Seven Pillars

Power of Music and Story

2012-01-14T16:32:00.000-06:00

It's been such a long time since I have posted to my blog. I wasn't sure if anyone has been reading it. Not too long ago, a visitor to our congregation said that he had been following my blog and it has benefited him.

Recently, I have been taking an interest in sacred music. The history of sacred music goes back as far as the Exodus from Egypt. The very first Psalm by God's redeemed people is a song that declared Yahweh to be a warrior. Yahweh defeated Pharaoh and all the gods of Egypt. He demonstrated that he is the universal Lord of all. The song commemorates Israel's redemption from slavery by the strength of Yahweh who cast Pharaoh and his army into the sea.

I occurs to me that there are many Psalms in scripture that are not in the book of Psalms. Many of them are interwoven with various stories and accounts of God's activity on behalf of his people. In addition to the Song of the Sea in Exodus 15, there is also Moses' song at the end of his life in Deuteronomy 32, the Song of Deborah and Barak in Judges 5, the song of Hannah in 1 Samuel 2, the song of David in 2 Samuel 22, a song of Asaph in 1 Chr 16, the song of Jonah in Jonah 2, the song of Habbakuk in Habakkuk 3, the song of Mary at Luke 1:46, and various songs in the book of Revelation.

There are powerful stories associated with these songs that give them deeper meaning. Some of the songs may perform similar functions to the festivals of Israel. For instance, the instructions for the Passover are actual interwoven with the narrative the festival commemorates (Ex 11:1-15:21). Observance of the Passover and other rites were never to be an empty ritual performed thoughtlessly. The story of God's redemption was to be passed on (Ex 12:26-27; 13:8-10, 14-15).

It seems that many of these Psalms along with the stories they are associated with perform similar functions. They were to be reminders of God's acts from the past. They were to encourage and strengthen by recalling who God is and what he has done. Singing the song as a response helps to etch these stories into the hearts of his people. In fact, here is what the Lord himself said concerning a song he instructed Moses to teach the people:

"Then it shall come about, when many evils and troubles have come upon them, that this song will testify before them as a witness . . ." (Dt 31:21a).

Songs are a powerful way to build up God's people. When you put godly words into poetry and music and not only hear it but perform it, it transforms in a way that is hard to describe. It transforms not only your thoughts, but emotions. It strengthens your devotion and commitment. It strengthens your ties to the brethren you sing along with.

Perhaps you have seen the war veteran who may get a little emotional when he sees the flag and sings the star spangled banner with his buddies. Maybe you have felt the deep meaning in a poignant moment when one sings a favorite song of a dearly departed one. The reason they are so meaningful is that there is a story behind it all.

There are stories behind the sacred songs we sing today. It may be the story behind the writing of the song, or it may be a story of someone's experience with the song. It may be a bible verse or story that the song illustrates. Whatever the case may be, I believe that it enriches the worship if we share these stories. Whether they are printed along with the songs in the song book, or printed in a separate form, I believe that the stories that enrich the song ought to be shared.

I remember hearing about a popular song writer a couple of years ago. Many are familiar with the name, Dennis Jernigan. He wrote many of the songs we sing today, such as the newer version of As The Deer, Nobody Fills My Heart, You are my All in All, When the Night is Falling, Thank you Lord, and many others.

I was touched by the story behind the writing of the song, Thank You Lord, when I heard it a couple of years ago.

Jernigan grew up in a Christian family and discovered his musical talent at a very young age. It was also at a young age that he fell into homosexuality. He later declared that even though there were a number of reasons he fell into homosexuality, it was basically because he believed lies about his father, himself, and God. He knew that his homosexuality was wrong, but he didn't know where to turn. He didn't feel he could turn to those in the church. All he heard was hateful condemnation of people like himself. People would say, "Ship them to another country" or "They all deserve to burn in Hell!" Due to this, he believed that God would not accept him and was disgusted with him. It was sometime after he went to college that his life hit a low. He finally discovered Christian brethren who loved him in spite of his struggle. He found those who were willing to be supportive during his time of deliverance from this struggle. He discovered that God did not hate him, but loved him intensely. He eventually married and had a family, and went on to write countless Christian songs to encourage others.

He realized that part of the problem was keeping struggle with sin a secret. As long as he kept it hidden, Satan had power over him. He finally confessed it his struggle to the church, and it was as if the shackles fell to the floor. Since that time, he has openly shared his struggle which has emboldened countless others struggling with secret sin to confess as well. He knew that the world needed to know that there is hope. His story of deliverance through the power of God from his homosexuality is indeed a story of hope. It was these events that led to the writing of the song, Thank You Lord.

Listen to some of the words of the song: , "Thank you for loving and setting me free, thank you for giving your life just for me how I thank you . . ." When I heard the story behind the writing of the song, it became that much more powerful. This is a constant reminder that no matter what kind of sin we struggle with in our life, God can indeed set us free. What a powerful story. What a powerful song.

The Lovely Bride

2010-02-12T12:42:00.015-06:00

You probably are acutely aware of all the pink and red decorating many of our stores. Yes, Valentine's Day is upon us yet again. I have been thinking a lot about what it represents, and what we can learn. It occurred to me that many of us preachers will preach timely messages on Thanksgiving, Mother's Day, Father's Day, Easter, and even Christmas. Yet, when it come to Valentine's Day, we usually pass that one over. I had to ask myself the question, "why?"

I can't speak for others, but I think the answer for myself is that this seems too worldly to merit preaching a message related to it. But is God completely silent on the themes this day brings to us? You can't avoid it. The commercials, the decorations in the stores, the parties in school, the gifts at the office, and many other things confront us whether we like it or not.

We are talking about romantic love. Why do we Christians avoid that topic so much at church and in religious settings? Is it completely worldly? Is it ungodly? Does the Bible condemn it? Maybe the Bible ignores it? I think what we will find it that it is far from worldly. In fact, it is a reflection of our God. God is love. When I say love, I am not talking about the little miniature fat guy that goes around shooting people with arrows. That is almost too cute for my taste. In fact, it can make romantic love seem almost silly or frivolous. What I am talking about is the special love a man and a woman have for each other. The love a man and woman have for each other is part of God's design from the very beginning when he saw that it was not good for man to be alone.

If you have never read the Song of Solomon, which is really titled the "Song of Songs" in the first chapter, which means "The Best of Songs," then you are missing out on the best love poetry ever written. The whole book is a love poem between a betrothed couple, who later appear to have gotten married. It is romantic, sensual and is part of the word of God. The couple refers to each other as the "one whom my soul loves." It speaks of being faint with love. It describes the admiration for and the delight they have in each other. In poetically describes the precious beauty that they see in each other. Some people have had a real problem with taking this book literally, as if romantic love poetry is not worthy of scripture. As a result, they interpret it as an allegory of God's love for his bride Israel or as an allegory of Christ's love for the church. But that doesn't eliminate the fact that it is still romantic love poetry. If it were merely figurative of God's love for us, the conclusion is still the same. Romantic love is not worldly but comes from God. In fact, if it were figurative, then the case is even stronger that romantic love is godly, good, and beautiful. It is a reflection of the love that God has for us. Imagine that! God describing is love for his people in romantic love poetry! However, I think we should take it as what it is. It is simply beautiful and romantic love poetry.

