Adam's Anecdotes

Funerals for 16,000 this Saturday

2012-02-16T16:27:00.001-05:00

This Saturday, funerals will be live-streamed on the internet for the 16,000 children reported to have died on February 11, 2012 from hunger-related causes. "That's one child every five seconds" according to Bread for the World.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has strongly defended his decision to have flags flown at half-staff Saturday, despite receiving emails and other messages criticizing him.

However the outpouring for these children on Twitter and Facebook has been unprecedented. Among the celebrities tweeting their memorials:

Mariah Carey: "Heartbroken and in tears..."
Justin Bieber: "just heard the news. so crazy..."
Katy Perry: "So devastating. We will always love you..."
Ricky Martin: "...Sending my love and deepest condolences..."
Khloé Kardashian Odom: "...So sad... RIP."
Kourtney Kardashian: "Wow! I just heard... Very tragic."
Ryan Seacrest: "At Grammys rehearsal... Everyone here is absolutely stunned."

At the Grammys, the tributes to the tragic and untimely death of those so young poured in from the performers and presenters. "We've had... death in our family," said LL Cool J, Grammycast host, "And so at least for me, for me, the only thing that feels right is to begin with a prayer for... our fallen ..."

Then LL Cool J introduced a clip of the children; the crowd got up on its feet and roared its approval.

In tribute to these children who died so unnecessarily, the host rightly concluded, "This night is about something much bigger than any one of us..."

So much bigger than any one person.

Funeral arrangements are still being made for the 16,000 children who died of hunger-related causes on February 12th, and 13th, and 14th...

Deli Reform

2012-02-13T15:43:00.000-05:00

Rabbis and deli owners across the nation are warning that new rules implementing President Barack Obama's deli meat reform law are making them "hog wild." Jews are fired up because the regulations force all delis, including kosher ones, to provide ham and other pig products for their customers and employees - even though that violates the Torah Law (Leviticus 11:7-8; Deuteronomy 14:8).

The fury started when the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) ruled that virtually all private delis will be required to include ham and other pig products because of the excellent protein they provide.

Pressed on the matter this week, the White House responded, "the administration believes that this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious beliefs while increasing access to the important proteins available in pork products."

The administration argues that one report last year found that a majority of Jews have tried, or even eat regularly, ham or other pork products despite the Torah's teachings. Moreover, not all employees or customers of kosher delis are Jewish. Since most employees are entitled to a free lunch while working or other discounts on deli products, is it fair that their access to free or discounted ham be so restricted? And since equal access to ham is a fundamental American right, guaranteed by our meat-loving founding fathers, what would happen if a kosher deli was the only one in town?

However, as one kosher deli owner said, "This ruling essentially says that freedom of religion pertains only to freedom of worship and religious teaching but not to the practice of religious faith in the commercial sphere." Asked his opinion of the new regulations, he emphatically responded, "BOLOGNA! ...which now we're going to have to start offering."

Why are we a people worth saving?

2012-01-16T14:29:00.000-05:00

On Facebook, one of my friends posted Lt. Col. Allen West response to the marines urinating on dead Taliban:

“I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.

“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?

“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”

My friend's post was met by a rousing chorus of "likes" and comments to the effect of "piss on them all" and "the only thing they did wrong was get caught."

In the 2003 Battlestar Galactica miniseries, Commander Adama asked in his speech at the decommissioning of Galactica, "You know, when we fought the Cylons, we did it to save ourselves from extinction. But we never answered the question, why? Why are we a people worth saving?"

That question resounds loudly in this situation.

Lieutenant Colonel West has instructed those of us who are not being shot at to "shut your mouth." If we are "the good guys," why does West's command sound so much like the Taliban - "the bad guys" we are fighting?

And of course there was no "self-righteous indignation" or "media outrage" when the 'bad guys' desecrated the bodies of American soldiers. That type of behavior is exactly why the Taliban has been deemed "a people not worth saving."

So if America decides to lower herself and treat others in the same barbaric and backward way as the people we are seeking to destroy (limiting the speech of dissenters or desecrating the bodies of enemy soldiers), it begs that question: Why are we a people worth saving?

I think America is worth defending and saving because we choose to stand for human dignity, even when that human disagrees with us or is our mortal enemy. As we fight the enemy, let us not become them - a people not worth saving.

Why I'm reading the ESV (until I get my Babel fish)

2012-01-06T11:19:00.000-05:00

I want a Babel fish. For the unenlightened, in the book The Ultimate Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, we learn that:

The Babel fish is small, yellow, leech-like, and probably the oddest thing in the universe. It feeds on brain wave energy, absorbing all unconscious frequencies and then excreting telepathically a matrix formed from the conscious frequencies and nerve signals picked up from the speech centres of the brain, the practical upshot of which is that if you stick one in your ear, you can instantly understand anything said to you in any form of language: the speech you hear decodes the brain wave matrix.

Until the Babel fish is discovered, we must do with our imperfect efforts to translate. There is a great interview at NPR about the difficulties of translation (with a reference to the Babel Fish!): 'A Fish In Your Ear': What Gets Lost In Translation. The interviewee, David Bellos, author of Is That a Fish in Your Ear?: Translation and the Meaning of Everything, explains the tension saying:

For translation to exist, you have to accept the fact that languages are all different and they don't describe the world in quite the same way. You also have to accept that languages are all the same in that anything you can say in one language can be said in any other.

So until the discovery of the Babel fish, we endure the tension and imperfections of translation. This means that for those of us who seek truth in the Bible, we must either learn Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek or rely upon one of the plethora of English translations available today.

Every Bible translation has its strengths and weaknesses - some translate more "word-for-word" making them awkward to read in English while others translate more "thought-by-thought" and are easier to read English but are not as close to the original languages. You can read more about some translation difficulties and decisions in one of my other posts: Brothers, sisters, and the inside of the coconut.

In 2012, our church is reading through the Bible together and I've decided to try a new translation - the ESV (English Standard Version). Why?

This pdf article, Why our church switched to the ESV by Kevin DeYoung, offers an excellent summary on the strengths of the ESV especially in comparison to the translation I have most often used, the NIV. Don't get me wrong, the NIV remains an excellent translation, but as I have begun using the ESV I have come to appreciate the 7 points that Kevin DeYoung makes in his pamphlet:

1. The ESV employs an "essentially literal" translation philosophy
2. The ESV is a more transparent translation (which means the ESV leaves interpretive ambiguities unresolved, so that the reader can determine the most accurate meaning).
3. The ESV engages in less over translation (other dynamic translations tend to add extra interpretative words that aren't necessary)
4. The ESV engages in less under translation
5. The ESV does a better job of translating important Greek or Hebrew words with the same English word throughout a passage or book.
6. The ESV retains more of the literary qualities of the Bible
7. The ESV requires much less "correcting" in preaching

So that is why I'll be giving the ESV a try this in 2012... at least until I get a Babel fish that can read.

Just As I Am

2011-09-13T23:38:00.000-04:00

Travis Cottrell's new album When The Stars Burn Down was just released today. I cannot wait to introduce the song, Just As I Am with the powerful new refrain Cottrell has written. Buy the song - it is worth it. The lyrics are below.

Just As I Am by Travis Cottrell

Just as I am, without one plea,
But that Thy blood was shed for me,
And that Thou bidst me come to Thee,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

Just as I am, and waiting not
To rid my soul of one dark blot,
To Thee whose blood can cleanse each spot,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.

refrain:
I come broken to be mended
I come wounded to be healed
I come desperate to be rescued
I come empty to be filled
I come guilty to be pardoned
by the blood of Christ the Lamb
And I’m welcomed with open arms,
praise God just as I am.

Just as I am, I would be lost,
But mercy and grace my freedom bought,
And now to glory in your cross,
O Lamb of God, I come, I come.
refrain

The Right to Rites

2011-09-01T00:01:00.002-04:00

The debate in San Francisco about criminalizing male circumcision (Criminalizing Circumcision | Christianity Today) raises a good question about the nature of circumcision. In fact, it is the same question that might be asked about marriage. Are circumcision and marriage essentially religious rites or essentially secular practices? The answer is important because it determines who has the right to these rites.

While both rites have undeniably taken on secular dimensions (male circumcision for suggested health benefits and marriage for extending legal rights and benefits to a partner), if circumcision and marriage are by their nature religious rites then who has the right to change them? Should the state or a majority vote have the right to regulate how or to whom churches, synagogues, temples, or mosques might administer any religious rite, such as Baptism, Communion/The Lord's Supper, Ordination, Bar Mitzvah, etc.? Despite their secular trappings, by whom should circumcision and marriage, which have undeniable roots as religious rites, be regulated?

I wrestle with these questions while confessing two things. First, even if you believe homosexual behavior is immoral, justice, love for neighbor, and basic decency demand homosexual partners be offered some sort of basic legal rights and protections. There are many people who engage in behavior or lifestyles that would be considered immoral by others, but we do not withhold from them basic legal rights and protections. However if marriage is at its core a religious rite, does the state or a majority vote have the power to alter that essentially religious rite? Rather should some other secular provision be made (such as civil unions)?

Secondly, when discussing circumcision I am talking exclusively about male circumcision, not female circumcision. Male circumcision has a long religious history for the three world religions that trace their roots to Abraham (Genesis 17:10-14); it has never definitely been proven detrimental to male function, pleasure, or psychology; and many studies have demonstrated both its safety (rate of complications resulting from circumcision [between 0.2% and 0.6%] is lower than ear piercing [about 20% of baby girls suffer minor complications; about 3% major ones]) and suggested its possible benefit (including helping prevent HIV infection, lowering the risk of STD's, decreasing the risk of urinary tract infections, and helping prevent penile cancer - see: Ban Circumcision? Why not Ear Piercing?).

However, female circumcision has unquestionably been demonstrated harmful to female function, pleasure, and psychology; it has no demonstrable benefits (see what the World Health Organization has to say about it); and any religious connection is sketchy at best. Male and female circumcision are two completely different things. My arguments are only made on behalf of male circumcision.

So again I ask, if male circumcision is at its core a religious rite, does the state or a majority vote have the power to alter or prevent that rite?

Who has the right to religious rites?

Certainty, Science, and God

2011-08-31T11:14:00.004-04:00

I appreciated very much the observations in this article: Why certainty about God is overrated – USATODAY.com.

I've written often about the leaps of faith that we make:

in Life: The Leap of Faith and Birth
in Faith: Surrender To It
in Science: Common Foundation of Faith and A View From Nowhere

I just wanted to share some of my favorite observations from this article:

For instance, does [Polkinghorne] know for certain that there is such a thing as a quark? Of course not, because no one has actually seen one. In fact, in a debate with Polkinghorne at the Smithsonian in 1999, Steven Weinberg, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, said this: "We don't believe in quarks because we've seen them. We believe in quarks because the theories that have quarks in them work."

Likewise, Polkinghorne doesn't know for sure that there is a God... In addition to believing that quarks exist, [Polkinghorne] believes in a God who is driven by love to continuously create a world that is beautiful. For him, the theories that have God in them work. But he doesn't really know for sure. And he's OK with that.

AND

...What do any of us know for certain? Not much.

Polkinghorne's level of comfort with uncertainty has its roots in reading the Hungarian chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, who used the term "motivated belief," and who called into question the idea that scientists deal in objective facts.

"Complete objectivity as usually attributed to the exact sciences is a delusion and is in fact a false ideal," Polanyi wrote in the 1950s. In other words, we're all coming from some kind of vantage point — always. Facts always come with interpretation. People of science are motivated to believe certain things as they proceed with their experiments, and people of faith are motivated to believe certain things as they proceed with their beliefs. Living with doubt leaves one open to additional discovery, both in science and faith.

AND

Some atheists like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens are similarly locked into their certainty about the non-existence of God. If something has a religious whiff to it, their certainty takes over and reasonable discourse is the victim. Religion, politics and science all have their fundamentalists who are blinded by their so-called certainty.

AND

At 80, Polkinghorne doesn't let his own doubts keep him from believing, any more than he let his doubts about quantum physics keep him from solving problems. He still prays, still celebrates the Eucharist, still believes in some kind of life eternal.

As for belief in God, "It's a reasonable position, but not a knock-down argument," he said. "It's strong enough to bet my life on it. Just as Polanyi bet his life on his belief, knowing that it might not be true, I give my life to it, but I'm not certain. Sometimes I'm wrong."

Scientist and Theologian alike make leaps of faith.

What are you betting your life on? Where are you leaping too?

The plank and the gavel

2011-08-29T12:29:00.004-04:00

Now Bachmann says she is kidding, however this weekend was a different story:

"I don’t know how much God has to do to get the attention of politicians. We've had an earthquake; we've had a hurricane. He said, 'Are you going to start listening to me here?' Listen to the American people because the American people are roaring right now. They know government is on a morbid obesity diet and we've got to rein in the spending" (Michele Bachmann on Irene, earthquake: natural disasters were messages from God).

This article goes on to note that she is not the first to see natural disasters as God's judgment: "John Hagee suggested that New Orleans' gay pride parade may have triggered Hurricane Katrina, while Pat Robertson speculated that Katrina may have been tied to the debate over abortion."

And who can forget Jerry Falwell's post 9/11 statement:

"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'"

We are so quick to declare God's judgment. However, the plank in my own eye should stop me from wielding the gavel.

Jesus made this clear in Matthew 7:1-5:

1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

We make lousy judges. We are both blind to and blinded by our own faults. The prophet Jeremiah calls the heart "deceitful" (Jeremiah 17:9); Paul says we are just as guilty of the sins we condemn in others (Romans 2:1); and the psalmist confesses: "Who can discern his errors? Forgive my hidden faults" (Psalm 19:12). If I've got this plank in my own eye that hinders me from seeing clearly enough to discern my own errors, how might I judge the errors of others?

More than that, I am not an impartial judge. As pastor Carlyle Marney said: "Many Christians define sin as the sum total of acts which they themselves do not commit." We are selective in the sins that we see and that we condemn.

Natural disasters have been attributed to God's wrath on homosexual behavior, abortion, taking prayer out of schools, etc. But never once in the wake of any tragedy have I heard a pastor stand up and say “God has brought this judgment upon America for OUR sins – the sins of: anger, jealousy, ungratefulness, greed, gossip, pride, back-biting, selfishness, empty religion, neglecting the widow and the orphan, and self-righteousness.”

We are always uneven and unjust in our in our judgments. We treat the sins that other people commit as far more heinous and deserving of harsher judgment than our own sins. THEIR sins deserved an earthquake, tsunami, terrorist attack, or hurricane while MY sins, well, they're not that bad. God alone is an impartial and just judge (cf. Psalm 9:8; 96:10; Isaiah 11:1-5).

Jesus teaches in Luke 13:1-5 that tragedy and natural disaster in this world are not judgments, but serve to remind us that time is short and one day there will be a judgment. In the Parable of the Weeds (Matthew 13:24-30), Jesus tells of a man who sows a field of wheat, only to have an enemy sow weeds amongst his wheat. When the man’s servants see the weeds growing in the field amongst the wheat, they ask their master, “Do you want us to go and pull them up?” The master replies, “No, because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.”

This parable speaks clearly of the judgment at the end of time (the harvest). Until that time the good wheat will grow alongside the evil weeds in the field of the world because to uproot the weeds might uproot the wheat as well. So if these natural disasters are judgments from God, then why is the wheat clearly uprooted along with the weeds? "Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?" (Genesis 18:25).

We are impatient and we speed up the day of judgment. We forget that the Lord is patient and kind; “The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9, cf. Ezekiel 18:23; Romans 2:4). Author Michael Horton makes clear, "That does not mean that God is overlooking sin, but that He is postponing His sentence…. One wonders whether we have moved the Day of Judgment up a bit and taken the matter of pulling up the weeds into our own hands."

My friends, we must stop moving up the day of judgment and playing judge. When we expedite the day of judgment we dishonor God by absconding His right as sole lawgiver and judge, we pass blind and unjust judgments, and we discredit God's just character.

So you with the plank in your eye: put down the gavel! You're going to hurt someone with that thing...

Ask a dumb question

2011-07-12T22:45:00.003-04:00

I very much enjoyed the open letter penned by a scientist to a young girl in: Dear Emma B.

This little girl was very proud because at the NASA display of a moon rock labeled as 3.75 billion years old she had "triumphed" over the presenter, challenging the true age of the rock by asking the question, "Were you there?"

This is the standard question that prominent Christian "scientist," Ken Ham, coaches children to ask teachers or real scientists who might make claims that the universe is older than a certain age.

This is a dumb question.

First, and most importantly, the question is rude, mocking, and disrespectful. It seems completely out of character considering the kind of witness the Scripture says we are to be:

"But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..." 1 Peter 3:15
"Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace..." Colossians 4:5-6
"Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen." Ephesians 4:29
"A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." Proverbs 15:1

This question is not respectful, gracious, beneficial, or gentle. There are plenty of ways to disagree directly, yet respectfully and graciously. This type of question is not one of them.

Secondly, I really liked what the scientist wrote in his letter to Emma about asking good questions:

I'd like to teach you a different easy question, one that is far, far more useful than Ken Ham's silly "Were you there?" The question you can always ask is, "How do you know that?"

Right away, you should be able to see the difference. You already knew the answer to the "Were you there?" question, but you don't know the answer to the "How do you know that?" question. That means the person answering it will tell you something you don't know, and you will learn something new. And that is the coolest thing ever.

You could have asked the lady at the exhibit, "How do you know that moon rock is 3.75 billion years old?", and she would have explained it to you. Maybe you would disagree with her; maybe you'd think there's a better answer; maybe you'd still want to believe Ken Ham, who is not a scientist; but the important thing is that you'd have learned why she thought the rock was that old, and why scientists have said that it is that old, and how they worked out the age, even if they weren't there. And you'd be a little bit more knowledgeable today.

"How do you know that?" or "Why do you believe that?" are far better questions than the arrogant and mocking, "Were you there?" As this scientist clearly states, you might hear the other person's explanation and still disagree; continuing to believe what you believe. However, now you have started a conversation. Having asked "Why do you believe what you believe?" the floor is open to say, "Now may I share with you what I believe?" A respectful dialogue has begun.

May I ask a good question; "Why ask a dumb question?"

I feel she is guilty and I know better than the jurors?

2011-07-06T08:31:00.005-04:00

May I take a moment two days after our country's birthday to to speak highly of our American justice system and the sixth amendment?

Thank you America that justice - as imperfect as it is - is dispensed not by the angry mob but by a jury trial. To hear the media pundits, commentators, and Facebook friends the mob would have Casey Anthony hanging high - don't bother with inconvenient due process.

As the commentator in this article (Ellen Gray: Convicted by viewers, not jurors | Philadelphia Daily News | 07/06/2011) wrote:

IF WE DIDN'T know the difference between trial by jury and trial by television, the verdict in the Casey Anthony case cleared it up...

"You cannot convict someone until they've had their day in court," Anthony's lawyer, Jose Baez, told reporters yesterday after the verdict.

It's a quaint notion, rooted in the Sixth Amendment, and it applies even in cases in which the victim is a defenseless child, the defendant a less-than-ideal mother and a preponderance of cable-news anchors have already made up their minds.

How does the angry mob KNOW beyond a shadow of a doubt Casey Anthony was guilty? Were they present when the alleged crime was committed? Did they listen to every part of the trial? Did they examine every piece of evidence and listen to the testimony of every single witness? Hear the argument of every attorney and the instructions of the judge to the jury members?

