As promised: new graphics, a better sidebar (two, actually), a concordance and enhanced comments (including integration with Facebook). Still coming: guest columnists, advanced search options, and of course more Biblical myth-busting.

On this Reformation Day, I’ve had this quote in virtual storage for a while, considering the best place to use it. Quite provocative:

If you could have heaven, with no sickness, and with all the friends you ever had on earth, and all the food you ever liked, and all the leisure activities you ever enjoyed, and all the natural beauties you ever say, all the physical pleasures you ever tasted, and no human conflict or any natural disasters, could you …be satisfied with heaven, if Christ was not there?

— John Piper, from God is the Gospel

For weeks I’ve had these changes in mind, having learned much from another certain site I helped relaunch this summer. Implementing them has been part of the reason I didn’t have new material last week. That process may actually bring more new material this week.

Any suggestions? In a couple of weeks readers should see:

Coming “concordances.”

Because I have sometimes lost track of what is where, I’m sure readers have. That will be limited when I revise the tags and use them in several indexes, which will make it easier to find articles and links on specific Bible books, topics and verses.

Improved searching.

I like WordPress, but it needs a better search engine: search by keyword, exact phrase, etc. Lord willing, this site will soon feature that.

Redesigned graphics.

Because I can be visually nitpicky and like to change things, yet not for only changes’ sake.

Guest columnists.

Though I’m already helping with one team blog (Speculative Faith), and have sometimes published some guest columnists here, I’d like to do more. Perhaps you know of a Biblical myth — within Christian orthodoxy — that’s badly in need of busting.

Better sidebar.

You’ll be able to find what you want and more effectively stay in touch with YeHaveHeard.

Enhanced commenting.

Talking theology isn’t usually as fun or edifying if only one person is talking. So adding options to this site’s comment forms — integration with Facebook, etc. — should help.

More Biblical myth-busting.

Many myths are still un-busted, not necessarily compromising people’s salvation but certainly keeping them from “small” Biblical truths, which often lead to big problems. That’s been the case in my life, when I’ve subtly accepted notions such as “Christians are supposed to avoid everything about the world” or, “have nothing at all to do with anything that even looks evil,” or, “if you’re not being persecuted, you aren’t doing enough.”

So the coming weeks should see pithier, readable, well-sourced columns that call into question those myths — still hoping to do that logically, lovingly and Biblically.

Also I still hope to come up with items purely for fun and frivolity, such as a second list (complete with actual photos) of spiritual superheroes in current Christianity. What good is doctrine discussion without Godward delight?

And no new columns this week. The web update is my reason. Stand by for resumed Wednesday-and-Saturday schedule (Lord willing!) next week.

Thoughts? Comments? Criticisms?

And of course, any new Christian myths you’ve heard — or once believed yourself! — are more than welcome.

Correction and clarification!

It seems that the “Federal Vision” movement, while sometimes similar to views of “patriarchy,” is still different from said views. And some people, such as church elder and ministry leader R.C. Sproul Jr., say they uphold patriarchy views, but don’t support the Federal Vision.

However, a recent column here, An open letter to newbie homeschoolers, posted Dec. 2, included Sproul’s name along with Douglas Wilson’s as a supporter of “Federal Vision.”

Just yesterday, Sproul himself stopped by, and disavowed “Federal Vision” in a comment (viewable here). While saying he did support patriarchy and that it was fair to link his name to that, Sproul asked for a correction to the column’s link of his name to “Federal Vision.”

Naturally, your humble webslinger was gratified to stand alongside such “renowned saints” of church history, such as Martin Luther, and refuse to repent and recant.

No, seriously — while “recanting” may not be necessary because no Biblical doctrine was contradicted, it is important to make a correction for wrongful attribution. So, the wrongful reference to Sproul’s name is now gone from the column, replaced by a footnote.

As I noted in a comment earlier today, directed toward Sproul-as-commentator:

It is hard enough to defend what one actually believes, without having to answer for what does not  believe! Though I am not a pastor or “official” ministry leader (in quotes because all of a true Christian’s life is in effect ministry), this has happened to me enough in personal situations that I can empathize.

It can be very frustrating, especially if one has a better-known name, more-”official” ministries to lead, and the truth of the Proverb that “a good name is better than riches.”

