tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-298779102023-11-16T05:25:55.029-07:00Blog Fantastique!mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.comBlogger120125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-25124766263771662842012-11-15T12:00:00.001-07:002012-11-15T12:00:58.379-07:00A Short Response to Anne<br />
This is a short response to <a href="http://www.anne-designingmylife.blogspot.no/" target="_blank">Anne</a>, who read my post on <a href="http://mikegorskirules.blogspot.com/2012/11/christian-fantasy-or-i-worship-myself.html" target="_blank">Christian Fantasy</a> and was kind enough to respond on her blog <a href="http://www.anne-designingmylife.blogspot.no/2012/11/christian-fantasy-or-i-worship-myself.html" target="_blank">here</a>. <br />
<br />
<br />
Hi Anne! I'm glad that you found my blog and that it interested you. And thank you for so graciously interacting with my thoughts, even if you disagree with them. Your English is fantastic, by the way!<br />
<br />
A few clarifications.<br />
<br />
1) The distinction I was making between imagination and fantasy is one that we all know and feel. The two words are not perfectly interchangeable. There is a great deal of imagination that goes in to fantasy, but still we tend to view fantasy as imagined things or situations which are impossible to be actualized in the real world. Think about the Fantasy genre in books and film. These works are called fantasy because the stories that they present could never actually come to fruition in reality.<br />
<br />
Here is where my thoughts on imagination as being productive comes in. For example, if you are a writer or an artist, you may fantasize about writing a great book and receiving rewards and accolades for having done so. But in the end, you are no closer to actually writing that great book because your fantasizing will never lead to anything productive. In fact, it is self defeating in that you can become so enamored with the idea of writing a great book that you will never put the hard work into actually writing that book.<br />
<br />
Imagination, however, serves to actually produce that book. You aren't vaguely fantasizing about some personal scenario which will never come to pass, but thinking about how you might put those imagined scenarios into stories that will engage a reader. So, if you are writing a Fantasy book, a great deal of imagination goes into writing that story, including creating fantastic characters and creatures that could never exist in reality, but you are not simply fantasizing. To say it another way, if you are fantasizing, you are necessarily using your imagination, whereas if you are using your imagination, you may be thinking of fantastic things, but you aren't necessarily fantasizing.<br />
<br />
2) Regarding my thoughts on fantasizing as stealing glory from God and being self-idolatry, I must say that I am a Christian in a sense that is not very popular today, and especially in Europe. By that I mean that I accept the Bible as God's perfect revealing of Himself to humans, and as the only true guide to knowledge of who/what/how He is, and who we are as humans. The way in which I interact with God, and with the rest of the world, is therefore dictated by what I find within the Bible. That being said, the Bible is a God-centered book, that is to say, it revolves completely around God Himself. And through all the stories and commands (it is a varied book made up of narrative, Law, history, poetry, wisdom literature) He reveals to us His plan and desire to be in relation with His creation in a way that focuses on His greatness.<br />
<br />
So, when I speak of my desire for recognition/glory as being an affront to God's glory and worth, what I'm saying is that, in those moments when I'm fantasizing of my greatness, I have left that God-centeredness that He desires for me. In so doing, I have stolen what He alone deserves, which is that central place of honor and glory and worth to which EVERYTHING in this universe was created to relate. And, the full expression of this entire concept was incarnated in the person of Jesus Christ.<br />
<br />
In Jesus, we find the ultimate paradox. God, the One who is deserving of all the honor and worship of all created things in the universe, became a man and died in our place, the ultimate expression of humility and love. And He did so to set me free from sin and death, which are often seen in this life in the form of self-centeredness and self-idolatry. As it is said in the Apostle Paul's second letter to the Corinthians in the New Testament:<br />
<br />
"16 From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. 18 All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation. 20 Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. 21 <i><b>For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God</b></i>." (2 Cor 5:16-21)<br />
<br />
Jesus, having rescued us from the death and worthless pursuit of loving ourselves, has freed us to love and serve others. It is only when we come into a relationship with God through believing in Jesus Christ that we can actually experience this freedom. And, it is in our nature to continually return to loving and worshiping ourselves, which is why we need to daily humble ourselves and ask God to help us in living a life that is truly God-centered and Christ-centered, focusing on bringing them glory and not ourselves.<br />
<br />
So, that is a bit of the perspective that I'm writing from. Having lived in Europe for 5 years and hoping to return soon, and being married to a French woman, I know that you will almost definitely disagree with me, and that you are more than likely unsympathetic, if not antipathetic, to my ideas. But interesting discussions should always be based on open and honest dialogue. Again, I thank you for making that possible by writing and interacting with my post in such a kind manner.<br />
<br />
I hope all the best for you.<br />
<br />
Mike<br />
mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-33482899058279599982012-11-01T17:11:00.003-07:002012-11-01T17:11:53.762-07:00Christian Fantasy, or, I Worship MyselfToday I glanced at my twitter feed and noticed <a href="http://bit.ly/Q7JpZi" target="_blank">this post</a> by Don Miller. He was writing about how his mind wanders and he could daydream all day if he wanted, but that contrary to what some might think, such fantasizing can actually be a great hindrance to creativity. Miller made a distinction between imagination and fantasy. Imagination is the life source of great art. It is what draws you into a work of art like a tractor beam, be it painted in colors or crafted in prose. Fantasy, on the other hand, is a useless distraction. Why?<br />
<br />
Imagination is productive, while fantasy is about escape. Interesting.<br />
<br />
I'm not a writer, but the reason Miller's post caught my eye was that just yesterday, a friend and I were talking about what we daydream about and why. I said that I often caught myself fantasizing about doing something great, be it a heroic act or a stirring message, and that what I was longing for in those daydreams was recognition. After all, I do describe myself as being good at everything, but great at nothing. But, Miller's thoughts came down like a hammer on my soul.<br />
<br />
I'm not longing for recognition, what I'm really longing for is glory. Saying it that way is only meant to cover up the treason that really lies in my heart. I don't just want people to notice me by imagining myself in situations where ignoring me would be impossible. Instead, I strongly desire that others would see me as being glorious and worthy of awe. Simple recognition won't suffice.<br />
<br />
But all glory that isn't ascribed to God is an affront to His worth. What I'm searching for in my fantasies is to rob God of His glory. Of course, I could never say that outright, which is why I phrased it the way I did to my friend--"I'm longing for recognition." That's a bold faced lie.<br />
<br />
I want Glory. And that infinitely devalues the redemption that Jesus Christ bought for me through His shed blood. In fact, the very idol of self that I set up every time I go seeking for glory, is the very idol from which he died to give me freedom. Christianity is a relationship in which God invites us to deny ourselves, die to ourselves, forget ourselves, and follow Jesus as He transforms our insignificant little lives into means of accomplishing acts of eternal significance. In my own hands, I'm but a child's drawing in the wet sand, waiting to be washed away by the next tide. But in His hands, my life becomes a brushstroke in the incredible work that is His eternal plan. I'm only beautiful in the right context in the the hands of the right artist.<br />
<br />
My name is Mike Gorski, and I'm an idolater. I love myself too much.<br />
<br />
My name is Mike Gorski, and I'm a sinner saved and sanctified by pure grace. All the glory and honor to Christ my Savior.<br />
<br />
<br />mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-88803626727001412772012-10-31T21:59:00.001-07:002012-10-31T21:59:53.050-07:00First Things First"Theologians, they don't know nothin' 'bout my soul." Many would agree strongly with this statement penned by Jeff Tweedy, frontman for the iconic group, Wilco (a personal favorite). And I'm beginning to think that maybe he is right, at least in light of the recent and rising scandal surrounding Dinesh D'Souza, a name that is gaining in popularity among evangelicals, and his apparent engagement to a woman not his wife.<br />
<br />
A few weeks ago WORLD magazine printed a story highlighting D'Souza's seemingly improper relationship with a woman which came to light at a Christian Apologetics conference, at which D'Souza was the keynote speaker. You can read the article <a href="http://www.worldmag.com/2012/10/king_s_crisis" target="_blank">here</a>. When confronted by event coordinators about the inconsistencies that surface when one is married, yet engaged to another woman, D'Souza said that he had been separated from his wife for a few years now, that divorce papers had been filed, and he was quite certain that he was meant to be with his present fiancée. Admittedly, the whole situation seems odd, if not downright reprehensible.<br />
<br />
Shortly after, <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/17/2016-obama-america-film-maker-am-not-having-affair/" target="_blank">D'Souza responded</a> on the Fox News website. He defended his actions as being above reproach and claimed that WORLD deliberately reported false information as part of an elaborate conspiracy theory involving Marvin Olasky, who has intimate ties to both WORLD (editor) and King's College (former provost). D'Souza claimed openly stating that he and his fiancée stayed in different rooms at the conference, and that if he had thought he was doing something wrong by being engaged before the finalization of his divorce, he would not have introduced her at the event as his fiancée. So, he vindicates himself by (1) declaring himself innocent of the apparent accusation of the appearance of sexual immorality, (2) by pleading ignorance of any moral/biblical standards regarding divorce and remarriage, and (3) by passing the blame on to the sinister forces of Marvin Olasky and his minions over at WORLD magazine.<br />
<br />
His first defense could be legitimate, at least in reading both the WORLD article and his own response. I acknowledge that it is entirely possible that D'Souza and his 'fiancée' could have stayed in separate rooms, and that they could very well maintain a high standard of physical purity in their relationship. Regarding his third claim, Marvin Olasky may as well have adamantly opposed D'Souza's rise to leadership at King's College, but I doubt that he would encourage poor reporting in order to have some sort of journalistic revenge.<br />
<br />
<b>What really floors me about the entire situation is that D'Souza has risen to relative fame as an apologist, even in evangelical circles, <i>while obviously being ignorant of basic Christian doctrines involving marriage and family</i>. </b><br />
<b><br /></b>
I think this highlights some important weaknesses in American evangelicalism.<br />
<br />
First, we are suckers in the realm of politics. Political conservatism has become so strongly linked to conservative evangelicalism that as soon as their is a Christian who offers some intelligent response to the dominant liberal <i>political climate</i> (the media, at least), we latch on to him in the hopes of establishing legitimacy in the political arena. But, as in this case, perhaps we are too quick to seek political recognition and in so doing sacrifice our spiritual legitimacy. After all, it seems obvious that evangelicals, and King's College in particular, were too quick to promote D'Souza to a position as spokesperson for a movement that should be better known for it's Biblical orthodoxy rather than its political strength.<br />
<br />
Second, this leads me to ask the question as to why evangelicals are so quick to ally themselves with people who will grossly misrepresent us? Frankly, I think it proves that our priorities are out of order. In the name of regaining political credibility, as mentioned above, we give spiritual authority to people who specialize in another area. Sometimes, as in the case with D'Souza, you wonder how this man ever came to be a leader of a Christian college, or a keynote speaker at an apologetics conference. If he is a political expert, then let him be just that, and leave him out of the Christian spotlight. This sort of thing happens all the time with celebrities and professional athletes who have some sort of conversion experience. Christian organizations, desperate for a platform, put an inexperienced or unverified convert right into the spotlight just to eventually shame themselves, the Lord, and possibly ruin the soul of one of God's beloved children.<br />
<br />