If not, then the only ground left to convict Casey Anthony is FEELINGS. Yes, Anthony was a deeply troubled and flawed woman but was she guilty of murder? Maybe - however that is not to be decided by me but by due process and a jury of her peers. I applaud a criminal justice system that while being wholly imperfect does not pass verdict based upon feeling, public opinion, or mob mentality.

Cities of Refuge were established by God to allow for a fair trial and protect against "feelings" and mob "justice." See Numbers 35:5-34; Deuteronomy 19:1-13; Joshua 20:4-6:

“When he flees to one of these cities, he is to stand in the entrance of the city gate and state his case before the elders of that city... He is to stay in that city until he has stood trial before the assembly...”

The power of the sword (punishment) is given not to the mob but to the government (Romans 13:1-5). Does the government wield it perfectly? Of course not, we are imperfect people. However, as the image of Lady Justice communicates, justice is to be blind, impartial, and dispassionate - the very opposite of the "justice" being called for by media commentators.

Justice today will always be imperfect. One day we will all be judged justly, not by imperfect humanity, but by the God who is infinite in wisdom, knowledge, and justice (Genesis 18:25; Psalm 96:13; Isaiah 11:3-4; Acts 17:31; Hebrews 4:13; 1Peter 2:23; Revelation 20:12).

Until that day, let me again applaud the American justice system. Perfect? No way. Was justice done in this case? It's debatable. However, I am glad to be part of a system of justice that does not convict simply because someone feels guilty.

Now that feels right to me.

Divine Judgment? Not today.

2011-06-27T22:56:00.005-04:00

In response to this story: Divine Judgment? | ToddRhoades.com, I just posted a comment and thought I'd share the text of it with you here.

---------------

I think that MacArthur has made a theological error. I was in Dr. Douglas Stuart's "Exegesis in the Historical Books" at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and I remember typing into my notes: "Israel-modern nation Confusion: Assuming that things that apply to biblical Israel also apply to modern nations." God's promises, blessings, curses, and judgments cannot be indiscriminately applied to America or to any other modern nation.

This misunderstanding is both common and understandable. As we read the Old Testament we witness God operating regularly on a "national level." This is for two major reasons. First, Israel was a "theocratic" nation. Israel possessed a special status as a nation that no other political or geographic nation before or since has ever possessed - it literally was "God's Nation." The theocratic nation of Israel was unique - it never has been and never will be duplicated (as such, America is not "God's Nation" nor is it a "Christian Nation" but rather "a nation with Christians in it" - but that is for another time).

Secondly, we recognize that in ancient times, nations were far more homogeneous than they are today. At one time, the metaphor used of America was that of the "melting pot." However America is no longer a melting pot but more like a "salad bowl" - very different and distinct ingredients all occupying the same bowl. Less and less do we observe acculturation (the melting pot), but instead different cultures, peoples, beliefs, and practices now live next door to one another. Thus this generation's buzz word is "tolerance;" for we must learn to live together within this diverse salad.

So with the theocratic nation of Israel no more and political/geographic nations no longer homogeneous cultures, beliefs, practices, and people groups - we no longer witness God's promises, blessings, curses, and judgments applied on a political/geographic "national" level in the same way we witness within the Old Testament.

I agree that "nationally" we have violated God's will because every one of us personally has done so (Is. 53:6; Rom. 3:10-18,23). However, has not every other nation done the same? How does the U.S. stack up against the U.K., Germany, Canada, or Afghanistan? Should we be judged more harshly than China with its human rights violations? Should we be punished more severely or immediately than Iraq, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, or Rwanda for their atrocities? And don't we deserve a reprieve for our humanitarian efforts and other national "good works"? (of course we don't, but just follow the logic...)

On June 5, 1973 Canadian radio commentator Gordon Sinclair made a broadcast titled, "The Americans." Early on in his broadcast, Sinclair emphatically argues, "this Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least-appreciated people in all the earth." His broadcast goes on to list time after time at which America came to the aid of those in need while never experiencing reciprocal kindness or often even gratitude. In his final conclusions, he writes, "I can name to you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble. Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble?"

But I agree we ALL stand deserving of judgment unless we stand in Jesus Christ in whom there is no condemnation (Romans 8:1). And one day, at the final trumpet, that judgment will come upon every man, woman, child, of every tribe, tongue, and nation. However I believe MacArthur (just as Falwell and Robertson and others) often speed up that day of judgment.

Humanly we forget that the LORD is patient, not wanting anyone to perish but all to come to repentance (2Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 18:23). In Jesus' day, when others saw "God's judgment" in a local tragedy, Jesus sternly warned them not to assume this was a judgment, BUT that one day there WILL BE a judgment so REPENT NOW (Luke 13:1-5). God will not bring a "national judgment" now - such as MacArthur warns of - because in Jesus' parable of the weeds (Matthew 13:24-30) the farmer [God] tells His servants not to pull up [for judgment] the weeds prematurely because, "while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn" (vv. 29-30).

Make no mistake, there will be a judgment on all at the end of time but I think MacArthur's scope (nationally) and timetable (immediately) are theologically lacking. So divine judgment? Not today.

Brothers, sisters, and the inside of the coconut

2011-06-23T20:13:00.017-04:00

The Southern Baptists have formally rejected the new 2011 NIV translation of the Bible. You can read about it here: The Word's words matter (OneNewsNow.com).

For those not familiar with the debate, the Bible was originally written in Hebrew, Greek, and some Aramaic. So in order for speakers of another language to read it, it must be translated.

Now, beyond the need to translate we have the periodic need to "re-translate," or update the language of the translation. Remember that language is ever evolving. The 2009 Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary added around 100 new words in 2009 including: carbon footprint, frenemy, locavore, waterboarding, and webisode. More than that, the Oxford English dictionary site says that: "The Second Edition of the 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary contains full entries for 171,476 words in current use, and 47,156 obsolete words." Over forty-seven thousand words have fallen out of use and out of consciousness!

Even beyond the addition and obsolescence of words, the meaning of words changes over time. As I was reading my sons J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings trilogy I was painfully aware of language's ever changing usage. I grimaced every time Tolkien used the word "gay" (meaning "having or showing a merry, lively mood") and I flat out 'translated' every usage of "faggot" (meaning "a bundle of sticks or twigs, esp when bound together and used as fuel").

Consider that not only is language a moving target but scholarship is always improving and manuscripts are being discovered. The result is that even the best translations eventually need to be re-translated / updated / tweaked.

The NIV translation was originally completed in 1978 and revised in 1984. Since that time, the NIV has become the most popular translation and is fairly well respected (although never without its detractors).

Over twenty-five years since its last full revision, the NIV translation committee released its 2011 update and as they say on their site: "in this update, about 95% of the text remains exactly the same as the 1984 NIV that it replaces." However, most noticeably in this revision, the committee took seriously that, "gender inclusive language is an established part of contemporary English and that its use enhances comprehension for readers, it clearly was an important factor in decisions made by the translators."

And that is how, to the Southern Baptists, the NIV was "lost in translation" (or re-translation).

The Southern Baptists are galled because the translators made such egregious changes as in 1 John 2:9:

1984 NIV - "Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness."
2011 NIV - "Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates a brother or sister is still in the darkness."

or in Psalm 1:1:

1984 NIV - "Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked..."
2011 NIV - "Blessed is the one who does not walk in step with the wicked..."

The translators carefully studied the Hebrew and Greek originals and wherever the text used a masculine pronoun to clearly reference both genders, they translated it as such. Seems like a no-brainer, huh? Not so.

As the above referenced article (The Word's words matter) makes clear:

"Southern Baptists, along with other evangelicals, affirm what we call the 'verbal, plenary inspiration' of scripture," [Dr. Randy Stinson, dean of the School of Church Ministries at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and president of The Council on Biblical Manhood & Womanhood] explains, "which means that we believe not just the broad thoughts of scripture are inspired by God, but every word. And so every word, when it is translated from Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic, matters."

While I also believe the words are inspired, what are words but containers for communicating ideas? What is more important to God, the word itself, or the truth that He desires that inspired word to convey? Should we cling to the container (word) at the expense of the content (truth)?

Is it more important to God that we use the actual word "brother" OR that we use the phrase which most clearly communicates the truth that we may not hate either man or woman (1 John 2:9)? Does God require we use a word that obscures His intentions and may leave some believing the blessedness of obedience is truly restricted only to men (Psalm 1:1)?

Some ask, "Isn't it enough that people already know that when the Bible says 'brother' it means both men and women and when it says 'he' it means a man or a woman?" My friends, NOT everyone "knows" this! This attitude requires people to translate the English word before they can truly understand it. A person must translate "brother" to mean something other than its meaning in today's usage! So why should we leave people to make a "translation" that they may or may not know to make? Instead, shouldn't we task knowledgeable, godly translators to translate the idea behind the word into today's usage?

What did God inspire - the word itself or the truth that the word conveys?

This provocative question is indirectly addressed by Wycliffe Bible translators. Their website declares: "Wycliffe's vision is to see the Bible accessible to all people in the language they understand best." In order to help explain the translation process to children, they offer downloadable Sunday school lessons on their website. One lesson includes this story:

The Kouya people in Cote d' Ivoire, Africa, have no word for snow in their language. So every time the word "snow" crops up, translators Philip and Heather have to decide which is the most important idea to get across: what it looks like - white and flaky, or what it does - falls from the sky. (Linguists call this form and function.) Once they've decided that, they’ll be able to translate a good meaning for snow.

Let's look at Isaiah 1:18 ["...Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow..."]. So, tell me, why do you think God used snow here? Because of what it looks like or what it does? Yes, because it is pure white and that is how completely God forgives our sins.

In Kouya, Isaiah 1:18 may come out as "your sins will be as white as the inside of a coconut." Why do you suppose the translators chose that instead? Yes, because the people have lots of coconuts and the insides are the purest white.

To be consistent, the Southern Baptists would have to absolutely condemn this method of translation. Instead they should demand that the Kouya people in Cote d' Ivoire, Africa - who never have and probably never will see snow - learn what snow is, create a word for it in their language, and read this passage as "Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow."

Words are but containers for ideas. Different languages use different words to contain the same idea. So what is most important to God - the word itself or the idea that word conveys?

I disagree with the Southern Baptists. I think God's truth demands brothers AND sisters AND the inside of the coconut.

Like a man whose pants are pulled down...

2011-06-17T14:55:00.003-04:00

An excellent commentary on self-control and the recent Anthony Weiner debacle: Anthony Weiner and the Manly Men of Yore - NYTimes.com. The author notes that in posterity:

A man who indulged in excessive eating, drinking, sleeping or sex — who failed to “rule himself” — was considered unfit to rule his household, much less a polity.

This is certainly true within the Scripture. "Self-control" is listed as an essential character quality for anyone in church leadership (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:8; 2:2-3). It is named as a "fruit," or clear indication, of the Spirit's work within our lives (Galatians 5:23; 2 Timothy 1:7). Self-control is character trait we are encouraged to help the young develop on their road to maturity (Titus 2:4-6; 2:12; 2 Peter 1:5-7).

We are warned that in the last days things will get ugly and, amongst other problems, people will lack self-control (2 Timothy 3:1-5). We are cautioned that there is an enemy actively stalking those without self-control so he can take them down (1 Peter 5:8). As such, we are commanded in this present age to be all the more self-controlled that we might pray and stand firm (Titus 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:4-8; 1 Peter 1:13; 4:7).

As evidenced by scandals involving Anthony Weiner, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, John Edwards, and the like, self-control is a ready defense against those things that otherwise would master and destroy us. Proverbs 25:28 summarizes well: "Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control." I guess these days, we might adapt the first part of that proverb to say, "Like a man whose pants are are pulled down..."

Blessing for the CHRHS Class of 2011

2011-06-06T17:56:00.007-04:00

The English word “benediction” comes from the Latin word meaning “to bless.”

So Men and Women of Camden Hills Regional High School Class of 2011 receive this blessing:

As you go into this world may you renounce

easy solutions for which you must sacrifice your integrity,

easy profit for which you must lose your soul,

and easy gain for which you must betray your God.

Men and women, renounce the easy life, gained dishonestly and sustained on the backs of other people’s sacrifice and suffering.

And instead

choose what is right over what is profitable, popular, or prudent;

choose what relieves the suffering of this world over that which contributes to it;

choose what is honorable in the eyes of God over what is valued in the eyes of this world.

Men and women choose a life that makes a difference for others and not just a profit for you.

Class of 2011 trust in the LORD with all your of heart, serve others with all of your life, and Godspeed on all of your journeys.

Amen.

Benediction delivered at the Baccalaureate service for the Camden Hills Regional High School class of 2011 - June 6, 2011.

Antimatter, matter, and a creator

2011-06-05T20:27:00.007-04:00

Trekkies and theologians (and Trekkie theologians) should pay attention to this news story: CERN Scientists Trap Antimatter for Almost 17 Minutes | PCMag.com.

Trekkies, now we need some Dilithium Crystals and soon we will be ready for warp speed ("Make it so!"). Theologians, now we have further evidences of a purposeful force shaping the creation. Trekkie theologians, we get the best of both worlds.

Theologians, take note of the ramifications of this discovery:

...scientists hope to start working their way toward an answer to the ultimate question: Why nature favored matter over antimatter at the creation of the universe, even though the two should have been fashioned in equal amounts (and subsequently annihilated each other, we suppose). They didn't, which violated CPT symmetry, or the position that particle charges, parities, and time flows should not be predisposed in one direction or another. In our universe, for example, positive charges favor heavy particles, matter is favored over antimatter, and forward time is favored over reverse.

"Any hint of CPT symmetry breaking would require a serious rethink of our understanding of nature," said Jeffrey Hangst, a professor at Aarhus University in Denmark. "But half of the universe has gone missing, so some kind of rethink is apparently on the agenda."

At the creation, why was there not symmetry so that equal amounts of matter and antimatter came into being and subsequently destroyed one another? If all is random and accidental, why did nature instead "favor" matter over antimatter? How is it that an "impartial" and "unintelligent" nature played "favorites"?

It seems instead that the force behind creation was not so impartial or unintelligent... as if there was a captain at the helm commanding "Make it so!" (Genesis 1:1-3, 31).

Jesus Loves Breastfeeding

2011-06-03T13:56:00.012-04:00

Why are Christians so freaked out by the human body? We believe God created it (Genesis 2:7) and we are created in His own image (Genesis 1:26-27). Yes, our society is guilty of obsessing over, prostituting, and sexualizing the human body. However the human body itself is not something to be ashamed of - our treatment, abuse, and misuse of the human body is.

So I cannot even comprehend the ignorance and lunacy of the store owner in this story: Our Family's First Nurse-In, Complete with News Coverage

...I explained that he does not have the right to violate the law. He said the law was “wrong” and I explained that this shop owner’s opinion of the law didn’t matter, and his behavior could get him sued. Then he said “But CHRISTIANS come in here!” and I said “JESUS WAS BREASTFED”. Then, he shouted some more stuff about “respect” and I tried to get him to read what the law says, which he refused to do, because he didn’t care about the law anyway...

...the shop owner replied, “I am called to a higher law than that. It’s called the Bible. It’s called purity and family-oriented. Respect.”

This "Christian" displays an ignorance of the Bible and an anemic theology.

Nursing and breasts are mentioned many times in the Scripture (Genesis 21:7; 49:25; Exodus 2:7-9; Numbers 11:12; 1Kings 3:20; Job 24:9; Psalm 22:9; Lamentations 3:3; Isaiah 28:9; Joel 2:16). In fact, if God created everything then God created breasts and ordained breastfeeding.

I have to agree with the woman in the report: Jesus was breastfed. As well as the Apostle Paul, Moses, King David, and... well... everyone in the Bible. Really, is there anything more "family-oriented" and family/baby nourishing than breastfeeding?

God compares His city Jerusalem with a nursing mother in Isaiah 66:11: "For you will nurse and be satisfied at her comforting breasts; you will drink deeply and delight in her overflowing abundance."

And my personal favorite - God compares Himself to a breastfeeding mother in Isaiah 49:15: "Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!"

Are modesty and purity important? Undoubtedly. However, breastfeeding a baby is not a sexual act but a spiritual act. Jesus loves breastfeeding.

Jesus is not Religion

2011-04-22T09:50:00.001-04:00

Filipinos re-enact Jesus's crucifixion in Easter ritual | Reuters. This article pains me (pun intended) on so many levels. It reads:

Nearly two dozen Filipinos were nailed to crosses to re-enact the passion of Jesus Christ on Good Friday, in what they see as an extreme display of devotion but which the Roman Catholic Church criticises as a distortion of the Easter message...

"I hope the Lord will grant my wish to make me win big in 'jueteng' this year," Alex Laranang, a 55-year-old food vendor who said he can't read or write, told Reuters before two 5-inch nails were driven into his hands on a scorching hot day.

Jueteng is a popular illegal lottery in the Philippines.

Crucified so that God is then obligated to help you win an illegal lottery? Jesus is not religion.

Dictionary.com offers the root of the word religion as:

popular etymology… connects [the word religion] with religare "to bind fast"… via notion of "place an obligation on," or "bond between humans and gods."

Religion seeks to bind humans to God - to obligate Him to act on our behalf. At its core, religion is a set of actions, rituals, words, prayers, dances, spells, sacrifices, etc. that we use to manipulate God. It is a tit-for-tat understanding of God - if I give/do this, He is obligated to give/do this.

I like to call this the vending machine understanding of God. Put your coins (sacrifice, gifts) in the slot, then press the right combination of buttons (prayers, dances, words, spells, rituals) and the correct reward will drop from the vending machine.

It is a very simple and straightforward system. Too bad it doesn't work.

Experience would make us believe that the vending machine is broken. How many times in human history have prayers been offered, rain dances done, or animals sacrificed and still no rain came?

Moreover, what a small and petty God who can be contorted to our whims or manipulated by our actions? And how anemic must He be if by my actions I can force him to act in violation of His own character and will (such as helping me win and illegal lottery)?

Scripture describes the true God as unchanging (Exodus 3:14-15; Psalm 102:27; Hebrews 13:8; James 3:17), not influenced or coerced (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Malachi 3:6), not swayed by men, paying no attention to who they are (Mark 12:14), for the true God does not need anything and is not served by human hands (Acts 17:24-25). Romans 11:35 asks pointedly: "Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him?" God is clearly not into religion.

Religion is about doing, manipulating, obligating, and earning; but Jesus is about grace - unmerited, unearned, and undeserved. As Ephesians 2:8-9 makes clear, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast."

So what these people are doing in the Philippines is painfully futile and foolish. God is not impressed.

Jesus is not religion. Jesus is grace.

Addictive Musical Fun

2011-04-10T21:15:00.002-04:00

Scumbags Welcome

2011-03-08T22:21:00.004-05:00

Short news report here from a Tampa area news station: Church welcomes 'Scumbags'

I think the more important question to ask is when did we stop welcoming them? Remember Jesus' words:

On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” Mark 2:17
When the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would know who is touching him and what kind of woman she is — that she is a sinner."..."I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven—for she loved much. But he who has been forgiven little loves little.” Luke 7:39,47
Now the tax collectors and “sinners” were all gathering around to hear him. But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law muttered, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them"... "I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent." Luke 15:1-2,7

In the church, how quickly we forget that if Jesus has chosen to hang out with us, it is because we are scumbags! Jesus has a wonderfully annoying habit of choosing all the wrong characters (1 Corinthians 1:26-31). He picks those who don't make the cut - those who don't get chosen for "the" team - the rejects, the weak, the broken, the sinful, the scumbags. We would do well to adopt the Apostle Paul's attitude: "Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst." 1 Timothy 1:15

So of course the Church must welcome scumbags. Otherwise, how could I ever hope to be included?