Many others have evidently been mixing-and-matching “Federal Vision” and some views of patriarchy. That and your friendship with Douglas Wilson (whose views on many things I appreciate, along with especially his sense of humor that more Christian leaders could use!) have led many to wrongly conflate the two systems of thought and thus their advocates. Originally I did the same, in the above article, and it has now been changed.

More ‘Vision’ correction

In a magazine article apparently in 2007, Sproul explained more about how he disagrees with “Federal Vision” views and what that entails. That material was quoted online¹, and is reproduced here at Sproul’s request.

Not long ago two Southern Baptist scholars met to debate the sovereignty of God in election. Al Mohler fought on the side of the angels, and won. Paige Patterson fought on the side of, well, the Remonstrants, and lost. Along the way Patterson sought to score some points by pointing out the deadly trajectory of Calvinism, by quoting from my book Almighty Over All on God’s sovereignty and the fall. Trouble is, he thought he was quoting my father. While I am most certainly a Calvinist, I am not the Calvinist. Pinning something on me isn’t pinning something on the entire school of thought.

Because we share a name, someone confused my father and I. Because Doug Wilson and I share a friendship, and an ecclesiastical affiliation, and perhaps a conviction or two, some have confused the two of us. Some have assumed because Doug and I are friends, a reality I trust will continue after the publication of this brief essay, that I believe in what has come to be known as federal vision theology. I do not now believe in it, nor have I ever. I do believe in paedocommunion, as did most of the church for the first millennium. I do believe, recognizing that we cannot read hearts, that we ought to treat our covenant children as believers unless or until they show otherwise, as has the great bulk of the Dutch Reformed tradition. I do not believe that this, nor being in the CREC (which welcomes Baptists into its midst), nor publishing men in Tabletalk who later came to be identified with federal vision, makes me federal vision.

I do not pretend to know exactly what defines federal vision. I certainly don’t know all the different convictions of all the different men associated with this movement, who sit at different places along the spectrum. I do not pretend to know everything the Westminster Standards have to say on the issues, far less all that Calvin had to say. I do know this. I believe that all those who have been given new hearts by the Holy Spirit, who trust in the finished work of Christ alone, will always so trust, and enter into eternal life. I believe that all such people will bear fruit in their lives, though that fruit is in no way the ground of their justification. I believe God justifies the ungodly, though the ungodly who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit and respond in living faith. I believe that those who believe that some come to real trusting faith and then fall away into apostasy, even if they affirm that God ordained all this and brought it all to pass, have denied perseverance of the saints. I believe non-elect covenant members, whatever grace they receive along the way, are not given new hearts that trust in the finished work of Christ alone, and are never actually at peace with God. I believe I can’t say for sure what the men involved in this controversy actually believe about all this.

I believe that no one who has not been given a new heart, who has not trusted the finished work of Christ alone, will enter into eternal life. That’s almost universally true. It allows for no exceptions for unborn children, little babies who die or the feeble-minded. The only exception is Jesus. I believe this makes me more committed to the scope and purity of justification by faith alone than many federal vision critics. I am to their right on this issue. I believe that the death of Christ is why my sins are forgiven, and the life of Christ is why I receive a gracious reward, as our Father has promised. Or, to put it more theologically, I believe in double imputation and in the active obedience of Christ. And always have.

I take a southern Presbyterian view on Romish baptism, believing Rome to be apostate since the adoption of the sixth session of the Council of Trent. Just as I do not require others to submit to my views on paedocommunion (that is, no one at Saint Peter, where I serve, is required to practice it) so I do not require others to submit on this issue. My view on Rome is by no means the majority report. But once again, it is to the right of many federal vision critics. I am troubled by the relative sanguinity of federal vision toward Rome and Eastern Orthodoxy. But I’m a cranky TR.

I have, since this controversy first came to the public eye, sought to be, as much as is possible, at peace with all men. I have had many conversations with men on both sides of the fence. I spoke against federal vision at Auburn Avenue II in 2003. I have also written, I pray graciously, about some of my concerns about this movement from time to time. You can find those brief essays at our website: www.highlandsstudycenter.org/journals/hsc/archive.html (Oct 30, Dec 30 2003, Jan 5, March 8, June 28, 2004). I have also, from the beginning, been decrying the rhetoric surrounding this controversy. This is the first great theological controversy to be played out in the age of the internet. The internet has been about as useful in encouraging thoughtful theological discourse, or even appropriate ecclesiastical judgments, as it has been in encouraging sexual fidelity. I have seen shameful rhetoric from both sides, and precious little effort by the more reasonable on both sides to silence the bomb-throwers.

