tohu va bohu

The Love of Forgiven Rebels

April 1st, 2009 § 15 Responses

I watched the Nightline Face-Off: Does Satan Exist? debate with great interest last week. Not only has Pastor Mark been a topic of conversation in the paths I’m walking, I had finished preaching Genesis 3:1-7 the previous Sunday. Satan was on my mind.

The condensed version aired on ABC was almost useless, overhyped and overedited. As long as you can stomach multiple BlackBerry commercials, watching online is the way to go.

For the record, I think Driscoll spoke graciously, boldly, and biblically on the issue at hand, especially while sharing a stage with the “super-spiritual.”¹ Deepak has no problem loving himself, and his love cup appears to be full as ever. Most importantly, Driscoll proclaimed Jesus as the only way of salvation and the ultimate Conqueror of Satan. His unaired closing statement, in which he read 1 John 5:19-20, could not have been better chosen.

But one particular part of the night keeps percolating in my head. After the opening statements from all four participants, the moderator pursued the Why? questions with Driscoll. I don’t know if he wanted to jab Driscoll with the apparent lunacy of believing in a good God who allows Satan to run amuck, or if he was giving Driscoll a bona fide head start. Either way, he volleyed the question back multiple times.

I haven’t found a transcript of the debate anywhere, so I (unofficially) typed out the interchange of interest, the beginning of Part 3 titled: Fairytale Versus Faith. I’ll be right back after these messages.

Moderator: Pastor Mark, if God is a loving God, why would he create Satan?

Driscoll: I think he created angels and people, and He gave us the capacity to have free will. For their to be virtue, there must be the possibility of vice. And that’s what distinguishes those of us, people and angels, from other forms of creation: trees, animals and the like. We have volitional will, we have consciousness, we have moral decision-making. And so God didn’t create evil, God didn’t create injustice or tyranny or oppression. He created free will in angels and people. And Satan and the demons and humans beings have chosen to disobey, to rebel, and that’s the source of the trouble.

Moderator: And so He can create us, and He could create the devil, and we can engage in evil, but He didn’t create that, the results?

Driscoll: No, initially, according to the teaching of the Bible, Satan was an angel. Angels are perfectly good. Those that didn’t rebel, the Bible says that they honor God and they help us and they are spirit beings that assist in God’s purposes on the earth. So Satan started as one of those, and then went astray. And so he walked away from God’s intention for him, he’s a rebel.

Moderator: So why would God allow somebody who’s an avowed enemy of God, to continue to exist? Why doesn’t God just stop it?

Driscoll: Yeah, and the point of the cross of Jesus, according to Colossians 2, is that, on the cross, in dying for our sins, Jesus canceled the right that Satan had to rule over us, to influence our thoughts, to have an effect on our eternity. And that ultimately Jesus is coming back to put a final end to Satan and his work. So we’re in the middle of history, and the Bible says that God works out all things for good, and so ultimately Satan will be ultimately, finally, defeated. Sin and all of its effects will be lifted, and the earth and humanity will be returned back to the state God intended, which was very good.

Moderator: So even though God loves us, He does allow Satan to exist in our lives, tempt us, and make us miserable?

Driscoll: And He also sends Jesus to die for our sins, sends God the Holy Spirit to tell us the truth so we don’t believe [Satan’s] lies, to give us the strength to say no to his temptations. And He allows and enables us to win in the battle we are in spiritually.

Moderator: Why create that choice? Why not just let everything be peaceful?

Driscoll: Well, I think if you don’t allow choice, the theologians will say you don’t have love. That love requires volition, and that God does not want automatons, He wants persons. And so the argument is made that if God were not allowing choice, then you wouldn’t have evil, but you would also not have love.

Now I understand that on a stage like this, quick-fire answers are the norm and must be addressed to a general audience. And again, the emphasis on the final defeat of Satan by Lord Jesus is unmistakable and commendable. But I think his answers at this crucial point are weak.

Of course, Driscoll serves the conservative bread-and-butter explanation behind the Why? “For their to be virtue, there must be the possibility of vice.” Men must be able to choice. True “love requires volition.” “[I]f God were not allowing choice, then you wouldn’t have evil, but you would also not have love.” After that last statement, much of the crowd erupted with clapping and cheering. We are not automatons, and “theologians” suggest this gives God greater glory.

