God, through the prophet Malachi, stated bluntly: I hate divorce. Why does divorce grieve God so deeply? Jesus explained that divorce negates God's original design: "For this reason a
man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate. "
When two people wed, something profoundly spiritual takes place. Marriage is more than a legal contract. It is more than a sexual union. A new math is discovered: 1 + 1 = 1. God has joined together a husband and a wife into a spiritual unity. And when that unity is ripped apart, they feel the pain of dismemberment. A divorce . . . is not like the pieces of a puzzle coming apart, with precisely defined, individualized parts remaining whole and intact. It is more like trying to make two bodies out of a single body. Ouch!
Dr. Judy Wallerstein who has been studying the long-term effects of divorce for the past 30 years, began her research with the prejudice that divorce would be painful, but the wounds would soon heal. Her findings shouted a different message. Decades after the divorce, Wallerstein observed: I was braced for a few tears, reluctance to look back, lingering attachments, and maybe occasional regret that a divorce had ever happened. But I did not expect the experience to endure so fully for so many, with high drama, passions, vivid memories, fantasy relationships, jagged breaks in development, intense anger.
She concluded: There is no evidence that time alone diminishes feelings or memories; that hurt and depression are overcome; or that jealousy, anger, and outrage will vanish. Some experiences are just as painful ten years later; some memories haunt us for a lifetime. God designed us to have one partner for life. When this pledge is broken, it produces sour fruit.
There are certainly conditions in which divorce is the only option. (The Scriptures make provision for these divorces.) But the majority of divorces come out of relationships that could easily be saved. All marriages go through difficult times. One study found that only a minority of people who are unhappy in their marriages today still feel that way only five years later.
Hang on. Divorce is seldom a cure for unhappiness. And there are experiences that are far worse than enduring a mediocre marriage.
2007/10/04
2007/09/18
Divorce: A Modern Day Tragedy
The car was shrouded in silence as dad drove his son home. Finally the seven-year old blurted out angrily: "When you comin' home?!" Dad paused, trying to put his own agony into a child's
words. He, too, wanted to come home. He wanted to be there when his kids scrambled out of bed in the morning. He longed for the chaos of family dinners. He yearned for someone to talk to in the evenings. Finally he answered: "I don't know. Mom and I aren't getting along right now. I hope it's soon." Dad never made it home. The separation became permanent.
During my entire childhood I knew only two divorced families. Today, it is estimated that somewhere from 40-50% of first time marriages will end in divorce. (Second marriages fail at an even higher rate.) Each year over one million new children experience the breakup of their families.
Because of the pervasiveness of divorce, I will devote the next several posts to this subject. Why is this important for all of us? "`Each divorce is the death of a small civilization.' When one family divorces, that divorce affects relatives, friends, neighbors, employers, teachers, clergy, and scores of strangers. . . . divorce is not a them-versus-us problem; everyone in one way or another, has been touched by it." I had a woman tell me that the divorce of her son was harder on her than the unexpected death of her husband. She mourned the loss of her daughter-in-law.
The purpose for these articles is not to beat people up who have had a divorce, but to offer hope and encouragement to those impacted by our divorce culture. The next post will examine God’s perspective on divorce.
words. He, too, wanted to come home. He wanted to be there when his kids scrambled out of bed in the morning. He longed for the chaos of family dinners. He yearned for someone to talk to in the evenings. Finally he answered: "I don't know. Mom and I aren't getting along right now. I hope it's soon." Dad never made it home. The separation became permanent.
During my entire childhood I knew only two divorced families. Today, it is estimated that somewhere from 40-50% of first time marriages will end in divorce. (Second marriages fail at an even higher rate.) Each year over one million new children experience the breakup of their families.
Because of the pervasiveness of divorce, I will devote the next several posts to this subject. Why is this important for all of us? "`Each divorce is the death of a small civilization.' When one family divorces, that divorce affects relatives, friends, neighbors, employers, teachers, clergy, and scores of strangers. . . . divorce is not a them-versus-us problem; everyone in one way or another, has been touched by it." I had a woman tell me that the divorce of her son was harder on her than the unexpected death of her husband. She mourned the loss of her daughter-in-law.
The purpose for these articles is not to beat people up who have had a divorce, but to offer hope and encouragement to those impacted by our divorce culture. The next post will examine God’s perspective on divorce.
2007/05/17
The Love of Reading, Part 3
While the average American reads less than two hours each week, he watches T.V. 15-20 hours each week--that’s about an 8-1 ratio. Does anyone believe that T.V. is eight times more valuable than reading?! If you truly want to read more, you must control your T.V. habits. You may want to unsubscribe to cable T.V. or banish the T.V. from your bedroom or read 30 minutes each day before you pounce on the remote. Author Roald Dahl pleads with us:
Please, oh PLEASE, we beg, we pray,
Go throw your TV set away.
