Monday, August 31, 2009
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Friday, August 21, 2009
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
The Rules of Engagement
- Always, always, always remember the purpose of this blog, to glorify God by exalting Him and by provoking one another to love and good works
- Submission guidelines
o No submissions over 750 words
§ No submissions over 750 words – this may change over time, and there may be exceptions, but keep it concise
o No comments over 150 words
§ No comments over 150 words – this also may change over time, and there may be exceptions, but keep it concise
o No politics, no sports, no weather, no business or financial, no product reviews
§ No politics, no sports, no weather, no business or financial, no product reviews – there may be instances in which a spiritual discussion falls into application with regard to topics like this, which is all right – but no comments on the latest Bulldogs game or the rain we got last night (except perhaps as an answer to prayer...for the rain, not the Dogs)
o No boasting
§ No boasting – writing can easily become a time of “testimony” that rather is a time of exalting self with the subterfuge of exalting God – Matthew 6 applies here – Christ talks about private prayer, he talks about private fasting, he talks about private alms-giving, and all should remain private and not be trumpeted so others will know about them – let’s keep the corporate things public, let’s keep our private spiritual disciplines and spiritual activities private (so we permit the Lord to reward us in His will, way, and timing rather than making sure to put God’s usage of us out there for the praise of others)
o Limit the reviews of works by living authors
§ Stick primarily with dead authors - we want to avoid falling into the trap of following after the latest and greatest fads, even within spiritual disciplines - most reviews of books or essays or sermons should be those of dead authors, with a few exceptions permitted from time to time - let's focus more on classic works that have stood the test of time rather than the newest ideas being espoused by someone who might have a spiritual flame-out tomorrow that will call into question his credibility
- Response and debate guidelines
o No ad hominem
§ No ad hominem – personal attacks will not be tolerated, against individuals in our church or against other individuals – feel free to tear down someone’s assertions and philosophy, but no attacks on their person or their family
o No solo authority
§ No solo authority – if you make a claim, back it up - if it is a biblical claim, include the reference or at least a quotation (even a loose quotation is all right, as long as it does not claim to be an actual quote and does not change the meaning of the verse or its context)
o No living support
§ No living support - if you support a claim with the thinking or comments of other men, use only comments from men who are no longer alive – additionally, use comments that can be verified
o No straw men
§ No straw men – if you make a comment in opposition to a particular view or particular person’s assertions, activities, or philosophy, then do not create a straw man by pulling one comment out of context and certainly do not create a straw man by completely digesting their philosophy into something that they have never claimed it to be
o No heat without light
§ No heat without light – discussions may from time to time become vigorous around a particular passage or topic – if those discussions devolve into simple “shouting matches,” a discussion will be cut off to prevent a fire from starting
o Always rub some dirt in it and take a lap
§ Always rub some dirt in it and take a lap – don’t take offense – rub some dirt in that wound and take a lap to blow off steam – no quick responses, thoughtful responses instead
o Careful with the sarcasm
§ Limit the sarcasm - sarcasm and satire can be useful tools in exposing a false assertion or false philosophy – but sarcasm and satire can also become hurtful rather easily, particularly to individuals who are not familiar with its usage – be judicious with the use of sarcasm and satire
o Any family disagreements stay in the family and get resolved in the family
§ Should any substantive disagreements develop, inside or outside the blog, among persons in our church family, those disagreements are to be handled within our church family – no allowance for bringing others into the disagreement, apart from perhaps Pastor bringing someone in to address a particular topic or a particular dispute
- Language guidelines
o Editing may occur
§ Editing may occur – editing will occur for questionable content (for instance, words that you may use without compunction with which others may have an issue) as well as for grammar and spelling (part of the purpose here is to encourage proper use of language in communication with one another – therefore, we reserve the right to correct your grammar and spelling, should you not police yourself in that area) and finally for disputatious or dangerous spiritual assertions (perhaps they were unintentionally drifted into, but should someone happen to say something that opens the door to questions regarding the deity of Christ, for instance, we will do our best to either remove it or reword it to assure that no misunderstanding occurs toward that direction)
o No coarse or crass language
o Limit the emoticons
§ Limit the emoticons – sometimes helpful to convey sarcasm, etc., other times just annoying
o No text messaging abbreviations
§ These have come into somewhat common usage, due to the difficulty of writing on a keyboard the size of a soup spoon, but they are not universally understood and they are not helpful at encouraging complete thoughts as well as proper spelling and grammar – don’t use them
o No shouting
§ Don’t use all capital letters to make an emphatic point – rather, use emphatic language
- Always shake hands with everyone before leaving the portico
§ We may disagree on certain interpretations, and those disagreements may become vigorous - we should each be convinced in our own minds about interpretations that are open (Romans 14), but we agree on enough, as evidenced by our joining membership in the same church, that we can disagree, even strongly, on other matters without causing actual schism within our church – whether by a quick comment of love and good will or simply by a conscious thought, give each other a handshake (or a hug) before leaving the site
Why the praise list?
This is intended to be a list of shared joys and praises, to encourage us to rejoice with one another that we have a God Who answers prayer.
Why a set of rules of engagement?