Romantic love does not originate from the world. It comes from the God of love. In fact, all throughout the Bible, God presents himself as the greatest lover of all. God fondly recalls the early days of his marriage to his bride, Israel. Look at this scripture:

"Then I passed by you and saw you, and behold, you were at the time for love; so I spread My skirt over you and covered your nakedness. I also swore to you and entered into a covenant with you so that you became Mine," declares the Lord GOD. Then I bathed you with water, washed off your blood from you and anointed you with oil. I also clothed you with embroidered cloth and put sandals of porpoise skin on your feet; and I wrapped you with fine linen and covered you with silk. I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your hands and a necklace around your neck. I also put a ring in your nostril, earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your dress was of fine linen, silk and embroidered cloth. You ate fine flour, honey and oil; so you were exceedingly beautiful and advanced to royalty. Then your fame went forth among the nations on account of your beauty, for it was perfect because of My splendor which I bestowed on you," declares the Lord GOD" (Ezek 16:8-14).

God loves his bride passionately. He showered all of the symbols of his love on her. Nothing was too good for her. God is the lover of lovers. When God loves, he loves passionately, and with passionate love can come intense anger, fury, and pain when the one whom your soul loves is unfaithful to you. Notice what happens next in this passage:

"But you trusted in your beauty and played the harlot because of your fame, and you poured out your harlotries on every passer-by who might be willing. You took some of your clothes, made for yourself high places of various colors and played the harlot on them, which should never come about nor happen. You also took your beautiful jewels {made} of My gold and of My silver, which I had given you, and made for yourself male images that you might play the harlot with them..." (Ezek 16:15-17).

And God continues for many more verses describing how his bride was unfaithful to him using the very jewels, clothes, and other things God gave to her. It was as if his bride had committed adultery in their own bed! After going into more details about how he beloved was unfaithful to him, he concludes:

"Thus I will judge you like women who commit adultery or shed blood are judged; and I will bring on you the blood of wrath and jealousy. I will also give you into the hands of your lovers, and they will tear down your shrines, demolish your high places, strip you of your clothing, take away your jewels, and will leave you naked and bare. They will incite a crowd against you and they will stone you and cut you to pieces with their swords. They will burn your houses with fire and execute judgments on you in the sight of many women. Then I will stop you from playing the harlot, and you will also no longer pay your lovers" (Ezek 16:38-41).

Do you think God is angry? Of course! Wouldn't you be angry and hurt if the one your soul loves cheated on you? In fact, many of us would divorce our spouse in a heartbeat. But God does no such thing. In his passionate, relentless, undying love, God does not close the book on his beloved bride. His love never dies. Notice:

"Therefore, behold, I will allure her (or "woo" her), Bring her into the wilderness And speak kindly to her. Then I will give her her vineyards from there, And the valley of Achor as a door of hope. And she will sing there as in the days of her youth, As in the day when she came up from the land of Egypt. It will come about in that day," declares the LORD, "That you will call Me Ishi And will no longer call Me Baali" (Hos 2:14-16).

Maybe some of the flavor of this is lost in translation. God woos his bride back to him after a period of anger and wrath. He puts a song in her heart again. In that day, she will no longer call him "Ba-ali," which translated means "my Lord." No longer will God be "my Lord," but "Ishi," which means "my husband." Do you see the kind of love that God has for his bride?

In fact, one of the final pictures we have in scripture of the consummation of God's plan is that of a marriage feast. In Revelation 19:7-9, God uses the image of a wedding to describe the time when his heart's desire will be fulfilled. We, God's people, are the bride, and he is eagerly anticipating that wedding day when we will be together forever.

"Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready. It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. Then he said to me, Write, 'Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.' And he said to me, 'These are true words of God'" (Rev 19:7-9).

In the next scene is the arrival of the groom. But it is unlike anything you have ever seen. Notice:

"And I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse, and He who sat on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and wages war. His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies which are in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, were following Him on white horses. From His mouth comes a sharp sword, so that with it He may strike down the nations, and He will rule them with a rod of iron; and He treads the wine press of the fierce wrath of God, the Almighty. And on His robe and on His thigh He has a name written, "KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS" (Rev 19:11-16).

The groom comes riding in on a white horse. His robe is dipped in blood, his own blood. Jesus died and was willing to go to Hades and back for his bride. Even though she has been unfaithful, he will come riding in, swoop her up on his steed and ride off into Heaven with her arms around his waist. Yes, Jesus loves his bride with an undying love.

You know, love does strange things. It makes people look past the warts and the rough edges. Sometimes people will say, "I just don't understand what he sees in her!" Maybe she is a "Plain Jane" with several flaws. Maybe she is overweight. Maybe her hair is stringy. Maybe her clothes are out of style. Maybe she is mismatched. Maybe her nose is too big. Maybe she is nothing to look at. Maybe she is a mess. But to her man she is the most beautiful thing in the world. Love causes him to look past those things to see who she really is.

Isn't that what God does? He looks past all of our rough edges, all of our filth, all of the ugliness in us. He sees what we can truly become. They say that "true love is blind." I disagree with this. Oh, I know that there can be the star struck person who is no longer capable of thinking with good judgment, but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about true love. True love is not unaware of the flaws, the warts, and the dirt. Instead, true love looks beyond these things. Listen carefully to this passage:

"Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless. So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also {does} the church, because we are members of His body. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND SHALL BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church" (Eph 5:25-32).

You see, our Savior's love for us was anything but blind. Jesus was acutely aware of the blemishes in us. He didn't turn away. He dealt with it. Why? Because of his unfailing love for us. He looked past those things to see how precious you are. You, who have been created in the image of God, are the crown of God's creation. You are his jewel and his joy. You were created as a thing of beauty and glory. Sin corrupted it, but he looked past the corruption to see you. He sanctified and cleansed you by the washing of water with the word. He purified you with his own blood. Now, you have no spot, or wrinkle, or any other such thing. He gave you a spiritual makeover.

If someone says, "I just don't understand what he sees in her," then consider what we have just looked at in this reflection. What he sees is the beauty of God in her. There is no greater beauty that this. In fact, there is no beauty other than this. The love that God has for us is the model for the love that a husband and a wife have for each other.

All of this is simply to point out that romantic love does not come from Hallmark. It does not belong to Hollywood or anything else of the world. In fact, the world usually twists and distorts the beauty of true romantic love. Romantic love comes ultimately from the God of love. We need to discard the attitude that romantic love is something worldly and not worthy of scripture.

Christians are not frigid prudes that do not know what love is. Christians are passionate people full of life that comes from the giver of life. Remember this, the next time your anniversary comes up, or the next time your beloved's birthday comes, or just when you are on your way home. We serve a God full of passionate love, and nothing is godlier when you display the same passionate love of God toward the one whom your soul loves.