I think there are two severe, biblical problems with that answer: man showed no virtue with his choosing ability, and also, man’s love for God, even at its best, is no great demonstration of love.

Man Showed No Virtue with His Choice

Driscoll — and I’m really only picking on him because the Face-Off was recent and seen by so many, as well as because I think his answer does represent the majority position — put forward that there can be no virtue where there is no, at least possibility of, vice. Let’s grant that proposition for the sake of argument.² God created the first man, Adam, placed him in a paradisiacal garden, and prohibited him from only one thing: “of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat” (Genesis 2:17).

As the story goes, Satan lures Eve through a serpent, she bites, and gave to her husband and he ate. With his “choice,” man disobeyed. It’s worse than that, actually.

Man rebelled. Adam intentionally defied the only prohibition given to him.
Man ran. When the LORD God came to fellowship with man, Adam took his wife and hid. He attempted to conceal himself from God. (Genesis 3:8-10)
Man rationalized. Not only did Adam fail to answer God’s questions directly, he blamed the woman and God who gave him the woman. (Genesis 3:12)
Man didn’t even repent. After disobeying and beginning to experience the negative effects, you’d think Adam would have anxiously confessed and pleaded for God’s mercy and forgiveness. He did nothing of the sort.

So my question is, where is this great virtue that man displays with his choosing ability?

God showed patience with Adam and pursued him rather than push him away. Though He does punish the man, God also makes preparations to redeem him. God does not wait for us to cry out to Him, because we won’t. Even Adam, pre-fall and pre-sin nature, failed to show any virtuous choosing. The answer to “Why [did God] create that choice?” cannot be to show something noble about man.

Man’s Love for God is No Great Demonstration of Love

Driscoll states that “if God were not allowing choice, then you wouldn’t have evil, but you would not have love.” I think I agree with what he said, but not with what he meant.

What he meant was that robots, if they could “love,” would love because they were programmed to do so, not because they wanted to. If love is going to mean something, it has to mean something to the one loving. Robots carry out a task; they do not care. Who wants affection-less, android love?

But let’s say that Adam didn’t eat from the fruit of the tree, that he recognized his sweet deal: a gorgeous, God-given, perfect partner, the opportunity to steward and rule the planet, a fantastic home, daily, face-to-face fellowship with his Maker, and only one restriction. What degree of love would Adam demonstrate by loving the One who gave him all that?

Isn’t that the gist of Satan’s accusations toward Job? “Of course he’ll love You! You’ve given him everything he could ever want!” (Job 1:9-11 It is no surprise when men love those who love them (Matthew 5:43-48), nor is it a wonder that much love comes from those forgiven from many sins (Luke 7:41-47). Besides, why wouldn’t Adam — or we — love the infinitely lovely anyway?³

I agree that the Genesis 3 story is about love. God writes Satan and evil into the script for the sake of love.⁴ But it is not love from man, it is love for man that is the climax. The fall is all about love. However, and here’s the point:

God is not glorious because forgiven rebels love Him. He is glorious because He loves and forgives rebels.

For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die — but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:6-8)

Full demonstration of God’s holy love and the riches of His glorious grace are the reason He endures vessels of wrath. His love is the infinitely eminent love, proven by His initiating sacrifice.

Greater love has no man than this, that someone lays down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command. (John 15:13-14)

If Satan and evil and vice exist so that man has choice, and then can choose virtue and love, then that plan failed miserably. Man chose — and we by nature keep choosing — sin. And even if we had chosen obedience, our love for the most worthy-to-be-loved Being in the universe would be no awe-inspiring thing.

Again, the answer to “Why [did God] create that choice?” cannot be to show off something about man’s love. What is amazing and glorious and worth singing about for eternity is that amazing love that bled for Adam’s helpless, unlovely, rebellious race. Rather than trying to defend God by asserting man’s ability for virtue and love, we should settle our feet in the stirrups of a God-centered worldview that enables us to ride through life hating sin and Satan, yet never wavering in confidence (and even celebration) that God is in control over the rough terrain.

