himself. He writes, "It is as if people had lost all sense of the majesty and grandeur of God. Disregarding all so-called metaphysical questions, people rushed on to the will of God in order to know and to do it" (pg. 41).

This made me think that perhaps there is a profound theological problem that is common both to liberal Christianity and to much of today's evangelical Christianity. In many ways the two are far apart. But could it be that both movements spring from an impulse to stress the knowing and doing of the will of God, at the expense of focusing on the glory and majesty of God (and making God's glory central to the life and worship of the church)? Liberal Christianity long ago jettisoned serious consideration of the holy character of God in favor of social activism. Modern evangelicalism, on the other hand, while adhering to the basic tenets of orthodoxy, seems far too preoccupied with knowing the "how to's" of Christianity (how to have a good marriage, how to be good parents, how to have less anxiety, etc.). Both tendencies seem to share at least this in common, in Bavinck's words: it is as if people have lost all sense of the majesty and grandeur of God.    

McCheyne's hymn, "When This Passing World Is Done"

This Sunday evening I'm preaching from Romans 8:12-17, which ends with the promise that believers will be glorified with Christ. In the course of doing a little reading on what it means that we will be glorified with Christ, I came across this hymn. I didn't realize we had it in our hymnal, and I don't ever recall singing it. But it is a gem. It speaks not only of future glory with Christ, but also of the infinite debt of thanks and praise we owe to God for the riches of his redeeming grace.

"When This Passing World is Done"
Robert Murray McCheyne

When this passing world is done,
when has sunk yon glaring sun,
when we stand with Christ in glory,
looking o'er life's finished story,
then, Lord shall I fully know,
not till then, how much I owe.

When I hear the wicked call
on the rocks and hills to fall,
when I see them start and shrink
on the fiery deluge brink,
then, Lord, shall I fully know,
not till then, how much I owe.

When I stand before the throne,
dressed in beauty not my own,
when I see thee as thou art,
love thee with unsinning heart,
then, Lord, shall I fully know,
not till then, how much I owe.

When the praise of heav'n I hear,
loud as thunders to the ear,
loud as many waters' noise,
sweet as harp's melodious voice,
then, Lord, shall I fully know,
not till then, how much I owe.

Chosen not for good in me,
wakened up from wrath to flee,
hidden in the Savior's side,
by the Spirit sanctified,
teach me, Lord, on earth to know,
by my love, how much I owe.

November 9th - First day of snow this winter

We knew the white stuff had to come soon. And it came, this morning - about six inches of it.

This is what we see when we look out our dining room window. Not a bad view!

This is the church:

The mist coming off the lake was pretty.

Another shot of Wasilla Lake.

Meredith is smiling after her orthodontist's appointment - maybe because it was painless.

The first snow always looks nice. In a few months we'll be sick of snow, but it was fun to have some today.

Sunday night recap

Tonight I'll begin and end this recap with a picture, and put one in the middle for good measure.

First, here are the kids after their visit yesterday with a face painter at Fred Meyer's:

Now for a rundown on the day. I had a full load today, filling in for Ron for Sunday School in addition to preaching in the morning and evening. The Sunday School lesson was on Noah and the flood. I've preached through Genesis before, but in my studies I didn't pay much attention to the chiastic that is present in various parts of the book, and which modern commentaries often discuss. Chiasms just never interested me much, but I was impressed with what appears to be a definite chiastic structure to the entire flood narrative (Genesis 6:9-9:19). It certainly supports the view (which I hold) that Genesis was substantially written by one author (Moses) and is not just a patchwork of various strands of oral tradition clumsily thrown together by a later redactor, as higher critical scholars have maintained.

While chiasm was on my brain, I also realized our children have a chiastic structure!:

A   Girl

B      Girl

C         Boy

B'      Girl

A'   Girl

In any case, it was good to look at the account of Noah and the flood from this different perspective.

In the morning I preached from Matthew 21:23-32, which includes the parable of two sons who are both commanded by their father to go and work in his vineyard. The first one says he won't, but later changes his mind and goes. And the second says he will, but doesn't go. The point is, notorious sinners such as tax collectors and prostitutes (the first son) were entering into the kingdom before the religious leaders of Israel (the second son). One application I made from this parable was for those growing up in the church. Being a member of the church does not save a person. But, I said, you are saved in the same way that drunkards, and drug addicts, and the promiscuous, and the adulterous, and cheaters and liars, and every other great sinner is saved, by the blood of Christ shed upon the cross. In other words, all who enter the kingdom of God, come in the same way - by God's grace and the work of Christ.

Here is Monica and Moriah at the morning service:

It's not the most flattering shot of Monica we've taken!

At the evening service, I preached from Romans 8:5-11. In a nutshell, we have the hope and promise of resurrection in the face of death since the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in us and will also give life to our mortal bodies.