Independence from our Independence

2011-03-02T14:38:00.004-05:00

Good reflection in the brief post Is There a Definition for Prayer? I appreciate this simple definition:

For the sake of common language, this assessment will operate on the idea that prayer is God’s means for people to acknowledge their dependence on him for all things...

So when we praise him, when we confess to him, when we believe him for a brother’s need, we put ourselves where God designed for us to be: dependent on his provision. A rich prayer life is one that regularly and unreservedly cries out "Abba, Father."

Dependence does not come easily. I thought Rich Mullins hit the nail on the head in the song Hold Me Jesus:

Surrender don't come natural to me
I'd rather fight You for something
I don't really want
Than to take what You give that I need
And I've beat my head against so many walls
Now I'm falling down, I'm falling on my knees

Surrender is the very essence of prayer. So maybe our struggle to be consistent in prayer is an unwillingness to surrender? A lack of humility? A stubborn independence?

So maybe prayer is really a declaration of independence from our independence.

Redemption

2011-01-15T21:13:00.003-05:00

Young shooting victim's organs help save child - U.S. news - Crime & courts - msnbc.com

An organ donation from the 9-year-old Tucson shooting victim has saved the life of a child in Boston, according to media reports.

Redemption.

From the brokenness of one family springs healing for another. From the loss comes gain. From death comes life.

While this good news does not lessen the darkness of a nine-year-old being tragically gunned down by a maniac, it does remind us that darkness will not have the final word. Dawn always comes after the darkness.

Motorcycles and World Cups | LeadershipJournal.net

2011-01-04T14:21:00.003-05:00

Fun little article here: Motorcycles and World Cups | LeadershipJournal.net. Here's the crux:

I tell you all that to tell you this: failure made me ambitious. Tasting defeat made me hungry for success, and that in turn made me disciplined, focused, strategic.

What have you failed at lately? Failure is only final if that's where you finish. What are you hungry to succeed at this year?

Me

2010-12-10T14:27:00.004-05:00

We all want to be liked: Facebook's narcissist effect - Fortune Tech. A great commentary on our "me" generation.

What affect does this have upon our ability to have real relationships? One pastor went as far as to encourage his flock to abandon Facebook for fear of infidelity. My friend Walt talks about The Death of Me, Myself, and I. . . ., quipping: "But I'm led to wonder if maybe this Narcissism stuff is so widespread, that it's now normal to be self-centered. . . so normal in fact that the next addition to the DSM might be something related to other-centeredness."

Love demands you look beyond yourself to another. And that doesn't mean to look to another to discover what he or she thinks about you (I hope she clicks !).

Are we diminishing our ability to look beyond ourselves? Are we rewarding patterns of thought and behavior that encourage self-absorption and self-centeredness?

For those who have truly loved, you know that love requires sacrifice. Jesus said it best, "Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends" John 15:13.

It demands that you consider another's needs over your own. The Apostle Paul wrote, "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others" Philippians 2:3-4.

Love does not seek to be (on Facebook or in the real world) as much as it seeks to know what another , values, believes, and desires. This is why First Corinthians 13 is read at so many weddings: "Love is not self-seeking..." (1 Cor. 13:5).

So is the crippling our ability to love?

Who are you? What do you want?

2010-11-23T00:01:00.000-05:00

You've just placed a phone call, and you get voice mail. But the greeting is unusual, not the usual "Leave a message." Instead you hear:

"This is not an answering machine; it is a questioning machine. There are only two questions in life that are relevant: Who are you? and What do you want? Most people do not know the answer to these questions. Please give your answer at the sound of the tone."

Those two questions are presented in Bill Pollard's book The Soul of the Firm

How would you answer?

Be where you are

2010-11-02T00:01:00.000-04:00

This commercial makes me sad. Why? Because it is painfully true.

As a generation, we struggle to be where we are. Our bodies are in one place but our minds are in another. We don't relate to those next to us because we are too busy relating to those in another zip code.

Why? In part, because text messages, Facebook, and Twitter are short and easy while face-to-face conversations are long and sometimes difficult. Depth is hard to achieve in 140 characters or less. Real relationships just are not bite sized, pithy, or neat - they are often long, rambling, and awkward. Moreover, it can be hard to hide face-to-face, while a technological mask is safe.

I'm no luddite. However, I know my own propensities. I just worry that technology, for all of its ability to seemingly "bring us together," at the same time threatens to separate us from those closest to us.

Evil Religion

2010-09-06T22:28:00.003-04:00

Recent news: Dove World Outreach Center plans "Burn a Quran Day" because in the words of Pastor Terry Jones, "Islam is an evil religion." In a related news story: Jesus Christ warns, "The Dove World Outreach Center is an evil religion."

Asked for his feelings about "Burn a Quran Day" Jesus said:

I thought I was pretty clear about that whole "love your enemy thing." Now don't hear me wrong, I am not endorsing Islam as truth, but I am endorsing the truth of love. I think the Apostle Paul said it well when he wrote: "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Or my servant Martin Luther King Jr. spoke truth when he said, "Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that." Dove World Outreach Center is an evil religion because it is driven by hate, not love.

How can I tell these people are not driven by a love of truth or of my Father? They do not seem to possess genuine love and compassion for those who are in error. Whenever I encountered those in error or bound by sin and oppression, I was always moved with compassion.

It is obvious these people are driven by hate because they preach Hell without compassion but instead with smug self-righteousness. As my servant Dwight Moody once wrote, "When we preach on Hell, we might at least do it with tears in our eyes." Pastor Mark Rutland also got it right when he said, "None should be allowed to mention Hell to the lost without tender, desperate concern in every word. And none should be allowed to preach a sermon on Hell unless it ends with an invitation to choose heaven." Terry Jones' and DWOC's actions are not those of compassion and love that will produce repentance, but actions of hate that will only beget more hate.

Sorry if I'm a bit worked up. You might have noticed that my anger burns most not against those that are lost and blind but against those that are smug and self-righteous (Matthew 15:1-14; 23:1-38; Mark 3:5).

Asked if he will talk to Pastor Terry Jones and try to convince him of his error, Jesus replied, "I have been talking to him. He stopped listening long ago. And I haven't been welcome to attend any of DWOC's Sunday morning services for years."

Jesus misses protest at church

2010-09-03T00:01:00.000-04:00

According to the AP: Bikini-clad strippers protest church in rural Ohio and the BBC: Ohio strippers stage picket outside church services. In a related news story: Jesus misses protest at church.

Asked where he was during the protest, Jesus replied:

"I was busy at The Fox Hole ministering to the other strippers. Little girls don't usually say, 'I want to be a stripper when I grow up.' It is often loss, tragedy, abuse, and desperation that lead a woman into the life of a stripper.

"It's easy to use fear and humiliation to shut down this type of place (all guerrilla tactics that I never used), but where does that leave these women? It's easy to protest places like this but it's harder to truly love these women by helping them find other good-paying jobs. It's easy to yell, 'What you're doing is wrong!' but what do you do when the answer is, 'I know! But if I don't do it my children will starve!'

"It's like that woman the Pharisees dragged before me. Was she guilty of adultery? Absolutely. However she was also clearly a victim in need of compassion, not condemnation.

"Sure, some women freely choose the easy money and debauchery of this lifestyle. But we've got to listen and understand first before we know what is really most loving - confrontation or compassion."

Asked where he was off to next, Jesus replied, "Once I'm done at The Fox Hole, I'm going to have breakfast with Stephen Hawking. We've got some catching up to do about M-theory, space-time dimensions, and creation. Well, specifically he's got some catching up to do..."

Stephen Hawking marked absent at the Universe's creation

2010-09-02T10:06:00.009-04:00

All over the news today: Stephen Hawking Says God Did Not Create the Universe. In a related news story: God says Stephen Hawking Was Not Present at the Creation of the Universe. Bad news Stephen, God was taking attendance and noted your conspicuous absence.

So if Stephen wasn't there, how can he be so certain that God did not create the universe? Hawking says:

"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing," writes Hawking.

"Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going,"

First problem with his statement: "Because there is." The fact that there is anything - including physical law - demands an explanation. What was the origin of the gravity which Hawking credits as the cause behind "spontaneous creation"?

If I were to insist that my car had been spontaneously created, I would rightfully be laughed at. Yet someone can declare the complexity of everything there is was just spontaneously created - just came into existence without cause nor creator - and we take him seriously? Nonsense is nonsense no matter how brilliant the speaker.

Moreover, Hawking says later in the interview:

"There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason. Science will win because it works."

Science is based upon observation and reason? Observe the beauty and complexity of the cosmos, the atom, or the human body - what does reason tell you of their origins? As I walk through the woods if I observe a tumbledown stone wall, which is more reasonable to say: the wall had both cause and creator or the wall had been spontaneously created?

Further, I continue to take exception to the clichéd sentiment Hawking regurgitates about religion and science being in some sort of battle. In my recent post, Marriage - just a piece of paper? I discussed this very issue:

Notice that while I chose the words "mystical" and "transcendent," I am still talking about reality. Science reveals truth (reality), but there is truth beyond what science can reveal. Transcendent truths are just as real. And I believe one of those transcendent truths is that in marriage, the two really become one.

I explore this same theme in both my posts: More than meets the eye and Common Foundation of Faith. The bottom line is that science and religion are no more at war than are numbers and letters.

So if you want to know the origins of the universe, don't ask Stephen Hawking but rather someone who was there: "In the beginning God..." (Genesis 1:1).

Fake Christians

2010-08-31T00:01:00.000-04:00

Author: More teens becoming 'fake' Christians - CNN.com

Fascinating article. Here are some of the highlights and my reflections:

Dean says more American teenagers are embracing what she calls "moralistic therapeutic deism." Translation: It's a watered-down faith that portrays God as a "divine therapist" whose chief goal is to boost people's self-esteem.

[from later in the article: "Many teenagers thought that God simply wanted them to feel good and do good -- what the study's researchers called "moralistic therapeutic deism."]

..."If this is the God they're seeing in church, they are right to leave us in the dust," Dean says. "Churches don't give them enough to be passionate about."

The command "Play nice" is found nowhere in the Bible but seemingly everywhere in our churches. Now, there's nothing wrong with "nice." However, "nice" is not passionate, transformative, or powerful. Nice is "pleasing; agreeable; delightful." Nice is Mr. Rogers - and Mr. Rogers never rocked the boat.

There is an enormous difference between "nice" and "loving." Love stands against all that is not love. Love is passionate, transformative, and power. Love sometimes must rock the boat. ( I found this same idea in the article: "Be Honest, Not Polite.")

Love we are commanded to. Nice we are not. The author of the article makes this point saying:

Others practice a "gospel of niceness," where faith is simply doing good and not ruffling feathers. The Christian call to take risks, witness and sacrifice for others is muted, she says.

Just as Mr. Beaver says of Aslan the Lion (who represents Jesus) in Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe: "Safe? Don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about being safe? 'Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you."

Being "good" or "loving" makes you unsafe to all that is not love. Our young people are revolting against the gospel of the nice, tame, domesticated, neutered and safe house cat Jesus Christ and they long for the true gospel of the loving, untamable, wild, and dangerous Lion of Judah (Revelation 5:5). As the article says, "If teenagers lack an articulate faith, it may be because the faith we show them is too spineless to merit much in the way of conversation."

The author also notes:

...the gospel of niceness can't teach teens how to confront tragedy.

"It can't bear the weight of deeper questions: Why are my parents getting a divorce? Why did my best friend commit suicide? Why, in this economy, can't I get the good job I was promised if I was a good kid?"

We either ignore the questions or content ourselves with easy answers and simplistic explanations. However, the gospel can and does speak to the pain of our real lives. As theologian and musician Michael Card writes in A Sacred Sorrow: Reaching Out to God in the Lost Language of Lament:

...from one-third to over one-half of the psalms are laments. With the exception of one psalm (88), each lament turns eventually to praise, revealing an important truth that has been lost; lament is one of the most direct paths to the true praise we know we have lost.... there exists within American Christianity a numb denial of our need for lament.

The Bible openly acknowledges the brokenness, suffering, and sin of our world. The good news of the gospel is that God reaches down into the midst of it and meets us there. If the good news does not address out brokenness, it truly is not good news and should be rejected.

A refrain repeated throughout the article is a rallying call to parents:

Dean, a United Methodist Church minister who says parents are the most important influence on their children's faith, places the ultimate blame for teens' religious apathy on adults.

...What can a parent do then?

Get "radical," Dean says.

She says parents who perform one act of radical faith in front of their children convey more than a multitude of sermons and mission trips.

A parent's radical act of faith could involve something as simple as spending a summer in Bolivia working on an agricultural renewal project or turning down a more lucrative job offer to stay at a struggling church, Dean says.

But it's not enough to be radical -- parents must explain "this is how Christians live," she says.

"If you don't say you're doing it because of your faith, kids are going to say my parents are really nice people," Dean says. "It doesn't register that faith is supposed to make you live differently unless parents help their kids connect the dots."

If we are raising up a generation of apathetic children, the most responsible party is not the media, the liberals, the fundamentalists, the abortionists, the evolutionists, the church, or whoever might be the enemy de jour. Instead, as Harry Chapin realized: "And as I hung up the phone it occurred to me / He'd grown up just like me / My boy was just like me." Parents, raising passionate children begins not with changing the culture or changing the church, it begins by changing ourselves (Deuteronomy 6:1-9,20-25; 1 Corinthians 11:1; Philippians 3:17; 1 Peter 5:3; Hebrews 13:7).

And this is the point in the article that the Church should take special notice of:

No matter their background, Dean says committed Christian teens share four traits: They have a personal story about God they can share, a deep connection to a faith community, a sense of purpose and a sense of hope about their future.

How are we offering these things to our young people? Never mind just young people, how are we making these things possible for all our church members?

One of the questions this article raised for me was, what steps are we taking to convert these "fake Christians" to the true gospel?

Leadership: First Follower

2010-08-26T20:23:00.003-04:00

Full transcript of this video is here: http://sivers.org/ff

My favorite quote: "When you find a lone nut doing something great, have the guts to be the first person to stand up and join in."

Marriage - just a piece of paper?

2010-07-30T13:00:00.001-04:00

USA Today reports More young couples are having babies, then deciding to wed. The article concludes with a quote from a twenty-three year-old interviewee:

Says Davie Melton: "Marriage, I guess, is a piece of paper nowadays, and I don't think you necessarily need it to be a good family."

Is marriage just "a piece of paper"?

Obviously, I believe the Bible teaches a mystical, transcendent reality in marriage: the two become one (Genesis 1:27; 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6).

Notice that while I chose the words "mystical" and "transcendent," I am still talking about reality. Science reveals truth (reality), but there is truth beyond what science can reveal. Transcendent truths are just as real. And I believe one of those transcendent truths is that in marriage, the two really become one.

Let's say you don't want to get all metaphysical. Is marriage just a piece of paper?

In marriage, no matter the type of ceremony, promises are made. These promises are made to your future spouse. These promises are made in the presence of witnesses. I believe these promises are made before God Himself.

So it comes down to a question of how valuable is your word/your promise? Is your word as worthless as an easily discarded piece of paper? Are your promises so insincere that they are easily broken and abandoned? The integrity of marriage is not in question, but the integrity of your word is.

No matter how you approach it, marriage is more than a piece of paper. Don't throw it away.

Lament and Intimacy

2010-07-21T13:38:00.004-04:00

"Lament teaches us that in prayer, the things we ask for are almost never what we really need."

Later in his lecture (the second video below), Michael Card says:

"...they're both going to die this week.

We've got three choices that I can think of.

The first choice: there is no God. OK. I'm not prepared to go there.

The second choice: there is a God and He doesn't care whether my mother and best friend die or not. I'm not prepared to go there either...

Third option: there is a God who cares and He's doing something that I don't totally understand... I don't completely understand what He's doing."

Then Card tells a story about a friend who was hit by a drunk driver and paralyzed. As he lay in his hospital bed, lamenting to God, he declared: "You don't have to heal me - just don't leave me."

Card observes, "The deepest desire of God - the thing that God wants the most is the thing that we need the most... [My friend] needed [God's] presence more than he needed His provision. And most of our prayers, let's face it, are provision prayers... understand that His deepest desire is this business of intimacy and being with us."

The above quotes and videos below are a seminar that Michael Card taught at the East Coast Worship Summit summer of 2008(?) in Wayne, Pennsylvania. He notes that most of worship literature in the Bible is Lament worship, yet hardly any of our contemporary Christian worship music reflects that.

This lecture is well worth listening too.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Part 6

Part 7

Love

2010-07-11T00:01:00.000-04:00

What if the lofty prose of 1 Corinthians 13:1-13 was written not by the Apostle Paul, but instead by a scientist?

The season (and series) finale of the CBS show Numb3rs answered that question. In episode 616 Charlie and Amita get married and Larry officiates the ceremony. Below is Larry's wedding "sermon" - a beautiful, lofty, and scientific reflection upon love:

Larry: "At the request of the bride and groom, I will keep my remarks short and non-technical. As you know, there are four fundamental forces in physics: electromagnetism, strong nuclear interaction, weak nuclear interaction, and gravity."

Colby: "So I wonder what the technical version sounds like?"

Larry: "I heard that."

"We’ve been talking here about the forces that bind the universe. But what binds humans? Love. Powerful in small spaces, yet with profound effect on distance. Love defies time – outliving both its source and its object. Love is faster than light, for light requires time in order to travel through space. But love reaches its object instantaneously. Love journeys forever, into infinity. And it’s here, binding together two lives."

Houston, we have a problem

2010-07-09T22:48:00.005-04:00

You've probably read in the news here, here, here or elsewhere:

Here is President Obama's vision of NASA's mission, as explained by administrator Charles Bolden:

"One was he wanted me to help re-inspire children to want to get into science and math; he wanted me to expand our international relationships; and third and perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and engineering."

First, mathematics likely wasn't a Muslim contribution, but originated in India (see also: The Universal History of Numbers: From Prehistory to the Invention of the Computer). As Albert Einstein said, "We owe a lot to the Indians, who taught us how to count, without which no worthwhile scientific discovery could have been made." And if it didn't originate in India, arithmetic and numerals likely originated in China (see Fleeting Footsteps: Tracing the Conception of Arithmetic and Algebra in Ancient China).

But aside from all that silly accuracy stuff (because it might make someone not "feel good"): Houston, we have a problem. The mission has been compromised.

How has the mission been compromised? For starters, the nursery rhyme: "Hey diddle diddle, / The cat and the fiddle, / The cow jumped over the moon," says more about space exploration than the Bolden/Obama comments above!

This is NASA's mission as stated on its website: "NASA's mission is to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research." But, now NASA administrator Charles Bolden is saying, "NASA is not only a space exploration agency but also an earth improvement agency."

Really? "Space exploration" and "earth improvement" (at least as described by the President's ideas above) seem galaxies apart (pun intended). Public relations is a universe away from aeronautics and engineering (again pun intended). You'd have to be a space cadet not to realize that the skills, gifts, and talents that you would look for in a potential astronaut, engineer, scientist, or cosmologist are vastly different from those of a diplomat, ambassador, public relations consultant, or self-esteem coach (OK, OK, I'm done with the space puns).