Third, in getting our priorities out of order, we are substituting foundational truths for nonessential areas. Surely politics should be important for a Christian, but it is not an essential aspect of Christianity. In fact, the New Testament paints a portrait of the Christian as being an alien and sojourner in this world, awaiting the return of our true King and the final establishment and confirmation of our true Kingdom. We can't trade the scriptures, and knowledge of God's revealed will therein, for aligning ourselves with someone from our preferred political party who just takes his political philosophy and just slaps Christian packaging on it. We are to test everything by the word of God.<br />
<br />
So, in this election season, if you find yourself being more passionate about seeing your candidate win a debate than Jesus Christ saving sinners from condemnation, remember to put first things first. You are a citizen of heaven before you are an American, and you should care greatly about the theology and beliefs of those Christian spokesmen that you get behind. Jeff Tweedy was right in criticizing theologians and pointing out their ineptness in helping lost souls, especially if he was referring to those who, at least in regard to their faith, have the equivalent of a mail order license practice spiritual medicine.<br />
<br />
Choose your doctors well and know what they believe.mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-75332115488496807322012-10-19T20:52:00.001-07:002012-10-19T20:52:26.664-07:00Thoughts on Image Bearing"<b><i><span class="text Gen-1-27" id="en-ESV-27">So God created man in his own image,</span><span class="indent-1"><span class="indent-1-breaks"> </span><span class="text Gen-1-27">in the image of God he created him;</span></span></i></b><span class="indent-1"><span class="indent-1-breaks"><b><i> </i></b></span><span class="text Gen-1-27"><b><i>male and female he created them</i></b>."--Genesis 1:27</span></span><br />
<span class="indent-1"><span class="text Gen-1-27"><br /></span></span>
<span class="indent-1"><span class="text Gen-1-27">What exactly does it mean to be made in the image of God? In the past months I have become increasingly appreciative of God's complete otherness. It is something that necessarily effects everything we do, especially in the development of our theology. And so, I recently posted the following on twitter: "</span></span>To be able to understand anything, we need a healthy grasp of God's
distinctness as Creator. He is not like us, or anything that is made." What I was referring to was this vast difference between God and man that exists because He is the Creator and we are His creatures.<br />
<br />
In response, a friend commented on Facebook regarding our being made in God's image. He was alluding to what we all know and feel, that in some way or other we are like God. If we are made in His likeness, how "other" can He really be? Here is how I think about the issue.<br />
<br />
In relation to the rest of creation, we are unique in that we bear His image. No other animal or created thing can boast of this. So, we are set apart from everything else in the universe, which explains my friend's comment and concern to defend our being in some way special. We all sense this privilege. Nobody ever looked at their dog and thought, "wow, it's amazing the things you have accomplished!" After all, there is quite a bit of difference between being able to roll over and being able to design and send a rover to Mars. Here, we see that we resemble our Creator, not simply because we are created, but because He has indeed made us like Him.<br />
<br />
In relation to God, however, the image-bearing is unidirectional. Since God is the only ontologically independent being in the universe, there is nothing else like Him. Really, there are only two categories of beings, those that were created, and those that weren't. We, along with the rest of creation, find ourselves in the former category, while God alone lives in the latter. That's a pretty big deal, which was what I was trying to get at in my previously mentioned tweet. Even though we are made in His image, we will always be different because we are created. Our perspective is limited to the finite and temporal, for example, while God's perspective, in a way we can't and probably won't ever completely understand, is free from the restraints of time and space, and infinitely so.<br />
<br />
All that to say that even though we are made in His likeness, we aren't completely like Him. Or, to say it differently, even though we bear His image, to look at a man is not the same thing as to look at God. We can look at the creativity of humans and conclude that God must be creative Himself, but in seeing our creativity, it isn't the same exact creativity that God uses. Ours is but the faintest semblance, but a true resemblance nonetheless.<br />
<br />
The exact nature of our image bearing has long been disputed. Many have defined it according to our intellect, emotion, and will. And, it's true, the combination of these three things doesn't exist in the animal world, at least not to the same extent as in humans. But, it seems that dominion must play a part, since, directly after the creation of the first man and woman, God gave them dominion over the entire earth. That would explain our unique giftedness in herding the rest of creation, at least. Also, our creativity must play a role, for no other creature uses their natural faculties to freely explore and create like humans do. Personality should probably play a part as well. In short, it's difficult to pin down exactly what our being created in God's consists in.<br />
<br />
However, one idea that has helped my growing understanding of this subject has been this: <b>We are made in the image of God, and we "image" God</b>. This covers how God's image is manifested in us in both <b><i>what we are</i></b>, and <b><i>what we do</i></b>. This gives us a bit more robust understanding of image bearing, and allows us to appreciate the likeness of God that exists in every human being simply because they exist, while at the same time seeing that likeness not only in their human-ness, but also in what they do with that human-ness. In other words, I'm not just an image bearer because I'm human in substance, but because being human, I necessarily do things that "image" God.<br />
<br />
At any rate, it is extremely humbling to think that God created mankind in His image. Even if there is a great distinction between the Creator and creature (Isaiah 55:8-9), still we do resemble Him (James 3:9). And, there is a great responsibility that comes with being made in His likeness. We are not only born bearing His image, but we also "image" him in everything we do. That means that as I go about my business, I need to be asking myself, "how is what I'm doing reflecting, or, 'imaging', my Creator?"mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-40144430594653469352012-10-15T14:08:00.001-07:002012-10-15T21:20:45.040-07:00Which Comes First: Orthodoxy, or OrthopraxyI have now been a Christian for over ten years. That has been sufficient time to see much change, both in my own life, and in the world of Christian things and people at large. One of the more startling changes, however, has been that of people I know, love, and respect abandoning their faith, or at least coming close to that. Of course, this happens for many reasons, but the gist of it seems to almost always be the same thing--they step off of the foundation of the Bible as the only rule for all of life and then lose their footing in a slippery and messy hodgepodge of ideas and -isms.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Objective vs. Subjective Foundations</h2>
Something that first triggered my thoughts on this subject is that old people, in general, grow theologically soft as they age. Even those who were filled with fire in their youth later fall prey to the sentimentalism that comes with old age. In <a href="http://youtu.be/WPH9f9ER7iQ" target="_blank">this video</a> Billy Graham shows the effect of decades of compromise in his crusades. This compromise came largely in the form of Graham's partnering with theological liberals and non-Christian religious leaders in his famous evangelistic crusades, and that in the name of getting the gospel to the largest population possible. And, last year I heard Chuck Swindoll, in a radio interview, talk about his great passion in life. What was the great passion that this amazing preacher had come to realize in his retirement years? Public speaking.<br />
<br />
I was shocked to hear a man who had nourished not only his own congregations through his teaching over the years, but also thousands of other Christians all over the world, confess that public speaking was his great passion. I expected him to say expository preaching, or something along those lines. Surely, as the interview proceeded, he would qualify that statement? But I waited in vain as he spoke about his new book that would help people become better public speakers.<br />
<br />
The other major event that got me thinking about why some Christians leave the faith, or at least begin to compromise in serious ways, was the uproar occurring around the release of Rob Bell's book <i>Love Wins</i>. I know, I'm about two years behind on this one, but this post is not a critique of Bell's book, but rather an attempt at tracing how it was that he arrived at a place where he could actually write it and believe what he wrote. For the best, and most fair, review of <i>Love Wins</i>, see Kevin DeYoung's thoughts <a href="http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/files/2011/03/LoveWinsReview.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>. Bell, in the famous promotional video released prior to his book, questioned what has long been an accepted as an essential Christian doctrine--the exclusivity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Instead, Bell claimed that not expressing faith in Christ is not a certain indicator of a person's eternal fate. We just can't put ourselves in the position of Judge and think that Ghandi could be in hell. Surely, as Billy Graham acknowledged in the above link, there must be a wideness in God's mercy that all allows people from all faiths to be part of the Bride of Christ, whether they are conscious of it or not.<br />
<br />
But what is common between these three examples? <b><i>My proposed answer is that each of these men headed down the road of compromise as soon as they began to judge the world around them by their feelings, which are highly subjective, rather than by the Scriptures, which are objective</i></b>. Graham and Bell have been outspoken as to how their experiences with people of differing faiths led them to their conclusions of the wideness of God's mercy. This response is a natural one. Of course, when you befriend a Buddhist or Muslim that is kind, generous, and genuine in their affection for you, you don't want to imagine that they remain in a state of condemnation before God. It's even harder when you recognize that they exhibit many 'Christian' behaviors.<br />
<br />
What is often considered to be 'Christian' behavior, though, is really just moral behavior, and here Christians can't take the high road. God has given a sense of morality to every culture, though some societies choose to suppress or emphasize one aspect or another at various times. In this way, when Billy Graham's Muslim friends sincerely loved him, he shouldn't have been surprised. After all, not all Muslims are violent extremists. Nor should Rob Bell be surprised that in a predominantly Hindu country there would be a man who once stood up for justice. But where they go wrong is in assuming that because these men do things that we tend to associate only with Christians they must therefore be Christians, whether they know it or not. What happens, then, is that in order to make sense of their experience, Bell and Graham drastically change their understanding of salvation in order to appease their conscience regarding their friends.<br />
<br />
God's justice must bow the knee to our experience.<br />
<br />
But again, moral behavior is not necessarily 'Christian.' Graham and Bell need not look further than the Bible to see this truth. Jesus, in Matthew 5:43-48, describes one reason why Christians should not only love their own, but also their enemies. He says, <span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">"For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? <b>Do not even the tax collectors do the same</b>?<b><sup> </sup></b>And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? <b>Do not even the Gentiles do the same</b>?" (Matt 5:46-47). Everybody loves those who love them. What is difficult is loving those who hate you and persecute you.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Here, Graham, Bell, and all those who have fallen for the "how can God not save these people? They are good people" line of reasoning have forgotten that God has given us an objective standard by which we must judge and evaluate all of life and our experiences--the scriptures. And, in regard to this issue it speaks loudly and clearly.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><b>Romans 3:9-18</b></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><b><br /></b></span>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 12px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><b><sup>9 </sup></b>What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, <b><sup>10 </sup></b>as it is written: </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; margin-top: 12px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>“None is righteous, no, not one; </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>11 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>no one understands; </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -16px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">no one seeks for God. </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>12 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -16px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">no one does good, </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -16px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">not even one.” </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>13 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>“Their throat is an open grave; </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -16px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">they use their tongues to deceive.” </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>“The venom of asps is under their lips.” </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>14 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>“Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>15 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>“Their feet are swift to shed blood; </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>16 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>in their paths are ruin and misery, </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>17 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>and the way of peace they have not known.” </span></div>