I take the old perspective on Paul. I have not read N.T. Wright, nor Norman Shepherd. I believe that the animus behind all this animosity is not the defense of theological purity, nor a recovery of biblical language. I believe that behind it all is pride. I believe that the devil has his hooks in both sides, and that both sides could do much more for the kingdom of God if they would spend their time and energy heeding the wisdom of Luther who said, “When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, ‘Repent’ (Mt 4:17), He willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.”

Sproul is a teaching elder at Saint Peter Presbyterian Church (SPPC) in Bristol, Virginia, and leads Highlands Ministries. We may disagree on “patriarchy,” and many others would disagree with his views, such as paedocommunion or paedobaptism (infant baptism, held more widely by conservative Presbyterians). Yet differences on such things don’t disqualify from the body of Christ. And doctrinal disagreements should not lead to deceptive statements — if it’s intentional, that requires repentance, and if unintentional, that still requires apology and correction.

Thanks to R.C. Sproul Jr. for being a good sport about it. Perhaps we can have a more honest and God-honoring discussion sometime about “patriarchy”? In the meantime I’d like to take this opportunity to reiterate two truths, truths that have been well-known throughout the history of this great institution Christ founded, the invisible and unified Church, His redeemed Bride:

1. It would be great to hear what “fall-through-the-cracks” Christian myths others have heard of and would enjoy graciously debunking — others such as, say, R.C. Sproul Jr.
2. Thanks to this situation, I had much less work to do today, writing an original column.

Next week, Christmas activities-permitting: Marketing moralism this holiday season. As a good Presbyterian would say, soli Deo Gloria.

So, Ralph Lee Laufenburger, The Weeping Pastor™! You’ve gone through Bible school, conferences on church growth, and finally have a ministerial position at Christian-Light Community Church in Kansas City, a middle-size congregation that you’ve made even larger during the time of 11 years. Your church, already on local television, is soon to go on syndication to many spiritually oriented cable networks, as well as TBN.

Now, you’ve written a proposal for a book. And we here at the public-relations and marketing firm of Rosenwald, Farnsworth, Sneed and Morningstar are certain that proposal has promise.

Here we have for you a list of proven marketing methods. They are sure to work, first in Christian bookstores nationwide, then eventually even the featured-items aisles and displays of real bookstores. We are sure the following steps will also bring about certain success!

1. Table of contents

We find your book proposal definitely impressive. Jesus Wept is a catchy title. It is based on a short, pithy Bible verse that is too often overlooked in today’s church. We believe your genteel writing style is appealing. The best marketing will match your book’s theme: everyone must see anew the value of weeping as Jesus once did. This of course is the “magic bullet” to everything that ails not only the Church, but people’s personal lives.

Here is our suggested text for the front inside-flap text. The back one will have a photo of you.

Have you ever wondered if a wise being, somewhere, is looking upon the state of his world, and crying?

What would happen if you met him? And you found not the angry God you imagined, but a tearful Father who only wants to lavish his love on you?

God is not angry with the world. In fact, he is sorrowful over the things so many people do to cheat themselves. They give up their dreams, they settle for less, and they fall for so many lesser things than the love and acceptance he has promised.

He weeps over you, just as he once did. Let Ralph Lee Laufenburger, The Weeping Pastor™, show you anew how to allow yourself healthful sorrow in your newfound love and hope.

When you, with help, write the book, its contents will be based on messages you’ve given, and a focus your church’s staff hopes to push in your new television program. It must be spiritual, but not too deep.

Please be sure to include some Bible verses in the book, here and there. We find taking them from different translations, at least 17, ensures the points are made most effectively.

Also helpful will be only single verses at the beginning of each chapter. Have the chapter’s contents have something to do with those, even if only one word ties them together. Other sources, including rare quotes from other bestseller authors, poets, filmmakers, mystics, and the Rev. Robert Schueller, will be cited in the back bibliography.

