- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostThe Organized Heart
- Next Post »Free Stuff Fridays
A La Carte (3/4)
- 03/04/11
- 36
I apologize for skipping out on A La Carte yesterday. I came down with an ugly variation of the 24-hour flu and pretty much spent all day in bed. I probably could have wrestled together a post, but I was having an odd problem with my eyes—I was seeing double for a few hours. That was a new one to me. It made reading and writing pretty much impossible.
Intercourse with God? - Everyday Mommy writes about Ann Voskamp’s new book—one that has made it to the lists of bestsellers. I thought Christians had gotten over this idea of making love to God. Apparently not.
The Book Surgeon - This is some amazing art. I bet I couldn’t afford to buy any of it. But I want it.
Redeemed Reader - Here’s a new blog I’m excited about. “Our goal at Redeemedreader.com is to shine a gospel light on children's literature so that Christian parents, educators, and the children they nurture may read in a more redeemed and redeeming way.”
$5 Friday - It’s always worth checking out the $5 Friday deals from Ligonier Ministries.
I Act the Miracle - John Piper: “Acting a miracle is different from working a miracle. If Jesus tells a paralyzed man to get up, and he gets up, Jesus works a miracle. But if I am the paralyzed man and Jesus tells me to get up, and I obey and get up, I act the miracle. If I am dead Lazarus and Jesus commands me to get up, and I obey, Jesus works the miracle, I act the miracle.”
Not Lords, Stewards - Burk Parsons has penned a good article about our celebrity culture. “A "bad steward" is oxymoronic. A bad steward is no steward at all.”
Facebook Obsession - This video gives some context to our current Facebook obsession.
Contextualization is not giving people what they want. It is giving God's answers (which they probably do not want) to the questions they are asking and in forms they can comprehend. —Tim Keller
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (36)
It’s fascinating to live thru the Fcaebook revolution isn’t it? Who’d have though that it 6 years, a kid from Harvard would completely change the way we use the internet…
I hear ya, we had it here pretty bad too.
Some weird germs are making the rounds, Tim. Don’t overexert yourself. One bug has people relapsing for a day a couple days after they thought they were well.
Prayed for you.
That Intercourse with God chapter highlighted in that blog post are horrific. As are the comments defending it!
Careful, you’re treading on the blogging world’s sacred cow that is the Voskamp book. (I agree, btw).
Tim—
I’ve done the seeing double thing. Take plenty of time away from the pixels, even though the world will fall apart without you, let it fall.
Doug
Hmm, there’s a long tradition of using the language of love for our relationship with God. It can be done well or badly, but I don’t think we should throw it all out.
I wish I could’ve known not to click that Voskamp link. What a horrible image that leaves in my mind. It’s shocking in its grossness.
While I agree that we shouldn’t totally throw out emotional language and comparisons to husband/wife love in relation to our Father, I also think there is a line that should not be crossed. He is a holy God, one before whom we tremble(but yes, one also in whose arms we can rest!), and using erotic language to fuel the emotions of the reader is going too far. There is a place for poetry and loveliness and joy and bliss as we describe our relationship with our Father, but to use such sexually-charged words(and if we feel using such an analogy is appropriate, how far is too far? How much can we describe before it becomes an affront to God’s holiness?) turns our focus away from God and onto how we feel…instead of receiving joy and feeling passionate because of the nature of God and what He’s done for us - we don’t need to resort to thinking of our relationship with our Father and Lord and Saviour as “making love to Him”. I feel that such phraseology and mental stimulation is not how we should be approaching our worship. Instead of going to worship thinking…”I’m going to make love to God!!!!”, let us simply worship.
In conclusion, just wanted to say that I have no doubt of the author’s love for God and Jesus, and as one who loves to write poetry of my own I understand the power of emotional imagery…I just feel this kind of imagery takes us away from glorifying our Father and towards a massaging of our emotions. In the end though, soli deo gloria!
Tim,I am concern that you apologized for not doing “A La Carte” yesterday. Makes me think that you think you owe it to us, when you owe us nothing.
Maybe I am being to critical, feel better.
On a separate note, how come Red is not a valid answer for CAPTCHA?
Well after reading all that I’m not going to the Voskamp link. But I wanted to tell you that I thought the “Book Surgeon” art was wonderful and would love to see it in real life sometime. I can’t imaging how long it took to create some of those.
Thanks for the link to Everyday Mommy. The book began troubling me early on and reading through her post and the subsequent comments was a help. I won’t be finishing it.
Thanks Tim. You truly are informing the reforming!
Trish
So I read the title and thought, “This seems like a whole A La Carte, not just 3/4 of one.”
Yes, Whitney, it is indeed a sacred cow.
I actually thought about emailing you, Tim, to see if you were planning on or would review VosKamp’s book. The sacred cow comment (@Whitney) made me laugh because it is seriously taking blogs, twitter, and FB by storm. Even my non-blog following friends have made the jump. I have a review copy and am trying to read it but her style makes it hard to follow. I think it works for a blog post (which I sometimes read) but not an entire book.
Is the Redeemed Reader link not working for everyone else too, or is it just me?
