The Post to be Named Later

I'm thankful I have a blog for several reasons. I think the foremost is that I don't want to ever lose the writing muscle that I've built up over the years. Writing definitely is a discipline. Like all disciplines, they must be exercised and refined. I love writing. I love writing without an academic prompt imposed by a professor. When I liked the prompt, I enjoyed that writing process as well.

There are a few dangers to writing in a public spectrum like this for yourself without clear parameters given by someone else. There is the danger of over-sharing. Very few of you want to know what I had for breakfast this morning. Actually, none of you should want to know that. That's creepy. Also, those in my inner circle (my husband, family, closest friends) would probably appreciate a certain degree of discretion on my part when I write about conversations or interactions I've had with them. There are certain aspects of life that are either uninteresting or inappropriate to share in the context of a public blog.

Another danger is prattling on about things that are trite and lacking of any real benefit. With all the things competing for place in our thoughts, I would hate to think that frivolous utterings (or worse, something potentially harmful) from me would set up residence in anyone's mind in place of something potentially edifying or helpful. I think my precaution for this danger has prevented me from many blogs. There have been countless times when I thought to myself, "I should write about that." And then I realize that it wouldn't be profitable and so I opt out. There have been times that my concern for this danger made me second-guess some posts. Anytime I begin to second-guess something, I take the safe route and promptly delete it. (If any of you were wondering what happened to certain posts you were certain were once there, the mystery has been solved).

So what's personal and at the same time edifying?

The Word of God, of course! :)

I'll be the first to admit (to my shame), that my time with the Lord in scripture is not at all organized and disciplined. When I go to scripture, it's usually to answer a very specific question. It's usually a theological question. I'll look for passages that specifically pertain to what I'm wondering. When I find them, I'll look at the context in which it is placed and verify that it actually is an answer to my question, not one that I have manipulated to seem like an answer. Then I'll go to Grace to You or Desiring God to listen to a sermon on that passage to make sure my quest has led me to the right place.

This has been helpful in many ways, but it definitely does not replace a quiet time of study and learning of our Lord by reading through a book or books of the Bible to see how He has revealed himself to us in the way He intends for us to learn about Him.

I've recently begun a study of the book of Second Peter. I chose 2 Peter because of its emphasis on growth in personal knowledge of God. (Just what I was talking about, right?) I definitely have a tendency to read scripture to look for defenses/evidences of my own theological inclinations. And though I'm not advocating ignorance of theology, I realized that a lot of what I was looking for was validation. But really, why should I care if I'M validated in my thinking? Yes, that sounds weird. Yes, being right is important when you're soul is at stake. But that's not what I'm talking about. What good is it if I can say, "Irresistible grace is clearly evident in verse so-and-so" if I'm not personally developing my relationship with the One who has so bountifully poured out that grace that was impossible for me to resist?

I think I was driven by a fear of being confronted by false teachers that I wanted to have a response supported by scripture to refute them. But, as 2 Peter points out, the best way to do this is not to be able to know the ins and outs of (and stay true to) any theological system per se, but to be so deeply rooted in the knowledge of who God is and your own salvation, that error is obvious. Error would be obvious to me not because of my knowledge of a system, but because of my knowledge of the character of God.  The difference is subtle. But it's there. If it's hard to grasp by anyone reading, I'm probably just not doing a good job of articulating the contrasting pursuits. I guess the nitty gritty of it is the pursuit of knowledge of arguments vs. the pursuit of knowledge of God. I hope that makes sense.

So, I hope to kind of journal about what I'm learning through 2 Peter over the next several weeks/months (who knows how long it'll take!) 

This post is just to serve as an introduction that would shed light on the shift of my mindset. Let's just say that the first two verses alone deserve an entire post for another time. A time that is coming soon, I'm sure.