2. The book itself

The first printing will be in hardcover, of course. On the front, we will include a picture of you, Ralph Lee Laufenburger, The Weeping Pastor™, smiling. Our photographers will make sure your hair, tuxedo, tie and fingernails are done well. You will be looking your best, all nice and handsome and sweet. This will increase the book’s appeal to the members of your reading audience. Our research has narrowed them down into the following demographics:

1. People watching your television program.
2. Nominally churchgoing middle-aged women in secret-sisters book-of-the-month clubs.
3. Little old ladies who have come into the Christian bookstore to buy cool-neon-covered Bibles for their teen grandchildren, in their hope that the teens will, at minimum, stop necking in the backseats of cars.
4. People buying books for others, whom the gift-givers consider Spiritual, so the givers know the recipients will definitely enjoy the book because it is Spiritual too.

Ads in Christian periodicals, endorsements from church-growth experts and popular evangelicals who are forging new seeker-friendly outreaches, will also help give a jump on sales.

Here we are talking about American periodicals and Christian media. International marketing, such as the United Kingdom, and especially Russia and the People’s Republic of China, will prove more limited. We find Christians in China do not respond well to new material of such spiritual magnitude. Our staffers continue to study this phenomenon.

3. Book tour

Our campaign will certainly bring requests for interviews, likely beginning on local Christian programs. Here, you will show the value of your ministry’s theme by erupting in tears multiple times. Like God himself, you weep, instead of getting mad, over the plight of people who are not living their lives well and following their dreams. And you wish for so much better for them.

4. Reviews

This will lead to another jump in sales. Your Amazon.com rankings will increase and we will respond by negotiating with the publisher to purchase marquee shelf displays in Christian bookstores. Christian periodicals will review your book. For many in the target demographics (see section 2), the reviewers’ perspective doesn’t matter, so long as they have included a picture of the cover with you on there looking all handsome and smiling.

Statistically, about one out of nine reviews will likely prove negative. Our advice: take it in stride. They are simply mired in their theological traditions. In further TV interviews, now at the cable-network stage, you will weep over them also.

5. Merchandise

Increased sales numbers will lead to a coveted slot on the New York Times bestseller list. This will necessitate more advertising for the book. We are thinking here of licensed merchandise.

At first, your publisher will offer only Jesus Wept prayer devotionals. Next will come the essentials: Jesus Wept coffee mugs, commemorative bracelets (Mr. Farnsworth suggests teardrop-shaped beads), mantle collectibles, little lacy things, t-shirts, Bible verse pens, and live-a-weeping-life-themed dreamcatchers to hang on rear-view mirrors.

More books and prayer devotionals will be given through your television program, absolutely free, only after people send in their suggested donations.

6. More spinoff books

As your popularity increases, more books will become necessary. We will assemble a paid committee for you to determine which are the best options.

The Jesus Wept prayer devotional will be followed by age- and gender-specific new titles such as Jesus Wept for Women, Jesus Wept for Single Mothers, Jesus Wept for Extreme Teens, Jesus Wept for Kids!, Jesus Wept for Grandmothers, and Jesus Wept for Kids Grades 5 – 8.

More titles will include books of inspirational stories targeted toward specific groups of hobbyists. Our committee will handle this by enlisting the aid of several dozen other freelance writers and locking them all inside a dark room with non-internet-access computers and denying them (the writers) food and water until the task is complete.

This second line will include Jesus Wept for Hikers, Jesus Wept for Pet Lovers, Jesus Wept for Girlfriends, Jesus Wept for Teachers, Jesus Wept for Single Women, Jesus Wept for the Broken-Hearted, Jesus Wept for Poor Lost Circus Performers and Jesus Wept for Unicyclists.

A likely sequel called He Still Weeps For You, with imitation leather-bound gift editions.

7. Dealing with criticism

At this point, some Christian organizations and their leaders will get mad at you. They will conduct broadcasts and write articles in which they will say so. They make their living causing controversy and ensuring people are too concerned about believing exactly as they do.

You may be pressed about your beliefs, say on the Larry King Live show, or asked for your views on religious issues such as gay marriage, the Ten Commandments in courthouses and border control. Do not comment heavily on these topics. Don’t try to articulate your ideas about how to solve the problems. In fact, it is best if you do not speak at all. Just cry — not for those who believe wrongly, but for those who are too dogmatic one way or the other at all.

More criticism may come from representatives of other faiths. (Make sure your church is partnering with others in order to cure AIDS, eliminate poverty in Africa and all sorts of things that up until your arrival in the world the church hasn’t given a rip about.) Remind those critics that the leaders of their faiths also wept a lot.

(Mr. Sneed suggests another spinoff product for Judaism: Jeremiah Wept, Too.)