We will conclude with a story that appeared in the newspapers a few years ago.

Early in 2005, John Phipps got called to work early. He boarded a train to work and went to sleep. He was jerked awake and saw smashed bits of train all over the place and a mist falling on his face. It dawned in him that he had just been in a bad train wreck. He touched the back of his head and found it bloodied. He was also bleeding below the waist. He called out for help, but no one was there. He reached out and felt a chair and saw his bloody handprint he left behind. The realization hit him: he was going to die. Without thinking, he scrawled a message on the back of that chair with his own blood. It read, "I (heart) Leslie." There was more room, so he wrote, "I (heart) my kids."

When rescuers arrived, they saw the message. Fire Captain Robert Rosario said, "I have seen some gruesome things on this job, but that moved me." Phipps was rescued and taken to the hospital. Leslie Phipps said she does not remember how she first learned about the message, but a nurse gave the family a photo that appeared in the paper. "Hallmark is never going to top this," she said. "It's moving, it's thoughtful and it's chilling all at the same time."

A dying man writing a message of love with blood is a moving one. But there is another moving love story written in blood. Jesus expressed his love for a lost world in blood. You see, due to sin, we were separated from God. But God didn't close the book on you. Jesus came and died on a cross to take away that sin, and rose from the grave to take away the power of death (2 Cor 5:15; 1 Thess 4:14). Imagine, Jesus, the creator and sustainer of the world (Col 1:15-17), became a man, became flesh like us (Jn 1:1-3; 1:14; Heb 2:14). He was able to bleed. He died a painful, humiliating death on a cross as a common criminal. His blood drained from his body. His very life left his body. He died for our sins (1 Cor 15:1-4). Sins are what has come between us and God (Isa 59:2). Sin has affected all of us. None of us are without sin (Rom 3:23). Because of sin, all of us were separated from God and at the mercy of death (James 1:15). But Jesus defeated sin by dying for our sins on the cross (1 Pet 2:24). He defeated death by raising from the grave (Rom 6:9; 1 Cor 15:20-23).

Now, the only thing that can stand between you and God is you. God wants you to believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead and confess your faith in Jesus as your risen Lord (Rom 10:9). He wants you to turn your life around serve him and no one else. He wants you to be godly in all things, to change. The Bible calls this reprentance (2 Pet 3:9; Rom 2:4-5; Luke 13:3). He wants you to be baptized (Acts 2:38). Notice this passage:

"Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;for he who has died is freed from sin" (Rom 6:3-7).

According to this, when you are baptized, you are baptized into his death, you are buried with him, and raised to walk in a new life. His death is where he shed his blood and died. When we are baptized into his death, his death becomes our own death. His blood becomes ours and it washes away our sins. According to what the passage says, that body of sin is done away with. That sin that separates you from God is destroyed. You are freed from it.

If you have not done these things, you are still separated from God and are lost. If the Lord were to come right now, or if you were to die to today, you would not go to be with the Lord but be in complete misery in Hell. God doesn't want that for you. So, if you need to do any of these things, then don't wait.

The Emperor Has No Clothes: The Truth About the Gospel

2009-02-06T16:08:00.008-06:00

About this time last week I was absolutely exhausted, but it a great sort of way. There is nothing more precious that being able to share the Gospel with someone and to witness how God works on their hearts, bringing them into his grace and into the family of God. There is no greater joy than to share in the joy of a new birth into Christ. There is no greater satisfaction than to welcome a new brother and sister into the family of God. Is it possible to be exhausted and energized at the same time? Last week proved that it is.

I would like to share some insights I have from the campaign. It was wonderful to see more and more younger cadre involved than in the past, especially teenagers.

You know, it has been said that human nature is a web of contradictions. This is so true. Jeremiah 17:9 reminds us that "The heart is more deceitful that all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it?" This seems to suggest that we can deceive ourselves into accepting blatant contradictions and yet feel okay about it. We have the capacity to feel secure, at peace, and all right even when it is clearly evident that everything is not all right.

Why can't you follow your heart? Why can't you trust it? The reason is that it has been corrupted by sin. According to this verse, you cannot trust your heart. It can deceive you.

Prov 3:5-8 says, "Trust in the LORD with all your heart And do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He will make your paths straight. Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and turn away from evil. It will be healing to your body And refreshment to your bones."

Prov 4:23 says, "Watch over your heart with all diligence, For from it flow the springs of life."

We need to evaluate our heart according to the word of God. We need to be honest with ourselves about ourselves. In thinking about this, I am reminded of the story of the Emperor's New Clothes.

Most of us have heard the story of The Emperor’s New Clothes. The arrogant Emperor wanted the finest clothes possible and hired some renowned fashion designers to work on his new clothes. But these designers were con-men. They didn't know anything about making clothes, but they knew something about getting people to part with their money.

They pretended to get to work. Time began to drag on and the emperor became impatient. He demanded to see what they had done so far. Before showing the emperor what they had so far, they assured him that only the truly noble, wise, and best of people could see and appreciate the fine clothes.

When the king looked at the material on the loom, he saw nothing. When the con-men held up the "clothes," he saw only air. But, everyone else was saying how beautiful and elegant the clothes looked. Even the king's counselors agreed they clothes were fantastic because they did not want to look unwise. The king did not want to appear unwise either, so he entered into the self-deception. This process of deceit continued until the money was in the pocket of the so-called tailors and the king was marching down the street with great pomp and nothing else.

Finally, someone blew the whistle. A little boy said, “The Emperor has no clothes!” At this moment, when the truth was spoken, everyone knew what was happening. The veil was lifted. The kingdom-wide denial and deceit was replaced with clarity and truth. The Emperor indeed was buck-naked.

This story illustrates how even a group of people can buy into deceit. In fact, there is a lie that has been sold to Christians all over the world. It has been repeated by many people who seem to know what they are talking about so that many subjects of the kingdom are afraid to say, "The Emperor has no Clothes!"

What is this message, this lie, this deceit that so many followers of Jesus hear and accept?

Here it is: “Christians are too forceful and blunt with their faith and we need to settle down, back off, and be more subtle.”

Tell me you haven't heard that message preached with passion! Over and over we hear this message from speakers, articles, teachers, and many others. According to this message, Christians are scaring people off with our bold and pushy evangelism methods. Therefore, we need to cool off, back off, and settle down. We are offending people who would otherwise accept Jesus. If we would back off, then people would start coming to Christ again.

I want to tell you that this is a lie. I don't think most of those who have bought into this lie and has passed in on has done so maliciously. I myself used to be one of those people. I used to read articles and hear speakers talk about all of the damage done by Bible-thumpers. A few years ago, I saw a Nooma video that portrayed a guy on a busy city street with a bull horn blasting a Christian message into the faces of pedestrians and driving them away. The message of this video seemed to be that there is a huge problem of Christians driving people away by blasting them with the message and scaring them away. I said to myself, "Boy, I sure don't want to be like that guy, so I'd better back off and quiet down. I don't want to offend anyone."