Even the customarily (constructively?) critical Steve Camp couldn’t keep from gushing about the whole thing. ↩
Though Jesus was tempted in every way as we are, He was not capable of sin. In His case, impeccability does not diminish His virtue, it accentuates it. ↩
I’m totally channeling Edwards’ The End for Which God Created the World here. Please read that. ↩
Though, Satan is fully culpable for his actions as God’s curse on him demonstrates (Genesis 3:14-15). The same principle applies to Pharoah (Romans 9:14-23) and Judas (Matthew 26:34). ↩

Bible Study Seminar Material

March 29th, 2009 § 5 Responses

Rightly Dividing

All material from the Rightly | Dividing seminar is now available for free to anyone interested. I summarized the goal of the seminar as follows in my original announcement here on the Void:

Rightly | Dividing aims to move believers beyond personal Bible reading to Bible study. There are many useful Bible reading plans, and for that matter, much excellent material is available from good Bible teachers. But this seminar hopes to train people how to understand and depend on the Book, not only on teachers of the Book.

The mp3 audio, m4v files with my slides synced to the audio, and my notes for each session are good to go. Take whatever you want from approximately six hours of teaching, including topics such as how to prepare for study, basic principles (hermeneutics) for Bible study, how to find the point of a paragraph, and recommended tools for further study.

Session One - Making Preparations for Bible Study
Session Two - Surveying Contexts in Bible Study
Session Three - Identifying Genres in Bible Study
Session Four - Collecting Tools for Bible Study
Session Five - Embracing Paragraphs in Bible Study
Session Six - Taking the Next Steps in Bible Study

Teenagers are Irresponsible [Series: Adolescence]

March 25th, 2009 § 1 Response

The following is a new article in the series

Lies Every Teenager Believes
And the Truth Pastors, Parents, and Peers Need to Help Them

Okay, before we get into it, I’m with you that my last post in the adolescence series was a little more than two years ago. Brutal. But if it makes you feel better, I’m always thinking about it. Besides, somehow the Void hits the first page of Google search results for the definition of adolescence. More new visits by far come to the Void from that URL than any other. I’m also slated to re-teach the material at a camp this June, so it’s time to dust off the files and juice the series again. Thanks for your patience.

The second lie teenagers believe is that they are, intrinsically, irresponsible. “Research” shows their brains have not yet fully developed so they can’t be expected to act appropriately. They are not ready to answer for their actions. Experts define adolescence as an extended season for experimentation and prolonged preparation. The teen years are for development and responsibility must be deferred.

Inevitably, the teenagers is a disappointment, whose combination of adult capacities and juvenile irresponsibility sows personal heartbreak and social chaos.” (Hine, 8)

Our government doesn’t hold teens responsible. We’ve created an entirely different legal system to segregate younger lawbreakers from older ones. We’ve written new laws with lower standards because we don’t think they are able to make right decisions and behave appropriately. Many parents, teachers, and youth ministries have done basically the same thing by postponing opportunities to fail, as well as by protecting young people from the consequences of wrongdoing. We’ve gift-wrapped the excuse for them.

Shifting blame and shirking responsibility is as old as sin. Adam did it first when he sidestepped culpability in the garden — and he wasn’t even a teenager (Genesis 3:12). “It’s not my fault; it’s her fault.” And then he went even further and said “It’s the woman You gave me.” Adam was shameless enough to claim his sin was God’s fault.

Teenagers walk a similar path of unreasoning when they disavow responsibility. “I’m just a teenager.” Who does that blame? It implicitly points the finger at God. It’s almost as if they said, “God is in control of how old I am, and since He has me in this stage of life as an adolescent, He can’t hold me responsible.” They also take that to mean no one else can either.

But here is the crucial question: when a teenager disobeys God, is it a lesser offense in God’s sight? Is the penalty for adolescent sin more along the lines of purgatory rather than eternal death? No. God’s law opens no loopholes for teenagers. His standard remains perfection for all His creatures, including those who are still growing. We may be slow to hold teens responsible morally and spiritually; God is not. Church leaders, especially those of us who are parents or youth pastors, do young people no favors by failing to prepare them for God’s judgment.

