I found the quote below some time ago, and it has always stuck with me:

“Sleep, for me, is a daily reminder that I am far from self-sufficient. Let me put it this way: I have a desperate, irreversible, physiological need to spend a substantial portion of every twenty-four hours in a state of mental and physical incapacity, utterly helpless and completely useless. Is this not comical? God then uses this time to strengthen and restore me for another day – a day in which I will invariably fail to obey Him fully, yet by grace He will somehow redeem my actions to produce a measure of fruitfulness. How can this not be humbling?” (C.J. Mahaney, in Thomas J. Ascol, ed: Dear Timothy: Letters on Pastoral Ministry, p. 133)

I had never looked at sleep that way before. What makes this insight so compelling, I think, is that Mahaney takes something so ordinary and mundane like sleep and finds the glory of God in it.

This practice is worthy of imitation, I think. And it raises an important, and broader, lesson. We joyfully confess that God created us – that humanity is no accident, that we are not the result of an undirected natural process but that we are crafted and shaped according to the will of God. After all, in the creation of man, God literally “got his hands dirty” and shaped and molded Adam out of the dirt. We are “fearfully and wonderfully made,” as David put it, and this is so for a purpose. God made us who and what we are so that we would give him eternal glory.

Ponder that! We are made for his glory. It can become a cliché, something we readily repeat but don’t really grasp. Christians struggle with this truth like the rest of the world, even though we have even less of an excuse. Take an example: many Christian men hit the gym and work out regularly. What’s wrong with that? Nothing in and of itself; after all, Paul did concede that physical training has “some value.” But these men need to be honest with themselves: what’s the motivation? Why are you doing this? Have you deliberately examined your intentions and desires the way you’ve examined your diet and physique? Have you given the same attention to planning how your routine will exalt God as you did the schedule and reps and diet and circuit in the gym? In all too many cases, it’s the desire to impress others, to look good in front of others. And so what could have been good becomes sin, because it’s not done for the glory of God but for the glory of man.

Another example: Christian women are warned by Peter to find their adornment in the beauty of a quiet and gentle spirit, rather than in outward adornment. Again, the issue is not that earrings or necklaces or nice shirts are wrong per se. It’s the motivation. If you’re a woman, why do you dress the way you do? When you get ready for the day, why are you spending the time you do? Have you given some conscious thought and prayer to your motivations and intentions? Is what you do in front of the mirror something self-consciously done to the glory of God? Is it merely enough to be modest, or is God concerned with more than just if enough skin is covered?

Let me make my point again, so there’s no confusion. The issue I’m raising is not whether it’s right to work out or wear a necklace. The issue is motivation, and more specifically, whether we are deliberate and intentional when we look at everyday, mundane things like that.

God is concerned with the details. Just read Leviticus sometime and you’ll see that! So this week, take some time to examine the everyday things of your life: your routine, your leisure activities, your plans. Ask yourself if you are as deliberately mindful of how they relate to God’s glory, to worship as an attitude and everyday practice, as they ought to be.

Are you seeking God’s glory in the mundane? A challenge for us all.

I recently read a fascinating review of a recent book called “Inside the Human Genome: The Case for Non-Intelligent Design,” by John Avise. You can find it here.

The book apparently (I haven’t read it) makes a case for a kind of “deistic evolution,” where God, if he exists, did not intervene in or direct the evolutionary process. Therefore, argues the book, God can’t be held responsible for the “mess” that is the human genome, or for heart-wrenching genetic conditions like Lesch-Nyhan syndrome, which causes compulsive self-mutilation. This, apparently, “frees” religion to speak to the issues of the day.

The review was written by an atheistic scientist, and made some very interesting arguments. First, the reviewer, Michael Le Page, points out that committed Christian believers are not likely to buy Avise’s argument: neither believers nor atheists are likely to find his approach satisfactory…The morality of theistic religions is inextricably intertwined with the notion of an all-powerful deity that created us.

Second, he points out that Avise’s argument, far from being a solution for Christians seeking to reconcile science and the Bible, raises big problems for theology: If, on the other hand, you absolve this God of blame by assuming it did not dirty its appendages with evolution, you face equally troubling questions about its nature and its relations with humans. For instance, such a deity could hardly be described as the "Creator". Avise does not acknowledge this problem.