And in its place you can install,
A lovely bookshelf on the wall.
Cathy and I recently finished reading Susan Howatch’s novel, Absolute Truths. Two of the primary characters are clergymen who are antagonists throughout the novel. One is liberal, the other is conservative. One was educated at Oxford, the other at a lesser college. One had an affair. The other preached regularly against immorality. But they both shared the same mentor, Jon Darrow.
One evening the two men coincidentally arrive at Darrow’s door at the same time. During the following difficult conversation between the three of them, Darrow expressed a desire that they know each other better: I know so much about you both. I know not only about all your difficulties but about how hard you’ve worked to overcome them. You look at each other and see only your faults, but I look at you in the light of my special knowledge and find I can overlook those faults because I know your virtues are far more important. How impressed you would be with each other if you knew what I knew! What heroes you would be in each other's eyes! As we read this book we were reminded again and again that we don’t know others very well. Our adversaries are never as foul or feeble as we think they are. Through reading this novel I was able to release a judgmental attitude that I have carried for a long time.
Though we all need some occasional fluff, easy reading shouldn’t be the staple of our diet. Compare a Danielle Steele novel with a Howatch novel. A Steele novel has more twists and turns than an episode of Fox’s “24”. Though you may be entertained, how have you benefited? Have you gained any insights into how to love your mate? how to direct your children? how to view your enemy? how to invest your life? You may be tempted to quit reading most good novels in the first 100-150 pages because they slowly lay the ground work for their characters and plot. One of the reasons that we don’t read more and better literature may simply be that we are lazy.
Please, oh PLEASE, we beg, we pray,
Go throw your TV set away.
And in its place you can install,
A lovely bookshelf on the wall.
Cathy and I recently finished reading Susan Howatch’s novel, Absolute Truths. Two of the primary characters are clergymen who are antagonists throughout the novel. One is liberal, the other is conservative. One was educated at Oxford, the other at a lesser college. One had an affair. The other preached regularly against immorality. But they both shared the same mentor, Jon Darrow.
One evening the two men coincidentally arrive at Darrow’s door at the same time. During the following difficult conversation between the three of them, Darrow expressed a desire that they know each other better: I know so much about you both. I know not only about all your difficulties but about how hard you’ve worked to overcome them. You look at each other and see only your faults, but I look at you in the light of my special knowledge and find I can overlook those faults because I know your virtues are far more important. How impressed you would be with each other if you knew what I knew! What heroes you would be in each other's eyes! As we read this book we were reminded again and again that we don’t know others very well. Our adversaries are never as foul or feeble as we think they are. Through reading this novel I was able to release a judgmental attitude that I have carried for a long time.
Though we all need some occasional fluff, easy reading shouldn’t be the staple of our diet. Compare a Danielle Steele novel with a Howatch novel. A Steele novel has more twists and turns than an episode of Fox’s “24”. Though you may be entertained, how have you benefited? Have you gained any insights into how to love your mate? how to direct your children? how to view your enemy? how to invest your life? You may be tempted to quit reading most good novels in the first 100-150 pages because they slowly lay the ground work for their characters and plot. One of the reasons that we don’t read more and better literature may simply be that we are lazy.
2007/05/02
The Love of Reading, Part 2
Whenever historians list the greatest U.S. Presidents, Thomas Jefferson is always included. What was the source of his greatness? Jefferson biographer, Fawn Brodie, believes it was rooted in his early training which she called an “apprenticeship for greatness.” While most law students served an apprenticeship of no more than two years, Thomas Jefferson was tutored by George Wythe for five full years. (Patrick Henry boasted that he studied no more than six weeks. That’s something to be proud of?!)
Jefferson’ training consisted of five years of “uninterrupted reading, not only in the law but also in ancient classics, English literature, and general political philosophy.” As a young man “when most of his friends were hunting, gambling, cockfighting, speculating, marrying young, or wenching among slaves, he seems to have buried himself in books and the kind of books most of his friends avoided as difficult or esoteric.”
Jefferson’s lifelong commitment to reading was obvious when he advised a young lawyer to spend his pre-dawn hours reading "in physical studies, Ethics, Religion, natural and sectarian, and natural law.” Then from 8 A.M to noon he should read the law, from twelve to one in politics, and in the evening criticism, rhetoric, and oratory. Over half of a lawyer’s day should be spent in reading. Wow! This commitment to reading became a “necessity for Jefferson, like music and gardening, a special nutrient without which he withered.”