But you know what? That bullhorn guy is nothing more than a caricature. He is a myth. This does not characterize the typical disciple of Christ. That guy is a rare exception. The typical Christian is NOT like that guy. The typical Christian is not overzealous, loud, invasive, and offensive with the message. The typical Christian is usually just the opposite. So, the message that the typical Christian needs is not that they need to back off.

What I have found is that being overzealous and too forceful with the Gospel is not a problem in ANY congregation that I have been at. The majority of those I have met do not believe their church members are too forceful and driving people away and need to back off. In fact, most believe that they need to have more passion, boldness and commitment to evangelism, not the other way around.

So, here is what I am saying - "The Emperor has no clothes!"

The message that "Christians are too bold and need to back off because we are driving people away" is a lie! The last couple of weeks in Mesa Arizona, I once again witnessed Christians who were both bold and compassionate in taking the Gospel to those who needed to hear it.

Let me tell you some of my personal stories and observations.

The day after we arrived in Mesa, I knocked on the door of a Hispanic family. They had come on hard times and were in need of some food, which we provided. They invited us in and we got to get acquainted. I indicated that we were also concerned about their spiritual needs and asked them how they and the Lord were doing, and if they knew for sure without a doubt they would go to Heaven if the Lord were to come right then. They said they had hoped so. We were there for about another hour, showing them how they could know for sure through the scriptures. Just as we were about to get started, their son in law, Troy, walked in. He sat down in the corner, and I asked him if he would like to follow along too. He didn't seem real interested, but went ahead and took a Bible and followed along. The Father spoke very little English, and left about part way through the study. When we got to the end, the mother said she just wasn't ready yet. Troy looked over at us, his eyes were wide open and this point. He said, "I am ready." I asked, "Ready for what? To obey the Gospel?" He nodded vigorously. That was the first one to obey the Gospel after the campaign had gotten started. There had already been one before the campaign officially got started. Troy was there every time we had a meeting or a meal. He said, "This is my family, this is where I belong."

Then there was Rich. He had walked in on Wednesday evening. Us Cadre had all assumed that he was a member there. The members probably assumed he was Cadre. We were doing training that night and had split up into groups for it. We were going through the approach and the study itself. It became evident that he was not a Christian because he had not obeyed the Gospel. He had just moved to the area and had attended some other churches. He had been reading his Bible and had wanted to be baptized, but he could not find any ministers who would baptize him. He knew he needed to do it, but he did not know why. It wasn't until going through this "training" that he finally understood why. Afterward, he also obeyed the Gospel.

Then there was a young woman named Ashley whom we met the last day we were there. After knocking on her door, we learned that her hours had been cut at work and she was really hurting financially. We gave her a food box and she got excited because it had bathroom tissues in it. She said that she was just about out. She told us that we had made her day. We were not able to study with her because she was in the process of getting ready for work. She asked if we could come back on Monday. I told her that I would be leaving the following morning, but that the other two team members, one of which was a member there, would be back.

That afternoon we met a young man named Andrew. He had a very rough life. He was impressed that we took the time to bring help and to listen to him and pray for him. We were not able to get to the study because he had to go get his wife and they had errands to run. He wanted us to come back tomorrow. I told him I would be leaving, and before I could explain that the other team members could come, he was already begging us to send someone else.

I did not see anyone with a bull horn driving people away. I didn't see anyone get offended that we came to their door. More often than not, we were greeted in a positive way, even by those who were not interested in talking to us.

As I reflect on all that happened on this campaign, I realized that this one was a little different. Not as many were obeying the Gospel…at first. Several who obeyed were the results of following up with them after we had the initial study with them. Many were cautious. It wasn't until we found out a little more about the area that we understood why. That area is repeatedly bombarded by cults. We were in the heart of Mormon country. There was a temple, and the place was saturated with Mormon missionaries who were out in force constantly. This, in addition to heavy activity by Jehovah's Witnesses made people cautious. However, this did not mean that they were not open to the truth. After a week, only ten had obeyed the Gospel. Then in one day, there were four. The following day there were five. There were seventeen who had obeyed the Gospel on Friday night, the last full day of the campaign. By the time the campaign was fully over, 26 people had obeyed the Gospel. The last couple days, many of us focused on going back to those whom we had studies with, especially those who were uneasy, fidgeting, or as one lady put it, "this is sending chills all over my body." It was obvious that God was working on their hearts, so we followed up on them, and many responded after a repeat visit.

Was this bold? Of course it was! Did it drive people away? Not in the least. In fact, my Dad was involved in a study that demonstrates that sharing the Gospel with boldness and compassion does not drive people away.

A young couple came to the Revival one evening, Alex and Joni. They said that some stranger had come into the beauty supply where she worked. The lady invited them to come, so they did. One of the members invited them to come and sit with them. Everyone was friendly to this couple and several visited with them awhile after it was over. They were headed for the door, and my Dad wondered if anyone had asked them the question. So he got to them while they were still in the auditorium and asked them the question. This led to a study in the church library there. Dad grabbed a couple from the church to join them in the study. After about an hour, most of the people were gone. I was in the auditorium visiting with some other folks, when they all came in the auditorium and Dad announced that they were going to obey the Gospel. Someone went out to the RV's in the parking lot, and some of the Cadre came back into the building. Dad baptized Alex, then Alex baptized his wife. Dad told me later that it looked like no one had asked them the question, and he didn't want them to leave without having been asked the question. They might have never come back! They are now our brother and sister and are a part of the family. They were so excited, and they said that had no idea when they showed up that all these good things would happen.

Was it forward for Dad to ask them the question? Yes it was. Was it bold? Certainly. Did it drive them away? No. In fact it was because he asked the question that Dad was able to share the Gospel with them.

These stories demonstrate that what we have been hearing is a lie! I have decided no longer to believe nor promote this lie. I have decided to say, "The Emperor has no clothes!"

Let me ask you, when you hear these real life stories, doesn't that excite you? It occurs to me that it excites those in my home congregation not only because of what God is doing, but because they have participated in an indirect way. I was doing the work of an evangelist, but my financial support was coming from my home congregation. Because of this, their presence was felt in Mesa. There were several preachers in the cadre just like myself. So, there were a lot of people who had a part in this effort. Our brothers and sisters in Mesa were so grateful that so many brethren came from all over the country to help them. Not all of them came in RVs, and not all were retired. Several came from West Virginia, and one college aged girl came from Queens. There were also a group that came from California. So people came from all over. I was thrilled to see what God could do even in the heart of Mormon country.

What was the purpose of this message? To encourage you in two ways.

1. Don't be afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes. The bull horn guy is for the most part a myth. I am sure there are probably a couple out there somewhere. But for every one bull horn guy, there are probably a few thousand Christians who are way too timid with the Gospel. The next time someone says we need to back off and settle down, politely tell them that the emperor has no clothes.