Portrait of a World-Changer [Series: Repentance]

March 25th, 2009 § 3 Responses

Sandro Botticelli’s first major fresco commissioned in 1480: Saint Augustine

Augustine of Hippo may be the most important man in church history. German historian, Adolf Harnack, called him the greatest man “between Paul the apostle and Luther the Reformer, the Christian church has possessed” (quoted in Piper, The Legacy of Sovereign Joy, 24).¹ Of course, Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk for many years, and my personal hero, John Calvin, quoted Augustine no less than 342 times in the fifth and final edition of his Institutes of the Christian Religion. B.B. Warfield summarized Augustine’s impact as follows:

His direct work as a reformer of Church life was done in a corner, and its results were immediately swept away by the flood of the Vandal invasion…[but] it was through his voluminous writings, by which his wider influence was excited, that he entered both the church and the world as a revolutionary force, and not merely created an epoch in the history of the Church, but has determined the course of its history in the West up to the present day. (quoted in Piper, 24-25)

We owe much of our thinking and theology to Augustine, in particular, “our developed anthropology and soteriology, [and] our understanding of the Bible’s teaching on the relations between human sin and divine grace” (Nick Needham, “Augustine of Hippo: The Relevance of His Life and Thought Today”, SBJT 12/2 SUMMER 2008, 39). We stand downstream in the torrent of his teaching on original sin and the sovereignty of God.

There are a few reasons, however, that understanding his life and thought is difficult for us. First, Augustine lived from AD 354-430, so we are removed almost 1600 years from his culture, language, and experience.

Not only is the time gap difficult to jump, but also the mountain of his writings makes for a grueling climb. Few can claim to have read everything written by him, and none can claim to have read everything written about him. There are more than five million words in his recorded works (especially remarkable considering he had no electricity, let alone a computer). There are almost 600 words in this post, so it would take over 8,333 posts pasted together to reach five million words. Benedict Groeschel, a Catholic historian, wrote an introduction to Augustine’s life and said,

I felt like a man beginning to write a guidebook of the Swiss Alps….After forty years I can still meditate on one book of the Confessions…during a week-long retreat and come back feeling frustrated that there is still so much more gold to mind in those few pages. I, for one, know that I shall never in this life escape from the Augustinian Alps. (quoted in Piper, 45).

The other difficulty is that, among those five million words, we find numerous contradictions, including some teachings that we would say are clearly unbiblical. I hate, for example, Augustine’s allegorical interpretation of numerous Old Testament passages (his approach to Genesis narrative is atrocious). Worse than his hermeneutic, Augustine seems to have attributed special, or sadly, even saving power to baptism. We do not agree with him here at all.

But for all that, I am convinced, now more than ever, that we need Augustine for our souls and for our churches, which in turn would change our world. I’ll explain why I think he’s so helpful and try to make my case as we follow two lines of thought in the following posts: the chronology of his life and the confessions of his life.

A free PDF download of this book is available here. The book also includes chapters on Luther and Calvin. It is currently #8 on my list of books that influenced me the most. The original manuscript and audio of Piper’s biography on Augustine is available here.↩

Faith by Hearing

March 23rd, 2009 § 2 Responses

Mo gifted me with my first iPod on my 30th birthday in 2004. Not only I have moved out of Music Naysayer Neighborhood since then, but more importantly, I have eaten up countless hours of solid food while legging it on my treadmill. A couple years ago I listed a few of my favorite online audio resources and, now with Grace to You making all their audio available for free, it seemed like a good time to update those links.

While searching for some Augustinian material¹ back in January, I also stumbled across a new-to-me, fantastic audio resources site with a fitting name, Faith by Hearing.

Faith by Hearing is designed to collect and categorize the ever-growing availability of great Reformed and conservative evangelical audio preaching & teaching that has a high view of God and Scripture.

You can read more about the site here. While I very much recommend subscribing, the on-site categorization is really quite useful. Browse by biblical book, by doctrine, by history, by person/preacher, by topic, or by venue. As long as you have an internet connection, not even a lion in the road can keep you from feasting on this sermon smorgasbord.

Google dropped me off at the Augustine of Hippo Series by Steve Lawson. ↩

Pink Ox 2.0

March 20th, 2009 § 10 Responses

In March of 2005, I posted the original pink ox logo from Jesse Martin. I’ve used it as my Gravatar here at the Void, for my Twitter picture, and to identify my online persona at various other internet sites. For those that may not have noticed, it looks like this:

But Jesse worked his Adobe Suite brilliance again this week, and I’m thinking the new insignia may start propagating across the web in the next few days. You may now enjoy the Pink Ox 2.0.

Eyes to See [Series: Repentance]

March 20th, 2009 § 1 Response

We learn much about seven churches’ problems in Revelation 2-3. Five of the seven addresses include the command to repent, by the way: Ephesus for lost love, Pergamum for failing to confront false teachers, Thyratira for allowing sin in the church, and Sardis for sleeping. But the last church addressed, the lukewarm Laodiceans, may be the closest parallel to us. Their presumed spiritual prosperity was really poverty, and Jesus implored them to be zealous and repent.