<div style="margin-left: 48px; text-indent: -48px;">
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span><b><sup>18 </sup></b><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>“There is no fear of God before their eyes.” </span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>Acts 4:11-12</b></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. <b><sup>12 </sup></b>And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.” </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">All people are sinners before a Holy and Righteous Judge, and there are none who escape His judgment who don't do so through the means of faith in Jesus Christ.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Our experience of life is subjective and prone to lead us into a form of naive sentimentalism, drawing us away from the hard truths of God's objective revelation. But, as He is infinitely wise and gracious in His dealings with us, we must subject all of our experiences and thoughts to His word, acknowledging that He knows best. We must fight against the tendency to think that God is unjust to judge all those who are outside of Christ. Our lives must be firmly planted in the fertile soil of the Scriptures. To let our roots spread into any other soil will only result in the withering and drying of our souls, as well as the possibility of being carried away in the mudslides of postmodern relativism.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<br />
<h2>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Objective vs. Subjective Interpretation</span></h2>
</div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">At this point, I'm sure that some, who are sympathetic to Graham and Bell's theological softness regarding salvation, would respond to my previous thoughts by pointing out the subjectivity of our interpretation and experience of the Bible and life. What I have tried to communicate in the above was that in understanding our experience of life, God has given us an objective, external source on which to ground our lives. When faced with conflicting feelings in our life, such as that of non-christian friends who are sincere in their ethic and love for others, we mustn't make our goodwill toward them the standard of judging the eternal state of their souls, rather, we must submit to God's revelation to us in the Bible.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Here, however, those in line with Graham and Bell might counter by directing us to the subjective nature of all of life, including our interpretation of the Scriptures. They too would claim to be consistent in evaluating all of life and in reaching their conclusions based on scriptural revelation. In fact, Bell's book is an attempt to justify his views based on the Bible.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">But where they are in error is in their starting point. That's why I have chosen to label the previous section "<b>Objective vs. Subjective</b> <b><i>Foundations</i></b>." True, they attempt to justify their conclusions biblically, and even consider themselves to be orthodox, evangelical, Christians in many senses. But, the order of their hermeneutic is flawed. A Christian should be someone who looks into God's revelation in the Scriptures first, and then attempts to form and evaluate his experience of life according to that truth. The soft Christian, however, puts their experience first.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">It's true that the interpretation of Scripture is a subjective endeavor that is colored by preexisting factors such as culture, language, and place in history. As many missionaries (hopefully) know, much of what is exported from America is not necessarily Christian, but American Christian. Much of how we think about Jesus' teaching regarding the poor, or money, depends on our nationality and are socio-economic status. But, this subjectivity takes place at a different level, or in a different manner than the way soft Christians apply it. As we read the Bible, it is of first importance that we try to minimize to the greatest extent possible these prejudices that we carry with us. In this way, the Bible becomes the means God uses to correct us, and to strip us of all that extra baggage. The goal should be to judge our subjective experiences by the objective word, rather than judging the objective word by our subjective experience. So, while they may claim to be faithful to biblical teaching, in fact they are trying to mold, or conform, the Bible according to their experience.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">When confronted with the fate of our non-Christian friends, we are tempted to say, "God would never send such a good man to hell?", and subsequently look to the Bible to justify our sentiment. When personally confronted with this dilemma, I am continually forced to direct myself back to the objective revelation of God, and to submit the feelings of what I wish were true, to that which is actually true. It's not easy, but it is essential if we are to guard our souls against falling away. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The order in which we relate our theology to our everyday life is extremely important. It is the only thing keeping us from sliding down the slippery slope of pluralism which has claimed so many well intentioned believers. We must first seek to have a firm, objective foundation in order to then be able to rightly judge our subjective experience of this world. A healthy orthodoxy must inform and direct orthopraxy.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-15340673731628433222012-03-17T20:32:00.004-07:002012-03-17T21:23:58.097-07:00I'm Back!So, it's been awhile since my last post. Actually, it's been like two years, I think. There are a million reasons why I haven't posted in forever, but here are just a few.<div><br /></div><div><b>WHY AM I WRITING ON THE INTERNET, AND WHO CARES, ANYWAY?</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div>I think that deep down, my blog exposed somethings about me that I didn't particularly like seeing. In a post from the distant past, I talked about having a bit of a superhero complex. Oddly, I often find myself fantasizing about various situations in which I do, or say, the perfect thing that ends up saving the day. Many people don't think that this is very serious, but my time working with the Sunshine Carpet Cleaners, aka <a href="http://www.whm.org">WHM</a>, taught me that such fantasizing is spiritual treason. After all, why do I so rarely fantasize about God saving the day?</div><div><br /></div><div>Anyway, all this spills over into my adventures in the interweb. In theory, my blog started out as a way to stay in communication with people back home when I left for Spain about five or six years ago. That was very honest and innocent, but, because of the aforementioned sinful tendency that I have, there was always a fear that I was using it to stroke my superhero complex. Sort of a way to write and pretend that I was one of those really great bloggers (like <a href="http://www.challies.com">Tim Challies</a>), but with the safety of knowing that nobody actually read or cared about what I was writing.</div><div><br /></div><div>All this led me to pose myself the question, "Who cares anyway?" I mean, why should anyone care what I think about anything? Mike Gorski is just an average person who does everything...well, average. Interestingly enough, this is linked to another sinful fear of mine, that I'll never be good enough at anything to be useful. When I read the most interesting books or blogs, or hear great sermons, I'm often convinced that the reason the person was so compelling is because they are so naturally gifted, and I am not, nor will I ever be endowed with such natural abilities. Of course, there is some truth here. Most people aren't in the habit of reading books written by freshman in college, and for good reason. But, my sin nature would again take a half-truth and pervert it into a seemingly stronger imitation of a full-truth.</div><div><br /></div><div>At the heart of my not writing for fear that I'm not smart enough to please other people is the sin of people-pleasing and approval seeking. Again, there are many who read those sins and think, "That's nothing! It's not like you were tempted to put naked pictures of yourself on your blog!" However, these are root sins, not surface sins.--sins that permeate everything that I do and every interaction I have. I'm constantly struggling with pleasing people and convincing them to either like me or say good things about me. So, of all the unfinished posts I have on my computer, they all have one thing in common--I stopped writing because I was scared someone would read it and think or say something bad about me, or the opposite, I wrote it to make myself look good, smart, and lovable.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>LIFE JUST GOT TOO BUSY</b></div><div><br /></div><div>Sadly, for the blog, life just got too busy and hard to keep writing. As a family, we faced a lot of trials, and for me, those were all mixed up with my cross-cultural struggles in France. Everything is harder when you live in another country. <i>EVERYTHING</i>. And the truth of the matter is that I didn't face my trials with the spiritual strength I should have. In fact, probably the greatest lesson I learned in all those difficulties, is that I wasn't as strong as I thought I was, and I was entirely self-sufficient in my walk with God. God's word being true, as it is, reminded me that God would never put me in a situation where my only recourse was to respond sinfully (1 Cor 10:13), but the bitterness I carried away with me from France revealed that Christ had not been my hope and ever-present Lord in my trials. Just the right idea.</div><div><br /></div><div>And now, here I am in seminary at <a href="http://www.thewestinstitute.com">The WEST Institute</a>, getting a full, two-year master's degree in one year, while trying to start a Spanish ministry in the church, take care of my family, and manage our apartment complex. Needless to say, I'm busy. Busier than I've ever been, and we can definitely all feel it. But, I'm back in the blogging saddle now, and hoping to write some short observations about our current life, like the fact that in the past year I've put on about thirty pounds. #fattyfatfat Oh wait, this isn't twitter.</div><div><br /></div><div>If you happen to stumble upon my little corner of the net, I hope you enjoy it. But even if no one ends up reading it again...here I go.</div><div><br /></div><div>Soli Deo Gloria</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-639333608095734312010-07-02T12:21:00.002-07:002010-07-10T05:35:20.600-07:00The Problem of EvilI'm slowly reading "The Doctrine of Sin and Redemption" by Henri Blocher, and the chapter on the problem of evil (the first chapter, and only one I've read so far) was interesting.<div><br /></div><div>He starts with three biblical principals that lay the foundation for assessing our attempts at answering the problem of evil:</div><div><br /></div><div>1) Evil is completely, radically, and absolutely bad (or evil). We should never diminish the wickedness of evil or the horror of its effects. God hates evil.</div><div><br /></div><div>2) God is completely, radically, and absolutely sovereign. We should never minimize his resoluteness in making all things happen, both in the big picture and the smallest details. "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:georgia;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">Whatever the LORD pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps." (Psalm 135:6 ESV)</span></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-size:medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-size:medium;">3) God is completely, radically, and absolutely good. He is never complicit with evil, nor does he ever approve of it.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-size:medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-size:medium;">Generally, he says, our attempts at resolving the problem of evil reflect some biblical truth as seen in one or two of these three principals, but at the same time minimizing or outright denying the remaining principal(s).</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">He set forth some of the classic representations of each of these three emphases. The reformed position--God allowed evil to enter into the world because he saw, in his infinite power and wisdom, that His defeat of evil would bring Him more glory than any other possible world He could have created. The free will position--evil entered into the world because man has a completely free will, and man has a free will because ultimately, if his choice of loving God didn't come from his own free agency, it wouldn't be love at all. And lastly, the least common view--that God had to create evil to be complete. Without evil, according to this view, God would be like Hall without Oates, or peanut butter without jelly, or yin without yang...you get the picture. Obviously, this last view can't be held by anyone who adheres to a traditional evangelical set of beliefs because it makes evil a part of God, i.e. God is part evil.