Mission affects everything. Imagine a factory whose mission was to "Provide the freshest and tastiest canned asparagus to our customers." One day they are told the mission is now to "Provide quality childcare to our customers." So what happens? Well, kids don't usually like asparagus, so better get rid of that. All this processing and canning equipment - kids could get hurt so it's gotta go too. We don't have any toys around here, better buy some Legos. Oh, young children might swallow Legos? What do I know about kid's toys - I've spent my whole life running canning equipment! There are state and federal laws regulating childcare facilities? Maybe we need to hire an entirely new staff.

Whether you are a business, a church, an individual, or a government organization mission defines and drives you. For NASA to be successful at its "new" mission, it would need to completely revamp, restaff, and recreate itself (there is an understatement). Just ask a NASA engineer trying to successfully launch a rocket into space (will they still do that in the future?) - even a small divergence from its stated target (mission) can cause a disaster. A diluting of mission always brings, if not absolute disaster, at least a serious loss of focus, momentum, and organizational effectiveness. Abort mission!

Well, for one thing, Star Trek will never be the same, "Self-esteem, the final frontier..."

Good advice from Brangelina

2010-07-07T12:00:00.004-04:00

In a desperate attempt to get people to visit his blog, Adam features Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie...

No seriously, I was impressed by the relationship advice that Angelina gave in this USATODAY article: Angelina Jolie: Brad and kids 'know all my flaws'. Angelina shares:

"We stay really connected. We actually don't go out much. It's funny. We're very homebound. We're very much Mommy and Daddy in our pajamas."

Yes, she says, the children "tie us together," but, she adds, "a relationship won't hold if it's only about the kids. You also must be really interested in each other and have a really, really wonderful, exciting time together. We do. Brad and I love being together. We enjoy it. We need it, and we always find that special time. We stay connected. We talk about it. It's very important."

Relationships take work. Being incredibly good looking, famous, rich, funny, or whatever doesn't make the relationship any easier. Brad and Angelina make clear that while they enjoy one another (and they are both good looking, famous, rich, and funny) they still have to regularly work on their relationship.

We must continually cultivate the enjoyment of our spouse that first drew us to him/her. We must make that special time, stay connected, talk about it. Do your choices communicate that your marriage and spouse are that important to you?

Angelina goes on: "Brad knows me completely, exactly as I am, every part of me. He loves me. The kids love me. They know all my flaws and all my oddities. And they accept them. And so I can feel complete."

Don't we all want that? Someone who knows us - warts and all - and yet loves us. The worship song Indescribable proclaims of God: "You see the depths of my heart and You love me the same / You are amazing God."

We need that kind of love not only from our God, but from our spouse. Someone who sees the depths of your heart - the good and bad - and loves you the same. Someone who loves you for who you are, and at the same time his/her love helps you become a better person.

Are you cultivating that type of honesty in your marriage or are you holding back thinking, "If my husband/wife really knew me (or knew this about me) he couldn't love me"? Are you cultivating a love in your relationship that frees both you and your spouse to be honest about who you really are? That allows you, as Angelina says, to "feel complete"?

At the creation, Genesis 2:25 reveals: "The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame." There was no need to hide. They had a love that allowed them to be "naked," real, honest, vulnerable, and complete before one another without fear. Are you cultivating that type of love and honesty in your own marriage?

Relationships are hard work - but well worth the effort. Take it from Brangelina.

Embodied Creatures

2010-07-04T00:01:00.001-04:00

One of the weakness of Christian theology has been a downplaying of the human body. Too often we have either promoted dualism (human soul good / human body bad) or we we have narrowly focused on "saving souls for heaven" instead of redeeming the whole person for eternity (cf. Romans 8:23).

We cannot forget that humans are embodied creatures. Humanity was created at the beginning of time with material bodies (Genesis 2:7; 3:19) and we will have resurrected bodies at the end of time (John 5:28-29; 1 Corinthians 15:35-57). Our destiny is not disembodiment - but rather resurrected bodies on a resurrected earth (Romans 8:19-23; Revelation 21:1-5).

Our bodies are an important part of who we are. Observe those whose bodies have been damaged in some way and that quickly becomes obvious (i.e.: brain injury, blindness, paralysis, etc.). So why should we be surprised by this recent report that Botox May Affect Ability to Feel Emotions? The article reports:

“For at least some emotions, if you take away some part of the facial expression, you take away some of the emotional experience,” says study researcher Joshua Ian Davis, PhD, a term assistant professor in the department of psychology at Barnard College in New York City.

Why should we be surprised? We are embodied creatures, that which we do in and to our bodies will affect the whole of us. C. S. Lewis picked up on this truth in The Screwtape Letters when the senior demon Screwtape advised his protege Wormwood in the temptation of humans:

"At the very least, they can be persuaded that the bodily position makes no difference to their prayers; for they constantly forget, what you must always remember, that they are animals and that whatever their bodies do affects their souls."

We are a part of creation - the stuff of earth infused with the divine image (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:7; 3:19; Psalm 8:4-6), or as the David Crowder Band sings "I am full of earth and dirt and You." How should our nature as embodied creatures affect what we do in and to our bodies? How should it affect the Gospel that we live and preach?

Who ‘Likes’ That Christopher Hitchens Has Cancer?

2010-07-03T00:01:00.000-04:00

Just stop it. Stop gloating. Stop celebrating. Stop the "God is punishing him" or "He's getting what he deserves" or "That's what happens when you defy God." People on Facebook are actually "liking" the Washington Post story that reports prominent atheist Christopher Hitchens, author of God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything has throat cancer (see: Who ‘Likes’ That Christopher Hitchens Has Cancer? | The New York Observer).

Come on people. NOBODY should be 'liking' this story.

Yes, he has virulently and unmercifully attacked Christianity at every turn. Yes, he has often been unfair and distorted the facts. Yes, he has unquestionably declared himself a critic and an enemy.

And our response should be... love.

⁴³"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' ⁴⁴But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, ⁴⁵that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. ⁴⁶If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? ⁴⁷And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? ⁴⁸Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:43-48).

My friends, our response should be prayer, not pronouncements. We should respond with grace, not gloating. We should pray for his healing (physically and spiritually) not for hell-fire.

Pray for Christopher Hitchens. Nobody should like that he has cancer.

Touchdown? No. Major Fumble.

2010-06-15T12:00:00.000-04:00

Just came across this article today: ‘Touchdown Jesus’ statue to be rebuilt - Dayton Business Journal. I guess this ~~monstrous idol~~... er, statue was struck by lighting last night and burned to the ground. In an interview with Darlene Bishop, co-pastor at the church, she said they will undoubtedly rebuild it:

“We’re going to get work on it immediately,” Bishop said. “He’ll be back.”

The statue was built by an architect in Jacksonville, Fla. and then assembled on-site. The massive, six-story structure cost approximately $250,000, Bishop said.

Comedian Heywood Banks had previously mocked this ~~atrocity~~... er, work of art in his song Big Butter Jesus. Heywood reacted to the destruction of the statue (Comedian reacts to demise of Jesus statue) by adding a verse to his song:

One night Big Butter got struck by lightning
And it burned to the framewire in a giant grease fire.
Some blamed it on Satan, and boy, that would be frightening
But I thought it was Jesus’ father who was in charge of lightning.

Not bad theology for a comedian (cf. Exodus 9:23-24; 19:16; 2 Samuel 22:13; 1 Kings 18:24; Psalm 77:17-18; 144:6; Job 36:32; Jeremiah 10:13). Now I'm not claiming this was a judgment of God - I don't know God's mind nor understand His ways. However, I will confess an affinity to the assessment made in the tweet by @XIANITY: "OHIO: Lightning strikes and destroys giant statue of Jesus, confirming that God does indeed control the weather."

This is not the first time I've written about this monstrosity and others like it. Below, I've reprinted a 2008 article I wrote for our Chimes newsletter titled They’re Laughing At Us.
-----------------------

I read the most disturbing articles this week. The World Overcomers Outreach Ministries Church in Memphis, TN constructed a 72-foot tall statue. She holds a cross in her upraised hand and the Ten Commandments in her arm. A burlesque of the original; it is called the Statue of Liberation Through Christ. The total cost to construct this abomination was $260,000.

I found a similar article about the 62-foot monument erected by the Solid Rock Church of Monroe, OH. Observers have dubbed this behemoth sculpture of Jesus with arms outstretched to the sky; “Touchdown Jesus.” The total cost to construct this oddity: $250,000.

Finally, to complete this trinity of misguided ambition, I read about the 198-foot cross that calls Effingham, Illinois its home. Total cost of construction: one million dollars.

The world is laughing at us… and they should.

In a world where more than 850 million people worldwide are persistently hungry and about 1.2 billion live on less than $1 a day, what could 1.5 million dollars have done? In a world where a child dies every three seconds (30,000 children die each day) due to preventable illness and malnutrition, how many could 1.5 million have saved? In a world where retro-viral drugs, which are extremely effective against the strain of the AIDS virus currently ravaging the African continent, cost just $1 per person per day, how many lives could have 1.5 million dollars have prolonged?

If these churches had given their money to battle poverty, disease, AIDS, and starvation then the media would have noticed and the world would have “seen our good works and [taken seriously] the Father in Heaven.” Instead these churches squandered God’s money, the media noticed, and the world laughed loudly at us. They justifiably could continue to dismiss the message of Christ because of the ridiculousness of the message bearers.

This world will not take seriously the message of Christ until we take seriously the problems of this world. To waste ludicrous amounts of money erecting monstrosities here on earth “where moth and rust destroy” while our global neighbor is “without clothes and daily food” is both irresponsible and unconscionable. No wonder the world laughs. May it make us weep.

Bible Band Aids

2010-06-04T12:00:00.001-04:00

Having children, I regularly get to celebrate all the simple joys of childhood. Remember the childish belief there is no injury so great that a well placed band aid cannot magically heal it? I have applied band aids to everything from invisible wounds to badly skinned knees, all with miraculous effect.

While band aids might suffice for our childhood nicks and scrapes, one day we grow up to realize that some injuries are just too grave, some wounds too deep, some illnesses too severe for just a band aid. Or do we?

As Christians it seems we are often guilty of running around like little kids who've gotten into their parent's medicine cabinet. We love to stick Bible band aids on every wound we see. But can the real and deep hurts, pains, and wounds of this world be healed with a simple Bible band aid?

"Your plans didn't work out the way you'd hoped? Jeremiah 29:11!"
"Your adult child seems to be walking away from the faith? Proverbs 22:6!"
"Not many people attended the ministry event that you planned? Matthew 18:20!"
"Your marriage is falling apart? Matthew 19:4-6! 1 Corinthians 13:4-8! Ecclesiastes 4:12!"
"You're struggling with addiction and temptation? 1 Corinthians 10:31!"
"You just lost someone you love? Job 1:21! Matthew 5:4"

Our tendency to apply Bible band aids is understandable. A friend has just poured out her heart to you, exposing some deep and very serious wounds. As she gently sobs, you're left feeling awkward: "I think I should say something now... How can I fix it??? What would Dr. Phil say? No, even better, what would Jesus say?" And next thing you know, you're applying a Bible band aid. Unquestionably, some band aids may help slow the bleeding, but the majority are ill fitting. Some can even make the bleeding worse.

None of this is to say that the Bible doesn't speak truth or offer us guidance and comfort - because it clearly does. What I'm asking is if we are misusing the Bible.

Maybe the Bible was never meant to be applied as a simple band aid on the deep and serious wounds of this world. Maybe the Bible is supposed to be used in the same way as many of today' medications: "Use under a doctor's supervision." The Bible was never meant as a stand-alone band aid, but is to be used under the supervision of the Great Physician. What if we stopped treating the Bible like a box of band aids and more like a prescription for His presence?

Band aids are great for some things. But for many of life's hurts, you need far more than a band aid. You need the touch of the Healer.

Compare Apples and Apples

2010-06-01T12:25:00.004-04:00

Our friends at Wikipedia (Apples and Oranges) say, "A comparison of apples and oranges occurs when two items or groups of items are compared that cannot be validly compared." Yet that is exactly what many do when they try to compare Scripture and science."

Christianity Today posted an article (Adamant on Adam) about well-respected scholar Bruce Waltke's dismissal from Reformed Theological Seminary (RTS). Waltke was dismissed "when he seemed to challenge evangelicals in a video interview to consider the possibility of evolution or risk being seen as a 'cult.'" The RTS interim president Michael Milton responded to Waltke's dismissal saying:

"Science is on a journey; revelation is a destination," he added. "We begin and end with revelation at RTS."

The problem with this statement is that Milton is comparing apples to oranges. God is the author of two books: Nature (Creation) and Scripture (the Bible). Yet, as I argued in a previous post (Herman who?):

None of us interacts directly with God's two books of Scripture or Nature. We interpret them both. Our human interpretation of Scripture is theology and of Nature is science.

God has authored the books of Nature and Scripture but science and theology are human endeavors. So we could compare the apples of Scripture and Nature or the oranges of science and theology - but Milton tries to compare the orange of "science" to the apple of "revelation (Scripture)." Don't compare the divine initiative to our human initiatives.

We all interact with divine revelation through theology just as we interact with nature through science. Consider that the exact same "revelation" with which Milton says RTS "begins and ends" has also been used to justify a geocentric view of the universe, the Crusades, slavery, the abuse and oppression of women, etc. And yet RTS would reject all these things. Why? They would argue all these things are examples of bad theology (human interpretation).

So are we absolutely certain that our current evangelical disdain of evolution will not prove to be another example bad theology - the mishandling/misinterpretation of divine revelation - in the same vein as a geocentric worldview or the Crusades?

I am not at this time arguing that that evolution is correct. However, like Waltke, I would say that it is foolish (and maybe a bit arrogant) not to "consider the possibility" of theistic evolution. In fact, one might argue that the only way evolution could have worked would have been if it was guided by a divine hand (and not random chance).

Again, I am not here advocating for theistic evolution but rather advocating against comparing apples to oranges lest we end up sounding fruity. How do you like them apples?

Uncomfortable Bedfellows

2010-05-27T10:22:00.004-04:00

Approaching this Memorial Day Weekend, we find ourselves staring down those uncomfortable bedfellows - Religion & Politics. Just how much politic and patriotism is appropriate to include in the Sunday morning service? Even more uncomfortable, what should be the role of the church in the larger political scene?

Leadership Journal is featuring an interesting assessment simply called the "Church & Politics" quiz. Take the Church & Politics Quiz (opens in a new window)

Or here is a direct link to the article that explains the four quadrants of political engagement: The Church & Politics Quiz.

I wasn't surprised by my result. In fact one of the books in the "recommended books" for my type is a personal favorite that I have referenced a couple of times on this blog.

How about you? Are you a Radical Reformer, a Quiet Critic, a Thumpin' Theocrat, or a Private Patriot?

What's in a building?

2010-05-23T00:01:00.000-04:00

We dare never forget that "the Church" is the people, not the building. However, these buildings are absolutely breathtaking (either because of beauty or hideousness). Many stand as testimony to our infinitely creative creator God. Enjoy.

50 Most Extraordinary Churches of the World | Bored Panda

Morality

2010-05-22T20:55:00.007-04:00

Fascinating video above (source: What is morality? | Dan Ariely | Big Think). Here is the quotation from the video that I found most fascinating:

Now what does it mean about morality? So in the economic framework, people should be sensitive to the probability of being caught cheating, and the amount of rewards. We don’t find any of this. When we changed the probability of being caught, nothing changes. When we change the amount of the reward..., nothing happens.

Instead what we theorized is that people have a threshold. We all want to think of ourselves as honest people, and we can cheat a little bit. There’s like a fudge factor that we can cheat a little bit and still feel good about ourselves. So the idea that people cheat up to that level.

Now if that’s the case, what should influence the level of cheating? We said this threshold should go down if people think carefully about honesty; and it should go up if the activity is less likely to reflect on their honesty.

So here is what we did. We took one group of students and we said you have two experiments today. The first one is a memory experiment. And half of the people try to remember the Ten Commandments; half of the people tried to remember 10 books that they read in college... in high school. Then they went to another experiment in which they could cheat. Will the fact that some people try to remember the Ten Commandments influence how much they cheated? Absolutely. People stopped cheating. We didn’t detect any cheating after that.

And by the way, almost nobody remembers all the Ten Commandments. And it doesn’t matter how many commandments they remember. The moment that they contemplated their own morality, they became more sensitive to deviations from their standards and stopped cheating.

That last sentence bowls me over; read it again: "The moment that they contemplated their own morality, they became more sensitive to deviations from their standards and stopped cheating." It reminds me of what James writes:

²²Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. ²³Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like a man who looks at his face in a mirror ²⁴and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like. ²⁵But the man who looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues to do this, not forgetting what he has heard, but doing it—he will be blessed in what he does. ~ James 1:22-25

Moral law is like a mirror - looking into it offers us a reflection of ourselves. Gazing upon that reflection, we become more aware of deviations and distortions - our disfigurement. The law "gives freedom" for it offers the opportunity to be freed from those deviations and distortions that make us and our actions so ugly.

The whole of Scripture bears out our need:

Psalm 1:2, "[His] delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night."
Deuteronomy 6:6-9, "⁶ These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. ⁷ Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. ⁸ Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. ⁹ Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates."

However, none are able to reflect perfectly upon, nor to reflect perfectly, the law. As such, the LORD spoke through the prophet Jeremiah promising a time in the future:

³³ "This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
after that time," declares the LORD.
"I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
(Jeremiah 31:33, emphasis mine)

Notice where it says the law will be written. Not just where it might be reflected upon and forgotten. The law will be written on the minds and hearts of people where it might truly transform. Upon the heart and mind, one might both reflect perfectly upon, and reflect ever more perfectly, that law.

This is why the Apostle Paul writes in Romans 8:3-4:

³For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, ⁴in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.

God sent his own Son Jesus to die and pay the price for our distortions and deviations from the moral law. The took upon Himself our ugliness. To look upon the cross of Jesus Christ is to see all our transgressions of the moral law - iniquities, sin, violence, darkness.

As one songwriter beautifully put it:

Oh to see the pain written on Your face
Bearing the awesome weight of sin
Every bitter thought every evil deed
Crowning Your bloodstained brow

This is the power of the cross
Christ became sin for us
Took the blame bore the wrath
We stand forgiven at the cross

If the moral law is a mirror, then the cross is the most terrible of all mirrors. For upon the cross, we come to grasp what we have become. Jesus' body reveals to us how we appear to God. We understand the effect that our deviation from and transgression of the moral law has wrought upon our souls. Inside, all of us are ugly, dark, unsound, infirm, lacerated, broken, bleeding, suffering, and dying.

Just as terribly, upon the cross we also discover what our violation of the moral law has done to others. Our words, our thoughts, our actions - the things we have done and the things we have left undone - have beaten, bruised, torn, tortured, starved, lacerated, and killed. Upon the cross, Jesus shows us what our fellow man looks like when we are through with him.

Our reflection upon the moral law should drive us to look upon the most horrible mirror of the cross. Witness the fruits of your and my violation of and deviation from that law. The good news is that all that ugliness was displayed upon, but also forgiven at, the cross.

And now, we might live differently, in harmony with the moral law, as Romans 8:4 (referenced above) goes on say: ^"4in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit."

The Spirit has written the law upon our minds and hearts as promised through the prophet Jeremiah. We might live according to - by the power of - the Spirit. The Spirit brings our minds, hearts, and lives into accordance with the moral law in a way we can never do ourselves. We are powerless to perfectly reflect upon, or to perfectly reflect the moral law - but the Spirit within us does just that.