Finally, the night ended with some serious excitement: SNOW! Even though this will be our third Alaska winter, the kids were thrilled to discover there was snow on the ground outside. Here the kids are checking it out.

The Heidelberg Catechism

Today Robyn and I (and Monica, of course!) attended a Reformation Day Conference hosted by Covenant Bible Church in Chugiak. The speaker was Dr. Lyle Bierma of Calvin Theological Seminary, and his subject was the Heidelberg Catechism.

Being Presbyterian, I am much more familiar with the Westminster Standards than the Heidelberg Catechism, which is used as a confessional standard by Dutch Reformed churches. In fact, apart from small portions, I had never even read it until this week. But knowing this conference was coming, I decided to read through it ahead of time. I didn't quite finish, but got a good taste of it.

As Dr. Bierma pointed out, the Heidelberg catechism is much more pastoral and applicatory in tone than the Westminster Shorter Catechism. The theology is the same in both, but the Heidelberg speaks more directly to the heart. I thought, how much more valuable is this little catechism, written sometime in the 1560's, than so much of the popular "inspirational" Christian literature on the shelves today? It's too bad more Christians aren't familiar with it (and obviously I say the same for the Westminster Standards!).

One good point Dr. Bierma made was that the stress on assurance found throughout the catechism was a response to the general lack of assurance medieval Christians suffered because of Roman Catholic teaching. I've heard before that the Protestant teaching that we can be assured of our salvation, by faith in Christ, was considered the greatest heresy of the Reformation by some Catholic theologians. But what a great doctrine it is - that I can know I am saved by the finished work of Christ on the cross!

That theme of assurance is present in Question and Answer 26, which I thought was wonderful:

What do you believe when you say, "I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth"?


That the eternal Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
who out of nothing created heaven and earth
and everything in them,
who still upholds and rules them
by his eternal counsel and providence,
is my God and Father
because of Christ his Son.


I trust him so much that I do not doubt
he will provide
whatever I need
for body and soul,
and he will turn to my good
whatever adversity he sends me
in this sad world.


He is able to do this because he is almighty God;
he desires to do this because he is a faithful Father.

Meditating on these words is good for the soul!

Leviticus and Christ

As long as I can muster the necessary mental focus, I enjoy listening to sermons, lectures, and theological discussions on my mp3 player while I run. During my run today, I heard a very timely discussion about the significance of the Old Testament sacrifices that are spelled out in the first five chapters of Leviticus. It was "timely" in a purely personal way, as I'm now reading through the book of Leviticus in the course of my regular Bible reading. The guest of the discussion was an Old Testament professor at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary by the name of Dr. Ben Shaw.

Leviticus is not the first place I would go if I just wanted to read some Scripture for edification or comfort. I'd be surprised if there is anyone who would! But Dr. Shaw explained how the various sacrifices detailed in Leviticus point to Christ, and shed light on his work on the cross. A couple of points he made were helpful to me, even if by way of reminder. First, the animal sacrifices were given by God in order to teach the Israelites that, if they are to worship God and be in his holy presence, there must be atonement for their sin. And that needed atonement was signified by the killing of various animals at the altar of God.

This idea, that their must be the shedding of blood to take away sin (Heb. 9:22), is not popular, both in general thinking and in some quarters of the church. It is seen as primitive, offensive, and somehow contrary to the idea of a God of love. Yet how else to explain the death of Christ on the cross, especially in the light of the old covenant sacrifices? "You know that he appeared to take away sins" (1 John 3:5).

The second helpful point Dr. Shaw made was, the fact that the sacrifices were repeated over and over pointed to the need for a once-for-all, perfect sacrifice. This was not new to me, because Hebrews teaches this very thing (Hebrews 10:1-18). Yet it helped to think about it from the perspective of the Old Testament saints. Here they were, watching over and over again, year after year, the continual sacrifice of animals. Some, by faith, must have understood - there is a better, more perfect sacrifice coming that will take away my sins once and for all.

I don't know if I'll ever preach through Leviticus. But there is nothing like knowing it, like all of Scripture, bears witness to the grace of God in Jesus Christ.

Bavinck on Apologetics

No argument, proof, or evidence, no matter how compelling to the mind of the believer, can by itself convince a person of the truth of the Christian faith. Only the Spirit of God can engender faith in the human heart. That much is sure. But, one apologetic appeal that I believe can be useful is the perfect sense Christianity makes of the world, and our experience in it. That is not to say Christians have all the answers (indeed, believing in Christ raises all sorts of new and unanswerable questions), but only Christianity provides the comprehensive worldview that comports with all the facts of life.