As evidenced so many places in Scripture (such as Philippians 1:9), even our activities of goodness, such as our love, must be bounded by knowledge and discretion. The rules of engagement on this blog are intended to be boundaries to encourage good manners and spiritual focus, thereby urging usefulness and edification and spiritual productivity.
Why the prayer list?
This is intended to be a list of shared burdens and concerns, to encourage us to intercede for one another on a regular basis rather than focusing so much on ourselves.
Why the daily devotional?
This is intended to be a basic shared devotional experience, building commonality around consideration of the things of God, as encouraged by the devotional writing of some saint gone on to glory. If we do not yet engage in a regular devotional study of our own, then may this be a catalyst toward that study and meditation. If we do, then may this be a catalyst toward consideration of particular thoughts and meditation to deepen the pleasure of that study and meditation. And in the process, all who participate have a shared experience, spiritual truths recently considered around which we can find conversation when we come together corporately.
Why the apologetic submissions?
At CBC, we need to recognize that others hold different positions on different topics than we hold. Some of those different positions are perfectly legitimate interpretations, but we believe the Bible tends toward the interpretation to which we hold. Others of those different positions are completely illegitimate and must be refuted as heresy. Particularly as men, as leaders in our homes, we must learn to analyze particular topics and to discern between the topics with acceptable variations and the topics that are heretical. Furthermore, in Romans, God through Paul encourages each man to be convinced in his own mind, specifically regarding those topics with acceptable variations. Without consideration of those topics, we will never be convinced in our own minds, but will always be holding to a position based on second-hand conclusions (i.e., we learned it from someone else, but have never actually considered it for ourselves). The apologetic submissions, while potentially dangerous (please see the rules of engagement in order to avoid many of those dangers), are intended to encourage us to consider topics and to move toward being fully convinced in our own minds, to know why we believe what we believe, to be ready to give an answer for what we believe, and to consider other interpretations of topics with acceptable variations, so we do not make pariahs of those who conclude differently than we conclude.
Why the biographical submissions?
At CBC, we have people with rich histories in their lives, histories full of the Lord’s leading and providence, both before and after they came to know Him. Through biographical submissions, we can learn portions of those histories from time to time, and archive them for future review, getting to know each other more deeply and meaningfully in the process. Also, as autobiographers, in this way, we may be able to share some of the events in our lives that may otherwise be too painful to share orally. Through these submissions, we particularly want older men (as each of us grows older in age and in the Lord) to be teaching the younger men and preserving for future generations a record of God’s work in our lives.
Why the didactic submissions?
At CBC, we have more than one individual who is able to teach. The didactic submissions allow those able to teach to use this outlet to teach others God’s Word, for its doctrine, its reproof, its correction, its instruction in righteousness. Some of these submissions may be reviews of recent lessons or sermons, in order to encourage us to continue in the things we have learned, to keep meditating on what we have recently heard. Others of these may be intended to go deeper than any public address may reasonably be able to, perhaps in particular topics of systematic theology or topics that are appropriate to be discussed but uncomfortable to discuss in mixed company. Finally, some of these may be equipping with tools by which we can study the Bible for ourselves, discussions in how to read and analyze or in good reference resources. In short, the didactic submissions, as their name suggests, are intended to teach us, and the goal of these submissions is that we would learn, even as we engage in the discussion through the comments.
Why have editors?
The main submissions to the blog are intended to be edifying. In order to assure that this is what occurs, the editors serve a gatekeeping function. Over time, more editors may be added. Eventually, perhaps we will find that editors are truly unnecessary, but for now, we would rather err on the side of too much discretion.
What types of submissions may be acceptable?
Although some submissions may be solicited, any participant is welcome to deliver a submission to one of the editors. Comments need not be sent through the editors, but may be made directly on the site. The main submission types likely will include didactic submissions, biographical submissions, and from time to time theological topics or application for back and forth discussion (intentional debate).
Why limit submissions to text and not podcasts or videos?
This limitation encourages us to exercise our writing and our reading and analysis skills. God gave us His Word in writing, in a book. It is precise. It is recorded. It is able to be analyzed by multiple people at the same time. It can be diagrammed and broken down. While a sermon or discussion recorded on audio or video may also be accessible, it is much harder to pick out that one sentence and go back over it multiple times, diagram it, etc., without actually producing the written transcript anyway. Furthermore, we permit much more variation in language in public speaking than we do in writing, particularly since public speaking can include gestures and other nonverbal cues. Without those cues, the transcript of a spoken discussion may not fully reflect the discussion. Therefore, we will limit ourselves to textual discussions.
Why limit references to and reviews of external works to those created by dead authors?