And third, he lays bare the theological hypocrisy of those who would like to carve out separate spheres for religion and science in hopes of keeping the Christian voice “relevant” on moral issues:  After summarising the compelling evidence from our genomes that no such entity exists, it is downright ludicrous to then turn around and suggest religious believers have some privileged insight into the morality of issues such as IVF, childcare, abortion and homosexuality.

And Le Page is right to say these things. Christian morality, and indeed all of Christian theology, depends absolutely upon the doctrine of God as Creator of all things. Denying that doctrine cuts the very root of Christian ethics. It makes the rest of the Bible, which repeatedly praises Father, Son, and Spirit as the “Creator,” a meaningless charade at best and manipulative lies at worst. And it silences the Christian witness on issues of morality – which has the further effect of sealing off our Gospel proclamation from the realities and applications in real, daily life. His disdain for theistic evolution, in all its forms, is something we should share. It's a fatal compromise and gains nothing.

As Le Page puts it: If there is a deity but it played no role in human evolution, why would it intervene in human affairs at all? What's the point in praying to a being that either can't help or simply doesn't care?

Absolutely right. Replace the “human evolution” with simply “creation,” and this is something I could have said.

But Le Page is dead wrong with respect to his overall perspective. At the end of his article, he begins making “moral” arguments: Why do we rightly glorify efforts to cure diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer's, but still regard tackling the root cause - our dismal, degenerating DNA - as taboo? (emphasis mine)

Why is fighting cancer and Alzheimer’s “right” in an atheistic world? By what standard is it right? Why would it be “wrong” not to do so, I wonder? Le Page has many arguments available to him, but none of them hold water. The “greater good” or “good of the species” arguments still assume a higher “good,” and I would merely respond by asking why I should then part with my hard-earned money and precious time to help the “species” when I could employ it for my own comfort instead. With no overarching moral code or standard, he couldn’t say I was wrong, could he? And if he said, “That’s selfish,” well, isn’t natural selection and evolution inherently selfish by definition?

He goes on: Our ethics have been so hideously distorted by superstitious nonsense that we cannot see the clear moral imperative: we need to start sorting out the mess of a genome evolution has left us as soon as we can.

Le Page’s argument is what, in my Army days, we used to call a “target-rich environment.” So here we go. The very word “hideously” isa value judgment. What if I like how our ethics are shaped by religion? He thinks it’s hideous; I think it’s not. I think Picasso is hideous; maybe he thinks it’s great. “Hideously” may look compelling rhetorically, but without an overarching standard to measure that statement against, it’s just what he thinks -- and I don’t care. “Distorted” is another one. Distortion assumes an ideal against which to compare the distortion and see differences. Otherwise, how do we know it's a distortion? What, pray tell, was this pristine, ideal “ethic” before religion came along? Didn’t the cavemen beat each other’s heads in with rocks before the development of religion, in the evolutionary scheme? How is that better? “Superstitious nonsense” is an old canard, but I see a lot of assumption of Judeo-Christian values in his argument; after all, fighting disease seems like a good idea to him, but he can’t justify why in a manner consistent with his atheistic worldview. He’s “borrowing” that from somewhere, and I think I know what garage he took it from.

Then the battle cry: “we NEED to start sorting out the mess.” Again: why? Why is it a “good” thing to do so? If I don’t suffer with those things, why should I bother? I don’t feel that need. And again, there’s no higher law or standard to compel me to do so – just a self-contradictory mess of an article.

What can we learn from this? Yes, the genome is a horrible mess. Let me say that again: as a thoroughgoing, creationist, theistic, conservative, evangelical Christian, I concede and admit – actually, I declare and preach – that the genome is a mess. I agree! And it won’t lose me any sleep; the Bible teaches that death and disease are results of the Fall and have afflicted the whole creation. A mess in the human genome is part of the Curse we have all incurred because of our collective rebellion against God. I would expect to see stuff like this. And some of the consequences are heartbreaking – Lesch-Nyhan syndrome sounds terrible. I’ve lost relatives to cancer and Alzheimer’s. But Le Page’s implied solution – abort the children – is just as bad. If a human life with Alzheimer’s and cancer is worth fighting to save, if a human child suffering the horrific consequences of Lesch-Nyhan is worth fighting to save, why would the Downs’ syndrome baby developing in utero be any different? Is it less human? Do we decide the definition of “human” based on someone’s conception of genetic perfection? That sounds like someone I remember from the 1930’s.

