read my profile
sign my guestbook
Location: Wichita, Kansas, United States
Interests: Serving Christ and growing in faith and obedience to the Sovereign God...how can I not with what He did for me?
I also enjoy reading, journalism and the thrill of chasing down a story, history, politics, listening to music (covering the biggest bands and their mothers, here is my list): Switchfoot, Yellowcard, Sum 41, Linkin Park, Avril Lavigne, Jeremy Camp, Steven Curtis Chapman, Caedmon's Call, Derek Webb, Eowyn *check her songs out....awesome*, Sanctus Real).
Hanging out with friends and watching movies and Family Guy. Sleeping in!
Expertise: I am majoring in history/secondary education but am also a journalism geek; I am editor of the college newspaper.
I love a good debate on politics or theology, so pay heed, ye supralapsarian heretics. /dry theological joke mode
Message: message meEmail: email me
Website: visit my website
AIM: Calvin dude 777
|Moving on from the theological tomes of late, it was worth posting just to say how amazing marriage is. Albeit, it is still the "honeymoon" phase and haven't had many challenges/disagreements yet that can make marriage hard work (though well worth it), but union with another person is great.|
It is hard to describe how you really do become one spiritually and in every sense. Incredible.
We have begun looking at churches and found a great one called Trinity Covenant Church. It is Reformed, yet was a great place because it was not your typical Presbyterian church. They kneeled during prayer and even raised hands during praise responses. They used covenant renewal worship, which I am used to and love. Most of all though, it was the Communion that touched me. I already discussed that in my last post, but not specifically regarding this church. They have a cup shared between families instead of each person having their own, which was an awesome thing because it highlights the family's union. I also believe it was wine, not grape juice, another plus, though I do not know for sure since we chose not to take part as visitors. They do it weekly like GOD WANTS US TO DO! Another plus. Furthermore, they don't view it as a dour event, but a time to retell the story of the Lord's death for us with joy. It is a celebration. Truly incredible, and I believe, Biblical view of what the Lord's Supper is....it is a joining together of the Lord's family to taste anew the love of God and look again at our union with one another and duty to seek God every day. Simply wonderful.
We will see what happens after we attend other churches.
In other news, we love our new place in Wichita except for one thing...the AC broke yesterday and is supposedly working today, but it sure as heck does not feel like it. The temp is still 80 and not falling.
This sucks. We both like it realy cool, so 80 is just a freaking furnace.
If it does not get fixed....for real this time....we will have to take action of some sort.
|More on FV issues for Calvinists reading this blog:|
I have been doing a lot of reading and in particular, I wanted to quote some things that caught my attention and respond. I am certainly becoming more favorable to the FV. I like a LOT of what I am reading....this is not the boogeyman portrayed by church reports.
Frankly, the more I read, the more I wonder why anybody could seriously object to the Federal Vision. What this theology does for the many non-Reformed people who read this blog is basically try to correct what in the Presbyterian Church and other Calvinist churches has occasionally been an over-emphasis on the decrees of God...the familiar focus on how God saves people. While extremely important, the "covenant" or basically how we relate to God as his followers sometimes got the shaft. Not always. I love the Puritans from the 17th century basically because they were very strong understanding that part of things, not just what God does, but what that means for us in response as believers. But, later things began to change, especially with the 20th century when Calvinism became "hip" to believe in. The focus sometimes was too much head-minded as opposed to what this whole Christian life is meant to do. I initially thought FV went too far, that frankly their beliefs were already Calvinistic, they just needed recovery. I even wondered if the FV was wrong completely based on what critics say. But, I don't believe they are wrong or go too far anymore...at least on most points. I think it is an admirable movement, and while their beliefs are already doctrines that Calvinists believe, they are neglected by some enough that perhaps their reformulation, Federal Vision, is necessary to recover those beliefs.
