When the Bible is Boring

This is a great post from Abraham Piper, son of one of my favorite preachers (second only to Rex Blankenship), John Piper. It was too good not to post here. Such truth! He writes:

It would be hard to have a slow, careful, exegetical Bible study about the second half of the book of Joshua. Chapters 13 to 21 are mostly lists: what parcels of land are going to which tribe of Israel.

Much of the Old Testament is like this—genealogies, lists, rules, procedures. As lovers of the Bible, what should we make of these mundane details? Is it even appropriate to call parts of God’s word mundane? It sounds sacrilegious.

What does it matter, though, that Issachar received the territories around Jezreel, Chesulloth, Shunem, and 13 other cities? Or that Manasseh’s land reached from Asher to Michmethah, just east of Shechem?

Joshua tells us why these obscure details are important: So that the Israelites would have specific and extensive evidence that God does what he says he will do.

Not one word of all the good promises that the Lord had made to the house of Israel had failed; all came to pass. (Joshua 21:45)

The more detailed the report of God’s faithfulness, the more proof that indeed not one word of his had been false. He promised their forefathers this land, and now, because of this account in the book of Joshua, they can remember specifically how God was faithful. Faithful in concrete detail. Faithful down to the most boring of trivia.

As Joshua died, he said to the Israelites,

You know in your hearts and souls, all of you, that not one word has failed of all the good things that the Lord your God promised concerning you. All have come to pass for you; not one of them has failed. (23:14)

It’s true that knowing Michmethah is east of Shechem ranks very low in the list of facts that are important to know from the Bible. But it matters, because the sum of all the dull details that God has accomplished proves that whatever he promises, he will do.

We have a God who keeps a tally of sparrows, who counts the hairs on our head (Luke 12:6-7), and who watches over the grass as it grows (Matthew 6:30). If that’s not boring, what is? But it is his power over the mundane and trivial details that proves his power over the universe. And because of this power, we know he can keep his promises.

Amen. Maranatha.

The Lord Jesus is Not My Girlfriend

I have figured out why so much modern Christian music gives me the willies.

Many of you know that besides Greek and Biblical Theology (and politics and travel and motorsports and fishing and now golfing), one of my chief loves is music. I have always loved music and was a music major in college. I have led worship for about 15 years now, and love to hear the saints sing the Bible back to the author of truth. We should all get weepy when we hear the lyrics to the recent hymn, “In Christ Alone” when we sing,

Till on that cross as Jesus died,
The wrath of God was satisfied;
For every sin on Him was laid—
Here in the death of Christ I live.

What is better than penal substitutionary atonement put to music, and the church of God singing such rich doctrine to the Lord corporately? May we never tire of singing the gospel!

This is why I have such a difficult time singing and hearing some of the worship choruses that have been aptly titled the “Jesus is my girlfriend” songs. You know the ones I am talking about. Perhaps it was merely a blinding flash of the obvious, but as I was driving through Louisville the other day listening to (enduring?) Christian radio, it hit me. I have figured it out. I have finally put my finger on it. It was when the singer sang the lyric, “Jesus I am so in love with you.” I don’t even know who was singing, nor do I question their love for the Lord. But, I do question the lyric with which they worship the Lord.

Here it is: The language of “being in love” with Jesus Christ. It just gives me the willies (from the Greek word, willaomai). You see, the language of “being in love” is always tied to romance in our culture. I love Jesus Christ, but I am not romantically inclined towards him. He is my Sovereign King and Lord, but I am not “in love” with him. True, I am part of the bride of Christ, but the biblical affection for the Lord is one of agape, and not eros. I love Denny Burk, Al Mohler and Bill Cook, but (egad!) I would never be “in love” with them. As such, I cannot tie romance to biblical worship of the Coming King. Again, the willies.

I don’t know how you ladies think of this, but as a guy it is not worshipful in the least bit to say that I am “in love with Jesus.” “In love” is so tied to romantic love in our culture, that I would love to see it excised from Christian worship in all its shapes and forms.

That’s it. I figured out why so much modern Christian music gives me the willies.