I came across this quote from Herman Bavinck's Prolegomena that says it well. He's speaking of the benefits of apologetics:

Secondly, it (apologetics) teaches that Christians, even though they cannot confer faith on anyone, need not hide from their opponents in embarrassed silence. With their faith they do not stand as isolated aliens in the midst of the world but find support for it in nature and history, in science and art, in society and state, in the heart and conscience of every human being. The Christian worldview alone is one that fits the reality of the world and of life. (pg. 515)

I thought this was a good reminder that the truth of Christianity is never totally foreign; at some point the truth must resonate with every person because it describes how things really are.

Trueman on ministry, the internet, and so-called "British pubs"

At Westminster one of my church history professors was Dr. Carl Trueman, who at that time was fresh off the boat (O.K., airplane) from England and just beginning his new teaching position here in the States. He was an immediate hit among us students, not only for his engaging lectures, but also for his unique perspective on almost everything.

His latest article at Reformation 21 is, as usual, thought-provoking. As the title of this post indicates, he does write about America's versions of the "British pub" (which he says resemble nothing back home), but more significantly he offers some good thoughts about the nature of God's call upon his people to service in his Kingdom. Most of us, Trueman argues, are called to serve locally: Like all believers, I am called to serve others, and primarily to serve where God has placed me.

He goes on to say:

This realization that the Lord has called me - and I am guessing, most of us - to serve first and foremost wherever we actually are - our families, our congregations, our denominations, and our workplaces - is surely a sobering one. It lacks so much ambition, and shows such a limited vision, after all. Yet in this regard, I think the church is best served by those with such limited ambitions and myopia. I am not much of a web-wandered but on the odd occasion I do a bit of websurfing, I am struck by how many Christians, pastors, professors, and laity, have blogs, Facebook pages, and Twitters going. How many millions of Christian hours are wasted writing this stuff, engaging in mindless blogthreads, and telling the world about personal trivia?

And further:

When I see Christians blogging so much, I wonder how many sermons are being prepared on the fly because of lack of time, how many parishioners go unvisited, how many prayers remained unprayed, how many words of love and affection to spouses and children are never said, how many books - let alone the Bible - are left unread, and how many fellowships atrophy through lack of any real, meaningful social and spiritual intercourse. Indeed, to summarize: how many online "communities' (sic) prosper to the detriment of the real, physical communities into which the Lord has placed each and every one of us? How many complain of insufficient time to do the boring routines of the Christian life - worship services, Sunday School, visiting the sick and the aged, fellowship, Bible reading, prayer - and yet always somehow manage to fit in a quick twitter or blog or podcast or change to their Facebook status?

As a pastor - and speaking as one who started blogging again recently! - I find these challenging thoughts. There is an undeniable appeal to blogging, and to using the internet generally, in that it offers an escape from the too-strict confines of the local and the routine. Yet, as Trueman reminds us, that is just where you and I are called to serve.

It boils down to a question of priorities. Based on my few years' experience as a pastor, it seems to me that so much of the work of ministry is getting priorities straight. There are a million worthy things to be done. But what is most important (not "pressing", but truly important)? I could be missing the mark even while doing that which is valuable in itself. There's no question I can spend too much time on the internet, or blogging (and sometimes do). But I can also spend too much time reading the Bible, or studying, or talking on the phone, or visiting, or counseling, or even praying, if there is at that time some more important work I ought to doing.

The crucial question is, from the perspective of eternity, is this activity the most important for me to be engaged in, right now? There's no easy answer to that question. But in general, as Trueman argues, God calls you and me to serve him right where he's placed us.

Monday meanderings

First, here is a picture of Moriah's odd choice of places to sleep that I described in yesterday's post:

Here's a girl who takes Psalm 84:10 very seriously: "I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of wickedness." Not even sleep will keep her from her post!

We did something unusual today. At the advice of a friend who is a mom, we went to the local humane society to play with the cats and dogs. I had never done that before, so I didn't know what to expect. But it was great fun both for the kids and for us. The workers were very welcoming and gave us access to almost all the pets with the exception of the puppies who have already been claimed for adoption. Apparently they don't let strangers play with them for fear of their getting injured somehow. I didn't quite follow, but that's their policy. 

In any case, we first played with several different kittens. Growing up, it seemed we always had kittens around. I had forgotten how playful they are. Next, the older kids spent a little time with the one puppy there who was yet to be adopted. Finally, we took an adult lab to a yard outside for a few minutes. He seemed like a good dog - full of energy and eager to fetch. 

After that, we looked at a pop-up camper for sale at the Butte (there is a local town called "Butte", but everyone here refers to it as "the" Butte for some reason). We liked it but are not sure if we'll see it again.

Here are some pictures from the humane society.

Sunday night recap

I'll start this Sunday night recap with a little incident that happened Saturday night. Caught up in the excitement of the evening, because we had so many trick-or-treaters coming to our door, Sander got carried away and somehow hit his head on the edge of a desk. I didn't see it happen; I just saw a kid coming upstairs with blood all over his face. It would have made a pretty good Halloween get-up, only it was for real. For all the blood, though, the cut wasn't too deep - no stitches or super-glue required. Best of all, at least from Sander's point of view, he got to go to church sporting this big colorful band-aid on his forehead.