"Part of what we are addressing is style. In our first essay, we called
attention to the amazing shallowness of some of the critiques coming
from supposedly learned sources. “The ‘Federal Vision’ emphasizes this
or that too much.” Wow! Now there’s a powerful criticism! And in fact
that kind of criticism characterizes the Orthodox Presbyterian Church’s
report into the matter."
This is one of the few things I take issue with...I do think an overemphasis on something or the opposite is a big issue. Nevertheless, after much reading, it appears to me this charge against FV is for the most part at least, not correct. It is balanced.
The following is a remarkable section of an article explaining to Christians how Scripture needs to be read as more than just instructions to individuals, and it starts by amazingly progressing through how God has used Scripture over time for his church, to edify and cause reform in mass groups of people:
"The chronology is not just a matter of this and then that and then
that. It is a history of how the Divine Parent educated the core and
center of the human race, and then of how He called all nations to be
grafted into that Olive Tree history so as to receive the benefit of
it. Exactly 1656 years after the creation of the earth, the starry
firmament, and man, God put the entire human world through an intense
death and resurrection in the Flood. In the year 2107, precisely 450
years after the new beginning after the Flood, God divided the human
race in half, tearing it apart by having Abram circumcise his
household. This tearing in half would have to be overcome, and was
overcome by the death and resurrection of the New Adam, as Paul’s
epistles are at great pains to explain.
God had told much to Abram/Abraham, and then had worked with Rebekah
and Jacob as well. These revelations percolated in the minds of the
faithful, and when they were mature enough, God spoke His law to them
in the year 2513, 406 years after the division of humanity by
circumcision. The conquest of the land was completed in the year 2560,
and shortly thereafter the “true pentateuch” of Exodus-Joshua (which is
one book by one author with one overall structure) was completed. What
we have at this point is a deposit of revelation consisting
of a faithful record of things Yahweh spoke to Moses and to Moses and
Aaron together, the book of Deuteronomy written by Moses, and a
Spirit-inspired history of all the events surrounding this deposit of
This deposit of revelation happened at this time. It did not happen
later. Just as you did not learn addition and subtraction in the ninth
grade but in the second, so God gave Israel this textbook when they
were about 450 years old (from circumcision to the time of the
Conquest). This deposit of revelation worked in the minds of the
faithful over several generations until, about 400 years later, they
were ready for another deposit of revelation.
At this time, David wrote the Psalms — David and Levites of his
generation — all but a handful. This deposit of revelation preceded the
building of the Temple, and was enshrined and symbolized by that
building. We are in the ninth grade, and we have been given the book Algebra I. Then a generation later Solomon wrote the books of kingly wisdom (Algebra II):
Song of Solomon, a book of “political eros”; Ecclesiastes, a book of
“political struggle”; the bulk of Proverbs, a book of “political
wisdom”; and probably Job, a book of “political failure.” After all,
Song of Solomon is about the love of the king and of Yahweh for his
people, using the imagery of Temple and Land to bring this out. And of
course, Job is a king and his three “King’s Friends” are his chief
Books about social order.
Later on the same chronological time line we get the book of Isaiah,
and then the other prophetic books. We know when each was written:
shortly after the prophet expired, if not during his lifetime. We are
told when each lived. In each case, we have a deposit of written
revelation designed to stimulate the maturation and development of the
Core People toward the time of the coming of the Messiah.
The Mosaic deposit (Exodus-Joshua) challenged the people to put away
pagan gods. Throughout the ensuing period, they kept turning to those
gods, but eventually they stopped doing so. The deposit had worked its
The Davidic/Solomonic deposit challenged the people to worship only
in the ways God had taught, at His temple, without images. Throughout
the ensuing period, they kept turning to high places and statues of
Yahweh and his court; but eventually they stopped doing so. The deposit
had worked its work.