Get your own dirt

2010-05-21T14:00:00.000-04:00

It's all over the news: scientists create life. But have they? Consider this report from ABC News: Scientists Create First 'Synthetic' Cells:

It's "synthetic in the sense that its DNA is synthesized, not in that a new life form has been created," according to Jim Collins, professor of Biomedical Engineering at Boston University and an expert in synthetic biology. "Its genome is a stitched-together copy of the DNA of an organism that exists in nature, with a few small tweaks thrown in." (emphasis mine)

A copy is far different from a creation.

The Economist reports in Synthetic biology: And man made life:

Craig Venter and Hamilton Smith, the two American biologists who unravelled the first DNA sequence of a living organism (a bacterium) in 1995, have made a bacterium that has an artificial genome—creating a living creature with no ancestor (see article). Pedants may quibble that only the DNA of the new beast was actually manufactured in a laboratory; the researchers had to use the shell of an existing bug to get that DNA to do its stuff. (emphasis mine)

...Yet that is not how many will view the announcement. For them, a better word than “creation” is “tampering”.

This is not creation but copying (or as the article says: "tampering"). In fact, this article notes that the researchers "had to use the shell of an existing bug" to even make it work.

Does this represent exciting and wonderful advances? Yes! I am thrilled (and equally terrified) about the possibilities that arise from this line of research. However, let's weigh our terms. Exaggerated and fantastic headlines like "Scientists Create Life in the Lab" might grab your attention, but mislead at the same time. There is a world of difference between "creating" a Picasso painting and "copying" one.

I think the joke below offers a humorous summary of this truth:

One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this, let's say we have a man making contest." To which the scientist replied, "OK, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.

God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!"

The Toe of God

2010-05-19T10:00:00.000-04:00

Fun article from the NYT for the physics/philosophically minded: From Fermilab, a New Clue to Explain Human Existence? While scientists can with a fair amount of accuracy determine when the Big Bang happened, they struggle to explain why it "worked" (or what caused it for that matter). This article wrestles with the "why it worked" question:

In a mathematically perfect universe, we would be less than dead; we would never have existed. According to the basic precepts of Einsteinian relativity and quantum mechanics, equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been created in the Big Bang and then immediately annihilated each other in a blaze of lethal energy, leaving a big fat goose egg with which to make to make stars, galaxies and us. And yet we exist, and physicists (among others) would dearly like to know why.

And I can't help but love the conclusion:

...Joe Lykken, a theorist at Fermilab, said, “So I would not say that this announcement is the equivalent of seeing the face of God, but it might turn out to be the toe of God.”

"And God said, 'Let there be light,' and [Bang] there was light." Genesis 1:3

When did God get so dull?

2010-05-14T20:49:00.003-04:00

(I was inspired to post this after a comment on Facebook from my friend Josh. This is an article that I published in our church newsletter in July 2005.)

There was a time in history when the Church was a wellspring of creativity. ALL of the great art was created in tribute to the Author of Light – exploring themes of His creation, His beauty, His redemptive work. ALL of the great music was first played as a song of praise to the Creator of sound. ALL of the thinkers and scientists who shaped the course of the future sprung from the fertile soil of the Christian intellectual community. Yes, there was a time when the Church was the leader, the cutting edge, the shaping force of culture and history.

But now? In discussions of cutting edge artwork, there is want for the name of a Christian artist to be mentioned and a famine for any work that might honor Him. The most talented and creative of today’s musicians rarely play for any glory but their own. The church no longer produces influential thinkers and scientists in the numbers it once did. No longer do we lead; rather we trail behind, being molded by (or just poorly imitating) the culture instead of shaping the future.

What happened? We became uncreative.

cre·a·tive adj. 1. Having the ability or power to create. 2. Productive; creating. 3. Characterized by originality and expressiveness; imaginative. --cre·a·tive n. One who displays productive originality.

“Characterized by originality” and “imaginative” are two descriptors not often used of the Church today. Original and imaginative mean different, unusual, strange. We’ve become very comfortable and secure in our beliefs, our practices, our way of doing things. We have our theologies, systems, styles, music, icons, images, structures, practices, dress, language, and understandings. Here is the box, you either fit in or you don’t – end of story.

People who are original and imaginative just don’t fit! They don’t believe exactly the way we do; they don’t look, sound, dress, act, talk like us; they don’t do things the way we’ve always done them! They ruffle feathers, make waves, and create chaos. They question the status quo and are discontent with the good, always believing that there is something even better to be found over the next hill.

If we are honest with ourselves, we no longer value those people. At best we label them as strange, peculiar, “not our kind of people,” and at worst we call them troublemakers, unorthodox or heretics.

The Church has become more concerned with preserving the past than with creating the future. If we are stuck looking backwards, how can we lead forwards? We must appreciate and learn from the past, but never at the expense of shaping the future.

Our past achievements were meant to be milestones that might encourage and inspire us to greater deeds, not millstones that might slow or even stop us. God’s repeated admonitions to His people to “remember” were never meant to cement them in the past but rather to call them to even greater feats in the future!

The movement that Jesus began 2000 years ago was always meant to be a force for creating the future. “Creating” necessitates “creativity!” If we are to once again become a force that produces great artists, musicians, thinkers and leaders, we must again become a movement who values the original and the imaginative. If we wish to shape the future – to again take the lead – we must nurture and encourage those who think differently, who challenge the status quo, who envision such a compelling future that they refuse to become slaves to the past.

Isn’t this what the Apostle Peter spoke of in Acts 2:16-17 (quoting Joel 2:28-29):

‘In the last days, God says,
I will pour out my Spirit on all people.
Your sons and daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
your old men will dream dreams.’

Visionaries. Dreamers. Original. Imaginative. When a creative God pours out His spirit, will it not produce creative, original, imaginative visionaries and dreamers?

Consider the God whose Spirit is poured out. The artist God who paints every sunrise and sunset, whose hands shaped the beauty and delicacy of the human body, from whose creative imagination came the platypus, giraffe, elephant and zebra. The God who taught the bird her song and tuned the notes of the musical scale. The God who placed within the human mind an intrinsic desire to stretch beyond the known, to seek, to imagine, to dream.

Consider those upon whom God’s Spirit is poured. John 3:8 says, “The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.” Those filled with the Spirit of our creative God move like the wind – for creativity is never stationary! Creativity is always moving – blowing in new, different, and unpredictable directions.

Now consider what the Church might become – a people filled with the Spirit of our immeasurably creative God. A people who move in new, different, and novel directions. A community of visionaries and dreamers. A place where the past is valued but only as a stepping-stone to an even greater future. A culture that forsakes the “good” for a chance at the “better.” A body where creativity is valued, stagnation reviled, innovation exalted, and the future is shaped.

That kind of a community would produce cutting edge artists of international renown who create new and influential images, icons, and expressions of our faith. That kind of community would produce musicians who write tomorrow’s popular music in laud of our King (remembering that God’s creativity did not end with the violin and organ but continues today with the electric guitar and drums). That kind of community would produce the world’s most forward, pioneering, and revolutionary thinkers, scientists, and leaders.

In short, that kind of a community might truly create the future.

May the Church once again be that community – filled with the Spirit of her creative God and resurrected as an unstoppable force shaping culture and the very course of human history.

Innovation, for all the wrong reasons

2010-05-14T00:01:00.000-04:00

This article is circulating all over the internet: AFP: Playboy to feature 3-D centerfold

The centerfold picture in the June edition of Playboy will be in 3-D, Playboy spokeswoman Theresa Hennessey said Tuesday.

I don't mention it for the purpose of promotion (nor announcing my "must read list"). Rather, the thing that so painfully stands out to me is that innovation is happening for all the wrong reasons.

Pornography has driven many of the major advances we've made in technology - the VCR, the internet, etc. As this article from CNN (In the tech world, porn quietly leads the way) correctly observes:

The announcement illustrates a widely acknowledged but seldom-spoken truth of the technology world: Whenever there's a new content platform, the adult-entertainment industry is one of the first to adopt it -- if they didn't help create it in the first place.

"It's not necessarily that the porn industry comes up with the ideas, but there's a huge difference in any technology between the idea and the successful application," said Jonathan Coopersmith, a professor at Texas A&M University who teaches the history of technology.

So where am I going with all of this?

Why isn't the Church innovating? Why aren't we leading the way in the development and successful application of new technology? Why do we trail woefully behind the curve - playing a never-ending game of catchup? And why are there so many Luddites amongst us?

We claim to have the most important message that humanity has ever heard. We claim to hold the only hope for a hopeless human race. We claim to offer the cure to the sick, freedom to those in bondage, sight to the spiritually blind. And yet, we fail to make use of innovation to promote and proclaim that message?

How can we become innovators and early adopters? A couple of initial thoughts:

Encourage creativity. Discourage status quo.
Don't fear different. We tend to push "different" into the margins or try to change it to fit the current mainstream. Look at history - the margins quite often become the new mainstream.
Keep up-to-date. If you're not that person, befriend the younger generation or those that are cutting edge.
Always ask, "How could we use this?" Never say, "That has nothing to do with us/what we're doing."
Don't ask, "Why should we use/do this?" Ask, "Why shouldn't we use/do this?"
Assume change, don't avoid change.
Be scared more often. Maybe we play it too safe.

There are plenty more excellent thoughts out there on this subject. My bottom line is that it pains me to see Playboy being more creative than the Church.

Uniquely Shaped

2010-05-13T00:01:00.001-04:00

Great article at BuildingChurchLeaders.com - Find Your Church's Unique Shape for Ministry. The article says:

Imagine being so clear about your identity as a church that you can answer the question, "What can our church do better than 10,000 others?"

That's a great question. When I consider the creativity of God, I have to stop and ask, "Why are we so quick to believe that God creates generic churches?" Imagine what might happen if we were to discover and do that which we can do better than 10,000 others? If we were to release our God-given creativity and uniqueness?

And what if you applied this same question personally: "What can YOU do better than 10,000 others?" Sure, false humility would dictate that you should say "nothing." Let's move beyond that. You are uniquely shaped. You are an original. You are not a generic human. What can you do better/differently/uniquely from 10,000 others? To discover and do that thing is to find your purpose and passion in life.

To some, questions like this one seem frivolous. The truth is that until we have answered questions like this one, our lives are frivolous.

Unspectacular and Encouraging

2010-05-12T00:01:00.001-04:00

While Leah and I were in NYC last week, we went to Redeemer Presbyterian Church and heard Tim Keller preach (author of The Reason for God, The Prodigal God, and Counterfeit Gods). The thing that was most spectacular about the service was just how unspectacular everything was. Everything - the service, the music, the sermon - was very solid but understated. People weren't attracted by glitz or flash - just solid, clear, understandable, applicable truth.

Now I have visited many larger churches, however never experienced one as simple and unspectacular as this one (1,200 in attendance at the service I attended; one of five services that day). I usually expect more polish, more "shine," more "professionalism" in a service run by a larger ("mega-"?) church, but not here. Again, that does not mean the service was sloppy or disorganized - it was solid and well executed, but unspectacular.

In reflecting upon it, here's why the service struck me so hard: it looked like something that we could easily do (or are already doing simply ramped up a couple levels). I usually walk away from a larger church saying, "We could NEVER do that unless we had _______" (fill in the blank with any expensive options you like: a bigger sound system, better worship equipment, redesigned church building, etc.). Instead of being discouraged at the apparently infinite chasm between "us" and "them," I walked away from Redeemer encouraged to see echos of our own church - solid if not always spectacular.

God Chaos

2010-05-11T12:15:00.006-04:00

The Blessed Mess - LifeChurch.tv : swerve

"...there are times when chaotic ministry is better than organized ministry." ~ Craig Groeschel

Now Groeschel makes an important distinction: the chaos that he references is not because of our failure but rather God's move.

Maybe we're nervous about "God chaos" because it smashes our dearly cherished illusions of control. Maybe we're guilty of thinking we can manipulate the move of God - so when he has the audacity to move independently of us, we're a bit taken aback.

Think what God might do if we prayed regularly for greater "God chaos" in our lives and our ministries? If we asked for the grace and strength to embrace, and not to fear, the blessed mess he wants to bring us?

Social Media and the Church

2010-04-21T22:02:00.002-04:00

We as the church can choose to ride the wave or be crushed by it. Which will we choose?

Happily Ever After

2010-04-16T13:49:00.003-04:00

I know it has been a long time since I've posted. So briefly, here's what's on my mind.

Life is not a fairy tale. Often the story is not "happily ever after." Instead people die, healing doesn't come (or is delayed), marriages dissolve, conflicts escalate, failure happens.

So where's the good news in all of that?

The ray of hope is that God has chosen to be "Immanuel" - God with us - in the midst of our mess and pain (Matt. 1:23; cf. Ex. 3:12; Josh. 1:5; Matt. 20:28). That God chooses to slog through the "unhappy ever after" of our lives with us is almost unbelievable. But I guess it's not as unbelievable as the thought that any of us might always live a life of "happily ever after."

A departed hero or a living friend?

2010-04-05T21:30:00.000-04:00

I was reading an interview in Christianity Today ("The Resurrection Changes Everything") with Adrian Warnock, author of the recently released book Raised with Christ: How the Resurrection Changes Everything. The interview was thought provoking, meaning this book very well may find its way onto my large and heavy-laden "too read" shelf.

In light of Jesus' resurrection - which just yesterday we celebrated - I enjoyed the author's response to the question, "How might we begin to live differently if we started to grasp what God did by raising Jesus from the dead?"

Through prayerful meditation on the Resurrection, we encounter the risen Jesus as a real person who is very much alive and active today. When Jesus stops being a departed hero to us and becomes a living friend who has changed our life, surely we will want to share that with others. Sin will also lose its appeal when we realize it is offending the risen and conquering Lord of glory. The more we gaze on Jesus, the more we will become like him.
The Resurrection also gives us an incredible hope to face the troubles in our lives. This world really is not the end. The day is coming when, with renewed bodies, we will all meet again, and we will see Jesus face-to-face! There will be no more pain, no more sin, no more death.

I found myself quite struck by the statement: "Jesus stops being a departed hero to us and becomes a living friend." I had to look painfully in the mirror and ask, "How do I regard him? What does my life say about how I regard him? What do my choices say about how I regard him? What does my preaching say about how I regard him? In my life, is he but a departed hero or a cherished and living friend?"

That is a post-Easter reflection worth dwelling upon.

BAT Signal

2010-04-01T09:06:00.002-04:00

One of the most frustrating things about being a pastor is when a church member ends up in the hospital and you are completely unaware. It leaves the patient feeling forgotten and the pastor feeling unable to care for the needs of his flock.

Well all of this is about to change.

A year-long project that has involved myself, the CSBC trustees, Pen Bay Healthcare, the Penobscot Bay Medical Center, and the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) is finally coming to a close. We were hoping to have an announcement prepared in time for the annual meeting, however some last-minute concerns raised by the FAA had to be addressed before the project could be made public.

After months of planning, negotiation, and construction we are pleased to unveil the BAT signal. BAT stands for “Body Admission Transmitter.” It will let me, your pastor, know immediately when any member of our body has been admitted to the hospital.

How will it work? We have arranged to have the BAT signal installed on the roof of the Penobscot Bay Medical Center. The signal is a large spotlight that can be shown into the sky and seen for miles around. This, by the way, is what caused the delay in our announcement - the FAA was awaiting the results of a study guaranteeing that such a signal would not interfere with the flight paths of planes landing and departing from Belfast Municipal or Knox County Regional Airports.

Now no matter where I might be, I will be able to look up to the sky, know that one of our members is in trouble, and spring into action.

I wanted an image in the center of the spotlight to let me know that it is in fact an attendee of CSBC who has been admitted. At first we were going to use the cross, but since this BAT signal idea will undoubtedly catch on with other area pastors, we figured that would become confusing. Then we considered a symbol for water since we are after all a Baptist church. However every church has some baptism requirement. Thus after a long, and often contentious, debate we settled on an image that represents something Baptists do frequently and do well: the crockpot. If nothing else, Baptists know their potluck dinners.

So next time you are admitted into the hospital, you can rest assured that the BAT signal is shining brightly overhead and your hero, seeing that shining crockpot in the sky, is on his way for a visit.

AFNS

Too good to be true? Not always.

2010-03-31T12:49:00.004-04:00

Colo. Casino Says $43M Prize Message Was Mistake - ABC News

A Colorado woman who won $42.9 million off a penny bet in a slot machine had her dreams quickly dashed when the casino said the jackpot message was an error.

You know what they say: "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is."

But not always.

^"4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, ⁵made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved... ⁸For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— ⁹not by works, so that no one can boast." (Ephesians 2:4-5,8-9, emphasis mine)

Too good to be true? Not this time.

Happy Saint Patrick's Day

2010-03-17T00:01:00.000-04:00

May the Strength of God pilot us.
May the Power of God preserve us.
May the Wisdom of God instruct us.
May the Hand of God protect us.
May the Way of God direct us.
May the Shield of God defend us.
May the Host of God guard us.
Against the snares of the evil ones.
Against temptations of the world

May Christ be with us!
May Christ be before us!
May Christ be in us,
Christ be over all!
May Thy Salvation, Lord,
Always be ours,
This day, O Lord, and evermore. Amen.

Have we given them a challenge worth taking?

2010-03-15T10:00:00.000-04:00

I recently came across this list:

Perpetua (the courageous early martyr) was only 22.
Athanasius of Alexandria was 29 when he argued successfully for the divinity of Christ at the historic Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.
Martin Luther was in his early 30s when he nailed his 95 theses to the door of the castle church in Wittenberg.
John Calvin was just 26 when he penned his landmark tome, Institutes of the Christian Religion.
Charles Spurgeon was only 19 when he was called to take the pastorate of London's famed New Park Street Chapel, the largest Baptist congregation in all of England at the time.
Missionary Jim Elliot and musician Keith Green both died before 30.

Paul writes to young Timothy: "Don't let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity." 1 Timothy 4:12

Have we offered our young people a challenge worth living for? Worth dying for? Have we prepared them for the challenge?

The Thom and Sam Rainer wrote in Essential Church?: Reclaiming a Generation of Dropouts:

A young woman named Jennifer, who had dropped out of the church, said in an interview, “You know, everyone wants to make a difference. I don’t know anyone who wants to go through life without having some impact… If [churches] would lead their members to make a difference, I believe that churches across America would be bursting at the seams with people who want to be there.”

also: “The young people in our churches are not content to be on the sidelines. They desire to be involved in ministries that reach out to the community and the world. They want to be in church that takes faith risks and gets them involved in real life-changing ministries. They are not loyal to the institution for the sake of the institution, but they are loyal to institutions that are making a difference and institutions where they can make a difference.”

Where are today's Luthers, Calvins, Spurgeons, Elliots? How can we help grow more?

Discussion Questions: The Garden & Come to the Table

2010-03-14T00:01:00.002-05:00

For those of you playing the home game, you may have noticed that I forgot to post the discussion questions last week. So, here are this week AND last week's questions.

March 14, 2010 – Matthew 26:31-46 – The Garden

Icebreaker
Have you ever stayed up all night? How did you do it, and why?

What was the longest night of your life? Delivering your first child? Waiting up for a teenager? Waiting for word from a doctor? Something else?

Discuss
How did God speak to you personally through this passage? this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

Where do you go and what do you do when you’re facing a difficult situation? Do you prefer to be alone or in the company of close friends?

Jesus knew his disciples’ weaknesses and failures (Mt. 26:31,34). How does the fact that Jesus also knows your weaknesses and failures give you hope?

Can you share a little about your “Gethsemane” – a place where you really wrestled with God? What did you learn from that experience? What does Jesus’ example in the garden teach us about those times in our own lives?