Rom 1:16 says, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes." The power is not in being good yet timid and quiet about the Gospel so that people are "attracted" to our goodness and will eventually figure out that they need to obey the Gospel. The power is not in a finely crafted worship service that will attract outsiders. In fact, if people are looking for a good show, they are not going to go to church to find it. The power is not in having a nice yard or an impressive looking church building. The power is not even in having a dynamic preacher in the pulpit every week. The power of salvation is in the Gospel. 1 Cor 15:1-4 reminds us of what this Gospel, what this "good news" is. Jesus died for our sins, he was buried, and he rose from the third day. Why is this good news? It is because sin has separated us from God. Isaiah 59:2 says that our iniquities have separated us from God and our sins have hidden his face from us so that he will not hear. Therefore we need a mediator to bring us and God together. 1 Tim 2:5 says there is one God and one mediator between men and God, the man Christ Jesus. Jesus became a mediator by becoming a man and dying for our sins. He rose from the grave and through his resurrection, we also can have life and immortality. He defeated sin at the cross and defeated death when he rose from the grave. He is coming back and will bring us into his eternal kingdom, into Heaven, and into the very presence of God himself. This is the Gospel! This is the good news! This is the power of salvation to everyone who believes.

With the Gospel comes a call to action. If this is what our Lord did, what is it that we are to do? 2 Thessalonians 1:8 indicates that we are to obey the Gospel. Remember that the Gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. We are also to "die with him, be buried with him, and to be raised with him."

Rom 6:3-8 says, "Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; for he who has died is freed from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him"

When we are baptized, we die with him we are buried with him, and we are raised with him to walk in newness of life. Our old self with all its sin is crucified with him and that body of sin is done away with. Remember that it was sin that separated us from God. We die with him, and we are freed from sin. We are raised him, therefore we will live with him. This is how we obey the Gospel. This is when Jesus washes away our sins.

2. The second reason I brought you this message is to encourage us to share the Gospel in the manner of Christ and in the manner of his Apostles. They preached it with confidence and compassion. If you don't preach it with confidence, you may wind up leaving part of it out, or watering it down to keep from possible offending people. Don't buy into the lie that says Christians needs to back off. We need to preach it with confidence, and compassion. If you don't preach it with compassion, then part of the message is missing. The Gospel is by nature a compassionate message. This is why ministries of compassion accompanied the Gospel of the kingdom in the ministry of Christ. This is why early Christians were hospitable, taking care of not only of their own poor in the household of faith, but others as well. This is why they demonstrated the love of God even to the least of these. Ministries of compassion must always be hand in hand with the preaching of the Gospel. You notice this even in the ministry of Christ. He fed their bellies with bread, then he fed their souls with the bread of life. It is God's plan that the church preaches the Gospel with confidence and compassion.

This is why compassion, benevolence, and hospitality are integral parts of kingdom activity. Not that we are trying to solve the world's problems, because only God can and will do that. Rather it is demonstrating the very character of God who is gracious and compassionate and is the very definition of love. This is why we were giving away food, clothing, and in many cases just listening to people, praying for them, and making a friend.

Matthew 9:35-38 says this, "Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness. Seeing the people, He felt compassion for them, because they were distressed and dispirited like sheep without a shepherd. Then He *said to His disciples, 'The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest.' "

The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. What I have been seeing is that the harvest is still plentiful. In spite of the fact that this country has become more secular, more pagan, more antagonistic toward Christianity, more embracing of eastern religions, the harvest is STILL plentiful. People are hungry for God and are hungry for his spiritual truth, yet many of them are not sure where to look. This is where the church comes in. We are the light of the world. We are the salt of the earth. We are God's ambassadors. We are the pillar and support of truth. We are God's spiritual house sent to proclaim the excellencies of God. We are the kingdom of God placed alongside the kingdom of this world.

We have what the world needs. The world needs the Gospel. It is the power of salvation. When one obeys the Gospel, he receives the Holy Spirit, the helper that transforms him into the image of Christ. A lot of people talk about the need for things to change in this country. There can be no real and lasting change without the power of God through the Gospel.

What about you? How are you and the Lord doing? Do you know for sure and without a doubt that if the Lord were to come right now, you would go to Heaven to be with him? However you answer that question, whether it is yes, no, or I am not sure, do not rely on the feeling of your heart. 1 John 5:13 says we can know that we have eternal life through what has been written. It is not by your feelings. If your answer is "yes," and the reason is because you know in your heart, then we need to talk. If you answer is no I would not go to Heaven, then we need to talk. If you answer is "I am not sure," then we need to talk. I can show you what has been written, what God has done, and what God wants you to do.

If you have already obeyed the Gospel, then you are a Christian whose sins have been washed away. Part of your mission is to share the Gospel with confidence and compassion. If someone tells you that you are overconfident, that you need to settle down and back off, that you just need only to "attract" people to Christ and wait for them to come to you, then it is time to politely say, "The emperor has no clothes."

Outside of the Box?

2008-10-14T11:59:00.015-05:00

In a conversation, someone posed an interesting and much needed question to me. "Is it wise to think outside of the box?" There are many, including myself, who have used this phrase. Wisdom would seem to dictate that this, like many other things, should have a caveat to it. Many things pressed to the extreme can be self-defeating and have just the opposite effect we desire. As I reflect on this question, I am not thinking of things such as science, medicine, and technology. We all can readily see the great progress and improvements we have had in these areas due to "outside the box" thinking. Of course, there are some serious caveats, such as the issues associated with cloning, abortion, and other things that "outside the box" thinking has brought. There still has to be some sort of limitation when you go outside the box, especially in the area of ethics. But this is not what I am thinking about.

I am thinking about our faith in God as we live it out in our daily life. Is it wise to "think outside the box" as it relates to my faith? As I reflect on this, I need to back up and ask myself the question, "What does this phrase mean?" The idea of a "box" suggests limitation. Limitation is not inherently a bad thing. God placed bounds on the sea so that it would not inundate the dry land. This is a limitation that is a blessing to us land-lovers. God also set a boundary between night and day. Without this limitation, our world would either freeze to death or burn up. God gave the Torah to his people, which also had limitations. It would be similar to putting a fence around the yard to keep the children from wandering out into traffic. Keeping the Torah was a limitation that God gave for the good of his people. God has limited even our life span. In the beginning, it appears that humans lived nearly a thousand years. During that time, the world became very wicked, and God was grieved about what had happened to man. Imagine the amount of knowledge, wisdom, and technical expertise you could amass if you could live that long! Since sin had corrupted mankind, imagine the amount of godless pride you could also amass as well! God decided to limit man's years. Though the text does not say whether this was a punishment or gift, this limitation can be seen as a blessing by limiting the amount of pride we could amass in a lifetime. So, a box is not inherently a bad thing.