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">What I appreciated the most about Blocher's position, was that he didn't want to abandon the three very obvious biblical principals that he cited (Evil is absolutely evil, God is absolutely sovereign, and God is absolutely good) for the sake of having a nice, clean, easily resolved doctrine of evil. Instead, he prefers to guard the mystery of the details. After all, the reformed position tends to minimize the pain in suffering and the fact that suffering at the hands of evil men is the result of evil itself, an evil that God hates with a pure hatred, though He remains in control at all times. The free will people tie God's hands just for the sake of keeping theirs free, though the scriptures are replete with examples of the contrary. And obviously, who could dare say that God is in Himself evil, as if it were a necessary part of his existence?</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">So, I'm resolved to try to look at the world and all of it's wickedness--encountered mostly in my own heart--through the lens of these three biblical principals instead of through the lens of my traditionally reformed doctrine. When I see evil, I can't deny that it is 1) absolutely, positively evil, 2) it is not out of the control of God's sovereign, loving, and protecting hand, and 3) God hates it, and it is absolutely contrary to the perfectly good God I find in the scriptures.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="white-space: pre-wrap; font-size:medium;"><br /></span></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-44098364404690017002010-06-18T06:16:00.004-07:002010-06-24T06:50:14.695-07:00Zombie EvangelismThe gospel is at the same time much simpler and much more complicated than we make it. When a suicidal prison guard saw the fruit of the gospel in the lives of his prisoners and asked them, "what must I do to be saved?", they said, "believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved." When the Apostle Paul sums up the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15, he basically says, "Christ died for our sins, was buried, then rose again--and a lot of people saw him after." It is a message that doesn't demand a lot from us intellectually. <div><br /></div><div>It's easy to understand.<div><br /></div><div>If you want to know God, believe in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection for your sins. Period. No jumping through hoops or going through red tape to get to heaven--just faith.</div><div><br /></div><div>But at the same time, the gospel is complicated. We tell people to believe in the Lord Jesus, while all the while knowing that they are incapable of following our advice. The spiritually dead don't respond to spiritual truths, in much the same way that our dead goldfish don't flush themselves down the toilet when we tell them to. In a way, every time we share the gospel, we are doing Zombie Evangelism. I can tell a corpse to get up and walk as many times as I want, but unless life reenters their body, something I'm not able give them, they will remain dead.</div><div><br /></div><div>"And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked...." (Ephesians 2:1)</div><div><br /></div><div>But I think God designed it that way for many reasons. First, when we are powerless to make the dead come to life, He gets all the glory. After all, we try and try to convince people of their lostness and need for Jesus, but they remain stubbornly ignorant. So when God steps in after we have exhausted all our abilities, efforts, and strategies, we have to stand and say, "Lord, you are amazing." </div><div><br /></div><div>Second, the more we grasp this concept--that we are powerless to convert people--the more we learn to depend on God in our efforts to share the gospel. Notice that I said 'powerless' and not 'helpless.' We are powerless. There is nothing we can do to make someone experience the new birth. But we are not helpless. In fact, the more we see we are powerless, the more we see how much help we have in God. The concept is: a continually diminishing sense of self-sufficiency that is replaced by an increasing awe at the all-sufficiency of God. </div><div><br /></div><div>Third, as our consciousness of the first two ideas grow, we are freed to share the gospel with more boldness and to share it more frequently. As I realize that dead sinners are brought to life only by the soul resurrecting power of the creator of the universe, I become more confident in my witness. I mean, who is bigger than God. Or more intimidating. I'm the one with all the power behind me. Also, when I see my great need and dependence on God in evangelism, I am free to share it often. After all, the closer I come to God, the more I see how much He loves me, and how He humbled Himself even to the point of dying on the cross in order to give me life. If that is true, everything that matters is already mine and I've got nothing to lose. No amount of persecution or ridicule could ever undo the fact that Christ died to make me, counted among His enemies, on of His own.</div><div><br /></div><div>Fourth, acknowledging God's sovereignty in evangelism frees us to be a lot less critical of other evangelists. Namely the ones who don't see the complexity of the gospel. This is where I am trying to grow. When Paul was in prison, there were a lot of people who were sharing the gospel just to spite him. Maybe they were sharing in a way that he didn't particularly like, so they took advantage of his imprisonment to prove to him that it could work. Maybe they wanted recognition, and since Paul was the biggest thing around in the church, they used his tribulations to gather their own following. But whatever the case, Paul was just glad they were sharing the gospel. Wow. I want to be like that someday.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, we can take heart knowing that God uses us to share the gospel for His glory, and that He empowers us to do so by His strength. And because of this we are liberated to be bold and freely share it, and to be encouraged by those who would do it by different means than us.</div><div><br /></div><div>And at least the people we're sharing with, though they may be the living dead, aren't trying to eat us.</div></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-46447651160782236132010-04-20T02:00:00.009-07:002010-05-17T12:06:56.368-07:00Discerning Love, or, Loving DiscernmentAs I've been going through 2 Timothy with the youth from my church, a few subjects have come up over and over. Boldness in sharing the gospel. Patiently enduring suffering. The importance of knowing the scriptures. Repeatedly, Paul talks about these same subjects in different situations and relationships that Timothy finds himself in.<div><br /></div><div>Paul encourages Timothy to boldly face his timidity, reminding him to recall that it is the power of God's Spirit that will face his opponents, and not Timothy's own strength. He urges Timothy to suffer in his labor to preach and teach in the same way that a soldier, an athlete, or a farmer would suffer to accomplish their goals. He also emphasizes the importance of having sound doctrine and knowing the scriptures as he explains how it is that Timothy should confront the false teachers he will find within the church--with scripture and with gentleness.</div><div><br /></div><div>But this last point, or at least our modern interpretations of it, is a bit of a mystery to me. We often hear people say either, "you've got to share the truth in love, but you still have to love," or, "you've got to share the truth in love, but you still have to share the truth." These statements represent a deeper problem that has come to plague the church, namely that somehow, we've managed to create two mutually exclusive categories--truth and love. Or, as they are often called, head and heart.</div><div><br /></div><div>How is it that we have come to think that our minds and our hearts can be separated? Are we really supposed to believe that human beings are made up of two different and completely unrelated parts that are constantly fighting for control? Think Knight rider, except Kit and Michael just fight over who gets to drive.</div><div><br /></div><div>Basically, this is what we experience in the church today. 'Intellectuals' clamoring for the attention and recognition that their high grades and pocket protectors kept them from in school, and 'poets' who are dying to show the world how emotional liberty can free them from the chains and oppression of logic. Too often God is reduced to being either a cold and numb equation or a flighty hippie going around and giving everyone sympathy hugs. </div><div><br /></div><div>Paul didn't make this distinction, however. He stressed the importance of doctrine and he stressed the importance of love. For him, you couldn't separate the two. They go together. In chapter 2 of 2 Timothy he says, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth." Timothy is to demonstrate his faithfulness by knowing and rightly understanding the scriptures, and by correcting those who err with that knowledge (v. 15; 4:2). Later in the same chapter Paul says, "And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness." (v. 2:24) Timothy will need to confront and correct people, but he should be gentle as he does it.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, we see these two ideas which are so commonly, yet mistakenly, set against each other, here working together. Paul wasn't scared of sounding 'heady' or 'intellectual.' And he wasn't scared of being nice to even the greatest of heretics, though he does warn Timothy and Titus to not engage in ongoing controversies with false teachers. That's another post.</div><div><br /></div><div>But Paul shows us in Philippians that love and knowledge can't be separated, and in fact, they work together. "And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God." (Phil 1:9-11)</div><div><br /></div><div>Four things jump out at me in these verses. First, as I've been saying, love and knowledge cannot be separated. He prays that as their love grows, that their knowledge and application of that knowledge would grow as well. Actually, I prefer to say that their love <b>can't </b>grow unless their knowledge and discernment increase as well.</div><div><br /></div><div>Second, he says that the desired result of this increase of love/knowledge/discernment is to be able to approve what is excellent. We grow in our capacity to love <b>so that</b> we will be able to tell what is true and what is false. Again, notice that love is leading to an increased ability to think, but not just as an abstract end-in-itself mental strong man competition, but with the goal shepherding. Approving what is excellent is meant to protect the church from following false teachers.</div><div><br /></div><div>Third, there is an added result from growing in love and knowledge, namely, that when we "approve what is excellent" we prepare ourselves for the day of Judgement. Learning makes us holy, or it should, at least. If the knowledge we are attaining isn't making us holy, or if it's leading us toward blunt criticism (not to be confused with discernment) and bitterness, then it's not real knowledge. After all, 'knowing' renders us "pure and blameless."</div><div><br /></div><div>Fourth, as love and knowledge grow, resulting in an increased discernment of the truth that purifies us, God is glorified. When we learn true things that cause us to grow in our capacity to love and be holy it is a worship experience. God is praised and glorified. In the church today, some look down on learning as if we won't need our brains when we get to heaven. But heaven won't be a never-ending Passion concert (Passion Infinity) with all of our worship 'heros' leading us in song. It will, however, be an eternity of using all our gifts, talents, knowledge, etc. to continually increase our understanding of--and therefore worship of--Jesus. That's right, eternity will be a perpetual study on the infinite everything of our Savior, and we will never run out of fresh reasons to give Him worship. So, this life is sort of like practice. We train ourselves now for what we will be doing for eternity--using every faculty to worship Christ forever.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-58699114335096913162010-02-28T13:41:00.004-07:002010-02-28T14:14:07.543-07:00The Rare Wisdom of (First) KingsMore and more I am disappointed by politicians and world leaders. Martin Luther was also really disappointed by the way "christian" rulers led their kingdoms. He always remembered that all people are no-good-rotten liars--even the best of us. This is what he said about the subject (my translation from French):<div><blockquote>"The Prince should look after his subjects and do it with all his heart. This is what he does while he turns all of his thoughts toward how he can be useful to them and serve them, and not think like this: the country and and people belong to me, I will do whatever pleases me. But on the contrary: I belong to the country and to the people and I have a duty to do what is useful and good for them. I shouldn't seek how I might raise myself up and dominate them, but how they could be given shelter and protected in peace. You might say: Who would still want to be a Prince? Because with principles and duties like these the Prince would be the most miserable person on the earth, and would count on hardships, difficulties, and displeasure! What would become, then, of the royal entertainment, of dances, of hunting, gaming, and other mundane pleasures?"</blockquote></div><div><br /></div><div>Then just tonight I read Solomon's request for wisdom from God (1 Kings 4:8-10):</div><div></div><blockquote><div>"'And now, O LORD my God, you have made your servant King in place of David my father, although I am but a little child. I do not know how to go out or come in. And your servant is in the midst of your people whom you have chosen, a great people, too many to be numbered or counted for multitude. Give your servant therefore an understanding mind to govern your people, that I may discern between good and evil, for who is able to govern this your great people?'