At Sunday School, Ron did another fine job teaching from Genesis. One verse we discussed is, I think, one of the most intriguing in all of Scripture: "Enoch walked with God, and he was not, for God took him" (Genesis 5:24). It is so matter-of-fact, and raises all sorts of unanswerable questions (Was his body transformed into an immortal body? What will happen to Enoch at the resurrection? Why did God do this?). Hebrews tells us this, at least: it was by faith that Enoch was taken up by God (Hebrews 11:5).

In the morning I preached on Matthew 21:18-22, in which Jesus cursed the fig tree for not bearing any fruit. When his disciples asked him about it, he taught them about faith and prayer. I said that, first, Jesus cursed the fig tree as a sign of God's judgment that hung over Israel because of her fruitlessness. Next, I argued that Jesus then taught his disciples about faith and prayer in order to show them how they, unlike Israel, may bear genuine spiritual fruit. I think the most salient point was, in order for us to bear any good fruit, we must be united to Christ by faith.

In the evening it was Romans 8:1-4. I followed John Murray in saying that the freedom from condemnation in view in v. 1 ("There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus") is not so much freedom from the guilt of sin as it is from the power of sin (though obviously Paul, and the Bible, teaches that in Christ we are free from the guilt of sin). It seems counterintuitive, but I believe the context supports this understanding.

The last couple of days I've had a few meetings with different people about various matters, sometimes of a more difficult and delicate nature. I found myself more than once wishing I had more wisdom, and wishing I knew just the right words to say.

We had a "where is a camera when you need one?" moment after the evening service tonight. Somehow Moriah managed to fall asleep on the floor in the doorway separating the sanctuary from the fellowship hall. Her body was propping open one of the doors, so people could walk in or out of the sanctuary by stepping over her. One member did take a picture, and I hope to post it after she e-mails it to me.

Finally, here is a great quote from Augustine that a member of the church e-mailed to me recently (along with many other memorable quotes):

The church is like Noah's ark - if it were not for the storm outside no one could stand the stench inside.

Reformation Day Reading - Luther's "Christian Liberty"

On this day, in 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, an act which seemed inconsequential at the time but became the spark for the Protestant Reformation. For that reason, October 31st is not only Halloween, but more significantly for those of us who cherish the Protestant understanding of the Christian faith, it is "Reformation Day". With that in mind, I set out this week to re-read Christian Liberty, a little tract written by Martin Luther that I had first read in seminary. In it, Luther describes the Christian faith in a clear, powerful, and memorable way.

Luther sets out to explain the true freedom a person comes to possess and enjoy in Christ. As I read it, I thought about the very title of the booklet: "Christian Liberty". Many people would consider that an oxymoron, since by nature we are prone to view Christianity is anything but the way of true freedom. Christ is not the source of personal freedom, but a threat to it!

In any case, Luther begins the work with this seemingly paradoxical statement:

I shall set down the following two propositions concerning the freedom and the bondage of the spirit:

A Christian is a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none.

A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all.

As he goes on to explain, a Christian is perfectly free in that he no longer pursues good works as a means of salvation. Moreover, he is a "lord" because God causes all things - even the cross and death - to serve his salvation. And a Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all in that he is called to serve his neighbor for the sake of Christ. Indeed, he is to be nothing less than a Christ to his neighbor.

The key to this paradox is understanding that a Christian, because he possesses all things in Christ through faith and faith alone, has no need to pursue works as a means of obtaining righteousness and eternal life. And because of his deliverance from works as a means of salvation, a Christian is now free to serve. Therefore, according to Luther, a Christian ought to think this way:

Although I am an unworthy and condemned man, my God has given me in Christ all the riches of righteousness and salvation without any merit on my part, out of pure, free mercy, so that from now on I need nothing except faith which believes this is true. Why should I not therefore freely, joyfully, with all my heart, and with an eager will do all things which I know are pleasing and acceptable to such a Father who has overwhelmed me with his inestimable riches? I will therefore give myself as a Christ to my neighbor, just as Christ offered himself to me; I will do nothing in this life except what I see is necessary, profitable, and salutary to my neighbor, since through faith I have an abundance of all good things in Christ.

Again, the freedom of the Christian consists in his full and free justification apart from works. But this freedom, which is through Christ, is a freedom to become like Christ - a humble servant of others:

Although the Christian is thus free from all works, he ought in his liberty to empty himself, take upon himself the form of a servant, be made in the likeness of men, be found in human form, and to serve, help, and in every way deal with his neighbor as he sees that God through Christ has dealt and still deals with him.