8. More merchandise

Our marketing plan for spinoff books will lead to a whole new realm of merchandise: Jesus Wept devotionals for teens, women and waitresses, coffee mug coasters, wall plaques, handbags, Bible covers (or covers for other books), cell phone cases, PDA-library software and special pens with verses and slogans on them, will prove valuable and essential to customers.

(Mr. Sneed and Mr. Rosenwald have also begun drawing up plans for a new board-game product. It will take players through this life, from failure to accepting love and the weeping realization that God loves us all and wants us to cry with him over our unfulfilled potentials.)

9. Time

Ralph Lee Laufenburger, The Weeping Pastor™, we believe that this will give you fame, fortunate and time on the bestseller lists for at least 1.3 years.

After that it will likely end. It will be replaced by an even newer line of amazing and never-before-known truths for spiritual people. (Mr. Morningstar just this morning informed us that we have received a proposal from a Frances K. McVeigh, pastor of Brown Hill Community Church in Sacramento, for a book entitled Jesus Slept^®.)

But you must also be assured that Jesus Wept and its assorted products, devotionals, coffee coasters, toilet seat covers, etc., will provide you and your church with unprecedented growth, long after your own bright light fades from the relevant radar screens. The momentum from your popularity will continue for at least six more years. It will be aided by your preaching of pretty much the same sermon in your church, without notes, and also helped later by your available-on-TV-only release of various artists’ inspirational inspired-by Jesus Wept CDs.

Long after the books have faded and even the paperback devotionals have been discounted for $.34 apiece, you’ll know that you, Ralph Lee Laufenburger, The Weeping Pastor™, have made a permanent mark on culture, and spirituality. People will remember you, for the rest of their lives, because of their newfound capacity to weep.

Therefore we encourage you here at the public-relations and marketing offices of Rosenwald, Farnsworth, Sneed and Morningstar to sign the enclosed contracts and waivers. We must begin our efforts at once. We will expect you to complete the book, with the help of your staff, in about two weeks. Meanwhile we will work through our schedules and lay out the ads to be released in magazines.

Memorize these steps. Learn them, know them, live them; bind them about your heart. We know they will work every time they are tried and that only these steps, at long last released upon the world, will solve everything. And finally the world will be a better, albeit weepier, place in which to live, and earn.

Tomorrow’s post will be either about marketing moralism for Christmas, or a redux of instructions on how to sell a Christian-culture success. I haven’t yet decided which.

Meanwhile, if you by chance aren’t sure that a Christmas tree, as-is, can be a means of giving glory to God at Christmas, there is always this option. It’s brought to you by an outfit called Boss Creations¹.

Because nothing is so pagan as a fake evergreen tree in your living room. But a fake evergreen tree in your living room with two pieces of wood up the middle of it — now that is sanctified.²

Christmas has been a part of my life for as long as I’ve been able to remember anything. There has never been a time that I don’t recall those shining lights, gifts, potpourri, red and green, Advent candles, Nativity scenes, the Christmas tree, and yes, even the anticipation of gifts left overnight Christmas Eve by some magical mythical figure in a red furry suit.

All of it was happy. It brought my family together with traditions and memories, whether past or being created. Altogether, it was so good, and such a picture of God’s grace.

Then came an annoying Phase of mine, in my early teens. It was a Phase of Snarkiness.

I’m not sure how long it lasted, maybe less than a few weeks. But I think it started when I found out the Truth About Santa Claus.¹ Based on that, along with my being sort-of, er, subconsciously impressed by all those Spiritual homeschooling families who didn’t have Santa come to the house, I began to wonder: was it really right and Spiritual to have a Christmas tree? And wasn’t Santa Claus a lie?

Sigh. If time travel were ever invented, I would go back and probably be just as obnoxious now as I was then, while lecturing my obnoxious self. Some of what I would say would be based on this week’s Wednesday column, about a Bible passage being misused about Christmas trees.

Yet I wonder if even those assumptions derive from broader, worse views about the nature of objects, as compared to the nature of humans.

Robbing Paul to pay Pelagius

Naturally, after that column, I got to thinking about the connection between Christmas trees and Pelagianism. (I would like to stress that I don’t normally do this. Maybe it’s just that I have a lot of pent-up amateur-theologian-style energy that would otherwise be spent on, say, seminary.²)

That connection also has to do with two separate reactions to this column’s title. Is this a good title, or a bad title — by which I mean sinful? If I were saying it angrily, using God’s name in vain, it would be bad. But the way I mean it now is literal, and in a right context: Hug a Christmas tree, for God’s sake! And I’m using His Name, for God’s sake, literally — not in vain.