When I look back on my life, I shudder to think how withered my life would be without reading. Books (including the Scriptures) have been my primary source of learning how to parent, how to be a husband, how to educate my children, how to steward God’s gifts, how to prepare for eternity, how to care for my body, and much, much more.
Sadly, nearly 40% of American adults seldom or never read a book. The average American spends less than two hours reading each week--this includes light reading like newspapers and letters.
Harry Truman said the “not all readers are leaders, but all leaders are readers.” Like Jefferson, do you want to be an effective leader? in your home? at work? at church? Then you would be wise to develop the discipline of reading.
Jefferson’ training consisted of five years of “uninterrupted reading, not only in the law but also in ancient classics, English literature, and general political philosophy.” As a young man “when most of his friends were hunting, gambling, cockfighting, speculating, marrying young, or wenching among slaves, he seems to have buried himself in books and the kind of books most of his friends avoided as difficult or esoteric.”
Jefferson’s lifelong commitment to reading was obvious when he advised a young lawyer to spend his pre-dawn hours reading "in physical studies, Ethics, Religion, natural and sectarian, and natural law.” Then from 8 A.M to noon he should read the law, from twelve to one in politics, and in the evening criticism, rhetoric, and oratory. Over half of a lawyer’s day should be spent in reading. Wow! This commitment to reading became a “necessity for Jefferson, like music and gardening, a special nutrient without which he withered.”
When I look back on my life, I shudder to think how withered my life would be without reading. Books (including the Scriptures) have been my primary source of learning how to parent, how to be a husband, how to educate my children, how to steward God’s gifts, how to prepare for eternity, how to care for my body, and much, much more.
Sadly, nearly 40% of American adults seldom or never read a book. The average American spends less than two hours reading each week--this includes light reading like newspapers and letters.
Harry Truman said the “not all readers are leaders, but all leaders are readers.” Like Jefferson, do you want to be an effective leader? in your home? at work? at church? Then you would be wise to develop the discipline of reading.
2007/04/15
The Love of Reading, Part 1
Roald Dahl, the immensely popular children’s author (James and the Giant Peach, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The BFG, etc.) was certainly one of my boys’ favorite authors. (Well, O.K., he is one of my favorites, too!) His imagination, wit, and eloquence combined to create marvelous literature.
Most of Dahl’s childhood, however, was very bleak. His education took place in an English boarding school, which Dahl described as “days of horror, of fierce discipline, of no talking in the dormitories, no running in the corridors, no untidiness of any sort, no this or that or the other, just rules, rules and still more rules. And the fear of the dreaded cane hung over us like the fear of death.” He hated school and the feelings were reciprocal. His report cards described him as “incapable” and “of limited ideas.”
But one Saturday morning a woman was hired to look after the boys while the school’s staff had a morning to themselves. Mrs. O’Connor loved literature and spent most of those Saturday’s reading to the boys. “Her enthusiasm and love of books were so contagious and spellbinding that she became the highlight of the school week for Dahl. Within a year he’d become an insatiable reader, and Dahl credits Mrs. O’Connor with turning him into a reader—which made it possible to become a writer.
A lifelong devotion to reading good literature is the cornerstone for all learning. Educator Jim Trelease explains why he believes teachers should read regularly to their students: When you take time to read to your class you are not neglecting the curriculum. Reading is the curriculum. The principal ingredient of all learning and teaching is language. Not only is it the tool with which we communicate the lesson, it is also the product the student hands back to us.
Similarly, Emilie Buchwald has written that “children are made readers on the laps of their parents.” One of my fondest childhood memories is my mother reading books to me--Swiss Family Robinson, The Little House on the Prairie books, The Hardy Boys. With our boys, vacations were a time to indulge in books--reading in the car, at the dinner table, at bedtime. We packed age-appropriate books about the flora and fauna and the history of the places we visited.
Children need time to read. Train them to read quietly in their rooms while you prepare dinner. Give them time in the evenings before bed to read by themselves. ("Do you want to turn your light out now or would you like to read for a while?") But remember--you can’t pass on what you don’t possess. If you aren’t a reader it is unlikely that your children will be readers.
Most of Dahl’s childhood, however, was very bleak. His education took place in an English boarding school, which Dahl described as “days of horror, of fierce discipline, of no talking in the dormitories, no running in the corridors, no untidiness of any sort, no this or that or the other, just rules, rules and still more rules. And the fear of the dreaded cane hung over us like the fear of death.” He hated school and the feelings were reciprocal. His report cards described him as “incapable” and “of limited ideas.”