</div><div><br /></div><div>It pleased the Lord that Solomon had asked this."</div></blockquote><div><br />If only every ruler had this same humility and desire to govern his people well!</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-15449607081877874042009-12-22T07:36:00.004-07:002009-12-22T16:52:01.233-07:00Piper on Knowing JesusIn <i>Seeing and Savoring Jesus Christ</i>, John Piper talks about a few ways we can learn who Jesus is. The first is by rigorous, painstaking, academic study. But this takes a long time as well as great devotion, not to mention the mental faculties to read and research the subject through the writings and findings of people who are a lot smarter than us (and try to prove it by making their writings completely unintelligible to the normal reader). He notes that there must be another way, since, "it would seem strange if God revealed himself in his Son Jesus Christ and inspired the record of that revelation in the Bible, but did not provide a way for ordinary people to know it."<div><br /></div><div>The second, more universally accessible way, is through self-authenticating, divine truth, as he calls it. Piper basically claims that there is something about Jesus--his attitudes, thoughts, actions--in scripture that causes us to know who he was and is, without having had to learn it. He says, "it is like seeing the sun and knowing that it is light and not dark, or like tasting honey and knowing that it is sweet and not sour. There is no long chain of reasoning from premises to conclusions. There is a direct apprehension that this person is true and his glory is the glory of God."</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, many people read the Gospels and never believe. There are theologically liberal seminaries full of experts on these biographical accounts, yet these experts believe them to be but fables. Yes, the words and works of Jesus were and are self-authenticating, but it is a spiritual business to believe, and the Holy Spirit must open our eyes to see and experience what is real. This enabling to see reality for what it really is is quite important, because salvation doesn't depend on having correct doctrine. </div><div><br /></div><div>Imagine that you were born blind, and that people had always lied to you and said the sky was yellow. If one day, some sympathetic person told you that everyone had lied to you, and that, in fact, the sky was blue, and for whatever reason you believed them over all the others, you still wouldn't really know what color the sky is until you saw it for yourself. After all, there are many people who confess with their lips that Jesus is the Son of God, but who don't know he is the Son of God. Knowing this truth means more than just saying the right proposition, it means that the Spirit of God has opened your eyes to SEE that He is the Son of God.</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-58165860635507985932009-12-20T15:17:00.002-07:002009-12-20T16:33:33.611-07:00The War of the Words<div>Tonight I was lying in bed, unable to sleep, thinking a bit about my life. Oddly enough, I often think in three different languages when I can't sleep. My mind wanders endlessy through my past experiences, my hopes for the future, and random scenarios where I am a super-hero. And all in English, Spanish, or French. But one thing I have noticed is that I feel completely different when I speak Spanish than when I speak French. </div><div><br /></div><div>When I speak Spanish, I feel like my heart is connected to my words. I feel what I say, and I say (or try to say) what I feel. Unfortunately, that process takes a lot of effort. The ability to speak Spanish comes at great effort, even when I was living in Spain. I was constantly thinking--conjugating verbs, using new vocabulary, seeing every word written down in my mind before it left my mouth. Sort of like a computer.</div><div><br /></div><div>But when I speak French, it's completely different. I feel so unattached, that often I begin speaking and don't realize that I've started to say something that is too complicated to finish. So, I'll jump in on a conversation without hesitating, but will end up not finishing my phrase, or having to say it two or three times to get my point across. I don't feel like I accurately communicate my emotions in French.</div><div><br /></div><div>My question is this: Does not feeling as connected to French automatically mean that I speak better Spanish? That's what I thought at first, but now I think differently. While I was in Spain, I remember thinking that I felt more Latino than American. I fit in better with my spanish speaking friends than I did with the Americans. I felt new avenues of communication, the emotive ones, in particular, open up, and I ran through them. The result was that when I didn't feel those same things while starting to learn French, I assumed that I didn't like French as much. Makes sense, right?</div><div><br /></div><div>Oh, but language learning is a very complicated process, and one that involves every part of the human being--soul, body, and spirit. When I started learning French, I had something under my belt that I didn't have when I started Spanish, that is the experience of having already learned a foreign language. When I began Spanish, everything was new to me. Every word was vibrant and full of meaning, and each new phrase gave me a new, fuller understanding of reality. But when I started French, I had already experienced that process. Now that I was learning a third language, the words weren't as fresh, and the phrases were a lot less meaningful. I had romanticized Spanish in a way that I couldn't do with French. It would have been dishonest. Like going on a date with a girl and pretending that she didn't have problems like every other girl you've dated. Entering into French with another language learning experience behind me left me unimpressed, not that it isn't a beautiful language, but after all it is just a language like all others. </div><div><br /></div><div>Second, French resembles English a great deal. And, in fact, I am just beginning to learn how much of the english language is borrowed from French. What this means is that I don't have to think nearly as hard to understand and speak French as I do Spanish. The sentence structure and words are close enough that most of the time I can take an older English word (one that is old enough that most English speaking people wouldn't recognize it) and Frenchify it in order to say what I want. Think King James Audio Bible read by Pepe Le Pew. The easier it is to speak, the less I have to think.</div><div><br /></div><div>My last thought is really a combination of the previous two. Which language is more natural to me? Spanish, where I FEEL like I can communicate more clearly because of the effort I put into speaking, or, French, which is so close to my native tongue that I speak without thinking? If I were backed up into a corner I would say both, mostly because I really love Spanish, but in reality I think the answer would have to be French. I mean, how many of us think before we speak in our native language? How many of us say, "I really put my foot in my mouth" and feel the weight of those words because we are so concentrated on understanding the grammar of the sentence? None of us. That just means, "I said something stupid," or, "I shouldn't have said that." When looked at in this light, French is a much more natural language for me.</div><div><br /></div><div>In Spain, I felt like I found a new aspect of 'me,' through learning the language. Here in France, I am learning that I'm the same old Mike Gorski, I just speak a little bit of a few extra languages. And my English is getting worse.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-18181541765129955842009-08-16T12:13:00.004-07:002009-09-02T13:02:51.901-07:00<div><br /></div>So I was just thinking about how learning a language relates to sharing the gospel with people in another country. Of course, there are the arguments about learning the heart language of the people you want to reach, and tons of christian language aquisition materials saying that the language is the key to understanding a culture--if you master the language, then you give yourself the greatest opportunity to effectively share the truth of the Gospel. <div><br /></div><div>And I am in agreement with these statements 100%. But then there is the objection that the real work of missions is spiritual. It's isn't learning grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, and phrases that we need to be doing, but reading the Bible and praying. We need to be spending more time "praying people into the kingdom," as it has been said. I know of some whose practice of missions is basically to set up a community that worships God, and as the people around them see their worship, they will turn from their sin and to Jesus. I also agree with this objection, but not in the sense that is implied.</div><div><br /></div><div>Why? Because of Romans 10:13-17 and 18-21.<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>In the first set of verses I see a focus on 'hearing,' and that is physical hearing. It starts with the statement, "for 'everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.'" Then, it describes, in a way, the reverse of the process that leads to calling on the name of the Lord and being saved. And at the beginning of that regression is hearing. Verse 17, "for Isaiah says, 'Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?' So faith comes by hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ." In order for someone to come to a saving knowledge of Christ, they must hear the words of the gospel. </div><div><br /></div><div>This is a very physical process that involves hearing certain phrases, propositions, and ideas, and responds to the truth of these statements with faith. Contrary to St. Francis of Assisi's famous quote--"share the gospel at all times, and when necessary use words"--there is no gospel without words. That is where missions and language learning converge in obedience to God's word. A person cannot be saved without hearing the Good News in a language they can understand. We must 'hear' in order to 'call on the name of the Lord.'</div><div><br /></div><div>This applies for evangelism within our own culture as well. I can't use the same words when speaking with a 90 year old as I can with a teenager. Just this afternoon, Valérie's mother was reading a magazine and she turned to ask, "What does 'bling-bling' mean?" One way that the church in America needs to grow is in sharing the gospel in a way that the hearer doesn't need to be a Christian to understand. Words like 'justification' are rich with meaning for a believer (or should be, at least), but to someone who has never read the Bible or been to a church, the word means something different altogether. We need to be more intentional about learning to share the message in a way that overcomes physical linguistic barriers to the gospel.<br /></div><div><br /></div><div>So, at least in one sense, missions is very physical.</div><div><br /></div><div>But in what way is the work of missions spiritual? Enter verses 18-17.</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Charis SIL'; "><p><sup class="versenum" id="en-ESV-28191" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: text-top; line-height: normal; "></sup></p></span></div><blockquote><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Charis SIL'; "><p><sup class="versenum" id="en-ESV-28191" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: text-top; line-height: normal; ">18</sup>But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for<br /><br /> "Their voice has gone out to all the earth,<br /> and their words to the ends of the world."</p><p> <sup class="versenum" id="en-ESV-28192" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: text-top; line-height: normal; ">19</sup>But I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says,<br /><br /> "I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation;<br /> with a foolish nation I will make you angry."</p><p> <sup class="versenum" id="en-ESV-28193" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: text-top; line-height: normal; ">20</sup>Then Isaiah is so bold as to say,<br /><br /> "I have been found by those who did not seek me;<br /> I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me."</p><p> <sup class="versenum" id="en-ESV-28194" style="font-size: 0.65em; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: text-top; line-height: normal; ">21</sup>But of Israel he says, "All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people."</p><blockquote></blockquote><p></p></span></div><div></div></blockquote><div>Verses 18-20 show that just because people hear the gospel, that doesn't mean they will believe it and, "call upon the name of the Lord." Paul says of Israel, "have they not heard? Indeed they have, for '...their words have gone out to the end of the world.'" The nation of Israel had been hearing God's truth throughout their entire history, yet they were still unbelieving. Verse 21, "but of Israel he says, 'all day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.'" They were hearing, but not believing. We need something to carry us from simple, physical hearing to mysterious, spiritual believing.</div><div><br /></div><div>That something is the Holy Spirit, and the answer to the question, "in what way is the work of missions spiritual?"</div><div><br /></div><div>THE SPIRITUAL WORK OF MISSIONS IS FIRST AND FOREMOST GOD'S WORK. Now, when I say this I don't mean it in a general sense. I mean that when people hear the gospel and respond to it in belief, it is solely the work of God's spirit in election. That is the spiritual aspect of missions. Verse 20, "...I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me." It is God, and God alone, who can bring a dead soul to life. We are all rebellious, independent, and uninterested in finding Him, but He shows Himself to those who did not ask for him.