Who is a person you would invite to “watch and pray” with you when you are in “Gethsemane”? Why this person? Who would call on you to “watch and pray” with him/her?

How does Peter see himself in relation to the other disciples (Mt. 26:33)? What is the danger of this (cf. Prov. 16:18; 1Co. 10:12)? In what ways can we guard ourselves against this same attitude today?

Prayer has always been one of the most difficult disciplines for Christ’s followers to master. How is your prayer life? What things cause us to falter in the area of prayer? What can we do to grow in our prayer lives?

How will the Gethsemane story change the way you pray this week? The way you face trials? The way you pray for others?

---------------------

March 7, 2010 – Matthew 26:17-30 – Come to the Table

Icebreaker
What is your favorite meal?

Discuss
How did God speak to you personally through this passage? this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

What words would you use to describe the spirit in which your congregation normally observes the Lord's Supper?

Read together Matthew 26:17-30. Try to imagine what it would have been like to sit with the Savior at this meal. What are you thinking? What are you feeling? Which person in the account to you most closely identify with? Why?

One author wrote: “For some, communion is a sleepy hour in which wafers are eaten and juice is drunk and the soul never stirs. It wasn‘t intended to be as such. It was intended to be an I-can’t-believe-it’s-me-pinch-me-I’m-dreaming invitation to sit at God’s table and be served by the King himself.” What is your response to this quote: Agreement? Disagreement? Joy? Sadness? Indifference? Other? Why?

What does the Apostle Paul say about the purpose of celebrating the Lord’s Supper in 1 Cor. 11:23-30? How is this remembrance meaningful to you?

Go Deeper
Compare Jesus’ last supper with the Passover meal described in Exodus 12:1-13. In what ways does the Passover point ahead to the work of Christ?

What does Jesus’ mean by “the blood of the covenant”? (cf. Ex. 24:1-11; Deut. 12:23) If the cup is the blood of the covenant, what do Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:22-32 tell us about the nature of this covenant?

How does Psalm 41:9 relate to Matthew 10:20-25? Have you ever had this type of experience?

Read John 17:20-23. What is the primary request Jesus makes in this passage? How is it relevant in talking about the Lord’s Supper? It has been said that the Lord’s Supper is personal, but not private. What do you think this statement means? What do you think it should mean for our celebration of the Lord’s Supper?

Sight unseen

2010-03-13T13:21:00.006-05:00

From the article "Day 1 estimate: 120,000 iPads sold" listen to this quote:

"Apple has been able to generate over $75 million in revenue in one day on a product that 99.9% of purchasers haven't touched or for that matter, even seen in person," said Victor Castroll an analyst with Valcent Financial Group. "And, we're still three weeks away. That is amazing."

My friends, by faith in Steve Jobs and in Apple, true believers spent $75 million - sight unseen.

And yet, some might ridicule we who by faith accept Jesus Christ - sight unseen.

"Then Jesus told him, 'Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.'" John 20:29

"However, as it is written: 'No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him' [Isaiah 64:4]—but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit." 1 Corinthians 2:9-10

"So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal." 2 Corinthians 4:18 [all emphasis mine]

Why do we accept sight unseen? For we have the testimony of those who have seen:

"Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word." Luke 1:1-2

"We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." 2 Peter 1:16

"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ." 1 John 1:1-3

"The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe." John 19:35 [all emphasis mine]

Some might pause at John the Disciple's words in these last two verses. He openly admits that while an eyewitness, he testifies with an agenda: "that you also may believe." For this reason, many would disregard the eyewitness testimony of these men - saying it must be skewed or tainted by their agenda.

And Steve Jobs does not have an agenda? So far, Steve Jobs has $75 million agenda - and increasing. Yes, Steve Jobs is an eyewitness to the iPad. But he is clearly an eyewitness with an agenda: "that you also may buy." Yet, his words can be unquestionably considered truthful?

We must confess that much of our life is a "leap of faith" (I've explored this theme in Surrender To It and The Leap of Faith and Birth). Put your faith in Steve Jobs and buy an iPad. Put your faith in the Bible and trust Jesus. Life is not as certain and clear-cut as some would have you believe. We must live much of our lives sight unseen.

Spring Forward

2010-03-13T00:01:00.001-05:00

TONIGHT (early tomorrow morning) remember to "spring forward" - turning your clocks AHEAD one hour!

This CBS News story - Spring Forward Messes with More than Time - reports:

Daylight saving time begins at 2 a.m. Sunday...

But when the country jumps ahead an hour Sunday morning, that one little lost hour of sleep has a big impact.

The number of serious heart attacks goes up 6 to 10 percent (PDF) on the first three workdays after the time change. On Wall Street, economists say sleep-deprived traders often produce "large negative returns" on that following Monday, once estimated at $31 billion.

And how will that lost hour affect Sunday's sermon? You'll just have to show up to find out.

and playing the role of god...Conan O'Brien

2010-03-12T09:00:00.001-05:00

Conan O'Brien's Twitter stunt turns tear-jerker - Twitter - Salon.com

The article says that Conan O'Brien is now on Twitter and last Friday he wrote:

"I've decided to follow someone at random," he wrote. "She likes peanut butter and gummy dinosaurs. Sarah Killen, your life is about to change."

And change it did. Killen found herself with scores of new Twitter followers and media interviews. She then chose to use her newfound fame not to further promote herself, but to promote breast cancer research and the Children's Hunger Fund. The article concludes:

But there's something lovely and breathtakingly generous about someone with newfound notoriety leveraging into something other than just more notoriety. Conan may have chosen her at random, but it turns out his one Twitter friend was an inspired choice, setting off ripples of kindness in the direction of breast cancer research and children in need. In the midst of random 140 character observations about gummy dinosaurs, sometimes, lives really do change. Killen's was just the start.

Killen did nothing to warrant O'Brien's attention. She did not earn it nor deserve it. And having found herself providentially chosen, she then chose to use what she had received not for her own benefit, but for the benefit of others.

It reminds me of the fact that we too have been providentially chosen (Rom. 8:29-30; Eph. 1:4-5,11-12; 2:8-9). We now face the same question Killen did: for whose benefit will we use what we have received?

We must always remember that God didn’t save us for OUR benefit but for the benefit of the world and for His greater Glory. God didn’t save us to bless us, but to bless the world! (cf. Matthew 25:14-30, Ephesians 2:10, 1 Peter 4:10-11)

Theologian Lesslie Newbigin drives this point home:

No one can say why it is that one was chosen and another not,…But if we cannot know for what reason one was chosen, we can most certainly know for what purpose he was chosen…He is chosen in order that through him God’s saving purpose may reach to others, and they too be reconciled to God in and through His reconciled and reconciling people…

And we can also see that wherever the missionary character of the doctrine of election is forgotten; wherever it is forgotten that we are chosen in order to be sent;…wherever men think that the purpose of election is their own salvation rather than the salvation of the world; then God’s people have betrayed their trust.”

Christian musician Keith Green lamented the too often self-centered nature of our salvation in his piercing song Asleep In The Light

Do you see, do you see / All the people sinking down
Dont you care, dont you care / Are you gonna let them drown

How can you be do numb / Not to care if they come
You close your eyes / And pretend the jobs done

Oh bless me lord, bless me lord / You know its all I ever hear
No one aches, no one hurts / No one even sheds one tear

But he cries, he weeps, he bleeds / And he cares for you needs
And you just lay back / And keep soaking it in
Oh cant you see its such a sin

So if CoCo... er, if God... chooses you - will you just sit back and soak it in or, like Killen, use what you have received for the benefit of the world?

Beyond Four Letters?

2010-03-11T11:08:00.010-05:00

Paul writes in Ephesians 4:29: "Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen."

The Bible make abundantly clear that we are to treat as holy the Name of the Lord (Exodus 20:7; Deut. 5:11; Ps. 139:20). However there are many other choice words and phrases that our culture has deemed as "unwholesome" or "profanity." Is this verse speaking of those words and phrases?

Now I'm not writing an apologetic for "four-letter words" here. However I believe we need to rightly understand the teaching of this verse because there is a far more insidious type of profanity that has infiltrated the church.

In this passage, Paul actually defines what he means by "unwholesome talk" - it is the very opposite of talk that "build[s] others up according to their needs" and "benefit[s] those who listen." The unwholesome profanity that Paul is warning against here is destructive, critical, and unproductive talk.

I was reading an article this morning about identifying potential leaders. The author makes an excellent distinction between constructive and destructive talk:

A constructive spirit of discontent. Some people would call this criticism, but there's a big difference in being constructively discontent and being critical. If somebody says, "There's got to be a better way to do this," I see if there's leadership potential by asking, "Have you ever thought about what that better way might be?"

If he says no, he is being critical, not constructive.

But if he says yes, he's challenged by a constructive spirit of discontent. That's the unscratchable itch. It is always in the leader.

People locked in the status quo are not leaders. I ask of a potential leader, Does this person believe there is always a better way to do something?

Do you see the difference between a "constructive spirit of discontent" and criticism? Constructive means "building others up" whereas criticism is destructive - not "benefit[ting] those who listen."

It is this type of unwholesome, profane, critical talk that often runs rampant through our churches. Whereas we would cringe if someone used a choice four-letter word in our midst, we often listen to critical, destructive, "unwholesome" talk without even blinking.

Maybe we need to expand our definition of profanity beyond just four letters.

Baby Steps

2010-03-10T00:01:00.000-05:00

I recently read an article were the author declared:

Everything we do [in our church] is now evaluated by this question: Does this connect with people farthest from Christ and help bring them closer to a relationship with him?

Shouldn't that be our goal - wherever a person might be, to help him or her take one step closer to God. Then another step. Then another.

It reminds me of "baby steps" in What About Bob?(see the clip below).

Baby steps?

It means setting small reasonable goals for yourself one day at a time. One tiny step at a time.

Baby steps.

For Instance, hum... When you leave this office, don't think about everything you have to do in order to get out of the building, just think to what you must do to get out of this room, and when you get to the hall, deal with that hall, and so forth... You see?

Baby steps!

Baby steps.

Oh boy! Baby steps, baby steps, baby steps through the office, baby steps out the door... It works! It works! All I have to do is just take one little step at a time, and I can do anything!

That last line is the key, "All I have to do is just take one little step at a time, and I can do anything!" Maybe we're guilty of not offering people just one little step at a time. Maybe we're guilty of overwhelming people - we require giant leaps of faith for which they are just not ready. Maybe we're guilty of confusing people - we don't explain where they are stepping to or why. With little, understandable steps we can help people towards God.

What are we doing to help those farthest away take baby steps towards God? How are we helping those who have shuffled their way towards God all their lives? How are we helping those who have tripped and fallen? How are we helping those who continue to walk the wrong way? How do we help those who are running in place? How do we help those who walk with a limp?

Does everything we do connect with people and help bring them one baby step closer to a (or in their) relationship with God?

In Summary

2010-03-09T10:38:00.004-05:00

"Here's the gospel: you're more sinful than you ever dared believe; you're more loved than you ever dared hope."
—Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian and author of The Reason for God and The Prodigal God and Counterfeit Gods

Reminds me of how the Apostle Paul expressed it in 1 Timothy 1:15: "Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst."

That's a summary worth taking to heart.

Good Advice

2010-03-08T23:06:00.003-05:00

This is from Sam Rainer's blog. Sam is speaking here (Preachers: Time to Ditch the Tie « Church Forward)

Without much regret I gave up wearing a tie while I preach several months ago. Hardly anyone in my church cared or noticed (with the exception of one anonymous hate letter in the offering plate).

After reading this article on the front page of the Wall Street Journal I now feel justified in my decision...

The article reports that a recent Gallup Poll revealed the number of men who wore ties every day to work last year dropped to a record low of 6%.

Perhaps this quote explains it all:

Some members of the neckwear association sensed the trend two years ago when, at the group’s annual luncheon in New York, a number of people turned up tieless.

This sounds like some advice I just might take...

Prodigal God

2010-03-06T23:43:00.002-05:00

Prodigal God from redeemer.tv on Vimeo

Rhetoric

2010-03-06T14:30:00.001-05:00

"[Feminism is] a socialist, anti-family, political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians." ~Pat Robertson

"Pat Robertson is a fascist, anti-intellectual, political stooge who encourages people to leave the Truth, kill their witness, practice ignorance, destroy the Name of Christ and become Pharisees." ~ me

Over-protected Christians missing out on "dangerous" life

2010-03-03T10:00:00.002-05:00

Over-protected children missing out on "dangerous" childhood: author

...These are among the activities extolled in a new book entitled Fifty Dangerous Things (You Should Let Your Children Do), the latest in a growing backlash against hyper-parents who try to insulate their children against every scrape, perceived threat and potential disappointment. Underlying this less-is-more parenting philosophy is a belief that today's bubble-wrapped children are missing out on the way childhood used to be.

Can't we say the same thing about over-protected Christians missing out on "dangerous" life? The Christian life is to be anything but safe.

Jonathan said to his armor bearer in 1 Samuel 14:6, "Jonathan said to his young armor-bearer, “Come, let’s go over to the outpost of those uncircumcised fellows. Perhaps the LORD will act in our behalf. Nothing can hinder the LORD from saving, whether by many or by few."

This entire account hinges on one word: "Perhaps." Perhaps means "maybe, possibly, conceivably, feasibly, imaginably, perchance." At the heart of this word "perhaps" is the dangerous reality "I don't know." Jonathan had no assurances, no guarantees, no promise of victory. He chose the dangerous road.

Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego replied to the king, "O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king. But even if he does not, we want you to know, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up. (Daniel 3:16-18)

These three men declare the truth that god is "able to save" but they obviously have no assurance that they will be saved from the flames: "even if he does not [save us from the flames]." There is a big difference between "able to" and "will be." Yet, they choose a dangerous road.

Coming over to us, [the prophet Agabus] took Paul's belt, tied his own hands and feet with it and said, "The Holy Spirit says, 'In this way the Jews of Jerusalem will bind the owner of this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.' "
When we heard this, we and the people there pleaded with Paul not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, "Why are you weeping and breaking my heart? I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus." When he would not be dissuaded, we gave up and said, "The Lord's will be done." (Acts 21:11-14)

Paul knew what was coming. Godly men tried to dissuade him from going. He would not be dissuaded from choosing the dangerous road.

My friends, there is NO other statement of Jesus given as much emphasis as, "Whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it." This statement is found in all four Gospels and in two of the Gospels more than once (Lk. 9:24; 14:26-27; 17:33; Mt 10:38-39; 16:24-25; Mk 8:34-35; Jn 12:25). Sounds dangerous to me.

As Erwin McManus writes in The Barbarian Way:

We created a religion using the name of Jesus Christ and convinced ourselves that God’s optimal desire for our lives was to insulate us in a spiritual bubble where we risk nothing, sacrifice nothing, lose nothing. Yet Jesus’ death wasn’t to free us from dying, but to free us from the fear of death. Jesus came to liberate us so that we could die up front and then live. Jesus Christ wants to take us to places where only dead men and women can go.

…I wonder how many of us have actually had this conversation with God: Abba, Father, Dad, would You purposefully put me in danger? I think a lot of us haven’t asked God that question because we went ahead and answered it for Him. Of course He wouldn’t do that. We’re His children. We’re family. He wouldn’t purposefully endanger us, not even to accomplish a higher or nobler purpose. Or would He? Maybe you should stop and ask Him. His answer might surprise you.

Referring back to the opening quote, we must recognize that: Churches, we are guilty of being hyper-parents who try to insulate our Christians against every scrape, perceived threat and potential disappointment. Underlying this less-is-more discipling philosophy is a belief that today's bubble-wrapped disciples are missing out on the way discipleship used to be.

Let's get dirty, bloody, and dangerous.

“Aslan a man? Certainly not. I tell you he is the King of the wood and the son of the great Emperor-Beyond-the-Sea. Don’t you know who is the King of Beasts? Aslan is a lion—the Lion, the great Lion.”

“Ooh!” said Susan. “I’d thought he was a man. Is he—quite safe? I shall feel rather nervous about meeting a lion.”

“That you will, dearie, and no mistake,” said Mrs. Beaver, “if there’s anyone who can appear before Aslan without their knees knocking, they’re either braver than most or else just silly.”

“Then he isn’t safe?” said Lucy.

“Safe?” said Mr. Beaver. “Don’t you hear what Mrs. Beaver tells you? Who said anything about being safe? ‘Course he isn’t safe. But he’s good. He’s the King, I tell you.”

The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe

Discussion Questions: How Much is Jesus Worth

2010-02-28T00:01:00.000-05:00

February 28, 2010 - Matthew 26:1-16 - How Much is Jesus Worth?

How did God speak to you personally through this passage? this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

It is easy for us to justify pampering ourselves. When was the last time you were extravagant with God and how?

Why do you think that what this woman did was a “beautiful thing”? What does the unnamed woman show you about Jesus Himself? What does the unnamed woman show you about the right way to respond to Jesus? What would it look like for you to worship as she did?

How does Jesus threaten the cultural power establishments? How does Jesus threaten our own personal power establishment?

As in the case of Judas, how does Jesus almost never meet our own personal expectations? What kind of expectations do most people have when they enter into a relationship with Jesus? How is Judas an archetype of how some people, and we ourselves, sometimes respond to Jesus?

What does it mean to you that Jesus was betrayed from within His own ranks? Even though Jesus knew it would happen, how do you think He felt when it did?

How do Christians today betray Jesus?

Read Matthew 26:1-16 again. Identify all the players and parties. How does each player respond and react to Jesus, the central character? Which character do you most identify with right now in your relationship with Jesus?: - The threatened “human establishment”?; - The “hold nothing back” unnamed woman?; - The clueless, judgmental disciples?; - Disappointed, and disillusioned Judas?

I don't serve his god

2010-02-23T14:10:00.008-05:00

Legislator: Disabled kids are God's punishment

State Delegate Bob Marshall of Manassas says disabled children are God's punishment to women who have aborted their first pregnancy.

He made that statement Thursday at a press conference to oppose state funding for Planned Parenthood.

"The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children," said Marshall, a Republican.

"In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There's a special punishment Christians would suggest."

Forgive the harshness of the cartoon at the top and my commentary here below. However this man, delegate Bob Marshall of Manassas, demonstrates a horrible ignorance of God and embodies the terrible arrogance of man.

What this man says has NOTHING to do with Christianity, the Bible, or the one true God. God, the Bible, and Christianity all receive another big black eye because this man presumes to spout off his personal ignorance and bias as Biblical truth (and normative Christian thought).

Why are children born with disabilities? Why does any tragedy befall a person? We don't know. As Reverend Al Mohler wrote in response to the Haiti earthquake:

And yet, we have no right to claim that we know why a disaster like the earthquake in Haiti happened at just that place and at just that moment.

The arrogance of human presumption is a real and present danger. We can trace the effects of a drunk driver to a car accident, but we cannot trace the effects of voodoo to an earthquake -- at least not so directly. Will God judge Haiti for its spiritual darkness? Of course. Is the judgment of God something we can claim to understand in this sense -- in the present? No, we are not given that knowledge. Jesus himself warned his disciples against this kind of presumption.

Why did no earthquake shake Nazi Germany? Why did no tsunami swallow up the killing fields of Cambodia? Why did Hurricane Katrina destroy far more evangelical churches than casinos? Why do so many murderous dictators live to old age while many missionaries die young?