The prophetic deposits challenged the people not to be hypocrites
but to carry God’s Name throughout the world. Gradually they began to
What we seen in this is that God was instructing Adam and bringing
him up. By Jesus’ time, Adam was not worshiping other gods, nor was he
using images of Yahweh on high places. Adam was traversing land and sea
to make even one disciple, and studying the Scriptures all the time. The
human race had matured to the point where it was fitting for Messiah to
come, and come not only to save the race, but to bring the race to
Now let us break off this catholic and Reformational understanding
of the Bible and consider what individualistic amillennialism does to
First, this kind of corporate history is not seen as relevant. God
is not saving and maturing the race as a race, but just rescuing
individuals. Because of this, Biblical chronology is seen as unimportant.
And this is a radical change from the entire history of how Christians
have read and understood the Bible. To be sure, you who are reading
this are likely to be “modern” and thinking that ignoring the
chronology is commonplace. It’s not. It’s very recent, and a radical
change. It took me some years to overcome my American individualistic
mind set and realize that the historic Church was right about the
Second, individualism means that the Bible history is reduced to
moralistic stories. And because of this, heroes like Jacob and Samson
(at the beginning of his ministry) and others are given the worst
possible reading, so that we can make moral applications from them. And
yes, this kind of moralism has been with the Church for a long time,
but only of late has it overcome all other aspects of reading.
Third, this reduction to individualistic moralism means that the
political and social aspects of the Biblical revelation tend to be
overlooked and/or shrunk down to the level of personal piety. Song of
Solomon gets to be either an allegory of the soul and Jesus, or else
some kind of marriage manual. It is neither. Job is seen as an
individual going through hard times. That’s part of it, but hardly the
Fourth, when people improve on moralism they go to typology. Far be
it from me to reject typology, but if that’s all you have, then Jesus
is merely fulfilling one interesting story after another. There is no
real history. The stories may as well be myths. Consider: Surely Jesus
as World Redeemer fulfills in His own way the stories of Oedipus and
Theseus and Judith, though all these stories are allegories and myths.
If all we have is moralism and typology, we don’t have history and
maturation. We don’t actually have what the Bible gives us.
So, fifth, we come to what is increasingly common in educated
Reformed circles: the notion that we can ignore the Biblical testimony
of how and when various revelations and writings and books were given,
and play games with it. Maybe the so-called books of Moses were written
much later, but they are still “inerrant” for certain purposes —
certain moralistic and typological purposes. Maybe Solomon did not
write Ecclesiastes as the Qoheleth who “qahal”ed (gathered)
the people in 1 Kings 8, but it was written much later by someone
pretending to be Solomon. Maybe Daniel was written 300 years after it
claims to have been. But none of this matters because there is no
history of cultural maturation that we need to worry about; there are
only various relatively timeless typological and moralistic snapshots.
Whatever the Bible may “inerrantly” say, it does not provide us a
history of maturation and cultural development, nor therefore can it
teach us any wisdom about such matters.
Now, an orthodox historic approach the Bible can indeed provide such
wisdom. We know when the Law was written and published and began to do
its work. And we know what kind of people it initially addressed. We
know when the Psalms and Wisdom were written and published and began to
do their work; and we know what kind of people they initially
addressed. We can begin to ask questions like this: “What is it about
the Law as a literary form that particularly addresses the kind of
people it was initially given to, and what was this literature designed
to change them into?” And we can ask the same kind of question about
the other deposits of revelation also.
And then we can notice that the seven churches in Revelation 2-3 are
each associated with a particular time in Old Covenant history. We can
begin to apply the societal wisdom we have begun to learn from Israel’s
history to address the particular problems and issues in our own
churches. Is your church most like Pergamum? Well, that’s the
wilderness church. Perhaps your church is made up of people who need to
be addressed in a Law-oriented fashion. If your church is like
Thyatira, maybe a strong dose of Psalms. If like Sardis, you need
Jeremiah. And so forth.