</div><div><br /></div><div>What are the effects of this spirituality on missions? First, I have made it sound a bit like the practical and spiritual aspects of missions are completely independent of and unrelated to each other, but they are not. We must do our best to learn the language where we are, but we have to remember that our 'success' does not depend on our level of fluency, but on the work of God's spirit. Yes, we should have the goal of mastering the language, but the Holy Spirit is powerful enough to speak through the most broken Spanish/French/German/Arabic and change the heart of the most broken sinner. That brings real freedom to a missionary's work. </div><div><br /></div><div>Second, this should bring us to depend more on God when faced with a lack of response to hearing the gospel. Discouragement is a daily, if not hourly presence in the life of anyone in ministry, so this should drive us to the Lord. The very things that are mistaken for the 'spiritual' work of missions--reading, praying, studying--should be the response of missionaries whose only hope is for God to work. There is only one encouraging place to be when you feel like a failure, and that is in God's word and in Prayer.</div><div><br /></div><div>Third, this frees us to see that our job as missionaries isn't to save people, but to sow the seed of the gospel and watch God save people. Like Paul says in 2 Timothy 2:10, "<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;">I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"> the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with</span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: large;"> eternal glory." We can be bold and spread the seed everywhere possible, but without the pressure of trying to make it grow ourselves. As one friend of mine once said, "I want to cast my net as wide as possible so that I can find the few fish I catch."</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman'; font-size: 18px;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'times new roman'; font-size: 18px;">Again, I'm not trying to lessen the importance of prayer in ministry, it's just that I'm trying to see it in it's proper place, as best I understand in God's word. If what I'm saying is true, then it should drive us to pray more and more, not less. Anyway, I'm tired so I'll have to finish these thoughts another day. Good night.</span></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-87669584169270182042009-03-03T14:05:00.004-07:002009-03-03T16:29:29.376-07:00RelationshipsSo I need to clarify something from my last post--my wife is awesome. And I'm sorry that she doesn't exactly look awesome as portrayed by my previous post. Know that this is not a confession. A confession is something you give after doing something wrong. I don't need to confess, because I've never felt that my wife is anything other than awesome. The only thing I'm guilty of is bad writing that didn't accurately communicate what I wanted to. Anyway, I'm sorry.<div><br /></div><div>I'm sure you remember my description of marriage, the words that every good Christian couple read right before feeling a profound nauseous shudder--"It's hard, but it's great." For most people, the word 'hard' conjures up ideas of suffering and pain and guilt and regret. The definition that I had in mind was something more like: "Not easy, in the sense of requiring genuine effort." Actually, I wanted to just write, "Not easy," but I'm pretty sure I would have faced the same fallout as the last post.</div><div><br /></div><div>In rewriting that section, I would say, "Relationships are hard, but they're great. And the deeper the relationship, the harder it is. But the more effort you apply, the greater the reward." And keep in mind my definition of 'hard.' </div><div><br /></div><div>Every interpersonal interaction we have every day is in fact a relationship. But the shorter the interaction, and the more superficial your knowledge of each other is, the more likely it is to continue without conflict. For example, my relationship with the cashier at our local supermarket is great. We've never disagreed about anything. Ever. We exchange our obligatory "Bonjour," she checks my food items (usually apples for Valérie and cookies for me), I give her money, and we say our obligatory "Au revoir." That's it. </div><div><br /></div><div>But it's only that easy because of how lame it is. If I really cared at all about her, I would invite her to eat dinner with Valérie and I, and after she left we would both give a huge sigh of relief and say to each other, "She's got problems," or, "She is SO annoying," or, "Do you think she is on drugs?"</div><div><br /></div><div>Now, increase the level of intimacy to solid friendship, or even further, to marriage, and you have multiplied the complexity and delicacy of the relationship by a million. I don't have to do a whole lot to convince the cashier that I'm a nice person, but my wife and my closest friends have seen me be a complete jerk. The likelihood of hurting the cashier's feelings is a lot lower than that of hurting my friends' feelings. And I'm a lot more likely to say or do something that upsets my wife than my friends, and it's not as though my wife is overly sensitive. In all reality, I'm the super sensitive one who takes everything way too seriously. Anyway, the closer the relationship, the more maintenance it needs.</div><div><br /></div><div>This is because there is more at stake. We've got more to lose should this close relationship turn sour. So I say something stupid to the cashier and she thinks I'm an idiot. Big deal. Our entire interpersonal world is built on saying "hello" and "goodbye" to each other, and that's only because we're expected to be polite. So I'm having a bad day and I'm rude to her even though I know it's wrong. In the long run, who cares what she thinks about me? I don't have to prove anything to her.</div><div><br /></div><div>But the deeper the relationship, the more we've got to prove, or at least that's how it feels. I guess it is unfortunate that we think of it that way. We spend all this time and effort to get close to people, earning the right to be comfortable being ourselves around them, and when we get there, we find out that it's not true. We can't be ourselves, because we are the problem laden annoying drug addict cashiers that we can't stand. And it is only in these relationships that we come to this hard realization.</div><div><br /></div><div>The shocking revelation that we are complete losers is accompanied by a call to vulnerability. It isn't enough that through relationships we come to see our own faults, but God doesn't want us to cover them up. This goes against everything in our nature. Everything about our world seems to revolve around saving face or making ourselves look better than we actually are. When I see pictures of smiling celebrities I think about how much their life must suck. It must be awful to wake up with a huge zit on your face and know that you can't leave the house without covering it up because millions of teenage girls' hopes and dreams and ideas about beauty depend on your pretending to be perfect. There really isn't any difference between that and Adam and Eve covering up their mistake with a fig leaf.</div><div><br /></div><div>But why does God want us to be vulnerable? First, because only when we're honest and vulnerable with Him does He get all the glory He deserves. To the extent that we try to make ourselves look good to God, we steal the glory of His victory over sin. Second, because only when we are vulnerable with God do we begin to realize how truly great our salvation is. As I begin to understand how terrible a person I really am, the good news that God's mercy and grace are infinitely greater than my sin increasingly looks like "Good News." Third, God wants all of our human relationships to reflect the first two reasons I gave. In relationships, this means that when I cover up my sin I'm actually stopping my friend, wife, etc., from seeing the worth of God and the magnitude of His love for them.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-29631156880458582712009-02-28T15:04:00.003-07:002009-02-28T16:10:34.950-07:00Depression and MarriageLately I've been feeling pretty depressed. I don't mean like indie-rocker write songs about how much the world sucks-depressed, but more like a general feeling that God and the world are out to get me and that in response I should stay in bed all day. I mean, what's the point if I'm just going to be disappointed all day anyway. Of course, this isn't a possibility because I'm married and my wife would never allow it, but nevertheless that's how I've felt.<div><br /></div><div>Actually, my wife is the one who made me feel guilty about being depressed. She didn't say anything like, "Get your lazy @$$ out of bed!", in fact, she didn't really say or do anything. She understands that it is part of life, and especially when you are adjusting to a new country. What made me feel guilty was that as the days passed and my sulking increased, Valérie started to feel the same way. The more I became quiet and withdrawn, the more sullen and hopeless she felt. Of course, she would never use the word hopeless. It's too extreme for her. But she started to see everything turning black along with me. </div><div><br /></div><div>I just finished a facebook chat with a teenager here in the village. He asked me what marriage is like and if I had any advice for him. Online chatting is hardly a medium worthy of such a sacred topic, but I wrote back, saying "It's hard, but it's great." He was confused by this. "What do you mean, 'hard'?" </div><div><br /></div><div>Only since I've been married have I begun to see the depths of my sin and selfishness. Everyday there is some small revelation about how I'm failing to die for my wife. After all, the apostle Paul tells husbands to love their wives, giving themselves up for her as Christ did for His church. I'm part of Christ's bride, the church, and everyday I act like I'm the most important person in the world. And what does Jesus do? He pays for my sin. No matter what. There is nothing I can do or say that His blood can't cover. </div><div><br /></div><div>It's this same selfless love that God teaches us through marriage. When she doesn't want to go for a walk because "there's a lion in the streets," or leaves the cap off the toothpaste, or seemingly complains about everything (which I'm slowly learning is part of being French), God is giving me an opportunity to love her and give myself up for her--to overlook her sins the way God overlooks mine. Sadly, I usually hold it against her and grumble about in my mind, but I'm learning. When you're single, there is a real freedom to sin that isn't there when you're married. As a single, you can take refuge in the fact that nobody really knows you. It's pretty easy to keep the facade and portray yourself to the world as you want to be seen. But when it comes to your husband or wife, you're naked. Every blemish is visible.</div><div><br /></div><div>What does this mean for me as a husband? It means that when I see all of Valérie's imperfections and shortcomings, I have a choice to make. I can either focus on those blemishes until they are all I can see of her, or I can be like Christ and see her as she should be, as she will be. This is very difficult. The more I can criticize her faults the more I can convince myself that I'm good, or at least better than her. But God designed marriage to show me my utter failure in loving my wife, because that's how we learn about His love.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, Valérie, I'm sorry that you have to suffer, but I hope you are learning as much as I am.</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-82898589805751449832009-02-13T17:45:00.006-07:002009-02-13T18:15:18.428-07:00Valérie is Pregnant, or, I Knocked Up My WifeJust covering all my bases. Email, facebook, and now the blog. Valérie is pregnant, and so by God's grace we will be parents by the end of August. Words can't really describe the roller-coaster of feelings that I've been riding about all of this. I've never felt so out of control and preoccupied for someone's health in my life. And I don't even know the one that is growing in my wife as I write this. But it is also driving me to seek God. <div> </div><div><br /></div><div>My feeling completely out of control is only compounded by the importance of the situation I find myself in. It's one thing to not understand what the cashier says to you at the grocery store, but to watch a doctor in a medical system that you don't understand hurriedly mumble and point at things in a fuzzy picture that you don't understand, and all of this in a language that you don't understand, is a lot more stressful. Sometimes my stomach hurts because of it all.</div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div>Right before Christmas Valérie had to go to the emergency room for something about the baby. Here is part of a journal entry I wrote while waiting for her: "Right now I can only find comfort in God Himself. In His love, His sovereignty, His character. I know the God who created the universe, in all his power and majesty, yet here my only resort is begging. I've got no eloquent prayers or reasons why He should be merciful; just begging. 'Please, God. Please.' It's my heart's cry."</div><div><br /></div><div> </div><div>It's stressful, and I imagine that won't ever change, no matter where I live, but I'm thankful that it all points to something bigger than myself, and that it's all heading somewhere. I trust Him. We humans are a hopeless cause in ourselves, but in Him we have everything. And that's enough.</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-11360013678903187162009-01-27T20:48:00.009-07:002009-02-02T13:16:37.478-07:00Stories Part I<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Stories are something that I really enjoy. I don't know why. And the closer they get to being unbelievable, the better. Forget the ones about having to pee in the woods because you were camping. After all, everyone's done that. But tell me more tales about my Grandpa evading the police. Tell me them all, and tell them to me over and over again. I love 'em. But why?