When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?

Psalm 8:3-4

Shot taken with a Canon EOS 50D set on manual exposure using a 55-250mm IS USM hand-held. The exposure was taken at 235mm, f/7.1 for 1/400th of a second at ISO 800 on digital film. Post capture processing was done in Picasa.

Today would have been my dad’s sixty-first birthday. That’s hard to imagine! It’s equally hard to believe that he’s been gone two-and-a-half years.

One of the things Dad and I did together was backpacking in the mountains of Montana. I wanted to take another trip with Dad, but that didn’t happen. In fact, I think the last time we went on a trip together was about fifteen years ago. I haven’t been since the summer of 2003. Thankfully I have the opportunity to go again in a few weeks.

In preparation, I have been going through my backpacking equipment, along with a couple of boxes of stuff that Dad and I used, but kept at his house. I hadn’t gone through those boxes yet since there had been no need. This has been a good time for me. It’s like getting reacquainted with old friends. Let me introduce you to a few:

If my memory is correct, this is the very first stove we carried into the mountains. Usually we only cooked with an open fire, but as Montana began to have drought years there were times when we could not have a fire, so a stove was the only option for cooking. Thankfully modern stoves are much smaller and lighter (although much more expensive!). This one has gone to the place good stoves go… (is there such a place?).

These are a couple of coffee pots and the “backpackers New Testament.” The pot on the right is an old, old friend. In fact, I’m not sure how old it is. I began backpacking when I was 3 1/2, and I believe this pot was in use before that. That makes it more than thirty years old. Notice that the handle has been melted off, with only the stump remaining. And the glass top from the percolater is gone, replaced with a custom-carved-and-now-burned wooden replacement.

The pot on the left has only been on one or two trips. Give it a few years and it will attain the exalted status of the older one.

Every trip must include a public reading of Psalm 147, particularly these oft-applicable verses:

16 He gives snow like wool;
he scatters hoarfrost like ashes.
17 He hurls down his crystals of ice like crumbs;
who can stand before his cold?
18 He sends out his word, and melts them;
he makes his wind blow and the waters flow.

This is a progression of backpacking history. The taller container on the right — the “Hunter’s Special” — is an old container (the expiration date is 1975). That places it in use just a year after my birth. The taller container on the left is Dad’s attempt at modernization. It is an aluminum water container that was very light for its time. In front of that is a shorter plastic container. I remember one year when Dad cracked some eggs into this container so we could have real eggs for breakfast while in the mountains (my wife tells me that probably wasn’t safe, but I’m still alive!). In front on the right is a film cannister with the label “Java.” Dad carried instant coffee in this container (Interestingly, Dad seemed continually amused when us “kids” suffered from caffeine withdrawal, but he always had his “Java”).

I assume this is Dad’s toiletry collection. If so, this changed as he aged. First, he never carried a full toothbrush. He always cut the handle off to save an ounce or two of weight. Second, I cannot remember him taking along a razor, much less a small piece of broken mirror in a hand-made leather pouch complete with duct tape. I guess he needed more creature comforts as he aged!

Portions of our mess kits and cooking pans. Years ago (25?) We engraved the bottom of our aluminum cups. Dad’s (on the right) with LH and mine with my name.

This is my very first backpack. If I remember correctly I first used it when I was four, a year before the picture above was taken. I have a memory of several of the other guys being exasperated when I went into the mountains carrying seven pounds and came out carrying two (I was carrying a lot of food). As I grew into a larger pack this one became our day pack for short day-long trips while in the mountains.

As you can see, this is a storage box for “Backpak” items. Just like he did with many things backpacking, Dad shortened the word to make it “lighter.” You know–think in terms of ounces, not pounds. An extra letter just might weigh more…

I hope you’ve enjoyed meeting some of my old friends. Some of them will be in use again in a few weeks, and some newer friends will be introduced to these old friends. I can’t wait!

“The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love” Psalm 103:8.

The words merciful (also translated “compassionate”) and gracious are words used in the Hebrew Old Testament many times. Interestingly, every time they are used they refer to God. Only God is truly compassionate and gracious towards us. Isn’t it a wonderfully comforting thought that our God is the One who is merciful and gracious?

In addition, he abounds in steadfast love. Many of you know that I prefer the translation “loyal love” for this word (Heb. hesed). It is a love that is enduring and always present. In this text the writer includes the adverb “much” (the ESV uses the word “abounding”) to intensify God’s loyal love. Our God does not merely have love for his people. No, he has loyal love. And he does not just have loyal love for his people, but much loyal love.

I’m not sure about you, but I will bask in the compassionate, gracious, and overflowing loyal love of my God!