The amillennial individualistic approach, however, does not notice
these matters. The Bible may include “mythical enhancements” of the
history it records. The Bible books may have been written much later
than they appear to have been. The author of a given book may be using
a pen-name, and not actually be Daniel or Isaiah. There may be true
contradictions in the historical accounts. None of that matters. All
that matters is the ideas in the books as they apply to us as
individuals, and as Jesus fulfills these stories."I have been doing much reading on communion and am completely convinced at this point that the paedocommunion position (communion for kids) is Biblical. They are just as much part of the church by virtue of the fact that it is God's intent for them to be, "for such is the kingdom of God." The fact that they may not have responded in faith yet is not the point....just like with Israel, the PROMISE of God is to all, even children of believers. The following quote is powerful.
"We are divided between those who are in the covenant (adults) and
those who are halfway in the covenant (baptized little children). When
the family of God gathers around the Table to eat dinner with the Lord,
why are the youngest children excluded? Do they not belong to him? Why
must they be told and sometimes forcibly hindered from eating and
drinking with the One with whom they are covenantally united? Have they
proven themselves to be schismatics or divisive? Do they fail to
discern the unity of the body of Christ? If so, then by all means they
should be excluded. If not, why are they denied access to the family
Table? No, it is not the children who fail to discern the unity of the
body of Christ; rather, we, the adult leaders of the church, are those
who fail to judge the body rightly. We traditional Presbyterians have
for too long “despised the church of God and humiliated those who have
nothing” (1 Corinthians 11:22)?
The analogy with the family table is valid and powerful. All of my
children eat dinner with the family, even my two-year old! They are all
required to “prove themselves” before and at the table. They are all
required to “judge the body” of the family. In other words, they are
all required to respect the unity of the family, even the toddler in
the family! If he fails to discern the unity of the family and starts
throwing food at his fifteen-year old sister, then he is disciplined.
He is learning what it means to have the privilege of eating at the
table. He must prove himself. He must “discern the body” before and at
every meal. If he refuses, he may need to be disciplined."The following quote has to do with wine in communion. I believe in having wine in communion...that is not an issue I have ever struggled with. Wine means wine!!!! Duh! While I believe God considers grape juice valid due to intent, I have always held a conviction that we should use wine. This quote below points out the arrogance of us saying no to wine because there might be alcoholics in the congregation:
"The sin of drunkenness is much older than our culturally-driven
diagnosis regarding alcoholism. It has been a prevalent problem in most
ages, and certainly was well enough known in Israel and the early
Church to be addressed by both the Old Testament prophets and by the
apostles in their letters. And yet, despite this, Jesus chose to
institute the Church's feast with wine. The notion that we are more
pastorally sensitive than Christ Himself is repugnant and arrogant
The following quote is a remarkable point about what Communion should be. It should be CELEBRATION, joy, a true feast. Instead, it has been a dab event in most churches, and I confess to being guilty of it myself. But, I am convinced after attending a Wichita church recently that had it as celebration that it is the correct view of things. After all, how did Christ institute it? As a solemn occassion? No.
"But what if? What if our practice is reinforcing a
wrong conception of the sacrament to begin with? What if Jesus intends
us to see His blood, not as something to mourn about and feel "moved"
regarding - but as life, abundant life? That, after all, is
what He indicates in John 6, where He ties life, eternal life - the
life of the world - to eating His flesh and drinking His blood.
25.6 has a glorious prophecy regarding the time of the Messiah. "And in
this mountain the LORD of hosts will make for all people a feast of
choice pieces, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of well-refined wines on the lees."
Is it so strange to think that the wine of the Lord's Supper is
intended to evoke and embody such a promise? Is it so strange to think
that we are (as we claim to be doing) to celebrate the Lord's Supper, rather than to engage in a wake?"
More on communion and wine:
"But do the churches do these things? Let’s see. First of all, Jesus
said to bring wine. How many churches use wine today? The American
evangelicals have decided to give wine over to the devil, instead of
claiming it for Christ. As a result, they use grape juice. Jesus,
however, used (alcoholic) wine. He turned water into wine as the first
manifestation of His Kingdom. He ate and drank with publicans and
sinners, and was accused of being a glutton and a drunkard — which
shows what He was drinking (Matt. 11:19). He prescribed just this kind
of liquid for His meal.