<div><br /><div> </div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Stories scratch the age old itch of communication. They connect us to other people and other times, and even other worlds. They give us messages in a way that is both informative and normative. That is to say, it gives us practical examples of how we should live, and why we should live that way, or how we shouldn't live and why we shouldn't live that way. When I think about the best books I've read, they have been the ones that made me 'experience' whatever it was that the characters were experiencing. When the characters were tempted, I felt the temptation, and when they reaped the fruit of their actions, I felt the stinging consequences, and therefore understood the error of their ways and changed my life and made decisions accordingly. </div><div> </div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>However, in this current period of human history, stories and myth are shunned for 'facts' and information. The Enlightenment and the resulting victory of Reason over human experience has left us with few sources of truth and beauty. We can only believe what dull textbooks and boring geniuses tell us, and our only justification is that they are smarter than us. The average person can no longer trust his feelings and justifications regarding what is Beautiful, he has to double-check it with the definition of beauty that comes down to us from the ivory towers of the critics. Even in the Church, especially my beloved Reformed churches, stories have been abandoned for point by point logic, as if the Apostle Paul were a robot and not a man.</div><div> </div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>This is a mistake because we as humans don't live in a world of abstractions and theories. We live in the real world--one of flesh and bone and tears and sweat and blood and sin and broken relationships. For the past 150 years we have heard about the progress of mankind, and how science and knowledge is directing us toward a better life. But we haven't seen increases in the quality of life, just the quantity. Sure, we live longer and are more comfortable than ever, but that just means we have more time to hurt each other. There as many wars today as there were then. It's obvious that this method of communication isn't sufficient by itself. Alright, enough science bashing for today. I'm just a little prejudiced, but trying to remain objective.</div><div> </div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>That's where stories come in. They take all the abstractions and theories, and give them hands and feet, flesh and bone. Instead of just reading the book of Romans in the New Testament, filled as it is with tight arguments, we can see that theory worked out in Paul's life. They are complementary. We read a commandment and know that we should obey it, but when we can read stories about what happens to people who disobey, or the pain God feels when we disobey, we have a more human reason and desire to obey. It's like 3-d morality.</div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>For example, the Hebrews taught their children to say something called the Shema every day. It was something like, "Hear O Israel, the LORD your God is one." It was a commandment that they teach it to their children, just it was commanded that they teach the law to the next generation. But, these mandates were always accompanied by stories. Why should you believe that the LORD is one, or not worship idols? Because He is the only God who could send the plagues down on Egypt, lead the Hebrews out of slavery and through the Red Sea as if it were dry land. Only the true and living God, the God of the Bible, could lead his people through the desert forty years and provide for them miraculously. Only He could drive out the nations before them as they headed toward Canaan. </div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>And so it was these commandments, coupled with the stories that reinforced why they were trustworthy commandments, that have given all of us a reason to keep believing, even in the face of trials and persecution. So don't be like so many Christians today who say, "the Old Testament was for the Jews and the New Testament is for us." Learn about who your God is and how His power, mercy, correction, and love have guided His people since the beginning of time. Read the Old Testament and remember that God still moves teenage boys to slay giants, and closes the mouths of lions--be they physical, spiritual, or emotional.</div><div> </div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Hear, O Christians! You who are the children of Abraham by faith: The LORD your God is one. He wants to do great things with your life, and he wants you to tell His stories and give hope to the world.</div><div> </div><div><br /></div></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-80281929942628853582009-01-26T00:32:00.002-07:002009-01-26T00:39:18.504-07:00Just in case......you were wondering where the title for my "Books! Check 'em out!" post came from. It sounds a lot like Sir Mixalot's voice. I guess "Baby Got Back" wasn't his only contribution to society.<div><br /></div><div>"Fellas, Fellas, has your girlfriend the books?"</div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10px; white-space: pre; "><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KTEU_e2qS1U&hl=fr&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KTEU_e2qS1U&hl=fr&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></span><br /></div><div><br /></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-85512340572101091902009-01-20T15:27:00.002-07:002009-01-20T15:58:46.418-07:00Pictures<div>Here are some pictures from the past few months.</div><div><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNGr-90gm9noI7mmTjRO0d14DBnOXV5C94ZRatkwkDIGbfgG7Vep9BC78NmiYGD_HEVkNDJ4ULjBTwfDnmj8cXk15A9T7lkc0ndnM4mL1Ca1NQdpCOLWvM3iQepaNdQmyJzmzX/s1600-h/CIMG1841.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 400px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNGr-90gm9noI7mmTjRO0d14DBnOXV5C94ZRatkwkDIGbfgG7Vep9BC78NmiYGD_HEVkNDJ4ULjBTwfDnmj8cXk15A9T7lkc0ndnM4mL1Ca1NQdpCOLWvM3iQepaNdQmyJzmzX/s400/CIMG1841.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5293512098972536690" /></a><div style="text-align: center;">Vancouver, Canada. I can't even mimic a stupid bear. Idiot!!<br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqZQLq8J0mJyj5vj6jEhC_Nny3zLb1bVDOxjdVoE8-zuBT0xukSr510ohHcyG1iOOTOxUyFE2C1b99kPAAoMWfCEHFLTjOSCChlzdFjo5v95HYYwoasfUYr1Z61yEYDgNUxRU7/s1600-h/CIMG1778.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqZQLq8J0mJyj5vj6jEhC_Nny3zLb1bVDOxjdVoE8-zuBT0xukSr510ohHcyG1iOOTOxUyFE2C1b99kPAAoMWfCEHFLTjOSCChlzdFjo5v95HYYwoasfUYr1Z61yEYDgNUxRU7/s400/CIMG1778.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5293512095757240562" /></a><div style="text-align: center;">Los Angeles sucks on the whole, but the beach was cool.</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7XcY91a7XPk4rQPY9de6IV14u6ciz0-zlBLEt41J6zKZNJj-sePLaq7BlN2EKFvVDdK6nDh0ua8FCSJ4t-O37KdCgkFO7cNp5pgEf-EAlNaYmF1DxKB87HLUMsh25bOZ1WEUD/s1600-h/CIMG1747.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7XcY91a7XPk4rQPY9de6IV14u6ciz0-zlBLEt41J6zKZNJj-sePLaq7BlN2EKFvVDdK6nDh0ua8FCSJ4t-O37KdCgkFO7cNp5pgEf-EAlNaYmF1DxKB87HLUMsh25bOZ1WEUD/s400/CIMG1747.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5293512093820480898" /></a><div style="text-align: center;">A Tyrannosaurus Rex trying to eat my wife. Soon after, I regulated. If you think he looks bad in the picture, you should see him now.<br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlrcm5Q1YrvCVXQ46wMiOkwgJNwRLzS1AheOllScONHvQ9p3Y15C8T9yhmwyZP5SKgIlkyS6qI9YjwDpILWX24hWDH0mN6K0kDOCWPF2whg_aVJ8juz4Yx3aDwYwSdkCnMkeHM/s1600-h/CIMG1731.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlrcm5Q1YrvCVXQ46wMiOkwgJNwRLzS1AheOllScONHvQ9p3Y15C8T9yhmwyZP5SKgIlkyS6qI9YjwDpILWX24hWDH0mN6K0kDOCWPF2whg_aVJ8juz4Yx3aDwYwSdkCnMkeHM/s400/CIMG1731.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5293512082781827970" /></a><div style="text-align: center;">San Francisco. I got my Visa and spent a day in a really cool city. And ate with Roland Cabral, Sheila Brown's brother.</div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: center;"><br /></div><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkFW2ruRm3J5d-vSaES_Hy7r-2iSPkeh4aFIBnSaojQ1kY0oFsCh9oCIdJUaiQsopx_0xROLIazzZFy_-g9Hfz_hQI2xe8inzQezAZ5SrCh0D2FaEpzg5vS_nbacIkETSO_If7/s1600-h/CIMG1703.JPG"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkFW2ruRm3J5d-vSaES_Hy7r-2iSPkeh4aFIBnSaojQ1kY0oFsCh9oCIdJUaiQsopx_0xROLIazzZFy_-g9Hfz_hQI2xe8inzQezAZ5SrCh0D2FaEpzg5vS_nbacIkETSO_If7/s400/CIMG1703.JPG" border="0" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5293512077098854114" /></a><div style="text-align: center;">Brugges, Belgium. It's pretty.</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-9311335174411254962009-01-20T14:35:00.002-07:002009-01-20T15:27:02.799-07:00Books! Check 'Em Out!Lately, I haven't been able to sleep. Most nights I lay down only to stare at the dark ceiling, a million thoughts running through my head at a million miles per hour. It's pretty frustrating. I finally fall asleep somewhere around one or two o'clock every morning, but I'm tired all day and can't think as clearly. Some good points are that I've been able to catch up on some long overdue phone calls. I've had a lot of good conversations that remind me that God has blessed me beyond what I deserve in my friends and family.<div><br /></div><div>Don't worry, I'll get to those questions from Psalm 78 soon enough, but I need a little more time to better shape my thoughts. For now, I'd like to write about a few books I'm currently reading. The first is <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">The Reason for God</span> by Tim Keller. He is the pastor of a presbyterian church in New York city, a tremendous preacher, and an equally talented writer. The book is really philosophical, but completely accessible. He is able to write about complicated things in layman's terms, which makes it a lot easier to follow. And, in my opinion, that much more useful for the church. But his book isn't meant to be "Christian", at least in the sense of just being for christians. Instead, it is a book for skeptics, addressing the most common objections that he has encountered during his time in New York City. </div><div><br /></div><div>I'm not very far into the book, just a few chapters, but it is amazing. Thanks go out to my friend who gave it to me this summer while I was in Laramie. He really reminds me of C.S. Lewis, which makes sense since Keller himself says that there isn't a chapter he's written or sermon he's preached that doesn't borrow from Lewis. I hope this book finds its way into the hands of many <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">honest</span> skeptics. People who really care about truth and are willing to question and test their own beliefs, not just secular fundamentalists. After all, we're all religious when it comes to our most basic and foundational beliefs, right?</div><div><br /></div><div>Normally, I'm skeptical of these types of books because christians tend to use them as ammunition against their neighbors and classmates without really understanding what they read. I think that in order to worship God rightly, we need to understand him, or at least the little that he has revealed to us in his word. Or better put--<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">begin to understand</span>. He is complicated and beautiful enough that even an eternity of revelation won't exhaust our thirst and hunger to know him. But I'm not elitist about the academic aspect of christianity either, though I used to be. Fortunately, as time has gone on, I've learned that I'm not nearly as smart as I once thought, and that it isn't nearly as important to God as I had originally thought. Loading your Gospel Gun with skeptic-atheist-agnostic killing silver bullets isn't what God is after, but he does want you to learn about him. That's why I recommend Keller's book, and would recommend it to any truth-seeking, honest person I know.</div><div><br /></div><div>Also, I'm reading N.T. Wright's <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;">Simply Christian.</span> Like Keller's book, it's written for those outside of the faith, and more particularly, those who know nothing about Biblical Christianity. No christianese. No alter calls. His premise reminds me of how I tell people why I became a christian and not a Jew, Buddhist, or Muslim--when I read the Bible, the world started to make sense. Evil. Sin. The complexity of nature. The fact that even the 'purest' of us think the most unimaginable thoughts. The entire human experience was explained. And not like a "Get Saved!" baptist handbook, but like a collection of books from different genres and time periods that make a 3-d image of life. Where it came from, where it's going, why it sucks, how it will be fixed, and what that means now. Not just for me, but for the whole world.</div><div><br /></div><div>Wright starts the book by reminding us that everyone is born with a longing for justice, and that we live as if we'd just woken up from a vivid dream. We can't remember what exactly the dream was, but it's effect and message remain with us nonetheless. In that way, every person has the knowledge of the Creator, even if they don't remember how they got it. </div><div><br /></div><div>N.T. Wright has some unorthodox beliefs regarding the specifics of salvation, and is a proponent of the New Perspective on Paul (maybe even the first?), but as far as I can tell, the book is neutral and unaffected by these beliefs. As Wright says in the introduction, he means the book to be a basic guide, not to what christians believe, but to the questions that all humans should ask about their existence, and how the Bible addresses all those questions. It's great so far, and I would recommend it as well. </div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-86791244864266597952009-01-09T15:38:00.003-07:002009-01-09T15:48:39.186-07:00Caribbean QueenIf any of you were wondering what it's like to be married to a West Indian girl, just watch this and listen to the lyrics.