Some time ago I noted that I was memorizing Psalm 103 and would be posting some nuggets that I discovered in the midst of my study. I finished memorizing the song, but failed to continue posting on the nuggets. After a long wait, here is the next one!

In Psalm 103:7 we find this sentence: He made known his ways to Moses, his acts to the people of Israel. The verb “made known” in this sentence is a unique form in the Hebrew text (a Hiphil imperfect, for those who may care) carrying the idea of causation. Thus, it would not be improper to translate this way: He caused his ways to be made known to Moses….

What an act of God! We would never know the ways of God aside from his revelation of them to us. God (himself) took it upon himself to act in such a way to provide revelation of himself to his people. This is exactly what Scripture is, according to 2 Timothy 3.16, 2 Peter 1:19-21, and Hebrews 1:1-2.

We did not (indeed, could not–Ephesians 2:1, and would not–Romans 3:10-12) search God out, but rather he made himself known. Amazing Grace…

If you haven’t read it yet, please begin here, otherwise this post will not make much sense.

For the sake of continuity, I’m going to include here the concluding paragraph of Part One and pick up where that left off:

Doctor Tiller’s church apparently viewed him as a true part of God’s Church (again, in the language of our illustration, having a “new engine,” being a new creation. In addition, they apparently didn’t consider abortion sinful. Or–at the very least–they didn’t believe that there was a need for him to confess and repent of any sin. This means there is a person in the local church who is considered to be “saved,” but whose actions are contrary to the Word of God. This will lead us into part two…

For the sake of argument, let’s assume a couple of points. First, that Dr. Tiller’s church is part of the true Church, a collection of believer’s in Christ who worship and fellowship together (I have my doubts about that actually being true, but let’s go with it anyway). Second, let’s assume that Dr. Tiller himself claims to be one of God’s newly-created, born again people.

Here is the situation: the abortion doctor claims to be a Christian but keeps on performing abortions as an active member of a local church. If, as Scripture states, taking the life of the unborn is a sinful action against our holy God, what is the correct response to this situation?

Thankfully we are not left to our own devices in this matter! God gives us instruction to follow in Matthew chapter 18. His first instruction is that someone should approach the doctor about his sin. Since this is a more public matter rather than a personal sin against another person, it would probably be best if that person were one of the elders. There should be some loving correction based upon the Word of God along with a heartfelt call for the doctor to confess his sin and repent of it (which means he would then stop performing abortions). If he responds appropriately, then no change is needed–he may continue as part of the church and activily persuing his service opportunities.

However, if there is no change and he continues in his sinful practice, God says to go with him again, this time with witnesses. If this successfully produces repentance, then no change is necessary. If change does not occur, then it is told to the church. At this point, if repentance has not occurred, it would be best to remove the doctor from his position as an usher in the church (since the issue of his sin is now fully public and the church knows of his unrepentant heart).

Finally, Scripture says if the doctor refuses to respond to the church lovingly calling him to repentance, then he is to be considered as a “Gentile and a tax collector.” Some would say that means he should be kicked out of the church. But we should not be so fast to take that action, especially since it is not explicitly stated.

Rather, a Gentile and tax collectors were those who were avoided at all costs unless (from the Jewish perspective) there was a renunciation of sin and a conversion to Judaism. That is, they would be coming into the “Jewish fold” of God’s people. Thus, the church should approach any unrepentant person as one who is not born again. At this point there is an assumption that since God’s process of dealing with sin has not brought about the desired result, that particular person much not have God’s Spirit within them to work out change. That person is then dealt with as an unsaved person by the church. They are not part of the Lord’s family and thus are generally avoided except for the purpose of evangelization. Anytime there is contact with the unrepentant person the church should lovingly share the gospel with them and call for repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth. If they do come to church, then they should not be treated as “one of our own,” with whom we are friendly and “lovey-dovey,” but as a visitor with whom we should share the gospel.

The answer to the question is varied: It would probably be unwise to remove the person from any positions (i.e. member, usher, etc.) until just prior to the step in which the church is told of the sin. At that point, however, it would be wise to remove the doctor from his position as usher. If that step does not have the desired effect of bringing about the repentance of sin, the doctor should also be removed from the membership roles  he is to be considered as an unbeliever who needs the saving grace of the Lord Jesus Christ to create all things new within him. The church is composed of those who are true believers, and one continuing in unrepentant sin is to be considered as someone in need, not already having God’s new life.

Does this seem harsh? Maybe to some. To God it is the loving thing to do. His desire is for people to be confronted with their sin in order to see the need for His grace. That grace then takes effect, changing a person into His image. If there is no change, as in Dr. Tiller, then perhaps Titus 1.16 is true in their case: “They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works.”