But do we do what He said? Usually not. "
I am beginning to rethink my position on the imputation of Christ's active obedience after reading this quote online...perhaps I am wrong, that the doctrine is unbiblical and in fact, Christ's life rather fulfills the law for us due to union with Christ and NOT "imputation" directly to us of his sinless nature. This quote points out the FV perspective goes well beyond that one doctrine and encompasses a much larger picture.
I especially am still amazed by this point: "He has wholly fulfilled what it means to be human." Yes, that fulfills "imputation of Christ's active obedience" with a different twist and a whole friggin bunch more..it encompasses everything. What an incredible insight about what CHRIST'S LIFE did for us and this entire world. His death was victory for restoration of God's kingdom on this Earth, but his life did so much as well, and my former adherence to one measly doctrine about Christ's obedience on our behalf does not do justice to what his life did when compared to THIS article selection.
"It is true that Jesus said He came "to
fulfill the law" (Mt 5.17). But law in this instance refers not narrowly to commandments; in this
verse, it is placed in parallel to "the prophets," and the two together refer to the whole
of the Hebrew Scriptures. Moreover, "fulfill" never means "keep" or "obey," or
even "confirm;" at its most basic, it means "fill." The law and the prophets -
that is, the whole Old Testament - is fulfilled in Christ, who takes up the whole history of God's
dealings with man into Himself. Christ's fulfilling of the law isn't a mere substitutionary obedience
that we couldn't accomplish; rather, it entails the reality that He is that which the law could never
be; He is the goal toward which the law points (see e.g. Rom 10.4). He is in fact the embodiment of
the whole Word of Scripture; the dual uses of "Word" to refer to the Scriptures and to Jesus
is no mere verbal accident but a fundamental indicator of the dynamic relationship between Jesus as
the eternal Voice of God, the Word He has spoken to Israel, and His history as the One who becomes
flesh. As with each of us, He is the embodiment of His own speech.
This is why we find so much typology
in the Gospels; repeatedly we discover that Jesus is the new and full Adam, the new and full Abraham,
the new and full David, the new and full Moses, and the new and full Israel. Indeed, He is the representative
and Head of creation itself.
In view of this, of course, we do indeed have a very strong biblical theology
of the redemptive purpose of Christ's life, and it is much larger than a notion of the imputation of
Christ's law-keeping to our individual account books. The redemptive significance of Christ's life
means that He has wholly fulfilled what it means to be human; indeed, He has fulfilled history itself
within His own life, as He has gone from new creation through final judgment and on into resurrection.
It is hard to imagine a greater redemptive theme than this, which culminates in the very redemption
of the body for which we also long (Rom 8.23)." That is quite convincing.
As for the allegation FV is NPP in a report by a church called the PCA a few weeks ago, I have come to the conclusion that is not corrrect. NPP is error, I would call it heresy. But, FV is not NPP.
Am I fully on board with FV? No. I am a bit concerned it is too hyper-covenantal still, mainly in the issue regarding covenant of works and grace. It seems to erase all distinctions between the OT and NT. While I agree God's covenant of grace has been throughout all of history....even in the OT people were saved by faith, not works....we must keep in mind there are some differences between the way the covenant was administered in the OT and NT. And, if I read things correctly, this may be erased in some FV thinking, becoming dangerously close to the heresy of the Protestant Reformed Church/Hoeksema. But, I may be misreading this and will need to do some more study.
|Beware....long theological musings ahead. I have often been amazed at how little people really know about what Christ did for us when he died for our salvation. People understand it was his death that made it possible for us to be forgiven, but it was so much more than that.|
I am going to discuss something called the imputation of Christ's active obedience....I will call it God lived a perfect life so we didn't have to do so.