The Redeemed Reader link is not working for me, either. Sounds like a great concept though!
I’ve read through these comments, and no one has called anyone any names. Therefore, the comments making those charges have been removed.
I suggest you read more carefully and thoughtfully.
David, I did go back and read more carefully, and I must have read it wrong. I thought they were calling her a sacred cow. My apologies.
Sarah Mae,I thought so. We accept your apology.
Re: the Ann Voskamp book:
Yikes. On two separate levels.
First - I’d had a bunch of (usually) really discerning women friends practically demand I read her book. I took one look at all the, ahem, overheated reviews at Amazon, rolled my eyes and decided to decline. The excerpts I read were certainly better written than a lot of other things targeted at women, and you can’t fault an author for fangirls’ loony responses.
But this is the first I’ve heard of how, um, far she goes with the metaphorical meanderings. Mercy. It’s not okay. Do I believe a lot of women are desperately in need of a deeper, more transcendent relationship with God? Absolutely. Are a lot of them also so worn out by the workaday life of raising children, ministering in their churches and caring for husbands, that their intimate life with the aforementioned husbands has utterly died? No question. But the answer to those two problems is not to conflate the solution and commit idolatry, not to mention potential blasphemy (albeit unintentionally).
BUT, having said that, the comment frenzy over at EM’s blog is almost as tough to take. I find it ironic how similarly overwrought and overwritten some of the comments railing against her are, as Voskamp’s own writing is at times, but with a big helping of Ichabod thrown in too.
She’s not Rob Bell, friends. She’s a genuine believer. She’s experienced some horrific things, and has wrestled to be faithful to God in the midst of them. It’s very possible the extremity of her hurt has something to do with the extremity of her thinking in reconciling what she experienced with the goodness of God. But I’m assuming her pastor read her book. I’m assuming her husband read it too. Let’s just be careful with the holy tar and feathering.
John Piper has written the following which is no different than what Ann Voskamp says. Where was/is the vigilant and vituperative language for what Piper has stated?
December 26, 1982 (Morning)Bethlehem Baptist ChurchJohn Piper, Pastor”Hosea 2:14-23 is one of the tenderest and most beautiful love songs in the Bible…But the most daring statement of all is the last one in verse 20: “And you shall know the Lord.” To see what this means recall the peculiar use of the word “know” in the Bible.For example, Genesis 4:1, “Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived and bore Cain.” And Matthew 1:25, “Joseph knew her [Mary] not until she had borne a son.”In the context of a broken marriage being renewed with the fresh vows of betrothal must not the words, “and you shall know the Lord,” (v. 20) mean, you shall enjoy an intimacy like that of the purest sexual intercourse.When the wife of harlotry returns to her husband, he will withhold nothing. He will not keep her at a distance.The fellowship and communion and profoundest union he will give to his prodigal wife when she comes home broken and empty.”
And John Piper ~ Sex and the Supremacy of Christ
“And his goal in creating human beings with personhood and passion was to make sure that there would be sexual language and sexual images that would point to the promises and the pleasures of God’s relationship to his people and our relationship to him.
In other words, the ultimate reason (not the only one) why we are sexual is to make God more deeply knowable.
The language and imagery of sexuality is the most graphic and most powerful that the Bible uses to describe the relationship between God and his people—both positively (when we are faithful) and negatively (when we are not).”
For those who hold Piper in high esteem Ann Voskamp is in good company. By the way, if time allowed I could show similar statements be Charles Spurgeon, G. Campbell Morgan, et al.
Tim,I think the link to the redeemed Reader is broken. Thanks for your ministryScott
@Bill Jensen (or John Piper)
How do you reconcile: , “and you shall know the Lord,” (v. 20) mean, you shall enjoy an intimacy like that of the purest sexual intercourse…
…with the fact that you are a man and God is our Abba Father.
I’m not trying to be ugly. I truly want to know.
Thanks.
Thank you for your response Bill.
I guess I “imagine” something physical or sexual because that’s what “sexual intercourse” is. I can imagine nothing else when those words are used.
I guess what it comes down to is this, men and women are not without error. God and His Word are without error. When I read, I eat the cherries and spit out the pits, and I have had to spit out a few pits lately! But that’s okay, that’s what a discerning Christian must do!
Thanks again,Trish
Trish, you may find the following quotes interesting…from Jonathan Edwards no less. Ann Voskamp is in good company indeed! Clearly, Edwards, Piper, and Voskamp wouldn’t be suggesting anything more that a metaphorical bridge to greater understanding, anything else should rightly make us shudder.
“And would you have him nearer to you than to be in the same nature, united to you by a spiritual union, so close as to be fitly represented by the union of the wife to the husband, of the branch to the vine, of the member to the head; yea, so as to be one spirit? For so he will be united to you, if you accept of him.”
~ Jonathan Edwards, the Excellency of Christ
“For Christ being united to the human nature, we have advantage for a more free and full enjoyment of him, than we could have had if he had remained only in the divine nature. So again, we being united to a divine person, as his members, can have a more intimate union and intercourse with God the Father.”