<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: 10px; white-space: pre; "></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: 10px; white-space: pre; "><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dkXV5O5GfJ8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dkXV5O5GfJ8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; font-size: 10px; white-space: pre;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; white-space: pre; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Right now my Caribbean Queen is sleeping on our folded out futon because she's sick. I </span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Lucida Grande'; white-space: pre;">think I'll join her.</span></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-24844530579054667992009-01-08T04:50:00.005-07:002009-01-09T15:30:34.242-07:00Psalm 78<a href="http://osculatingcogitation.blogspot.com/">My friend Brian</a> is a pastor in a small town in Indiana. He wrote about his New Year's resolutions in <a href="http://osculatingcogitation.blogspot.com/2009/01/new-year.html">this</a> post on his blog. Discipline and self-examination are only two of his strengths. Among the others are his physical strength, an inhuman ability to consume chicken wings, and projecting sound at high volumes over long or short distances in either open or confined spaces. This year's resolution: <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold; white-space: pre;"></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold; white-space: pre;"> </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold; white-space: pre;">BE A BETTER DAD AND BLESS THE LORD IN FRONT OF HIS FAMILY, ESPECIALLY HIS CHILDREN.</span><div><br /></div><div>Brian and Betsy have been parents, and good parents, long enough to realize that the goal in disciplining their kids isn't just behavior modification. Many times, he says, he reacts with harsh words (bad) and correction (can be good), but it doesn't seem to work. Actually, it seems to do more damage than anything else. His goal is to have well behaved children, but that is not his ultimate goal. His ultimate goal is to have children who really fear and love God.</div><div><br /></div><div> </div><div> </div><div>Reading Psalm 78 this morning made me think about how to teach obedience to children of any age, including ourselves. Asaph starts out by saying, "Hey, listen up!! I'm going to tell you all something very important!! All the stories our parents told us about the amazing things God did for them and their parents, we should tell them to our kids and the coming generations."</div><div><br /></div><div>This Psalm is made up of example after example of God's faithfulness and miraculous protection of His people, followed by their failure to follow Him. Seriously, Asaph had to be pretty creative to think of ways to describe how weak they were. "But they rebelled against Him." "And they still rebelled." "Despite all this, they <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">STILL</span> didn't turn their hearts to the Lord." He even mentions when they give lip service to God, just to highlight the fact that they really didn't care. It's a sad history.</div><div><br /></div><div>Of course, I'm reading this Psalm with a lot more perspective than Asaph or his contemporaries had. He wrote about God's people being stubborn until they were given a good king in David. That was a great way to end a somewhat depressing song, by talking about God's mercy in granting them a godly leader. But even then, we know the rest of the story. Within a few generations they had already strayed again. What a hard headed group.</div><div><br /></div><div>But here are some questions/observations I had after reading Psalm 78. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">First,</span> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">it's important to share the story of God's provision and protection to the next generation.</span> This means everything found in scripture as well as all the history leading up to today, including our own personal testimonies. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Second,</span> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">is that knowledge enough to cause obedience? </span>I don't think it is, but it leads to a related third question/observation. <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">What can we do to encourage obedience without just changing our children's behavior?</span> I don't have kids, but I'm still going to think about it because, <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">if that knowledge isn't enough to make the next generation obey, then it isn't enough for me.</span> So, how do I bring about my own obedience? <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">And lastly, how do we present the gospel to people in a way that communicates God's desire for obedience AND confronts the human desire to just be a law keeper?</span> </div><div><br /></div><div>These are all hard questions, and I'm looking forward to thinking about them more and more in the coming weeks. Realizing the effects of growing up in a postmodern culture and living in post-christian Europe have made me think about that last question a lot, but I don't want to swing to extremes the way that I'm often tempted to do.</div><div><br /></div><div>Anyway, I'm hoping to get back into blogging more this year for a number of reasons, so please feel free to comment, ask questions, dialogue, or offer suggestions. Just remember, I'm not an expert on anything, especially difficult things like life.</div></div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-57087308758826088492009-01-06T11:58:00.003-07:002009-01-06T13:59:55.740-07:00This is my resolution...It's 7:58 on a cold winter's evening here in Thumeries. The occasional car passes outside, but other than that, the only noises I hear come from the ticking clock that hangs above our futon, and my sleeping wife, who rests just below the clock. Unfortunately, she has come down with a cold and is feeling pretty weak. Fortunately, we have some homemade chicken noodle soup simmering in the kitchen. Hopefully it will give her some relief.<div><br /></div><div>The Christmas season has been an interesting one for me. Though I tried, it was hard to have a good, spiritual, christian Christmas. I wish I had some good excuses, but the sad truth is that this year Christmas just didn't feel like Christmas. For many reasons, it should have been one of my most memorable holidays. It was my first Christmas with Valérie. My first Christmas in France. The first Christmas where I didn't spend time with either my family or someone from my home church. But it wasn't Christmas. It was just another Thursday. </div><div><br /></div><div>And I kept telling myself, "Mike, it's time to start thinking more about the advent season, to meditate on how and why Christ came to earth," but no motivation. Nothing. I tried to watch Andrew Peterson's "Behold the Lamb of God," a personal Christmas season tradition of mine for the past 3-4 years, but I didn't even watch it through one time. But, why? I still don't have any good answers, except that all of my surroundings were just unfamiliar enough to make me long for the familiar, and familiar enough to not make me desperate to seek God's face. Here in france there are lights up, and sales and Christmas shopping just like in America, but it's still different. No Christmas specials on TV. No egg nog. No frosted sugar cookies. And instead of celebrating on Christmas day, the God intended, they celebrate on Christmas Eve (GASP!!).</div><div><br /></div><div>But I guess that's the way everything is in life. For some reason, we are only drawn to God when we really need him. When we're sick, or a loved one dies. After a national tragedy like the September 11th attacks, or we get news of cancer. Between these milestones we say goodbye to a real, living dialogue with God and welcome every other idol that comes within arms' length. For me it is comfort and security. Sorry if this sounds like one of those overly spiritual posts that tries to tell you all what bad Christians you are. That's not the point at all. The point is, that even the most Godly among us get distracted and seduced by the everyday.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'm learning that I live in a perpetual state of making resolutions and being overwhelmed. Telling myself that I'll read the Bible more or pray more, don't actually motivate me to perform. Actually, when I lift up my eyes to see the top of the mountain I've just promised to climb, I am overwhelmed by the fact that its peak is invisible, stretching far above the cloud line. As my jaw drops and I ask myself, "what have I done?", it sinks in that none of my resolutions will ever be fulfilled. Not while I keep throwing out rediculous, out of reach goals that only a genius could keep.</div><div><br /></div><div>This year, my resolution was to make a schedule that would help me set aside time to accomplish all of the various tasks I want to perform this year. Something that would give me time to study French, study the Bible and pray, read the bible in a year, study theology, play music, and write more. And I'm thinking about starting to slowly teach myself greek.</div><div><br /></div><div>I have yet to create the schedule, and astonishingly, it hasn't started or finished itself. But I remain hopeful that it will help me make the most of my time in these days. Working on a schedule has never been my strong point, but I'm learning that nothing worth gaining isn't worth working for, and that even those who are the best at what they do have to work hard to get to that point.</div><div><br /></div><div>So, here I am, another year, another mountain. But this time, I'm making a plan. I'm going to divide the mountain into sections, and take each section until I reach the top. This year I'm not going to raise my eyes to the elusive mountaintop looking for hope and motivation. Instead, I'm going to, "lift my eyes up to the hills--where does my help come from? My help comes from the LORD, the maker of heaven and earth."</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-74604391204389144302008-12-03T01:26:00.005-07:002008-12-03T01:48:42.540-07:00Jet Lag and BureaucracyWow. It has been a crazy, incredible month. After nine airplanes, four different cities, and two countries, I was definitely ready to sleep in my own bed and see my apartment. Valérie and I are still trying to get over jet lag, but it's going away slowly. <div><br /></div><div>So yesterday we went to Lille, to make an appointment to apply for a residency card here in France. As you know, I got my visa from the French Consulate in San Francisco without any problems, but that didn't give me permission to do anything except stay in France while I apply for my residency card. No social security number, no legal work status, nothing but permission to apply for all of that stuff. In three months we have to go back for our interview, where they will either supply me with a Béret (one of those little flat caps with a mini-ball on top), a pencil thin moustache, and an "I'm smarter than you" smirk, and say, "Welcome to France!!", or they will drug me, throw me into the bottom of a ship with everybody else that they rejected, and sell me into slavery in some French protectorate. Obviously, I want them to grant me residency, but if not I'm hoping they send me to Tahiti.</div><div><br /></div><div>Anyway, when we made the appointment, the lady was really nice to us. And on our first look at the paperwork, there isn't that much to do, and it doesn't look as difficult as we expected. But still, I'm pretty sure I'll be nervous when we go for the appointment. </div><div><br /></div><div>And I'll make sure to hide some bread on my person, just in case.</div>mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29877910.post-21498646278257547672008-11-12T17:19:00.002-07:002008-11-12T17:35:19.870-07:00The last post was about waiting to speak with the French Consulate on the phone, and as you vicariously experienced it through my blog, it was pretty difficult. Eventually, I did talk with someone, and they were pretty helpful. Well, this post comes after actually going to the French Consulate in San Francisco to apply for my visa. <br /><br />As The W said--Mission Accomplished.<br /><br />Actually, the experience was rather pleasant, but in the days and hours leading up to it I was scared to death. But, the guy who processed my paperwork was really nice, and we were walking out the door, visa in hand (passport) in about an hour and a half. I don't think my feet were touching the ground.<br /><br />But, this is only the first step in my process of trying to become a legal, working resident who actually contributes to French society. Right now I've got a visa to stay in France while I apply for a residency card. I'm trying to remember how good and powerful God is. Thankfully, He has given me a good wife (and French citizen) to walk with me in the process. <br /><br />So, the new news is that as I'm typing this, I'm sitting in my Mom's house in Laramie, Wyoming. This trip home has given me a lot of first experiences. First time in Los Angeles with a bunch of Koreans. First time in San Francisco. First time for Valerie to meet someone from my family. First time back to Laramie as a married man. And, maybe the most astonishing, I went to GreatClips and got a faux hawk this morning. I like it, even if it's the first 'styled' haircut I've ever had in my life.<br /><br />Well, I better go, but right now I'm reading the the Luke's gospel, and I have been sidetracked and ended up in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus was an amazing teacher, and His words are so powerful--complex and simple at the same time.<br /><br />Today I'm thankful for the kisses my wife just gave me.mike gorskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17200344266151363705noreply@blogger.com0