Adam failed to obey God, thus resulting in sin being passed down to all generations of humanity. Christ lived an obedient life from day one, thus resulting in what.....only the removal of God seeing our sin, God putting blinders on because Christ took our place in death? Is that all it did? I do not think so. If Adam's sin resulted in DISOBEDIENCE being actively passed on to all humanity, surely the death of the Sovereign Son also actively passed on something else to those he died for and who end up trusting in him....HIS OBEDIENCE. Not only does the blood of Christ cover us, but also the sinless life of Christ has been imputed to us....that is what God sees in our life. He does not only see his blood covering us, but he sees perfect obedience when looking as his people. God is holy, and Scripture makes clear only the pure in heart can see God. A mere covering does not make us pure in heart, does not make us holy. Only Christ being the SECOND ADAM can do this, and this is a critical doctrine in Reformed theology. To do away with it does terrible damage to Reformed thinking. Yes, we are justified by faith, and the death of Christ takes away the penalty for our sin and cleanses and covers our stain and guilt for our sin. But, the life Christ lived is every bit as important as his death and Resurrection. Scripture speaks numerously of the need to live a perfect life only to say we can't do so. If all that was needed for salvation was a covering by the blood of Christ only and not Christ living his entire life in our place, it seems to me that part of God's requirement for holiness is missing. If we are only covered and not considered righteous by virtue of Christ's obedience, only part of the glory of salvation is present. Christ also bought for himself a people on the Cross. He did not just make salvation possible, he purchased it for you and me and every other believer at Calvary. He had YOU in mind and when he said "it is finished," he meant he had bought you your salvation that the Holy Spirit would call you to down the road of your life.
To non-Calvinists reading this, it seems weird. No doubt all you have heard is that Jesus died in our place, and therefore we are forgiven, having our sins washed away and considered worthy because of Christ dying in our place. But, in my view, that is only a piece of the picture.
Scripture says in Romans 5:19: "For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made
sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be
made righteous." This makes it darn clear that it is the obedience of Christ that will make us righteous in the sight of God, just as it was Adam's disobedience who tainted us. Yes, his death covers our sin and removes our guilt for it. But, it ALSO led us to being considered righteous because Christ was obedient to the very end. Furthermore, in addition to Christ dying for us and living a perfect life in our place, he constantly intercedes for us before the Father, pleading on our behalf.
Hebrews 9:24: "For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of
the true one; he entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's
My friends, it is through the Cross that Christ paid the ransom for our sin. But, Christ said "it is finished," meaning his entire life was singularly dedicated to OUR SALVATION. From the moment of his birth, Christ was working to save you and me.
Salvation is so much more than Jesus covering over our sin on the Cross. And when you realize that, it makes it so much more amazing than it already is.
The sad thing is, some even in the Reformed camp are starting to water down salvation, at least if you believe some critics. If true, that is a real shame. There is a movement called Federal Vision, and much of it is good...well needed....meant to reform Reformed/Calvinist theology. Many of the ideas are wonderful. But, some aspects (IF being represented correctly by opponents, and I am having a very hard time discerning whether objections are correct) may be doing damage to Biblical theology. I have noticed on some blogs a tendency to pooh-pooh the glory of Christ's obedience on our behalf and say it is not something we need to believe. Several have flat stated they don't believe in it.
And, I find that really sad, which is why I posted this.
Salvation is so incredible, and if we miss the whole picture of what is happening, it dumbs it down and simplifies it too much.
I do like a lot of what FV is trying to do. I am particularly impressed with the focus on salvation beyond the individual experience. That is incredible and an amazing point of view. The movement is trying to recover a greater emphasis on how we as people fit into God's plan and the responsibility we have as believers. With sometimes stodgy Calvinists focusing too much on minute details and overly much on God's decrees, this is welcome. The movement also has a high regard for the Church, which is excellenct, and a greater emphasis on the covenant, also great. There are a few areas that worry me, such as the imputation of Christ's righteousness SEEMINGLY getting downplayed a bit. Also, baptism seems to be emphasized more than I really like (even more than regular Reformers), but it is an area I have always strugged with really defining what I believe anyway. Penal substitution (where Christ dies in our place) is supposedly deemphasized if you read the critics, but I have not really found that to be the case. Perhaps in the non-Reformed people who believe something similar to FV, but I haven't read them anyway.