In this way, Luther in this tract draws out for the Christian the implications of that glorious Reformation truth which Luther championed, justification by faith alone.

I'm no scholar of Luther or Calvin, but my understanding is that while Luther emphasized the doctrine of justification by faith alone, Calvin gave far more stress in his theology to the believer's union with Christ. Which is why I found the following passage remarkable. In it Luther gives a thrilling description of our being united with Christ as a bride is with her bridegroom:

Christ is full of grace, life, and salvation. The soul is full of sins, death, and damnation. Now let faith come between them and sins, death, and damnation will be Christ's, while grace, life, and salvation will be the soul's; for if Christ is a bridegroom, he must take upon himself the things which are his bride's and bestow upon her the things that are his. If he gives her his body and very self, how shall he not give her all that is his? And if he takes the body of the bride, how shall he not take all that is hers?

Here is the "great exchange" - we give Christ our sin and death, he gives us his righteousness and life. And by faith in Christ we obtain eternal salvation and enjoy perfect freedom. Now there is something worth celebrating on October 31st!

Herman Bavinck on the Internet

Well, sort of. Herman Bavinck died in 1921, so technically he couldn't have written about the internet (but in one sense, he is "on" the internet - see the Bavinck blog). However, an article I came across today - on the internet! - reminded me of something I had read in Bavinck's Prolegomena.

According to the article, today is the 40th birthday of the internet. Way back in 1969, on October 29th, a team of computer engineers, led by a Professor Leonard Kleinrock, enabled two distant computers to "talk" to each other for the very first time. And the rest, as they say, is history.

This is interesting for a couple of reasons. First, I had no idea the internet is almost as old as me (I was born in August of that year). So, when I tell my children, "Listen, when I was your age, there was no such thing as the internet!", I now know that statement is technically incorrect. And this is good to know, because if there is a logical or factual flaw in anything I say, sooner or later my eldest daughter will discover it and try to use it to her advantage.

Second, it is interesting because of how much a part of peoples' lives the internet has become since its invention four decades ago. The internet is certainly a big part of my life. Whether that is a good thing or not is debatable, but the fact is I find it hard to imagine what life was ever like before e-mail, Facebook, online shopping, online news, Wikipedia, blogs, internet radio, Google maps, st.louis.cardinals.mlb.com, and so on.

The internet is a two-edged sword. Like any technology, it is morally neutral in itself but in our hands it becomes an instrument either for good or for ill. E-mail and Facebook is a wonderfully convenient way to communicate with others, and to stay in touch with friends. But is my life really enriched by knowing what 80's song my college buddy is most like?

And I'm not convinced the internet saves us much time. Sure, it is much faster to send pictures to relatives via e-mail or Facebook, compared with the old-fashioned method of developing film and using "snail-mail". But the internet could very well be the biggest time-wasting device ever created (it may be a toss-up between it and television). Who hasn't kicked himself after spending needless time on the computer, knowing there are far more pressing and important things to be done? When it's all said and done, the increasingly-rare person who avoids all things internet may prove to be the wisest among us.

I'm also struck by the strange way the internet distorts human relations and interpersonal communication. I've known of an online "dating" relationship that completed fizzled once the two people actually met in person. Typing words onto a screen is a wholly inadequate substitute for face-to-face interaction. And, the internet is probably the world's worst forum for engaging in theological (or political) debate. I can't believe some of things Christians will say online.

On an even more serious level, the internet has been the means for all sorts of wickedness. What immediately comes to mind is the pornography epidemic it has fostered. If the devil tried to create the perfect tool to make pornography as accessible as possible to as many people as possible, all as secretly as possible, he would have invented the internet. And this torrent of online pornography only spawns more depraved and dangerous sexual sin.

On the other hand, the internet can serve the interests of the Kingdom of God. Used rightly, it can be a great tool for the church (though it can never be a substitute for the church!). I personally benefit from various Christian websites, blogs, online books, articles, lectures, and sermons. And I'm sure many, many other believers profit as well from the all the good resources online.

What does Bavinck have to do with all this? In a section in which he discusses the necessity of written Scripture, Bavinck argues that the increasing complexity of the world demands a fixed and unchanging, and thus inscripturated, Word of God:

Scripture is the word of God that has completely entered into the world. It makes that word universal and everlasting, and rescues it from error and lies, from oblivion and transcience. To the degree that humankind becomes larger, life becomes shorter, the memory weaker, science more extensive, error more serious, and deception more brazen, the necessity of Holy Scripture increases. (472)

And then what he wrote next is extremely relevant for our information and internet age:

Print and the press are gaining in significance in every area of life. The invention of printing was a giant step to heaven and to hell.

If the printing press was a giant step to heaven and to hell, how much more so the internet?