How can we fix our broken hearts, our broken churches, and our broken culture? Is it possible for our souls to be spiritually rich and righteous? Is it possible for our churches to be spiritually hot and bright lights in our culture? The answer is a resounding Yes! And what we need is repentance.

Things are not good, yet we are indifferent, and worse, ignorant of our indifference. We often fail to see sin for what it really is. Sin deceives us, offering us substitute, short-term joy of second-rate quality. Our churches suffer as a result. As our personal interests are worldly, so are our corporate programs. As our souls are apathetic, our local bodies grow perilously anemic.

We need a change. We need repentance. We need Augustine. Similar to today, “The congregations who heard Augustine preach were not exceptionally sinful. Rather, they were firmly rooted in long-established attitudes, in ways of life and ideas, to which Christianity was peripheral” (Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo, 247). He “preached to men who thought they knew what the Christian life consisted of” (ibid., 244).

Maybe more than anyone else in church history, Augustine of Hippo wrestled with blinding, joy-stealing sin. He was afraid to let loose of his lusts for fear that he would lose joy.

But in his Confessions, Augustine described God’s sovereign reproof and loving discipline that lead him to repentance. We will consider his life and his teaching, throughout this continuing series, as someone outside our century, who may give us perspective and remedy for the problems in our own day. By God’s grace, we may have our eyes opened. Or, as John wrote in Revelation 3:22,

He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

The Invitation [Series: Repentance]

March 18th, 2009 § No Responses

The richest, most cherished fellowship awaits the repentant.

Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.

Jesus is close. He says, I stand at the door and knock. Differing arguments are made as to whether Jesus stands at the door of unbelievers’ hearts, or at the door of sinful, lukewarm believers’ hearts, or if He was standing at the actual door of the Laodicean church.

The singular pronouns indicate a personal rather than corporate knocking: “if anyone,” “come to him,” “eat with him,” “he with Me,” “the one who conquers.” At the same time, the passage is addressed to the church. Therefore, I think the invitation is to those who were in the church, who may have been indifferent to, and ignorant of, their spiritual condition. The ones who didn’t even realize what they were missing are now graciously summoned to intimacy with their Master.

Jesus is pictured as the master returning to his house (cf. Luke 12:35-36), whose servants should be alert, attentive, and eagerly awaiting their master’s arrival. They know that the master is their good, not the things that he left behind in his house. Jesus offers Himself to the repentant, to those who give up their ignorant claims to prosperity, who want Him more than anything else. Of course, only those He loves will actually get up and open the door.

Jesus emphasizes sweet communion, eating face to face with His servant over dinner. No other relationship in the universe provides such soul fulfillment. For that matter, no other religion in the world offers a man such personal intimacy with His Lord.

Even more, as He did with the previous churches, those who conquer or overcome will reign with Jesus on His throne. This promise anticipates the rest of the book of Revelation, the King’s second coming, and the final destiny of the world. The invitation is to fellowship that begins now and that we will enjoy forever. But, as the entire paragraph makes clear, that intimacy is a result of repentance.

The Imperatives [Series: Repentance]

March 13th, 2009 § No Responses

There is only one approach to receive His generous gifts offered in verse 18. There is only one path to escape spiritual poverty, shame, and blindness. There is only one source of fulfillment, honor, and sight. There is only one program to exchange indifference and ignorance for intensity, only one way to avoid being spit out of Christ’s mouth: repentance.

Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.

According to verse 19, Jesus doesn’t leave the ones He loves in a lukewarm condition, at least not for long. He will reprove and discipline; He will correct and train. In this context of spiritual lukewarmness, the design of Jesus’ discipline is to fire up His beloved.

At least two implications stand out about Christ’s loving correction. First, do we realize that conviction is a blessing? If we don’t know something is wrong we’re unlikely to seek a remedy. Perhaps our current misery is a training grace to turn our attention to the One who makes rich.

Second, do we realize that indifference is a judgment? Apathy is bad. Ignorant apathy is worse. Being left in ignorant apathy is the worst! God curses us when He affords us with what we think we want. Unchecked unconcern not only leaves us in the ditch, it also demonstrates we are not loved by Jesus.

I’m afraid this is where many in our churches are today. Things aren’t good, around us or in us, and we don’t care. We go on, desperately trying to act like things are okay. Our affections are lukewarm. But if our love is regularly running low, we may be experiencing God’s judgment, not His blessing.