But, I must believe in Christ not only dying in my place, but living for me as well. Perhaps I will come to change my mind, but at this point, I feel that to be saved, we need not only the blood of Christ taking away our sin, but the LIFE of Christ from birth to death, perfectly fulfilling and keeping the law for us when we fail daily to keep from sin.
Praise be to God for his glorious grace.
|Well, it finally happened: I got the call saying "we would like you to join us next year working with the principal on his newspaper and broadcast program."|
I got a job in a field I love. It isn't social studies, but I am just as happy teaching journalism, and perhaps I will even like it more than social studies. We will see.
I just counted and realized I sent out 65 applications before finally getting hired. Yikes. I also received 20-25 rejection notices no doubt and had about 10-15 interviews, not counting four job fairs. But, it finally happened. I got a YES. Human resources makes the call in Wichita, not principals (principals tell human resources individuals they want to hire, and then HR makes the offer call). The human resources guy actually sounded shocked when I told him I had not taught previously under contract, having only finished student teaching. That was interesting.
My job will be in a Wichita middle school built in 2003, which is extremely exciting. The technology there is great. Moreover, the school has lots of rich kids in it, so that will be a somewhat weird experience....maybe I will have to confiscate iPods or something. :) But, I look forward to teaching there. It is an awesome school, and I am really impressed by what they attempt to do in terms of a team atmosphere.
Now, I just need to make sure I can teach the video stuff well. Though I served on the video news team at Sterling, I was mainly a writer. However, I have had some camera experience and am confident I will get that broadcast program on the right path provided I do a lot of reading and learning this summer on video editing and other issues.
But, I know I will do a good job, and I am thrilled to get to help students develop their skills in these areas.
God has blessed me immeasurably. I don't think it was a coincidence that I got the job once I started doing my best to surrender my worry to God. Though I am Reformed, that does not mean it is any easier to do so. It is still extremely hard to really give everything to God even though in my head I know God is sovereign and will care for me. It is so hard to truly do that in my heart, to trust his provision and care.
The Lord has done so beyond my wildest dreams today. And, he will provide for both Monique and I as we walk down this lane of life together starting in June. He will provide her with an amazing way to serve His kingdom like He has just opened up an incredible door for me as well. I pray He will open up Habitat in Wichita for her. I know God has something amazing her Monique, regardless. Look at what he has done for me!
It is just a job, but it is a way to serve him and help others, and I have been blessed with the job I wanted the most in Wichita. Wow.
Thank you, God, for your never-ending care.
|Well, since graduating from Sterling College in December, I have been busy on a couple of fronts. First, I have been taking classes through Fort Hays to add journalism to the list of subjects I can teach. That has not been as easy as I anticipated due to thet second thing I have been doing....job hunting. The amount of time that a teacher job application takes is nothing short of ridiculous, particularly when you send a resume that says exactly the same thing to each district. It seems like all I have time for each day is filling out job applications. But, I am getting through it. At first, things were depressing. Jobs I had applied for were filled without even getting an interview. However, once I found out many of these jobs had over 60 people applying for them, it made me feel better.|
I have started getting real interviews now in addition to the job fair interviews I have been taking part in, which is exciting. I know I will get a job for the fall. I certainly better. I am currently substitute teaching to get some money, and I just don't think that would pay the bills after I get married this summer.
And on that note, plans are moving along nicely. It looks like the summer will be a financial struggle, but we will make it. We have our invitations now and most plans have been made. I can't believe I will be a husband in a few months, and it is a great feeling.
God has blessed me greatly. I can't wait until I am married and also for the start of my career.