Or as Reverend Billy Graham preached on September 14, 2001 at the National Cathedral on the National Day of Prayer and Remembrance following the attacks of 9/11:

But how do we understand something like this? Why does God allow evil like this to take place? Perhaps that is what you are asking now. You may even be angry at God. I want to assure you that God understands these feelings that you may have...

But what are some of the lessons we can learn? First, we are reminded of the mystery and reality of evil. I've been asked hundreds of times in my life why God allows tragedy and suffering. I have to confess that I really do not know the answer totally, even to my own satisfaction. I have to accept by faith that God is sovereign, and He's a God of love and mercy and compassion in the midst of suffering. The Bible says that God is not the author of evil. It speaks of evil as a mystery. In 1st Thessalonians 2:7 it talks about the mystery of iniquity.

Jesus Himself didn't even pull back the curtain in Luke 13:1-5 to reveal the reasons behind that great tragedy.

My friends, evil in this life stands as a great mystery. We dare not arrogantly presume to know God's mind and His purposes (as presumes Bob Marshall).

Rather, tragedy and brokenness in this world remind us of the brevity of this life and that we must think eternally, for none of us are promised tomorrow (Luke 13:1-5).

We live in an imperfect world marred by sin and our life is but a breath. In this life, we all suffer. So why does one suffer "more" than another? Why does a tragedy befall one and not another? We don't know. So don't assume. You know what they say about those who assume (delegate Bob Marshall)...

Discussion Questions: Essential

2010-02-21T00:01:00.000-05:00

02/21/2010, Discussion Questions - Essential - 1 Cor. 12:21; Eph. 4:11-16

How did God speak to you personally through this passage? this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

What are those essential things that you never leave your house without? Why those items? Why do you think church has become non-essential in the lives of so many people? What do you think that we might do about it?

A protest sign in the 1960s simply read: “Jesus Yes, the Church No!” How have you heard this sentiment expressed today? How have you seen this sentiment lived out? What are some of the reasons that someone might say this? How would you respond to someone who made this statement? How might 1 Corinthians 12:21 answer this sentiment?

Christian author Philip Yancey wrote, “And so, my journeys away from church have always circled back to the church.” What has your relationship with the church been like?

Philip Yancey also wrote, “I rejected the church for a time because I found so little grace there. I returned because I found grace nowhere else.” What has your search for grace been like?

An early-church leader wrote, “The virtuous soul that is alone . . . is like the burning coal that is alone. It will grow colder rather than hotter.” Why do you think he wrote this? Do you agree or disagree? Why?

One person said, “Christianity is not a purely intellectual, internal faith. It can be lived only in community.” Do you agree or disagree? How do you think passages like Rom. 12:4-5; 1 Cor. 12:12-27; Eph. 4:11-16 answer this?

Research in the book Essential Church?: Reclaiming a Generation of Dropouts suggests that people are looking for churches that 1) Simplify – create and articulate a simple, clear path for growing as a disciple; 2) Deepen – not “dumb down” Biblical teaching, but instead go deeper; 3) Expect – articulate clear and high expectations of church members; and 4) Multiply – be focused on reaching the world and making a difference in the Name of Jesus Christ. What is your response to this research?

An Olympic sport I would watch

2010-02-17T13:44:00.002-05:00

It's time for Olympic table hockey - Page 2 - ESPN

Think about it. What do you think takes more athletic ability -- gliding a stone across ice in a game of frozen shuffleboard [i.e.: curling], or the eye-hand coordination, reflexes and skill necessary to pass from your left wing, past a defender, to your center and then score on a goalie all in one fluid motion?

Next get Foosball as part of the Summer Olympics and I'll start training tomorrow. Game on!

Discussion Questions: Love

2010-02-14T00:01:00.001-05:00

Feb. 14, 2010 Discussion Questions, First Corinthians 13 on February 14

How did God speak to you personally through this passage? this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

Do you think what is described in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 is what most people celebrate on Valentines Day? Why or why not? How would you explain the difference between “falling in love” and “real love”? What characteristics of real love separate it from a euphoric, “in love” experience?

Do you agree or disagree with the statement “love is a choice.” Why?

Christian author Gary Thomas wrote, “The opposite of biblical love isn't hate, it's apathy.” What is your reaction to that quotation: Agree? Disagree? Don't care? Why?

How is this passage a character description of who Christ is? In what ways should this love be our character description as well? God is the source and perfect example of love. So, how can this help us with the proper building of relationships?

Who has come the closest to living out 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 toward you personally? What factor(s) enabled that person to demonstrate such love for you? What changes do you need to demonstrate this kind of love for others?

List the qualities of 1 Cor. 13:4-7. Let each participant take a turn picking & explaining how a failure to live out that quality could damage a relationship.

Which qualities in 1 Cor. 13:4-7 come most naturally to you? Which one(s) would you most like to grow in?

Given the Corinthian’s quest for spiritual gifts and power, what is Paul’s point in 1 Cor. 13:1-3? First Corinthians 13 is emphasizing the importance of love in the exercise of all spiritual gifts. Give some examples from your experience of people using spiritual gifts without love. What was the result?

Fear

2010-02-12T12:00:00.002-05:00

Pastor and author Max Lucado observes in Fearless: Imagine Your Life Without Fear that the four gospels list some 125 imperatives from Jesus' mouth. Of those, 21 urge us to "not be afraid" or "not fear" or "have courage" or "take heart" or "be of good cheer." The second most common command - to love God and neighbor - only appears eight times.

Fear affects every one of us.

Fear of what others think about you.
Fear that others won't think about you at all.
Fear of doing wrong.
Fear of not doing right.
Fear of failure.
Fear of success.
Fear you won't be accepted.
Fear that you'll be accepted by the wrong group.
Fear that you'll be accepted for the wrong reasons.
Fear of not being your true self.
Fear that others will discover your true self.
Fear of the dark.
Fear of the light.
Fear of loving.
Fear of not being loved.
Fear of isolation.
Fear of being with others.
Fear of your past.
Fear of your future.
Fear of death.
Fear of living.

Fear can paralyze or alternately motivate us to do that which we otherwise would never do. Our fear reveals our god(s). Fear influences, shapes, and transforms us in a way that only God Himself should be allowed to.

This is why Jesus so often showed up on the scene declaring "do not be afraid." He wants to be God in our lives. He wants to replace and overshadow all of those other things that we cower before and bow to serve by our action or inaction. He wants to be our God above all other gods. He wants us to "fear" Him above all other fears.

As the Psalmist writes: "His pleasure is not in the strength of the horse, nor his delight in the legs of a man; the LORD delights in those who fear him, who put their hope in his unfailing love" (Psalm 147:10-11).

The pants-less luddite

2010-02-11T15:50:00.005-05:00

The Newest Diet Trend: What Would Jesus Eat? | Food | AlterNet

"Did Jesus actually teach anything about nutrition or how we should eat? My contention is that He did, not necessarily by what He said, but by what He did," Colbert writes. "The medical and scientific facts confirm it. If we eat as Jesus ate, we will be healthier."

Reasonably enough, he explains that Jesus consumed no "fried chicken, fried country ham, fried potatoes, fried onions," no white bread, no Splenda. Blaming the spread of fast-food chains for a global health catastrophe of which Christ would not approve, Colbert avows: "Let me assure you, Jesus did not eat processed foods, too much sugar, or food additives. ... Ask yourself these two questions about everything you eat today: 1. Why do I eat this? 2. Would Jesus eat this? ... What He did eat was a diet based upon biblical principles that were focused on health and wholeness for the whole body."

No fried chicken or fast food? By golly, he's right! Let us be done with all these foods that Jesus never ate! And while we're at it, let us ALSO do away with all the other things in our lives that Christ never did/had. Jesus never owned a house (Matthew 8:20). Jesus never emailed, texted, surfed the web, watched TV, drove in an automobile, or used electricity. Jesus didn't wear pants. So shall we all become homeless, pants-less Luddites?

Further, many of the same people who would bring us "back to the Bible" for our food choices are still a little sheepish about the fact that wine and beer are the primary beverages consumed and discussed throughout the whole of Scripture. My pants-less Luddite followers, shall we also embrace a Biblical beverage selection? What would Jesus drink?

The Bible is not a diet manual. Might we learn some interesting and maybe even useful principles? Unquestionably. Would we all benefit from transitioning to a diet consisting of less processed foods, less high fructose corn syrup, and more fruits and vegetables? Undoubtedly. But let's not force the Bible to be what it was never meant to be. If these diets work for you, great. As the article concludes:

But hey: If believing that God wants them to ditch the Krispy Kremes is the only way some of our fattest fellow Americans can be convinced to shape up, then why not? More power to those who promote healthy diets to those who might never otherwise touch hippie chow with 10-foot poles.

"Hippie chow" or becoming a pants-less wine-drinking Luddite. Here's to your health.

Programs or People

2010-02-11T10:00:00.003-05:00

... As I Follow Christ: Pastoral insights after a year of living like Jesus | LeadershipJournal.net

When I began the year of living like Jesus, a youth pastor in a large church in town decided he wanted to join me. He started the beard and began reading the Gospels every week. After a few weeks, he told me, "I can't live like Jesus. I work full time in a church!" We both laughed.
But underneath the laughter was a serious point. Sometimes the church's preoccupation with programs makes it hard to follow Jesus. In listening to the Gospels over and over, I was struck by how much time Jesus spent in relationship with his disciples. We talk a lot about relationships in church, but we don't make time for them.

When a problem arises in the church, our answer is often a new program. When we evaluate our success (or failure) as a church, what we are really evaluating is our programs (and then usually evaluating them only by attendance). When we evaluate the spiritual lives of our church members, we often measure "spirituality" based upon how busy people are in and with church programs.

But do programs always (or even usually) offer the best solution to the problems that we as the Body of Christ face? Is our success or failure as a church best evaluated by attendance at a mid-week program, Sunday school program, or worship service? Are those who are more involved in and with church programs more spiritual or just more busy?

Jesus called us to make disciples (Matthew 28:18-20). Discipleship never has been a program. Discipleship is relationship.

So how do we make room for, foster, and support such discipleship relationships in our church? How do we move away from a program mentality and towards a people mentality?

Again, I come back to the message I feel God has been hammering away at: small groups are not the whole answer, but a large part of it (see: Small Groups vs. Large Group redux redux; Small Groups vs. Large Group redux; Small Groups vs. Large Group; Small Group Dynamics: Renewing our Small Group Purpose).

Unjustly Persecuted or Justly Prosecuted?

2010-02-09T10:30:00.008-05:00

Officer: U.S. missionaries had tried to take other Haitian kids - CNN.com

Silsby and four other Americans arrived for an appearance before an examining judge Monday. One of them, Paul Thomson, referred reporters to a passage in the New Testament book of 1 Corinthians, in which the apostle Paul tells early Christians, "It seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena."

The passage continues, "To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; when we are slandered, we answer kindly."

OK, I don't want to add to the overwhelming backlash against these people, but I need to speak about the blatant misapplication of Scripture made above. This team member was quoting from Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 4:9-13:

⁹For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men. ¹⁰We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored! ¹¹To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. ¹²We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; ¹³when we are slandered, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world.

It is true that Jesus promised we would have trouble in this world: "I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world." John 16:33

It is undeniable that because of our stand for Christ, there will be times we are unjustly persecuted: ¹⁷"Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their synagogues. ¹⁸On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. ¹⁹But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, ²⁰for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you." Matthew 10:17-20

So are these men and women being unjustly persecuted for the Name of Christ or are they being justly prosecuted for crimes they have committed?

The Apostle Peter writes, "If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler" (1 Peter 4:15). These men and women currently suffer and languish in a Haitian prison as criminals and meddlers - albeit it criminals and meddlers with good intentions.

Peter also writes:^"19For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. ²⁰But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God" (1 Peter 2:19-20). These men and women are receiving "a beating" for doing what was wrong (although they did it with the right motives).

Some might claim this mission team now suffers as did great civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., who repeatedly violated the law and paid the penalty. However unlike this mission team, Martin Luther King Jr. never violated the law out of ignorance, but consciously and purposely to highlight the injustice of the law itself.

Well then, is the law that these Americans violated itself unjust? Child Trafficking is a most horrible crime and a very serious problem in Haiti. The New York Times recently reported Bleak Portrait of Haiti Orphanages Raises Fears. The International Justice Mission has statements on Haiti and and child trafficking here: IJM Advocates for Measures to Protect Vulnerable from Trafficking in Haiti and here: Breakdown Of Rule Of Law Puts Haiti's Vulnerable Children At Increased Risk For Human Trafficking. Gary Haugen, president and CEO of International Justice Mission summarizes:

"The situation in Haiti is ripe for a tragic acceleration in the trafficking and exploitation of vulnerable children, and the world must stand vigilant against it."

So is the law itself unjust? Not at all! In fact, at a time such as this, the law needs much stricter enforcement! While these missionaries tried to traffick children out of Haiti with (arguably) good intentions, many more wish to traffick children out of Haiti for sexual exploitation.

The bottom line is that these men and women are not martyrs for Christ. They are not being unjustly persecuted for Christ's sake but justly prosecuted for their very serious crimes. Ignorance of the law is not a defense and good intentions do not excuse what they have done. Team member Paul Thomson's comparison of their situation to Paul's situation in 1 Corinthians 4:9-13 is unwarranted and inaccurate.

All that being said, I still pray the best for this team. Although they suffer justly for their crimes, these crimes were committed in ignorance and good faith. While a "right heart" does not - and should not - excuse such crimes, we must pray for mercy.

Discussion Questions: Win

2010-02-07T00:01:00.001-05:00

February 7, 2010 – Discussion Questions – Win! – Matthew 7:15-23

How did God speak to you personally through this passage?; this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

What does “the win” look like (how do you know that you’ve been successful): in your job? as a husband or wife? as a parent? as a Christian?

In the American church, we tend to define “the win” (success) in terms of number in attendance or how busy we are. Why do you think these might not be the best measurements of success as a church?

Read together Matthew 7:15-23
Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:15-23 parallel Matthew 21:18-19 – He is unimpressed with healthy looking, leafy, green trees that bear no fruit (cf. Luke 13:6-9). What do you think it looks like for a church to be “green and leafy” yet not be producing fruit? Why do you think we are so enamored by “green and leafy” people or churches – even if there is no fruit to show? What warning do you think individuals should take from these words? What warning should churches take?

How do you see Jesus’ description of “false prophets” embodied in our world today?

How have you seen people be “religious” and yet not follow Christ?

Why do you think outward disciplines don’t always indicate a right heart inside?

What was the fault of those eventually banished as evildoers? If the ability to prophesy, drive out demons, and perform miracles is not what Jesus means by doing the will of the Father, what is?

What are some of the “good fruits” Jesus is looking for? Do you think evaluating a person’s fruit is contradicting the mandate not to judge?

How do you think we should respond to Jesus’ words in 7:21-23?

Obedience or Transformation?

2010-02-05T12:00:00.002-05:00

I love an article that makes me think. Articles that I completely agree with simply allow me to continue cruising only half-conscious down the intellectual highway. In other words, I enjoy intellectual potholes.

Long Live Organic Church! | Christianity Today

Our God appears not to be particularly taken with efficiency, effectiveness, or our changing his world. He is mostly interested in our obedience. What he longs for is not people who make a difference in the world, but people who listen for his call and lovingly respond—no matter how absurd or impossible the command...

In his providence, God has raised up in our day men and women who rail against church-as-usual, church-as-program, church-as-institutional-management. They are telling us something true and vital about the church. They are disturbing the religious establishment, upsetting our pious social order, causing a holy chaos! These are prophets in our midst whom we should honor, and for whom we should have ears to hear.

And for whom we should pray—that they would keep their eyes not on the prize of transformation, but that their ears may continue to hear and obey that still small voice that called them into ministry in the first place. Only then will they be among us, challenging and energizing us, even when things look as disappointing as ever.

Nothing really that shocking here, so why would this be an intellectual pothole for me? Because I assume God is just like me - that He values what I value. I value efficiency and effectiveness, plus I want our church to change the world. So I just assume that God wants what I want, and that He wants it the same way that I want it.

But this article is right, God desires obedience above all - whether or not there is change / it is efficient / it is effective / etc.

Consider God's call to Ezekiel: God tells him right from the beginning that he is going to fail (Ezekiel 3:4-9). Go and preach. The people won't listen. Have fun Ezekiel.

I would have looked and said, "Ezekiel this is not an efficient use of your time and talents. You could better spend yourself elsewhere. If you're not being effective, do something differently or just go somewhere else. If you're not making a positive change in the lives of those stubborn Israelites, find another group of people to whom you might minister."

But no, God calls us to obedience to Him and not to our ideas of efficiency, effectiveness, or transformation. The problem is that it feels far more rewarding to obey the latter rather than the former.

Small Groups vs. Large Group redux redux

2010-02-03T15:09:00.002-05:00

John Piper talks about why small groups are so important. Are you with him?

Man, I feel like God is hammering away on a theme with me. God, what do you want of our church in 2010?

Small Groups vs. Large Group redux

2010-02-02T15:01:00.004-05:00

Not that long ago I posted about Small Groups vs. Large Group. I've encountered some further quotes that continue to push forward this line of thinking.

This is from a Christianity Today interview with Rob Bell (Tying the Clouds Together):

In the New Testament, there are 43 "one another" passages, and during a Sunday morning service you might be able to practice three or four of them. And as the service gets large, you can probably do fewer. A massive group setting is also dangerous. You can come, sit, listen, and go home and think, I've been to church, even if you haven't practiced any "one anothers." And with video that only gets more intense. I'm not sure that's the direction we want to be heading.

We want to be calling people to deep bonds of solidarity with one another. We may gather in a massive group, but from the stage I often say, "This is just a church service. Church is actually about caring for one another, and serving one another, and speaking truth to one another in love. Don't get the two confused."

Secondly, I was just re-reading Natural Church Development and came again across this quote:

Christian small groups are not a nice, yet dispensable hobby. No, it is the very essence of the true life of the church of Jesus Christ that is worked out in small groups.

I continue to be unable to escape the idea that small groups need move to an ever-more central place in our church's life together. How do we do that? What will it look like? What challenges are there to this happening? What resistance must first be overcome?

Discussion Questions: Simple

2010-01-31T00:01:00.001-05:00

January 31, 2010 – Discussion Questions – Simple – Matt. 11:28-30; 22:36-40

How did God speak to you personally through this passage & this week’s sermon?: - Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?; - Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?; - Any helpful information or reminders?

In this culture how have you seen people respond to “simple”?

In what ways have you tried to simplify your own life?

The religious leaders of Jesus day had developed a complex religious system with 613 laws – divided into positive and negative commands as well as binding and non-binding commands.: - Compare this complex religious system to Jesus’ words in Mt. 22:36-40. What do you notice? How do you think these two commandments simplify, “All the Law and the Prophets” (Mt. 22:40)?; - Jesus says in Matthew 11:28-30, “Take my yoke upon you and learn from me… my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” The “yoke” is a common metaphor in Judaism for the law and religious regulations. What do you think it means that Jesus’ burden was “light” and “easy” while people could “hardly carry” the “heavy” burden of the religious leaders (Matthew 23:4; Luke 11:46)?

How does Jesus’ offer in Matthew 11:28-30 speak to your need today?

“Churches with a simple process for reaching and maturing people are expanding the kingdom. Church leaders who have designed a simple biblical process to make disciples are effectively advancing the movement of the gospel.” Simple ChurchThom Rainer & Eric Geiger: - What do you think it might look like to have a “simple biblical process”?; - In what ways do you think our church is currently simple? too complex?; - In what ways do you think we might better “reach and mature people” in order to “make disciples”?