~ Jonathan Edwards, the Excellency of Christ http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/edwards/excellency.html
@Mr. Jensen, you are speaking out-of-turn. Your comments regarding me are quite uninformed.
To clarify, for the sake of Mr. Challies’ readership, I am not young as Mr. Jensen assumes. Quite the contrary, I’m nearing the half-century mark. Nor do I hold an earthly teacher in ‘highest esteem’ or revere John Piper.
In other words, if you cannot speak to what I’ve written, rather than what you’ve imagined me to be, then you should remain silent.
I have spoken to what you are written showing how Voskamp is in good company in regards to her metaphor besides discussing the use of metaphor. Her book is endorsed by numerous significant conservative evangelical Christian leaders with more doing so everyday.
@Bill Jensen
Your statements about me are completely incorrect, Bill.
To clarify, you said:
“Everyday Mommy is like many young reformed believers, enthralled with her own opinion (check out her 50 product reviews on Amazon on everything from books to baby seats) yet I am sure she holds John Piper in the highest esteem as the Grand Poobah of Calvinists. ”
You are wrong.
This is getting way out of hand.
1. Ad hominem attacks are unacceptable.
2. It’s not your place to decide what is “worth linking” here. You are guests. You do not have editorial privileges. Agree or disagree (civilly), take it or leave it, but take it or leave it as it is.
3. No, I will not itemize and explain why each deleted comment was deleted.
If this counts as a disclaimer, both Tim Challies’ and Ann Voskamp’s blogs were the first ones I subscribed to and stuck with, probably 4 years ago. I have benefited from both, sometimes more than others. I appreciate Tim’s desire to inform and edify, and think The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment is a helpful and needed book for Christians today.
I have also been moved to greater love and gratitude for Christ—yes, and His work on the cross—through Ann’s blog. She has challenged me to see God’s sovereignty in all circumstances, and I have grown in my contentment in Him by seeing all as His gift of grace to His beloved children. Because I had read her blog before (and I have not finished the book), One Thousand Gifts probably did not affect me as radically as it did others. I know that her style will put some off, but the book deserves to be evaluated as a whole, and not on the shock value of a few sentences. I do think a review by Tim would have been more helpful than what does seem, as one commenter said, a bit like throwing the author under a train.
In particular, everydaymommy’s comments on her blog of “The metaphor of marriage is a picture of the Gospel. Christ died for His Bride. He didn’t meet her in a secret rendezvous in Paris.” and “But, I guess that dying for someone you love just doesn’t sell books, does it? Sex sells.” seem like a bit of an unkind attempt to use innuendo and wit to make her point. However, there was no “secret rendezvous in Paris”, and the book is in no way about sex. From reading Ann’s blog, aholyexperience.com, her (very) rare allusions to being “one flesh” show more modesty and discretion than most other bloggers I have read. Saying “sex sells” is a gross mischaracterization of Ann’s writings. I don’t think she cares about the sales of her book (and not about sales of T-shirts or mugs, either).
I appreciate that Tim does not jump back into the fray of comments once he has laid his thoughts out there, although apparently David is doing needed work of editing and deleting “out of hand” commenters. As much as we would like Tim to clarify and bolster one side or another in a dispute, I like that he is willing to let his thoughts stand and move on without trying to defend his position. (Also, I am sure he is much too busy!) I noticed that Ann Voskamp made one early gracious comment on everydaymommy’s blog in an attempt to clarify, then stepped away. Maybe Jules (everydaymommy) should have followed these examples (and 1 Peter 2:23); then I might have taken her criticism more seriously.
“I fly to Paris and discover how to make love to God.” - Ann Voskamp, pp. 201, “One Thousand Gifts”
Well put!
I’m sorry, that response was to J. Hogan. I found his balanced questions about the appropriateness of such language well put. However, I also appreciate Mr. Jensen’s quotes.
Let us think about the meaning of marital sexual intercourse. It is the deepest expression of intimacy and conjugal joy on this earth. It will not continue in the new heaven and earth. Why? Because we will then experience the deepest intimacy with God, transcending the physical.
Recently I was reading 1 Cor. 6, that noble passage in which Paul says “You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So glorify God with your body.” In the passage, Paul says it is evil to use our bodies, temples of the Holy Spirit, in illicit sex.
Buried in the passage is a little phrase “he who is joined with the Lord becomes one spirit with him.” Now, at the time I was reading the passage, I was seeking help from the Lord on guarding my thoughts toward my boyfriend. To me, this phrase lit it up for me. I must desire the deepest intimacy with the Lord. That is one of the reasons why I must guard my thoughts now until we’re married or very close to it. That moment of joy in the Lord blessed me a lot, assuring me of an amazing union with God and challenging me to be pure within it. I didn’t extrapolate upon it, and I’m not sure I like Voskamp’s doing so, but it was there.
@everydaymommy: Yes, I know from where you took the quote, and know that Ann went to Paris to stay with a female friend and be refreshed. Not the same as a secret rendezvous, and I didn’t feel the innuendo was warranted.
I also appreciated the thoughtful comments here.Grace and peace.