But one Saturday morning a woman was hired to look after the boys while the school’s staff had a morning to themselves. Mrs. O’Connor loved literature and spent most of those Saturday’s reading to the boys. “Her enthusiasm and love of books were so contagious and spellbinding that she became the highlight of the school week for Dahl. Within a year he’d become an insatiable reader, and Dahl credits Mrs. O’Connor with turning him into a reader—which made it possible to become a writer.
A lifelong devotion to reading good literature is the cornerstone for all learning. Educator Jim Trelease explains why he believes teachers should read regularly to their students: When you take time to read to your class you are not neglecting the curriculum. Reading is the curriculum. The principal ingredient of all learning and teaching is language. Not only is it the tool with which we communicate the lesson, it is also the product the student hands back to us.
Similarly, Emilie Buchwald has written that “children are made readers on the laps of their parents.” One of my fondest childhood memories is my mother reading books to me--Swiss Family Robinson, The Little House on the Prairie books, The Hardy Boys. With our boys, vacations were a time to indulge in books--reading in the car, at the dinner table, at bedtime. We packed age-appropriate books about the flora and fauna and the history of the places we visited.
Children need time to read. Train them to read quietly in their rooms while you prepare dinner. Give them time in the evenings before bed to read by themselves. ("Do you want to turn your light out now or would you like to read for a while?") But remember--you can’t pass on what you don’t possess. If you aren’t a reader it is unlikely that your children will be readers.
2007/03/27
The Tomb of Jesus?
Part 2, The Biblical Witness
When James Cameron's documentary claims that finding The Burial Cave of Jesus “is the biggest archaeological story of the century,” is this bad news for the good news? Not at all. Soon after the news of the possible find of Jesus’ bones came out, I had a non-Christian friend gloat to me: “So, this disproves Christianity, right?” This documentary gave me my first good oppor-tunity to talk to him about Jesus.
As opposed to the unfounded assertions of the documentary, the testimony of numerous eye-witnesses is clear: Jesus was bodily resurrected from a rich man’s tomb. (Thus there are no bones to find.) Jesus repeatedly (Matthew 16:21; 17:22f; 20:18f) predicted this (“the Son of Man must suffer many things ... and after 3 days will rise again.”) It was proclaimed by the angels at the tomb (“Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here. He is risen.” Lk.24:5,6). It was believed by the disciples (“It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.) During the 40 days the resurrected Christ met with his disciples, hundreds saw him alive. (I Cor.15:6). (Some have conjectured that the disciples so wanted Jesus to be alive again that they hallucinated his resurrection. But do 500 people have a mass, unified hallucination?!)
But what evidence do we have that the Biblical eye-witnesses are reliable? Much indeed. First, what event could have caused the dramatic change in the disciples? When Jesus was arrested, his followers fled. Peter wouldn’t even admit his allegiance to Jesus to an insignificant servant girl. But a few months later, he boldly preached a risen Christ in the streets of Jerusalem. Would the disciples have risked the murderous wrath of the Jewish officials for a rotting carcass lying in a coffin? I don’t think so. Chuck Colson has pointed out that when Richard Nixon’s presidency was sinking, his closest aides jumped ship and testified against him to save their own skins. Self-preservation is one of our strongest urges.
Furthermore, even if we grant the possibility that the disciples concocted this story about a Living Jesus, wouldn’t his enemies have exhumed the corpse and dragged it through the city streets to disprove this dangerous “heresy”? A dead body would have buried Christianity before it sprang to life.
Be prepared to “give an answer for the hope within us” when people talk about the purported burial cave of Jesus. The belief that best fits the facts is that HE IS RISEN!
When James Cameron's documentary claims that finding The Burial Cave of Jesus “is the biggest archaeological story of the century,” is this bad news for the good news? Not at all. Soon after the news of the possible find of Jesus’ bones came out, I had a non-Christian friend gloat to me: “So, this disproves Christianity, right?” This documentary gave me my first good oppor-tunity to talk to him about Jesus.
As opposed to the unfounded assertions of the documentary, the testimony of numerous eye-witnesses is clear: Jesus was bodily resurrected from a rich man’s tomb. (Thus there are no bones to find.) Jesus repeatedly (Matthew 16:21; 17:22f; 20:18f) predicted this (“the Son of Man must suffer many things ... and after 3 days will rise again.”) It was proclaimed by the angels at the tomb (“Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here. He is risen.” Lk.24:5,6). It was believed by the disciples (“It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.) During the 40 days the resurrected Christ met with his disciples, hundreds saw him alive. (I Cor.15:6). (Some have conjectured that the disciples so wanted Jesus to be alive again that they hallucinated his resurrection. But do 500 people have a mass, unified hallucination?!)