On the other had, a box is not inherently a good thing either. If the box means falling short of God's will, it is actually a bad thing. Those who think outside of the box cast off whatever falls short of God's will. Some examples include people like Hezekiah who did not accept the status quo and enacted reforms in order to be more faithful to Yahweh. He broke down the high places, which had been around for so long, the people accepted them as a part of life. He also destroyed the bronze serpent that God had instructed Moses to build because Israel began to venerate it and burn incense to it. Then there was Josiah, who also enacted reforms that not only included destroying the high places, but also destroyed the first shrine that Jereboam ben Nebat had built at the beginning of his reign 300 years earlier. He even went so far as disinterring the graves associated with the high places and burning the bones on their altars in order to defile them. This was definitely "outside of the box." For the Jews, especially the Pharisees, Jesus himself was way outside of the box. His actions on the Sabbath, his revolutionary teachings about the nature of greatness, mercy, and justice were all outside of the box. The inclusion of the Gentiles into the Kingdom was way outside the box for many Jews, including Peter the Apostle. He had a lot of trouble with accepting this to be the new norm. Throughout history, there have been others who have went outside the box, such as John Wycliff, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, Menno Simons, John Wesley, Alexander Campbell and Pardee Butler. Going outside of the box resulted in death threats for people like these. One translated the Bible into a language all people would be able to read and not just those with advanced degrees and training. Another was very innovative and used the printing press to distribute scriptures to the common man. One was a professor of theology that dared to question the doctrines, practices, and beliefs of the church. Another taught that as God's people, we are not of the world; therefore there is no such thing as a "state church." God's people are citizens of Heaven. One decided to preach the Gospel outside in the open air to the lowliest classes of people who did not attend a Cathedral, and then enrolled them in classes dealing with holy living after their conversion. Before this, preaching was confined to the cathedral to those acceptable classes of people who attended. Another taught that we should discard all creeds because they tend to be divisive, and that our only authority should be the word of God, and that all who claim to be Christians should unite rather than divide into various sects. Then there were those who made moves to abolish slavery, speaking out against those brethren who waffled on the issue and those who supported slavery. Many brethren not only accepted, but actively promoted slavery. For many Americans, including Christians, the rejecting of slavery was most definitely outside of the box. These ideas were revolutionary. They were outside the box. So, a box is not inherently a good thing either.

So, what of the question? Is it wise to think outside the box? I suppose it depends on what you mean by the "box." By itself, this is a nebulous question.

As I reflect further, it occurs to me that we all have a "box." It is our way of understanding the nature of our world, our humanity, and the nature of the God who created it. It consists of what we think is right, good, and proper. Fifteen hundred years ago, the "box" included the belief in "Christian" monarchies, and that the government and God's kingdom were one and the same. Since the time of the reformation, especially the Anabaptists, that has changed. This is one example of something in the box that did not belong there.

I remember putting together some toolboxes at one of my jobs. Everyone's toolbox had to be identical to the master toolbox, which was the standard. There was the master toolbox, and there was my toolbox. They had to match. Once put together, everyone was issued one of these toolboxes to go out and do their jobs. If something was missing from the box, no one could check out until the missing tool was found. I remember one time when no one could go home for a couple of hours because someone on the shift did not account for all his tools and we all wound up having to go look for it. This was not just an issue about missing tools, but about tools being left in equipment that could cause damage, dollars, or even death. Tools left in running machinery can be disastrous. Each tools was shadowed, which made it easy to identify what was supposed to be in that particular spot in the toolbox. This was a reflection of the "standard" of what was supposed to be in the toolbox.

It occurs to me as I think about our "box," the question should not merely be one of whether we are thinking inside or outside the box, but what is the standard for the box? What is in the box may not belong there, and thinking outside the box may be correct or better depending on what is inside the box. Without a standard, it merely becomes a subjective enterprise - "My box is better than your box."

God is a God of both freedom and limits. When God freed Israel from slavery, he brought them to Sinai and gave them the Torah, which included the limits and boundaries for their daily lives. When God created the world, he set limits for the day and night, for the land and the sea, so that they would not transgress and bring chaos and disorder to the order and beauty of the world that he had created. Limits and order go together. Limits and beauty are cousins to each other.

Unrestrained freedom brings gross distortions to what God has created. One well-known example of this is Joseph Smith and his Mormon Church with all its strange teachings. The teaching that humans become God, that Jesus and Satan were at one time brothers, that blackness of the skin is God's curse, and other such teachings are fabrications of an imaginative mind and not from the true word of God. This manufactured religion is just one example of unrestrained freedom.

On the other hand, unrestrained restrictions can also bring gross distortions to what God has created. An example is the medieval church with its inquisitions. Religious inquiry, questioning the status quo, reading the Bible for yourself, and forming your own conclusions, and things of this nature were ruthlessly suppressed. This is an example of unrestrained restriction.

What is inside the box in each of these cases? What is outside the box? It depends on your perspective. Once again, the question should not merely be whether we think and operate in the box our outside the box, but what is the standard? Going with the standard may mean going "outside the box." From God's perspective, our going "outside the box" may be getting back in the box.

The most basic questions should consist of things such as, "What is the nature of God?" "What is the nature of man?" "What is God's desire?" "How has God instructed us to serve him?" "What are my presuppositions?" "How does my background color my understanding of the world, of myself, my God, and his will for me?" "How does God guide us through these questions?" "How much time do I spend in reading his word, in prayer, in inquiry, in confession and prayer?" And the questions go on. That we should "examine ourselves" is an imperative given to us by God. The answers, as they come from God, gives us a picture of the "standard" for the box.

So, is it wise to think outside the box? If our beliefs, practices, and attitudes fall short, and "outside the box" entails a change of practice, beliefs and attitudes that are more inline with what God has set as the standard, then the answer is clearly "yes." Not only is it wise, it is mandated. Without this sort of thing, there would have been no reformation, and no restoration movement, and no back to the Bible movements. We would still be trapped in the dark ages. God has given us a "box," so to speak. He has painted a picture of what goes in the box and what does not belong in the box. It takes commitment, courage, and a humble, repentant heart to make needed changes, especially when we become so comfortable with the box that we think that this is inherently the way it is supposed to be, as many did in the dark ages.

How about some specific issues? Does evangelism happen through building church buildings? What does God's word say about this? How does the character of God illuminate this question? God modeled evangelism through the incarnation, and its implications are far reaching. In fact, any reflection on evangelism, methods, etc. should begin with a theological reflection on the incarnation and its implications (Jn 1:1-14; 14:7-11; 15:15-16; 20:21). The example in Christ, passed on to his Apostles, and to the Apostolic church, are all connected to this. Incarnation means "fleshing out" the message in such a way that it can be heard, understood, and even identified with (Acts 2:14-39; 17:22-31). It is not tied to a culture, language, or place (Mt 28:18-20; Acts 1:8). As many cross-cultural missionaries learning in past decades, it speaks the language of the people, uses analogies of the people, and in turn transforms people through the power of the Gospel which can be communicated in any language and in any culture. Is evangelism cross-cultural right here in our own country? Since the Christian faith is not tied to any culture, language, or people, then any evangelism is inherently cross-cultural. Evangelism in the USA is every bit as cross-cultural as evangelism any place else. Perhaps this is why more new congregations that are effective are less concerned about owning a building, and more concerned about being transformed into the image of Christ. Maybe this is why some Christian assemblies are happening in homes, coffee-shops, rented halls, and other conventional places. Maybe this is why many are seeing Christian faith as not tied to a "place," like a church building, but tied to a people who are tied to Christ. Maybe this is why some have determined to "be" the church rather than "go" to church. Is this outside the box? It depends on the nature of your box.