He doesn’t allow His own to go on unaware forever. His tender, loving discipline brings those He loves to repentance.

So be zealous and repent. These are the two imperatives. The indictment is not final or irreversible, if we will repent. “Lukewarmness is not necessarily terminal” (Thomas 318), and that is good news.

The first command is Be zealous. It confronted the predominant Laodicean problem. Jesus required His followers to be hot, on fire, boiling over with zeal. The command to be zealous comes first for emphasis, but second in sequence.

That’s because the spiritual heart-fires spark when we repent. Proper passion is the result of repentance, otherwise we could be (presumably, and incongruously) excited about being cold.

Repent fundamentally means “change one’s mind.” Repentance includes ownership of our wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked state. Repentance makes no claims of possessing what we need. Repentance turns from self-sufficiency, self-righteousness, and self-justification. It comes with empty hands to the only One who can fill them.

We wrongly think about repentance as giving up what we really love for what someone told us we should like better. With reluctance we turn away from what was sure to please us in the past, even though the pleasure was temporary. But we miss that repentance is not a turning from pleasure to empty handedness. Repentance is a turning from a mirage of pleasures to the real, highest, and substantial pleasures. He makes rich! He covers our nakedness! He opens our eyes to finally see what is truly glorious! And the doorway into spiritual fullness is repentance.

The Instruction [Series: Repentance]

March 12th, 2009 § 5 Responses

Sin not only offends God, it ruins us. It not only robs God of His glory, it also steals our joy. Sin makes us soul-poor. Sin exposes our shame. Sin blinds us. Therefore, the restoration of spiritual prosperity begins as we abandon sin, renounce self-sufficiency, and seek all our good in Christ.

I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see.

Herein is the Lord’s gracious instruction. He counsels the Laodiceans to buy what is priceless, to purchase great spiritual benefits though they were bereft of any personal resources. Christ pressed the Laodiceans to do business with Him; He was (and is) the sole-supplier of these goods.

He listed three objects for them to buy: gold, white garments, and eye-salve. Each of the three objects struck close to home for the Laodiceans, known for their wealth, their wool, and their medicine. But Jesus wasn’t opening a competing marketplace on an adjacent corner, He was offering spiritual commodities with transcendent worth.

There is little doubt that Jesus’ advice deliberately echoes the call of the LORD in Isaiah 55:1-2.

Come, everyone who thirsts,
come to the waters;
and he who has no money,
come, buy and eat!
Come, buy wine and milk
without money and without price.
Why do you spend your money for that which is not bread,
and your labor for that which does not satisfy?
Listen diligently to me, and eat what is good,
and delight yourselves in rich food.

God will make us spiritually rich if we come as beggars. The bank account of our hearts will be full if we admit emptiness. God will clothe us in purity and righteousness, if we strip off our own. And He will open our blind eyes, correcting our vision of our condition and into His truth, if we confess our inability to see. In a word, His spiritual gifts are granted to those who repent.

About

tohu va bohu is a weblog written by Sean Higgins, more or less since April 2004. The name "tohu va bohu" is a Hebrew phrase meaning "without form and void" found in Genesis 1:2 and works well to describe the condition of my content. You can read more about the site here.

I'm happy to offer full and free subscriptions to tohuvabohu.org via RSS . Or if you prefer, get the void in your email inbox.

For those who don't like long reading assignments, you might prefer following me on Twitter, viewing my Flickr gallery, or reading from some other blogs I like. I've also started reviewing some of the books I've read on Goodreads.
Quick Void

Recent Discussion

Simon: Praise the Lord! Thanks for saying it like it is, please keep it up. May the Lord continue to bless you as you...
angelgirl: Is it right for a pastor to hold on to followers. Like they have to be under him, sit where he tells them....
Josh: Christians, followers of Christ, started meeting on the first day to commemmorate the Resurrection. Saturday is...
Greg: Sean Thanks for all the hard work, time and effort you put into making this seminar. I’ve read through...
Sean Higgins: Aright, thanks, and that’s it. The conversation about clothing and contextualization is going...

Recommended

How to Destroy Unity
Some practical suggestions.

Man Showed No Virtue with His Choice

Man’s Love for God is No Great Demonstration of Love

About

Quick Void

Recent Discussion

Recommended