While a work may be analyzed on its own merits, and the beneficial material within a particular work may be helpful apart from the life of the author, the credence of an argument or an exposition or an instruction is certainly informed by the life of its author. Once a man has died, his life can be assessed, as to whether he remained faithful and finished well or whether what he wrote needs to be discounted by a less-than-exemplary application or finish. Additionally, this limit avoids disputes over current issues that are being handled by currently-living writers, some of whom may have very wise and appropriate things to say on the issue. But such issues and such discussions can too easily lead to needless disputes over personalities or over particular applications regarding modern issues. Furthermore, this limit helps us to avoid chasing after spiritual fads, the newest book by the latest author, and the newest hot dispute among this or that group of professing believers. Some of these books are very helpful, and some of these disputes are very needful to understand (and maybe even be involved in). Accordingly, from time to time, book reviews and current topics may be discussed here; and those may include works by living authors and current discussions within Christianity. But generally, we will seek to use classic works to address spiritual issues and support within this blog.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Why limit a submission to 750 words and comments to 150 words?
While these limits may be waived from time to time, they force us to think more clearly, to organize our thoughts, to write more concisely, all of which help us create statements with more substance. Also, these limits discourage readers from skipping a whole submission or comment simply because it appears to be long and drawn out.
Why no politics, no weather, no sports, no business and financial, no product review topics or discussion?
These are the topics to which we as men often default when trying to make conversation and are topics that we as men often are tempted to worship. Further, there is enough news on each of these topics to keep us distracted from now until eternity. While they may be interesting topics, for the most part, they are temporal; since in eternity, there will be no politics (other than our King), no uncertain weather, no sports competitions, no money, and no products. Rather, in eternity, while God will provide beauty and wonderful things to enjoy, all of those things will be ancillary to loving, worshipping, and enjoying God Himself. While we are here on earth, we should be increasing our capacity and our desire to love, worship, and enjoy just Him. Our fellowship as men in a local church, then, should not be built upon a temporal foundation, but rather upon God’s Word and truth and the application of that to our lives.
Why limit this blog to CBC's men?
While God is no respecter of persons, and while men and women equally can have a relationship with God, God has established a functional hierarchy placing men in leadership and likewise requiring heightened accountability from us regarding that leadership. Therefore, the primary responsibility for the spiritual health of any household or any church falls on its men. The purpose of this blog is to build the spiritual health of our church and the families within it; so focusing the spiritual discussion among the men will by proper definition accomplish that purpose.
Why make this blog private to CBC members only?
There are many forums and discussion boards and blogs on the web available to anyone and everyone who would like to comment, including sites devoted to spiritual matters. Those have their place, but they also introduce certain risks, particularly when a participant has no vested interest in a relationship with other participants. As members of CBC, we have covenanted with one another to serve the Lord together, and part of that service is fellowship around Him and His Word. Since we have ongoing relationships with one another, we are less likely to make unsubstantiated, caustic, hurtful, or off-the-cuff comments, particularly when we know we will see each other again in just a few days at the next church service. On the flip side of that, we also are more likely to give each other the benefit of the doubt rather than taking offense at a comment that might be taken in more than one way. Additionally, since we do have this covenant relationship with one another, we are able to observe each other’s lives to consider whether what we claim to believe (in blog comments, for instance) fits with how we live. Next, since we have this relationship, we are more likely to be open and vulnerable with each other, since we have confidence that the response will be one of a loving Christian brother. Finally, opening the site to others could jeopardize any or all of these things, and in the process could raise the risk of a simple rabble-rouser attempting to take pot shots, just to cause trouble and dissension and damage.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Why call it the Portico?
The portico of Herod’s temple and the porticoes of other societies served as places of regular meeting and discussion, similarly to the men sitting in the “gates” of Old Testament cities. Solomon’s Portico is referred to in John 10:23, Acts 3:11, and Acts 5:12. Essentially, porticoes were open areas with roofs supported by columns, under which people could meet, discussing any particular matter while being protected from the elements. Likewise, this blog is intended to be a place to safely discuss spiritual matters with one another.
Why therefore this blog?
Acts 2:42 and 46 indicate that the early church continued in the apostles’ doctrine, and fellowship, and breaking bread, and prayer, and that they were daily of one accord in the temple, and fellowshipping from house to house. There are some special things that God performed in that early church that He no longer provides for us, since He has given us His completed Word. Likewise, there were some specific logistical issues that were addressed that were based on the throngs of people who had come to the Jerusalem area for the feast, likewise that are not universally prescriptive to our day. Nevertheless, the principles of close fellowship, the principles of interaction around the apostles’ doctrine and around prayer, certainly are principles to be emulated by us today.
Hebrews 10:23-25 indicate that we should exhort one another to love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, but rather assembling more and more often as we see the day of the Lord approaching.
In light of those two passages, the purposes of this blog include the following. While we would like to fellowship more often, this blog allows us to interact more and more often, even though we do not live and work in close proximity to one another. With our varying schedules, this blog allows us to read and contribute when our schedules allow rather than attempting to coordinate all of our schedules. Due to the increased interaction and the defined focus, this blog opens the door to deeper discussion among the men of our church, thereby encouraging each of us to think deeply and seriously about God, His Word, and our lives. As that interaction develops, this blog allows for potential teachers and leaders to be identified by their wisdom, as expressed in submissions or comments.
In short, this blog is intended to be a complement to, and never a replacement for, actual corporate worship and assembly. Nevertheless, as that complement, given the realities of the schedules and logistics of our lives, this blog allows us to “assemble” more often around God’s Word, thereby exhorting one another to love and good works as we see the day approaching.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