What about the nature of a Christian assembly? What is the thrust, the emphasis. Is it worship? Is it evangelism? Is it to put on a production? Is it edification? There are some more specific instructions concerning assemblies than there are methods of evangelism. The underlying theological foundation for Christian assemblies has to do with love not only for God, but love for God expresses as love for one another. The "body of Christ" (1 Cor 12) has a focus on edification in Christian assemblies (1 Cor 14; Eph 4). This makes worship distinct. It is not merely a performance by some professional worshippers to God as in the Old Testament, but a participatory event where everyone sings and worships not only to God, be especially "to one another" to edify and build up in the name of Christ (1 Cor 14:26). In Christian assemblies, there should be "mutual edification." A Cappella congregational singing to "one another" is the music of mutual edification (Eph 5:19). It is something all can participate in. It is not the time to put on a Christian production for an audience, nor is it a time for evangelism. It is a time for mutual edification even in the actions of worship. Praise bands, professional musicians, orchestras, etc., while they can be glorious in the sounds they produce for God, are not appropriate for a time where there needs to be "mutual edification," which entails participation from the whole congregation. This is why the synagogue service entailed congregational A Cappella singing. The focus there was on mutual edification. It was not like temple worship where the focus was on worship to God by the best professional musicians who were able to make beautiful music for God. Even though God approved of (Ps 150), and in one case even commanded such worship in the Old Testament (2 Chr 29:25), this is not the focus of Christian worship in the New Testament. Since we ourselves are temples of God, we ourselves make melody in our heart and we each sing to one another in worship for mutual edification. Is this outside the box? Once again, it depends on your box. For many, doing away with the choir, the band, etc. would definitely be outside the box. Or, since it is in harmony with what we see in scripture and with the practice of the Apostolic church, perhaps it is a return to "inside the box."

What about something as basic as conversion? There are a variety of ways people say it happens. Nearly all agree it involves faith. There is no question about this. Jesus is God who came to earth in the flesh (Jn 1:14), died on the cross for the remission of our sins, was buried, and raised on the third day (1 Cor 15:1-4), and ascended to the right hand of God and reigns as Lord in his spiritual kingdom (1 Pet 3:22) where he has given the Spirit (Acts 2:38) and will one day return to resurrect humanity (1 Thess 4:9-5:11), some to a resurrection of eternal life, and others to a resurrection of judgment (Jn 5:29). Most agree that this is the object of our faith, what is central to it. However, how is faith to be initially expressed? Has God given any instruction on this? In the New Testament examples in the book of Acts, conversion involved a faith that included the following: repentance, confession, baptism, and reception of the Holy Spirit. Many disagree on the place of baptism. Some relegate it to a sacrament, others dismiss it as unnecessary, and some claim that if it is performed as a part of the salvation process, then in invalidates your salvation since you are trying to be saved by works. However, God has clearly revealed that baptism is rich with meaning and is intimately tied to your salvation. As an expression of faith and conversion, it is a dying to your self (Rom 6:1-8). You are passive as you are lowered into the watery grave and raised to walk in newness of life. You become a new person. Jesus washes away all your sins as you express your faith. In fact, you cannot express your faith without action. Faith without action is no faith at all (James 2:14-24). Even the demons "believe" and shudder. In baptism we are buried with him and are raised to walk in newness of life (Rom 6:4). As Noah was saved through the water, we are also saved through the water by the resurrection of Christ and the power of his blood he shed on the cross (1 Pet 3:20-22). Baptism is like the Christian's wedding ceremony to Christ (Eph 5:25-27). This is where you are united with him and start your new life in him. Bottom line is that we do not save ourselves, Christ saves us when we express our faith in him in the way he has prescribed. So, baptism (as an expression of faith) is intimately tied to our salvation. Is this outside the box? Once again, it depends on what is in your box. To practice Christian conversion in this way may seem outside the box, but in reality, it may be a return back into the box.

And the list goes on and on. So, is it wise to think outside the box? Perhaps this long reflection will help you to better answer this question.

Our Creed

2008-04-24T23:51:00.011-05:00

Studying the history of creeds is interesting. The earliest creeds arose in reaction to heretics who were teaching heresy concerning the nature of God and Christ. They served to unite the church in sound doctrine against false teaching. When the church and government became fused, resulting in the paganization of the church and the christianization of society, many abuses, aberrant practices, and erroneous teachings flooded into the church. Worldly values such as power and authority overshadowed biblical ones such as humility and meekness and deeply affected the leadership of the church in a negative way. With the Reformation came an explosion of reform movements all over the world. In order to unite and define their distinct belief and practice, these movements formulated creeds. These dizzying array of creeds tended to divide and fracture these movements into various sects, all claiming to be true Christianity.

On the American frontier, there were two "Great Awakenings." During this time there was an emphasis among many people on going back to the Bible alone. One of the mottos from this time period was, "No creed but the Bible." Many leaders believed that if we discarded denominational names and creeds, we all could unite upon the simplicity of the Gospel as presented in the Bible. We would all be simply, "Christians," nothing more. This was a vast improvement on former movements that tended to formulate creeds that tended only to bring more division and more Christian sects. Effort of many of these pioneers were designed to move away from sectarian Christianity on the basis of the Bible alone as the basis for unity.

Churches of Christ and Christian Churches are descendents of this back-to-the-Bible movement. Historians have often said that one of the greatest strengths of this movement was its emphasis on biblical teaching and authority. The article in Mead's Handbook of Denominations in the United States says that it is remarkable that Churches of Christ, without any centralized government, headquarters, or creed, have the level of uniformity that they do in regards to doctrine and practice. There was for the most part a large degree of unity among Churches of Christ based in large part on biblical teaching without an official creed.

However, some in their zeal to return to the Bible may have missed the big picture and have neglected the weightier matters of scripture. There is an emphasis on the Bible, but not a greater emphasis on what is more central in the Christian faith.

This seems to be to sort of thing that many scribes, doctors of the law, Pharisees, and Jews had done. Jesus said, "You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about me" (Jn 5:39). Faith in God wasn't primarily about counting out each grain of wheat or spice to make sure it equals exactly 10%, or about not lifting a finger to do anything that remotely looks like work on the Sabbath, or about making sure you were thoroughly ritually washed. These were not bad things in themselves. However, these in themselves did not endear the people to God. The reason they did not is that these folks had neglected the weightier matters, such as justice, mercy, and love. They knew their scriptures, but didn't know God. To them, God was reduced to a set of rules. They often elevated the wrong rules. There seems to have been a religious debate on which commandments were the greater commandments. This is probably why Jesus was asked which is the greatest commandment. The rules that these Pharisees, Jews, lawyers, and scribe elevated indicate what God was like to them. To them, God was not relational, but a rule giver and a accountant of who keeps all the rules.