Another word on memorizing scripture

I came across a passage today from Herman Bavinck's Prolegomena that also testifies to the value of memorizing Scripture. He isn't writing about that topic per se, but what he says is certainly relevant:

All believers have the experience that in the best moments of their life they are also most firm in their belief in Scripture. The believer's confidence in Christ increases along with their confidence in Scripture and, conversely, ignorance of the Scriptures is automatically and proportionately ignorance of Christ (Jerome). (pg. 440)

In other words, we cannot grow in the knowledge of Christ, unless we are growing in confidence in, and knowledge of, the Bible. So to memorize Scripture, as unexciting and mundane it may seem at times, is one sure path to growing in the grace and knowledge of the person of Christ. 

Memorizing Scripture

I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you.
Psalm 119:11

I don't know the Bible as well as I ought. I'll be honest, as a pastor, there are times when I am embarrassed by my lack of mastery of the Scriptures. When speaking with others, relevant passages will come to mind, but I cannot recite them verbatim. So I'll say something like, "I'm paraphrasing here, but in some place Jesus said,..." Or every so often, someone will ask, "Where is the verse that says (such and such)?" And I'm a bit ashamed when I can't give a quick answer.

It's only a small consolation to know I'm not alone in this. We live in a day and age in which most people are biblically illiterate. I remember once, before I became a Christian, watching a football game on T.V. with a friend who grew up in a church-going home. After the screen flashed the ubiquitous "John 3:16" sign someone was holding up, I asked my friend, "I see that everywhere - what does that mean?" I had no idea, but even worse, my church-going friend didn't know either! So, both in and out of the church, people simply don't know the Bible.

And in case you're wondering, John 3:16 says - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." It's O.K., I didn't know it either!

While this ignorance is understandable, at least for Christians, it's inexcusable. Obviously the solution is to read and study the Bible more. But an indispensable part of that study is committing Scripture to memory. Psalm 119:11 says, "I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you." The way to store up God's Word in your heart is to memorize it.

Psalm 1 says the man is blessed who delights "in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night" (v.2). The word "meditate" in Hebrew means literally to "groan" or "utter". The idea is that of a person going over and over in his mind some portion of God's Word, muttering it to himself as he does. Here you see the close connection between meditation and memorization. Memorizing Scripture is really forced meditation. As you say the same words over and over, they become fixed both in your heart and mind.

This is one great value of a diligent and consistent effort to memorize Scripture - you are meditating on God's Word. And in the hustle and bustle and push and pull of our complicated, busy, distracted lives, if you don't plan to meditate on, and memorize, Scripture, it won't happen. In the parable of the sower, when Jesus spoke of the thorns that will choke the word that has been implanted in the heart, he said that they stand for, among other things, "the cares of the world" (Mark 4:19). As busy people taken up with all sorts of concerns and worries, we must take care lest the cares of the world leave no more room in our minds for thoughts of God. Thus, memorizing verses and passages will help you to ponder and meditate on God's Word. And, as Psalm 1 says, this is the way to be blessed.

Another benefit of memorizing Scripture is that once you commit a verse or passage to memory, it becomes yours; you own it. The Spirit will bring it to mind at just the right time to minister to you, or through you, to another. And that brings up another reason to commit Scripture to memory, especially for preachers. If you are a pastor, I am convinced that nothing will make your preaching and teaching ministry more effective over the long haul than a growing mastery of God's Word. When I preach or teach, or counsel, how I wish I knew the Bible better! Nothing lends weightiness to a minister's words than a well-chosen verse or passage that speaks right to the heart of a matter.

How do you go about memorizing Scripture? It helps if you are young! Children have an amazing capacity to memorize, and I am glad my kids are memorizing both Scripture and catechism (and, I have to give a hearty thanks to their Sunday School teachers, and to their mother, who regularly assign them Bible verses to memorize).

If you're not young, here is what works for me. I work on memorizing a larger passage at the same time as three or four different verses. Right now, I am trying to memorize Psalm 119 and at the same time various New Testament verses. I work on Bible memorization 15 minutes at a time, using 3 X 5 note cards. I don't get to it every day, and there will be stretches of days or even weeks at a time when I don't work on memorization (it's a lot like physical exercise that way). But the beautiful thing about memorizing Scripture is, it is always time well spent. And diligence and consistency will pay big dividends.

Now, I will say the following not in order to boast, but to show that it is possible even for someone with average intelligence to memorize a large portion of Scripture: while I was serving as a one-year pastoral intern, I memorized the entire book of Romans. All 16 chapters. I did it for one hour of seminary credit, but the real benefit was getting into Romans, and getting Romans into me. I couldn't recite it now, but the exercise was still worth every minute I put into it.

Paul says in Colossians 3:16, "Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly." One sure way to have Christ's Word indwelling in you richly, is to commit it to memory. Memorizing is hard work - it is grunt work! - but it is never wasted time.