Le Page, ironically, is half right. We NEED to “start sorting out the mess,” by “tackling the root cause.” And that is rebellion against sin. That is rejection of the Creator God who owns us. In short, the solution to the genome problem is, again, and always, the Gospel of Christ. This Gospel gives us meaning and significance by relating us to the God who made us. This Gospel restores the image of God that we all carry and which gives us inherent value. This Gospel compels us to love our neighbor, which is why we should pursue medical advances and the eradication of disease. This Gospel gives us that higher law or standard by which we may measure our decisions and make value judgments in the first place.

Yes, the Curse is real. But so is its solution.

“Then they said, ‘Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.’” (Genesis 11:4)

Towering menacingly over the North Korean capital of Pyongyang is a monstrous pyramidal tower called the Ryugyong Hotel.

This aesthetic nightmare simply has to be seen to be believed, which is why I’ve attached a picture. Sort of like science fiction meets horror, it is very possibly the world’s ugliest building. Called the “Hotel of Doom” in at least one article I read, this ghastly edifice was originally planned to be the world’s largest and tallest motel. Resembling some maniacal supervillain’s fortress, right out of a comic strip, it stands 1,083 feet tall, boasting 3,000 rooms and more than 3.9 million square feet of floor space. It counts 105 levels, and its sloping walls are angled at a spine-chilling 75 degrees.

What makes this terrifying hotel so interesting is not its impressive specifications. Rather, it’s the fact that for two decades, this hotel has sat empty and abandoned. The Ryugyong was begun in 1987 and was never finished. Its 10,000 windows are mere holes, no frames or glass ever installed, and stare morosely from the gruesome concrete walls like unseeing eye sockets in a dried skull. Its seven revolving restaurants, at the top of the structure, have never moved and are still crowned twenty years on by the same rickety, rusting construction crane that began this ill-fated endeavour.

The homicidal North Korean government, which very literally starves its people in order to maintain a gigantic army to threaten its southern neighbors and develop nuclear weapons to deter the Americans, originally conceived of this brilliant idea as a way to enhance national pride and win international acclaim. More than 750 million dollars, two percent of North Korea’s gross national product, was poured into this awful beast, when construction abruptly stopped.

Nobody knows for sure – the North Koreans are nothing if not secretive – but the two best explanations I’ve found (which could very well both be true) are that the North Korean government ran out of money – and/or that the building’s concrete was of such poor quality that the structure is now unsafe for occupation. Many expect it to collapse.

To add a further comic element to this already freaky tale, the North Korean government is now so embarrassed about this architectural albatross that it now officially pretends that this monumental concrete corpse does not exist. Official government photos of the Pyongyang skyline are routinely airbrushed or Photoshopped to remove the hotel from view. Pyongyang maps do not show the tower’s location. And reportedly, North Korean tour guides routinely say they have no idea where it is or whether it exists or not – despite the laughably obvious fact that, being the world’s 22^nd-tallest structure, the gigantic Ryugyong is plainly visible from everywhere in the city.

Now the Ryugyong, far from being a source of national fame, is an embarrassment to North Korea’s megalomaniacal and image-conscious leadership. It is a monument to insufferable pride and hubris. This rotting concrete hulk stands as an unmistakeable indictment of the failure of the nation’s leadership and political system.

It also serves as a sobering example of human sin. Like another group of ambitious human architects thousands of years ago, North Korea set out to make a name for themselves and establish their own fame and glory by building a tower into the heavens. Like that group of people, the self-reliance and pride of the North Korean authorities was such that they felt no one could stop their project – they even released commemorative postage stamps before the building was finished! And just like that group of biblical builders, this modern Babel’s construction was suddenly brought to a halt in the providence of the True God and their half-finished creation now sits empty and unused, a warning against human self-glorification.

It may be easy to laugh at this. But aren’t we all tempted to build earthly monuments for ourselves? We call it fame, or fortune, or a legacy, or a statue, or a place in the history books, or even just being remembered by others after we die. There’s a part of our sinful nature that wants to make much of ourselves, to lift ourselves up to heaven and replace God with ourselves. The essence of sin is the attempt to replace God’s authority in our lives with that of our own. And while we don’t all get to build huge towers, the same basic impulses that have brought such ridicule and shame to Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il are shared by us all.

May God preserve us from similar flights of folly. Do you have an earthly monument you’re trying to build, not to the glory of God, but for your own fame? A reputation, maybe? Or some project or accomplishment?

Psalm 127:1a – “Unless the LORD builds the house, those who build it labor in vain.”

Examples like this remind us to constantly check our motivations. Are we doing everything for the glory of God? Only those things will have any lasting value.