Similarly, is a Christmas tree good, or bad? Answer: it depends on how you’re using it. Are you using it as a vain thing, or with Godward purpose? That depends on one’s heart.

That’s where Pelagianism can interfere. That way of thinking, originated by a British layman in the fourth century, claims that humans aren’t afflicted with a sin nature from Adam’s and Eve’s sin. Instead, we must almost repeat their decision in our choices, with a neutral nature.

The most extreme view of this isn’t much different from a non-Christian who would claim people aren’t basically good or evil, but neutral: what causes sins is our environment.

Pelagian assumptions are rampant in some Christians. Among those would seem a spinoff notion that things in the world can be evil. That skews the Bible’s teaching that it is not humans who are neutral; objects are. And objects are not naturally evil; humans are. Jesus said that putting something into one’s body, such as food, doesn’t cause evil or defilement; real evil comes from within (Mark 7: 14-23). Paul told the Corinthians that meat cooked in honor of idols is neutral, because God is the only real God; an idol doesn’t exist and is a nonissue.³

So I have started to wonder: how many Christians have this kind of objects-as-evil view when it comes to movies? Or music? Or Santa Claus, or Christmas trees, or celebrating Christmas at all?

Did I have that view in other ways when I was growing up? Absolutely I did. I even made little self-righteous lists of things that were Good and things that were Bad.⁴ The Bad things included Batman, Barbie dolls, and Ninja Turtles.⁵ The list of Good things included — included —

Hmm, come to think of it, I never had a list of things that were Good. That might have helped.

I wish I had known better at the time — I think even a child could understand this — that things by themselves are neither good nor bad. This week I thought about this even more because of a little word study about the Hebrew term hebel. It means “vanity,” something pointless, useless. All is hebel, the author of Ecclesiastes would have said. And in Deuteronomy 32:21, God doesn’t just say that idols are vain, He says they are vanities. It’s the same word.

It is not the statues, poles, trees, whatever, that cause evil. People cause evil, misusing things.

If I had known that more when I had my little I-wonder-if-Christmas-things-are-evil Phase, it would have saved me a lot of trouble. Instead of letting other Christians send those guilt vibes my way (even if they didn’t mean to, they didn’t do much to prevent that from happening), I would have felt sorry for them, that they couldn’t enjoy these symbols of grace.

Christ is born, hug a tree

Still, it turns out that without creating a time-paradox of trying to grow myself up in retrospect, I grew up (at least in that way) anyway. Thank God, I matured past those faux-adult, faux-spiritual, should-I-be-“holier”-than-thou attempts — at least in this specific respect.

Years later, one of the first things I planned to ask my special friend, during our dating⁶, was how she and her family had celebrated Christmas.

And I couldn’t help but be thrilled at her responses. They put up lights outside. They sang carols and played Christmas CDs real loud, decorating indoors. Even Santa Claus had come to her house. They had a Christmas tree, and loved it all, while celebrating the birth of the newborn King Who does, and will, bring His people joy.

Like my family, they had enjoyed these symbols of God’s grace, so different from subtle views of performance-driven Christianity. And they learned even more later about His specific grace.

Two years after that discussion, we’re married and celebrating our first Christmas together. Joyously we began playing Christmas music on the Saturday before Thanksgiving. We budgeted for decoration items, including outside lights, indoor candles, ornaments, tinsel, garlands. At the local megastore we found the perfect artificial Christmas tree on sale. Elated, we bought it.

On the Friday after Thanksgiving, with Christmas music playing and instant French-vanilla cappuccino steaming, we unpacked that first tree and put it together. We strung lights, hung ornaments, enjoyed the time together. We rejoiced in Christ’s birth and His gifts in our lives — even while not thinking specifically about the Christmas story. We shared in that experience and, no doubt, made memories for years to come, to share with family, present and future.

And yes, when we’d finally put it together, and turned all other lights off and the tree on, with its colorful glows sparkling, I even hugged that Christmas tree — for God’s sake.

Thank Him for making objects, even Christmas trees, that by themselves are worthless and vain, but with His grace can be used for His glory. And thank Him even more for turning me, a worthless object of His wrath (Ephesians 2: 1-10), into someone who can show His glory too.