One Monday in the life of the Johnson family

Here's a photo tour of our day. Monday is my day off, and I usually spend it with Robyn and the kids.

On Mondays, just like on Tuesdays, and Wednesdays, and Thursdays, and Fridays, and Saturdays, and Sundays, I like to start off with a hot cup of coffee. Maggie was awake, and seem interested in the coffee-making process, so I taught her how to do it. I'm always looking to give my children new and exciting learning opportunities. What could be more exciting than learning how to make dad's morning coffee!

Here is our usual Monday breakfast - cinnamon rolls. Robyn makes these from whole-grain wheat, and so they are very healthy.

What every kid loves - a trip to the dentist! The three older kids had their teeth cleaned today. And, believe it or not, they were very excited to go. We'll see how long that lasts. Here's Sander, "laid-back" and ready to get those choppers cleaned.

In addition to the free toothbrush, floss, sticker, and toy each child received, they each also got to take home flavored chapstick. Moriah spent the rest of day applying it to her lips. Though Moriah gives us a lot to worry about, at least today we did NOT have to worry about her precious lips getting chapped. I told Robyn, trying to be witty, "We should start calling Moriah 'Suzy Chapstick'." Silence. I forgot my rule with Robyn - no references to pre-1985 popular culture (I'm a tad older than her, you see).

Here's Meredith waiting patiently for her turn in the dentist's chair. As you can see, she is a reader.

After the dentist, it was off to one of our favorite Monday destinations - Wal-Mart! Moriah took it upon herself to add one apple to our cart. Maybe licking her fruit-flavored lips all day gave her a hankering for the real thing.

 Monica is safely ensconced in her child-seat cocoon.

If you factor in Monica's car seat, we are a TWO cart Wal-Mart family. 

Our plan was to spend some time at another favorite local haunt, Wonderland Park. As you can see, the weather was less than "wonder"ful. So, instead....

...we to a new cafe in town, The Metro. Here the kids are enjoying a peach and cherry steamer. 

Meredith had her first swimming lesson today. I was proud of how hard she tried. 

There you go - a fairly typical Monday for the Johnsons.

Sunday night recap

First, baseball. I just read that Tony La Russa will very likely be returning as the Cardinals' skipper in 2010. I am glad to hear it. Like all Cards fans, I still have a very bitter taste in my mouth after the 2009 post season: three games, three losses. There is some unfinished work to be done, and who better to see to it than "TLR"?

Now, for the real business of the day - worship. Worship was the general theme of my morning sermon. I preached from Matthew 21:12-17, the account of Jesus cleansing the temple. Matthew includes the intriguing detail that Jesus, after wreaking havoc on the merchantmen and moneychangers, healed the blind and the lame. It is very likely that these people were limited in their access to the temple because of their physical defects (a supposition based on Leviticus 21:18 and 2 Samuel 5:8). For that reason, Jesus' healed them for the very purpose that they might draw near to the altar of God for worship. The lesson for us is that, in order to truly worship God, we must first be healed by Jesus. Christ must cleanse us from our sin and guilt, making us whole, so that we might draw near to God and worship him.

In the evening I preached from Romans 7:14-25. The great question interpreters have struggled to answer is, was Paul speaking of his pre-conversion state, or of his experience as a believer? Following John Murray, whose commentary I am using for my sermons, I based my sermon on the latter understanding. Paul was writing about his struggle with sin as a Christian. I said that, in this passage, the apostle comes within an inch of disowning his sin, i.e., blaming it on the sinful nature within him (v.20). But he says this not to evade responsibility for his sin, but in order to argue that, because he belongs to Jesus Christ, sin is a contradiction of his most basic identity. And as Christians in the heat of the battle against sin, we also must remember that before all else, we are those united to Christ. In a very real sense, our sin is a contradiction of who we are.

I talked with a member after the service about this passage. We both agreed that it is one which can easily be mis-applied, to make excuses for sinning. But, I believe this passage, properly understood, should be a great encouragement for us as we engage in the very difficult struggle with sin.

It was a good day at church. Like always, there were reasons to be encouraged, plus one or two things that were less than encouraging. But, if I believe the words I preached this morning, we were gathered before the presence of Christ to worship him. And that is always a good thing.      

Not glorious enough

About this time each year, I take our cars to a local tire shop to have studded tires put on for the winter. This is a ritual known up here as "change over". This morning, as I waited for the shop to open (it's a good idea to arrive early since everybody else is doing change over, too), I finished listening to a debate between Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson on the existence of God. I wrote earlier that this debate, and others between them, is the subject of Collision, a new movie soon to be released.