But what evidence do we have that the Biblical eye-witnesses are reliable? Much indeed. First, what event could have caused the dramatic change in the disciples? When Jesus was arrested, his followers fled. Peter wouldn’t even admit his allegiance to Jesus to an insignificant servant girl. But a few months later, he boldly preached a risen Christ in the streets of Jerusalem. Would the disciples have risked the murderous wrath of the Jewish officials for a rotting carcass lying in a coffin? I don’t think so. Chuck Colson has pointed out that when Richard Nixon’s presidency was sinking, his closest aides jumped ship and testified against him to save their own skins. Self-preservation is one of our strongest urges.
Furthermore, even if we grant the possibility that the disciples concocted this story about a Living Jesus, wouldn’t his enemies have exhumed the corpse and dragged it through the city streets to disprove this dangerous “heresy”? A dead body would have buried Christianity before it sprang to life.
Be prepared to “give an answer for the hope within us” when people talk about the purported burial cave of Jesus. The belief that best fits the facts is that HE IS RISEN!
2007/03/07
The Tomb of Jesus?
Part 1: The Archaeological Facts
James Cameron who produced the movie, The Titanic, is trying to float a theory that a recent (1980) discovery of a tomb in Jerusalem is the tomb of Jesus’ family and one of the ossuaries (coffins) in the tomb contains his bones. But the iceberg of facts sinks this theory faster than the Titanic.
First, where would we expect to find the crypt of Jesus of Nazareth? Not in Jerusalem but in Jesus’ ancestral home of Nazareth.
Secondly, this tomb is the tomb of a wealthy family. It has a large central room surrounded by alcoves which contained the ossuaries of the different family members. Jesus was a poor man from a poor family. It is very unlikely that they could have afforded the tomb that was discovered.
Cameron’s documentary also claimed that the names on the coffins was a major piece of evidence. But even though some of the names were the same, others didn’t fit. And the names in Jesus’ family were very common. One source contends that Mary was a name that was given to nearly one-fourth of all girls born at this time!
Furthermore, the documentary claims that one of the coffins contained the remains of Mary Magdalene. What is the evidence for this? Simply that one of the coffins contained the bones of a “Mariamene” (which is the Greek name for Mary). Then the documentary suggests (much like the Da Vinci Code did last year) that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married. And the evidence for this wild claim? DNA samples of the supposed bones of Jesus and the bones of “Mariamene” show they didn’t share any family blood. But even if “Mariamene” and “Jesua” were married, there isn’t more than a speck of evidence that they were the Jesus and Mary Magdalene of the Bible.
If all of this seems like a giant leap, it is. Israeli archaeologist, Amos Kloner, who has researched the tomb thoroughly and has written about those findings, claims that there isn’t “any proof whatsoever” for the documentary’s claims. Another researcher believes it is all “about money and headlines.”
James Cameron who produced the movie, The Titanic, is trying to float a theory that a recent (1980) discovery of a tomb in Jerusalem is the tomb of Jesus’ family and one of the ossuaries (coffins) in the tomb contains his bones. But the iceberg of facts sinks this theory faster than the Titanic.
First, where would we expect to find the crypt of Jesus of Nazareth? Not in Jerusalem but in Jesus’ ancestral home of Nazareth.
Secondly, this tomb is the tomb of a wealthy family. It has a large central room surrounded by alcoves which contained the ossuaries of the different family members. Jesus was a poor man from a poor family. It is very unlikely that they could have afforded the tomb that was discovered.
Cameron’s documentary also claimed that the names on the coffins was a major piece of evidence. But even though some of the names were the same, others didn’t fit. And the names in Jesus’ family were very common. One source contends that Mary was a name that was given to nearly one-fourth of all girls born at this time!
Furthermore, the documentary claims that one of the coffins contained the remains of Mary Magdalene. What is the evidence for this? Simply that one of the coffins contained the bones of a “Mariamene” (which is the Greek name for Mary). Then the documentary suggests (much like the Da Vinci Code did last year) that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married. And the evidence for this wild claim? DNA samples of the supposed bones of Jesus and the bones of “Mariamene” show they didn’t share any family blood. But even if “Mariamene” and “Jesua” were married, there isn’t more than a speck of evidence that they were the Jesus and Mary Magdalene of the Bible.
If all of this seems like a giant leap, it is. Israeli archaeologist, Amos Kloner, who has researched the tomb thoroughly and has written about those findings, claims that there isn’t “any proof whatsoever” for the documentary’s claims. Another researcher believes it is all “about money and headlines.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
