I was reading the Henry Neighbor this morning as I ate Corn Flakes with one hand and helped my 6 month old eat baby food Bananas with the other. I ran across this article by Dick Yarbrough.
-------------------------------------------------
I warned you: Dr. Gil can ...Pray Up a Storm
My hair is wet. My socks are mildewed. My joints ache. There is a torrent of water running down the street, and more rain is on the way. Drought? What drought?
I hate to say I told you so, but well — I told you so. Remember when Gov. Sonny Perdue had a prayer session at the state capitol in November 2007, at the height of the drought? I said at that time that you had better get your umbrella ready because he had invited Dr. Gil Watson, the World’s Greatest Preacher, to pray for rain. If Gov. Perdue wasn’t serious about wanting rain, he should have invited one of those weird-dressing televangelists instead. They would have asked the crowd for money instead of asking God for rain.
At that time, the governor said his goal was “to very reverently and respectfully pray up a storm.” He may have been trying to be funny. Frankly, I doubt it. Gov. Perdue is a lot of things. Funny is not one of them. But he hit the jackpot when he turned the matter over to Dr. Gil, who has prayed up a bunch of storms. Now, look at us. I need a rowboat just to get to the grocery store.
Dr. David Stooksbury, Georgia’s head climatologist, isn’t ready to recommend we all run out and build an ark and start loading the giraffes and elephants. According to news reports, he says long-term rainfall deficits are still a concern and that soil moisture levels across south Georgia remain “abnormally dry.” Maybe so, but I read the other day that peanut farmers in south Georgia have had to delay planting next season’s crops because of rain totals that are reported to be 500 percent above normal. They got almost 18 inches from mid-March to April. Maybe the state’s climatologist, Dr. Stooksbury, needs to confer with God’s climatologist, Dr. Watson.
It is a theological fact that God likes Dr. Gil a lot. For one thing, neither God nor Dr. Gil has any hang-ups with women being preachers. Women can be governors, senators, secretaries of state, House speakers, CEOs, professional golfers, skydivers and Army generals, so why not preachers? Before you Bible-thumpers rail at me about what the Good Book says about women in the pulpit, be sure and read the part that talks about how women should dress in church and not speak out. Don’t go choosing the verses that suit your fancy and passing on the ones that don’t.
We aren’t talking about ordering cafeteria vegetables here.
And while I am on the subject, neither God nor Dr. Gil would refuse a child her first communion because she was allergic to wheat, and the church said she couldn’t have a rice wafer because it was against the rules. Anybody who wants to defend that piece of wrongheaded thinking needs first to read the part in the New Testament where Jesus said, “Suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not.” He didn’t add, “unless they have a wheat allergy, and then they are just flat out of luck. Hey, rules are rules.”
God doesn’t care about all the rigmarole that we humans make up just so we can claim to be right and everybody else wrong. He wants us to obey the Ten Commandments and love each other. Dr. Gil does both of those better than anybody I know, with the possible exception of Billy Graham. That is why God likes Dr. Gil and why we are all wearing hip waders to work these days.
Now that he has the state as soggy as a tomato sandwich on white bread, I have this nagging feeling that Dr. Gil Watson, the World’s Greatest Preacher, is going to turn his attention to trying to save my sorry soul. God and I wish him all the best in that endeavor.
Making it rain in Attapulgus and Hahira and Varnell is one thing. Making me a kinder and gentler person is more along the scale of feeding the masses with five loaves of bread and a few fish.
That would be a miracle.
-----------------------------------------------------------
I decided to respond...
Mr. Yarbrough,
Thanks for your recent praise of the power or prayer in the "I warned you..." editorial. God often uses the prayers of his people to bring blessing upon us. Even when our prayers are not answered in the way we hope for, prayer is still vital as a link to relationship with God. Ultimately, he will be most glorified in whatever he wills to occur. I am thankful that he has sovereignty decided that Georgia should experience some relief from drought, even if it means more time behind my lawnmower than last summer.
However, after reading your article I was dismayed by your theological convictions and I felt compelled to respond in the case that you are misunderstanding the faith. You said "God doesn’t care about all the rigmarole that we humans make up just so we can claim to be right and everybody else wrong. He wants us to obey the Ten Commandments and love each other." I certainly agree that God is not concerned about man-made religion. Yet, your characterization of what does interest God is quite off the mark. In Matthew 22:36-40 we read the Pharisees asking Jesus "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets."
Clearly from Scripture we can glean that our greatest duty, in fact our greatest joy, is found in loving God with our whole being - not obeying the Ten Commandments. Confusing the relational aspect of Christianity with the legalistic aspect of religion is a common occurrence in society, one I am afraid you may have fallen into. We can read from the apostle Paul in Galatians 3 as he explains the difference between the two. He says that the purpose of the law is to lead us to Christ. In essence, to show us our inability to obtain perfection and our subsequent need for Jesus. It is only in a relationship of faith in Jesus as Savior that we might find salvation. Stemming from that relationship of faith is a relationship of obedience to Jesus as our Lord. Once he has become the chief treasure of our life we begin a process of being sanctified by the Holy Spirit, in which we may gradually become more law-abiding, kinder, gentler, etc... The observance of law without relationship is empty legalism; the observance of law within relationship is loving obedience. The key is that our salvation depends not on our efforts to follow rules or be nice to folks - but on God's mercy and grace through the work of Jesus on the cross, cleansing us from our sin - if we believe and trust.
Secondly, I imagine that your reflection on communion and wheat wafers may refer to Haley Waldman of New Jersey. I was likewise appalled by this incident. As a Reformed Protestant I might be opposed to the stance of Rome for different reasons than you, nevertheless I agree that this is a real shame. However, I don't think that we can object to the teachings about the sacrament by quoting a single Bible verse in response. I think we must object more generally about the nature of the Catholic view of the Lords Supper in contrast to what the Bible tells us. But, as that is more of an in-house (and detailed) matter, I will be satisfied to say that I agree with your condemnation of that situation.
Lastly, I think that your view of women serving in the role of church leadership is not a biblical view. This may make me a "Bible-thumper" as you termed it, but I feel that it is an important subject. It is not a breaking point for me, I think it is a secondary matter (compared to my initial point regarding the glorious message of grace vs. the wage based system of law), yet it is worth speaking to. The logic that argues for women leaders in church because of the roles of women in society is faulty. The bible speaks less-clearly to the role of women outside the church while it does speak volumes about the role of women in God's designed order. It is clear in Scripture that women are created equal yet deferent (an allusion to the role of Jesus within the Trinity). The role of women as under the headship of men seems to stem from the sin of Eve in Eden. She was deceived and yet Adam was called to account. The plan of God was to give overarching responsibility in life, and especially in church, to the men. Within this structure we see that women are not to exercise authority over men in church, noted in 1st Timothy 2:12. I could go on about this matter, but others have done a far better job. Check out the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood for more details (http://www.cbmw.org/).
Ultimately, I was delighted to read your column giving God the credit for brining the rain, through the prayers of your favorite pastor and others. God always deserves our adoration and worship. I was just concerned about some of the other points you made in your piece and I hope you have found my reply to be challenging and thoughtful.
Best regards,
Jason
McDonough, GA
No comments:
Post a Comment