I also wrote that I was struck by Hitchens' worshipful tone as he spoke about the transcendent beauty of the universe. His point was that an atheist, though he denies the existence of God, is not unable to appreciate the numinous and awe-inspiring. In fact, according to Hitchens, only by jettisoning age-old religious superstitions has man been able to discover the beauty of our universe. He appealed to the stunning images of the far reaches of space taken by the Hubble Space Telescope (thus the starry picture above). How can anyone say that a burning bush in the wilderness is more glorious, or beautiful than that? Or how can the miracle of Jesus casting a legion of demons into a herd of swine be considered anything other than vulgar in comparison to the revelation of beauty found in nature?

I believe there are good answers to these questions. But, what I found fascinating in his argument was the explicit language of worship. He spoke of the "absolute magnificence," "underlying beauty," "majesty", and "awe" of nature. This is why I believe that Hitchens may be in fact closer to pantheism than atheism. Though he denies God, he transfers to nature the language of worship and awe that properly belongs to God.

What Hitchens implies by all of this, is that nature, or creation, is sufficient in itself to satisfy our innate longing to experience the transcendent, the glorious, the numinous. And there I believe he is wrong. As awe-inspiring as the Hubble images may be, they, or any wonder of creation, cannot in the end answer to our God-given longing for eternity. Nature is finite, but we are created in the image of an infinite and eternal God. And we were made to know him. "He...put eternity into man's heart" (Ecclesiastes 3:11). Therefore, nothing less than God can satisfy our longing for the transcendent. Hitchens has replaced God with nature, and is in effect worshiping what John Calvin called a "shadow diety".

Ravi Zacharias said, somewhere, that the only thing that can sustain wonder in the human heart is another person. God has given us the creation, with all its beauty, so that we would be led by it to know the Creator who made it. Only when we look to God do we find the one source of beauty, majesty, and wonder that will fully satisfy our heart's longing for the eternal and transcendent.    

When Jesus prayed his high priestly prayer in John 17, he said, "Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world" (v.24). Jesus knows what is the deepest longing of our hearts, and that is to see (and worship) that which is infinitely, eternally glorious. That glory is not found in nature, but in Christ.

Miscellaneous

Last night I took the lovely and talented Mrs. Johnson out for a long-overdue date night. The three of us - Monica goes wherever mom goes - had a relaxing time. First we enjoyed a delicious meal at a new tapas restaurant in Wasilla called The Grape Tap. We followed that with some coffee and checkers at Pandemonium, a favorite coffee shop of ours. With all humility, and all due respect for my worthy checkers opponent, I crushed her. Though it's probably not fair to play any game involving thought with someone who has spent all day at home with five young children. But, excuses aside, for now I am the reigning checkers champ in the Johnson home. 

While running today, I listened to an engaging debate between atheist Christopher Hitchens and Christian pastor Douglas Wilson. I didn't catch the title, but the subject was the existence of God. There are several reasons why this debate interests me, the first being simply the subject itself. I am also a bit familiar with both men. I love reading Hitchens - he's such a good writer. As for Wilson, he is well-known among evangelicals, especially Reformed Christians. I'm not a particularly huge fan of his, but I've profited from some of his writings. 

Also, the debate took place at my alma mater, Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia. I wish I had been there to see it! At any rate, I'm about half-way through it. Both men are intelligent and well-spoken, so I don't anticipate a clear "winner" emerging. Like all debates of this sort, the atheists will think the atheist won, and the theists will be sure the theist came out on top.

My impression of Hitchens' main argument is that it comes perilously close to pantheism - nature and God are one and the same. I say this because he emphasized his belief (!) that we can find beauty, and transcendence, and wonder in nature with no need to reference a divine being. In other words, he almost spoke in worshipful tones about the glories of our universe. That struck me. 

There's a documentary coming out soon featuring a series of debates between the two men, of which this was just one. It's called Collision, and should be fun viewing. 

Sander - "The Boy"

My sister, when talking with my parents, used to refer to me as "the boy". She did this after we had already grown up, just because it sounded kind of funny. As though I was more of an afterthought than a full-fledged child such as herself: there's Meredith, and then there's "the boy". She didn't mean anything by it but to be funny, and you probably had to know my sister to appreciate the humor of it.

But with four sisters, our only son, Sander, really is "the boy". And if there is anyone who thinks gender differences are wholly shaped by culture and environment, and not hardwired by God into our very DNA, then I invite you to stay a few days at our house to see the difference first-hand. 

Without any prompting or pushing on our part, Sander has taken an interest in sports. I thought about that today as I was playing Nerf-ball catch with him in the living room. As far as I can remember, our two older daughters have never asked me to play catch with them (however, they do like to join in when Sander and I are playing). I also don't recall our girls making sound effects. Without teaching or example, Sander started making sound effects, often to accompany his description of shooting something. And he likes to "announce" baseball plays: "grand slam home run by Albert Pujols!" There's no question in my mind this boyish stuff comes from within. He's a guy, he can't help it. 

I love my girls dearly, but with four daughters, I'm sure glad we have "the boy" around, too.