What do you think is the relationship between focus and excellence?

Do you think there is sometimes a relationship between complexity and mediocrity? Why might that be?

Time, Space, Creation

2010-01-29T15:30:00.004-05:00

"When I consider 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, the son of man that you care for him?" Psalm 8:3-4
This video is mind-blowing. To realize the immensity of creation is to realize the humility of humanity. So small, and yet so important to Him who created us.

The video articulates that there is a "edge" to both time/space. If the universe is constantly expanding, then that which is beyond the "edge of the universe" is literal nothingness - there is neither time nor space. For without time there can be no space and without space there can be no time.

It makes me think about our God - unbound by the creation He has made. As Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 1:17, "Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen."

God is ETERNAL - unbound by and outside of time. As such, if God chooses to "experience" time or speaks to us about time, it is accommodation to us time-bound creatures. He stoops to our level and He who is timeless speaks in the language of time.

"For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night." Psalm 90:4
"With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day." 2 Peter 3:8

God is IMMORTAL. The Greek word is aphthartos – and is better translated as undecaying, incorruptible, imperishable. Only those things bound by time are mortal.

Temporal things are subject to the Second Law of Thermodynamics: the Law of Entropy. Simply stated, things naturally go from a state of greater order to disorder. Over time, things break down, decay, become corrupt, change. However, God is unchanging - outside of and not influenced by time.

And, as the song Immortal, Invisible by Laura Story says, God is INVISIBLE:

Invisible our human eyes can't see / The depths of Your majesty...
Invisible You are not bound by space / But Your glory is filling this place

To be visible is to be bound to a particular location. But God is invisible, unbound, uncontainable.

So while this video reminds me of the utter immensity of the creation, more than that it reminds me of the infinite immensity of the Creator. Our God is the maker of, and far beyond and above, all creation.

So what is humanity that you are mindful of us? of me?

Unto Him be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

A story of fall and redemption

2010-01-27T09:00:00.001-05:00

Story "My New Name" | Sarah Markley
(cf. Revelation 2:17 - "I will also give [her] a white stone with a new name written on it.")

A powerful story of temptation, deception, fall, forgiveness, grace, redemption, and marriage. From her story:

No one wakes up one day and decides to commit adultery. I don’t know what other people have told you, but something like this takes a hundred million tiny poorly-made decisions layered on top of one another. Never excuses, but certainly reasons.

Compare to The Screwtape Letters by C. S. Lewis:

It does not matter how small the sins are, provided that their cumulative effect is to edge [a person] away from the Light and out into the Nothing. Murder is no better than cards if cards can do the trick. Indeed, the safest road to Hell is the gradual one -- the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts. [emphasis mine]

Discussion Questions: Defender of the Weak

2010-01-24T00:01:00.000-05:00

Jan. 24, 2010 – Discussion Questions – “Defender of the Weak”
Dt. 10:18; Ps. 68:5; 82:3-4; Prv. 14:31; 19:17; 31:8-9; Isa. 1:15-17,23; Jer. 22:16

What does this statement mean to you: “Life is Sacred.”

What do you think are some implications of the fact that humanity is created in God’s image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27; 9:6; Jam. 3:9; 1 Jn. 4:20)?

The Scriptures repeatedly describe God as a defender of the fatherless and the widow (Deut. 10:18; Psa. 68:5; Prov. 23:10-11; Jer. 22:16) - there was no weaker, more vulnerable segment of society. Following our Heavenly Father’s example, we too are to be defenders of the weak. In today’s society, who are the weak and vulnerable members of our human family (besides the unborn) that need to be defended? What might we, as the church, do to defend them?

According to Isaiah 1:11-17,23 why was the Lord not pleased with His people even though they were obeying His laws of worship? How do you think this passage is relevant to Christian worshipers today?

What do you think is the difference between actively seeking justice (Isa. 1:17), and merely avoiding committing injustice? Do you think God is pleased if we simply avoid doing what is wrong, but yet fail to seek what is right? Why or why not?

Read Prov. 14:31; 19:17; 1 Jn. 4:20. How does one’s attitude toward the poor, vulnerable, and weak reflect one’s relationship with God? According to passages such as Psa. 82:3-4; Prov. 21:13; 28:27; Matt. 25:44-45; Jam. 1:27, how should we respond to the needs of the weak, vulnerable, and powerless?

Do you think society is moving toward a greater respect for life? Why or why not? What do you think are some underlying causes that lead people to fail to respect the lives of other humans?

How do you think we can best value human life while at the same time avoid condemning those who have had abortions or in other ways made choices that devalue human life?

Read Proverbs 28:7 & 31:8-9 - What do you think we can do as individuals, as families and as the church to better defend the weak and vulnerable?

Pray for Haiti, Donate to Haiti

2010-01-22T11:30:00.007-05:00

A free MP3 titled "Song for Haiti." Listen by clicking on the song title. Download by right clicking and selecting "Save Link As."

Does God Hate Haiti? (by Rev. Al Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary)

The cross of Christ declares that Jesus loves Haiti -- and the Haitian people are the objects of his love. Christ would have us show the Haitian nation his love, and share his Gospel. In the midst of this unspeakable tragedy, Christ would have us rush to aid the suffering people of Haiti, and rush to tell the Haitian people of his love, his cross, and salvation in his name alone.

Pray for Haiti. Give to Haiti.

Small Groups vs. Large Group

2010-01-21T00:01:00.002-05:00

I just received the January 20, 2010 SmallGroups.com newsletter. It says:

In my experience, the biggest stumbling block working against authentic worship in a small group is a desire to copy what happens on Sunday mornings. (Actually, I should revise that. The biggest stumbling block is when groups don't even try to include any form of worship in their gatherings.) But when an attempt is made, I think what prevents success most often is when groups try to create a "mini worship service."

Worship in a small group is an entirely different animal than worship in a Sunday-morning service. Small-group worship should be an intimate experience. It should facilitate connection with God and with other people. And (gasp!) it may or may not involve a lot of singing.

Maybe our small group gatherings should stop trying to emulate our large group gatherings and instead become what they're meant to be: the Body of Christ in practice. Maybe it is small groups that allow us to truly become the church?

I've been reflecting upon a quote by Dave Browning from Deliberate Simplicity: How the Church Does More by Doing Less

“At CTK we have chosen small groups as our Plan A (and there is no Plan B). CTK is not a church with small groups. It’s a church of small groups. Small groups are not just another program. They are our essential and nearly exclusive activity. While most churches are organized by hundreds in hopes of reading thousands, we are organized by tens in hopes of reaching tens of thousands.” (p. 46)

I'm trying to come to grips with the distinction that Browning draws between being a church with small groups versus being a church of small groups. To determine which we are, we must answer only one question: “What is the center of our life together?” At CSBC, it is unquestionably the Sunday morning service and not our small group gatherings. Thus we are a church with, and not of, small groups.

Is this how church is supposed to be? If we were to set aside our traditions and our cultural practice for a moment and examine the Scripture, what was the center of life in the early church? Consider this sampling:

“They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts” (Acts 2:46).

“Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house…” (Acts 8:3).

“Greet also the church that meets at [Priscilla and Aquila’s] house” (Romans 16:5).

“Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house” (1 Corinthians 16:19).

“Give my greetings… to Nympha and the church in her house” (Colossians 4:15).

“To Philemon our dear friend and fellow worker… and to the church that meets in your home” (Philemon 1:2).

Notice that Paul does not greet the “small group” that meets in Philemon’s (or Priscilla’s, or Nympha’s) home – but the church. These home gatherings are never called a ministry, or subset, of the church but are always referred to as the church. Paul further reinforces this truth by describing the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians 11:17-22 as a meal shared in people’s homes (that in some cases had gotten out of control). The locus of the early church’s life together was the home gathering, not the large group gathering.

Pastor Francis Chan explored the possibility and perils of decentralizing our contemporary life together from the Sunday morning large group back into small groups in The Comfortable Substitute:

I also want to be honest about some of the dangers I see with a neighborhood church network:

1. It could easily become ingrown. As we become comfortable with our own little group, we can stop caring about and therefore reaching out to the people around us. While this is also a problem in the current church model, the neighborhood church network model seems to pose an even greater danger of this.

2. Individual groups could stray from truth. More leaders means more potential for things to go in the wrong direction.

3. By deepening involvement we increase the potential for inappropriate relationships. Again, this problem has always been present, but as we encourage deeper interaction, sin has a greater opportunity to pervert what is intended to be good.

What strikes me most about Chan’s assessment is that as you read Paul’s letters these are the exact issues faced by the early church!

It is hard to deny that the home group gathering was the center of early church life and any larger gatherings were incidental. And yet, our church life is the exact opposite - focused on the Sunday large group gathering with home groups as nice, but non-essential. It seems to me that we might do church backwards.

There are many weaknesses to the large group focused model of church. The one that stands as most prevalent and dangerous is passivity. The large group model of church relies on a small group of people to “do” church and the congregation becomes - for the most part - passive consumers. The large group model does not allow us to live out the words of 1 Corinthians 14:26: “When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church” (emphasis mine). The large group gathering does not allow nor encourage active participation, contribution, engagement, questioning, wrestling, study, or discussion.

Further, the large group gathering does not allow us to live out the “one another” commands of Scripture (*jump to "One Another" list below). In a large group we find it difficult, if not impossible, to admonish one another, bear one another’s burdens, care for one another, confess to one another, forgive one another, or the like. These are all commands that must be lived out in relationship. Relationship does not naturally happen in the large group, but in small groups - most often gathered around a shared meal in someone’s home.

Joshua Jinno emailed me a provocative article the other day, The Flabby Body of Christ, by Stephen W. Simpson. The quotation below below is extreme, but I like ideas that provoke and challenge me to reflection, even when I do not agree with them wholeheartedly:

Church is boring. I don’t ever recall hopping out of bed on Sunday morning jazzed about the sermon, even when the preacher was good. I’ve never driven to church in anticipation of hearing the choir or the worship band, even when they included remarkable musicians. When I went, it was to see my friends. I wanted to talk. Sunday school and Bible study were okay, but breezeway and parking lot conversations were the most invigorating. My utmost communion with the Body of Christ didn’t even happen on the church premises…

… I want to talk. I want to listen, but to a friend instead of a sermon. I want to be taught, but only if I can ask questions and participate in dialogue. Mostly, I just want to eat, drink, laugh, and enjoy other people. That’s where I find God.

My reflections are not an apologetic to do away with the large group gathering all together. However, I am asking if we should move small group gatherings to the center of our community life where they arguably belong. Is church backwards really church?

* The "One Another" Commands of Scripture

Be at peace with one another (Mark 9:50)
Love one another (John 13:34)
Be devoted to one another (Romans 12:10)
Honor one another (Romans 12:10)
Live in harmony with one another (Romans 12:16)
Stop passing judgment on one another (Romans 14:13)
Accept one another (Romans 15:7)
Instruct one another (Romans 15:14)
Greet one another (Romans 16:16)
Serve one another (Galatians 5:13)
Carry each other’s burdens (Galatians 6:2)
Be patient, bearing with one another in love (Ephesians 4:2)
Be kind and compassionate to one another (Ephesians 4:32)
Forgive each other (Ephesians 4:32)
Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs (Ephesians 5:19)
In humility consider others better than yourselves. (Philippians 2:3)
Teach one another (Colossians 3:16)
Admonish one another (Colossians 3:16)
Encourage each other (1 Thessalonians 4:18)
Build each other up (1 Thessalonians 5:11)
Spur one another on toward love and good deeds (Hebrews 10:24)
Do not slander one another. (James 4:11)
Don’t grumble against each other (James 5:9)
Confess your sins to each other (James 5:16)
Pray for one another (James 5:16)
Clothe yourselves with humility toward one another (1 Peter 5:5)

Change

2010-01-20T14:58:00.007-05:00

Below is analysis of the Massachusetts Senate race upset yesterday:
Analysis: Brown's win changes political narrative for 2010 - CNN.com

In many ways, the campaign in Massachusetts became a referendum not only on health care reform but also on the openness and integrity of our government process.

News Analysis - A Year Later, Voters Send a Different Message - NYTimes.com

It is hard not to view that as a repudiation of the way Mr. Obama and Democratic Congressional leaders have run things.

In response to the election, one supporter of Obama's agenda asked on Facebook, "This just guarantees two years of gridlock. How exactly is that supposed to bring change to Washington?"

Change.

Obama ran on a platform of change. Come to think of it, most politicians run on a platform of some sort of change. In fact, I as a leader use the word "change" ALL the time! We throw the word "change" around so often we stand in danger of making it synonymous with "good" (i.e.: change = good). However, this would be an erroneous correlation.

Change is neutral. Change is a good thing only when it is change to a good thing. (e.g.: if I proposed a change of American government from democracy to monarchy - few would consider that a good change).

So maybe the vote in Massachusetts wasn't against the idea of change itself, but against the content of the change? "How exactly is that supposed to bring [a specific] change to Washington?" Maybe that is the point.

Discussion Questions: Formed to Fit

2010-01-17T00:01:00.000-05:00

January 17, 2010 - Discussion Questions - Formed to Fit, Romans 12:1-8

Read Romans 12:1-2. How would you explain what it means to be “a living sacrifice” (cf. Ps. 51:16-17)? What do you think it looks like to “conform…to the pattern of this world”? What things can you do to put yourself in a place where the Holy Spirit might transform you “by the renewing of your mind”?

The Latin word for “body,” corpus, gives us the word corporate, “as a body.” Why do you think some members of the body might feel inferior or superior (Rom. 12:3; cf. 1 Cor. 12:14-24)? How do those attitudes affect the functioning of the entire body? In what ways do you think we might lessen attitudes of inferiority or superiority within our own church body?

Authoritative leadership is a spiritual gift given by God for the benefit of the church (Rom. 12:8, cf. Heb. 13:17; 1 Thes. 5:12-13). Authoritative leadership is an important - but not the most important - gift in the church (cf. Romans 12:3; 1 Cor. 12:14-24; 1 Pet. 4:10). How would you explain the importance and the role of church leadership? Why do you think there is such suspicion of authoritative leadership today? Why do you think it is important to respect and follow those in spiritual leadership (Heb. 13:7,17; 1 Thes. 5:12-13)? What do you think it looks like practically to respect those in spiritual authority?

How can you respect authority while still standing up for what you believe when you disagree with those in leadership on an important issue?

Everyone has vital role to play using “whatever gift he [or she] has received to serve others, faithfully administering God's grace in its various forms” (1 Pet. 4:10). Earl Palmer said, “You know you have the gift of speaking when the people around you have the gift of listening.” What gifts and abilities of yours have others affirmed? How can you use those gifts to administer God’s grace in its various forms?

In Rom. 12:6-8, Paul lists examples of gifts that may be found among Christians in any given church. The list is not exhaustive, for it is meant to teach principles about how we should use any gift. What principles can you discern?

Romans 12:4-8 and 1 Cor. 12:4-7 emphasize that there are different gifts but one Body. What is one ministry or work of God that you are part of right now? What is your part in this ministry? What have you seen the Spirit do in this ministry?

Pat Robertson, Haiti, and Satan

2010-01-16T17:04:00.000-05:00

Letter of the day: Haiti suffers, and Robertson sees the hand of Satan | StarTribune.com

Dear Pat Robertson,

I know that you know that all press is good press, so I appreciate the shout-out. And you make God look like a big mean bully who kicks people when they are down, so I'm all over that action. But when you say that Haiti has made a pact with me, it is totally humiliating. I may be evil incarnate, but I'm no welcher. The way you put it, making a deal with me leaves folks desperate and impoverished. Sure, in the afterlife, but when I strike bargains with people, they first get something here on earth -- glamour, beauty, talent, wealth, fame, glory, a golden fiddle. Those Haitians have nothing, and I mean nothing. And that was before the earthquake. Haven't you seen "Crossroads"? Or "Damn Yankees"? If I had a thing going with Haiti, there'd be lots of banks, skyscrapers, SUVs, exclusive night clubs, Botox -- that kind of thing. An 80 percent poverty rate is so not my style. Nothing against it -- I'm just saying: Not how I roll. You're doing great work, Pat, and I don't want to clip your wings -- just, come on, you're making me look bad. And not the good kind of bad. Keep blaming God. That's working. But leave me out of it, please. Or we may need to renegotiate your own contract.

Best, Satan
(LILY COYLE, MINNEAPOLIS)

Discussion Questions: State of the Church Address

2010-01-10T00:01:00.000-05:00

January 10, 2010 – State of the Church – Joshua 24:1-24

Icebreakers
What was one highlight of 2009 for you?

Read Joshua 24 together.
- Have one person read the narrator’s words (Joshua 24:1, 25-26, 28-33);
- another read Joshua’s words (Joshua 24:2-15, 19-20, 22a-23, 27);
- and the rest read the people’s words (Joshua 24:16-18, 21, 22b, 24).
Listen carefully to what you each say, and put yourselves into the scene. What stands out to you? How does God speak to you?

Questions
How did God speak to you personally through this passage & this week’s sermon?
- Anything you didn’t understand or for which you would have liked further clarification?
- Any thoughts or insights you found valuable?
- Any helpful information or reminders?

What reports and stories from our life together in 2009 were most exciting and encouraging to you? Why?

Where would Israel be if the Lord hadn’t intervened in Abraham’s life, in Egypt, in the desert, and in Canaan (Joshua 24:2-13)? Why is this important for Israel to remember? Where would you be if the Lord hadn’t intervened in your life? Why is this important for you to remember?

What do you think is the main message of Joshua 24 for future generations of Israelites? the main message for us today? How is Joshua 24 relevant to you personally? What truth from it do you want to take to heart and apply?

What ‘gods’ are we tempted to serve (Joshua 24:23)? What makes serving them so easy and tempting? What steps might we take to “throw away” these gods? What steps do you take to “yield” yourself daily to the true God?

What are you most excited about as you look at 2010? What are you most apprehensive about? How does remembering God’s past faithfulness help you as you face the future?

What do you most hope to see God do in and through your life in 2010? What do you most hope to see God do in and through our church in 2010?

Deceived

2010-01-07T12:48:00.005-05:00

"The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" Jeremiah 17:9

I feel lied to by my own heart.

I think that I have done the right thing, only to discover just how wrong I am. Or even worse is to be convinced that I have done something with the right motives or attitude only to find that I have been lied to. I discover that so often my motives, attitude, and actions are all tainted by the stink of my own selfishness and stupidity. My heart just can't be trusted.

No wonder after blowing it with Bathsheba, David wrote: "Create in me a pure heart, O God" (Psalm 51:10). My heart is not pure.

So then, why is it that so often we pedal this stupid advice to our teens: "Just follow your heart"? That advice sure has not served me well.

My favorite movie is Braveheart. In that movie Robert the Bruce was a Scottish noble whose character is most remembered for betraying William Wallace. However Robert the Bruce went on to redeem himself - rising up and leading his people to freedom - and become King of Scotland.

Shortly before his death, King Robert the Bruce requested that after death his heart be removed from his body and taken on crusade by a worthy knight. James Douglas, one of his closest friends, was at his bedside and took on the responsibility. The heart of Robert the Bruce was embalmed and placed in a small container that Douglas carried around his neck. In every battle that Douglas fought, he literally carried the heart of his king pressed against his chest.

In an ill-fated battle, Douglas found himself surrounded, and death was both certain and imminent. In that moment Douglas reached for the heart strapped around his neck, flung the heart into the enemy’s midst, and cried out to his men, "[Follow] the heart of your king!"

God, help me to follow the right heart.