Those who know God reflect the vary character of God. That is why John says, "He who loves is born of God and knows God because God is love" (1 Jn 4:7). God IS love! Love is one of the central aspects of his character. That is why Jesus elevates Love as the greatest commandment (Jn 13:34-35). That is why justice, mercy, and kindness, and other "relational" things are weightier matters. The commandments flow from one of the most prominent characteristics of God. These Jews had missed this because they had reduced God to a set of arbitrary rules. This is not to say that God does not have rules, because he most definitely does. But his rules flow from his character. Some are more central than others. Some are "weightier." The greatest expression of God's character, of his love and relationship is when Christ becomes flesh, lives among us, fully identifies with us in our humanity, and dies on the cross as one of us. This is the high point and the central thing in scripture. Everything points to it. The "rules" God has that flow from this are the weightier matters of the law.

These are things I remind myself of when I read scripture. If not, Jesus could just as easily say to me, "John, you search the scriptures because you believe that in them you have life, but it is these that testify of ME!" Everything beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation points not to a set of arbitrary rules, but to Christ, who is God in the flesh and the ultimate message and explanation of God and his character. If I miss that in my study of scripture, then I have truly missed it.

Remember that the word of God is the Sword of the Spirit (Eph 6:17). It is the Spirit's primary tool to transform you into the image of Christ. We also need to keep in mind that we are encountering scripture that is "inspired" (2 Tim 3:16). More literally, this verse says it is "God-Spirited" or "God-Breathed." It is from the breath of God, and it is only the breath of God that gives life (Gen 2:7; Eccl 12:7). This is why the word of God is said to be "living" and "active" (Heb 4:12). You cannot read it the same way as you read Plato, Shakespeare, and other great literary works. Indeed, the Bible is a great literary masterpiece, but it goes far beyond this. Jesus said that his words were spirit and life, or "breath" and life (Jn 6:63). Jesus also said "I am the resurrection and the life" (Jn 11:25). Furthermore, Jesus said "I am the way, the truth and the life" (Jn 14:6). In other words, the God breathed scripture is not merely a manual to memorize, but a tool of the Spirit to bring us to Christ, who is our life.

So, here is a suggestion on reading scripture. Studying scripture is beneficial. But don't limit yourself to just studying the scripture. Set aside time to merely read it, not dissect it, do word studies, and things of that nature. Let God "breath" new life into you through his God-breathed word. As you read the Gospels, dialogue with God. Ask things such as, "What are you telling me here? How does this point to Christ? What does this say about you God?" Read the Psalms regularly as part of your personal worship. Read the great accounts of God in the Old Testament to learn what he is like. Read the epistles of that deal with specific issues of the Christian life, remembering that Christ is the foundation of the message in the epistles. Read the book of Revelation, and see how all of human history culminates with Christ, the faithful and righteous divine warrior.

Indeed, Christ is the source of true life, and scripture bears witness to Christ. The motto, "No creed but the Bible" is a good one, but I believe we can improve on this even more. Since the scriptures point to and bear witness to Christ, and since Christ is the fullness of Deity in bodily form (Col 2:9), God in the flesh (Jn 1:14), the exact representation of God's nature (Heb 1:3), and the explanation of God (Jn 1:18), you could correctly say based on this,

"Our Creed is Christ."

What a powerful statement. Spend some time in reflection on this and how it might affect the nature of your Bible reading.

"I AM" or "I WILL BE"

2008-03-31T12:21:00.004-05:00

I remember talking to a Christian from another country. He commented about how different many of us American Christians are than the brethren were from back home. He talked about how "dead" many of us were and how "dead" many of our churches were. At first, I thought he was referring to the mood in our worship services, which tend to be pretty formal compared to what he was used to. Their worship is less structured and has more spontaneity, and has a lot more singing, reading, and praying. But this isn't what he was talking about. He said it looked like most of us in worship did not want to be there and were in fact bored out of our minds. It appeared we were going through a ritual, fulfilling a duty, and were not really there because we wanted to be together and together thank God, worship God, and pray to God. I took a little offense at this at first. This is a matter of difference in culture. Besides, how could he possibly know what was in the hearts of worshippers. After I got past being offended, I began to consider what he was saying. Could it be true? Do I want to be there? Am I really focused on thanking, honoring and praising God or merely fulfilling an obligation? Am I struck by the wonder, grace, majesty, and holiness of God when coming together with my brethren for worship? Is there a sense that we are, in a manner of speaking, on "holy ground" when God invites us into His presence in worship?

I have had conversations with people who believe that we are too casual and laid back. We do not act as though worship is a particularly holy time in the way we start and begin, in trying to quiet down the chatter so we can worship, in writing notes back and forth in worship, and so on. I know there are those who came from a high church background where even the physical structure of the building was constructed in such a way that this was to be a holy place and a holy time when coming together. The colors, the stained glass, the use of precious metals all communicated something of the holiness and highest worth of God. Do we need to contract our worship space in such a way that it reflects a little more of the purpose of this space and its use and think of it as a "sanctuary?" To be sure, it sure would communicate something of the majesty and the holiness of God.

On the other hand, I have had conversations with people that believe we are too formal, cold, and even lifeless. From an outsider's perspective, it looks as though we are bored and apathetic. It is not just that we don't say Amen much, that we don't raise our hands or kneel when praying, or that we don't clap our hands. It is the fact that it seems we do next to nothing. We might sing, but only in a whisper if we sing at all. We don't sing out loud. It is subdued, it appears, not because we are in the presence of the holy, but because we are just not excited or overjoyed to be there. The "feeling" in the room is dead. I took offense at this as well. This is not a concert, a pep-rally, or anything like that. It is worship and needs to be dignified and honoring to God. Once again, after I got over being offended, I had to ask myself is there any truth in this? To be sure, worship need not be so stuffy, formal, and ritualistic that we squeeze the meaning out of it. Isn't shouting to the Lord, making a joyful noise, raising open and undefiled hands toward Heaven, reading to God and ready to receive his blessings, or even an "Amen", aren't these appropriate responses from the heart? After all, David leaped about with all his might before the Lord during that special occasion when God's Ark was coming to the city. I don't think I would dance in a linen ephod in a worship service, but surely when God has done something special in my life, singing with joy or an "Amen" would be appropriate. I remember in a worship period with a bunch of teens, we all gathered together on the floor to sing. Some sat, others were on their knees, and a couple at one point even reached toward the heavens as we sang a particular song.

As I reflect on this, I ask myself, do we really need to make the worship space more ornate an holy looking in order to inspire the sense of majesty, holiness and awe? Then I remember God telling the Israelites about how to build their altars. Not with cut stones, but with uncut stones. In other words, a pile of rocks. Wouldn't that be embarrassing in light of some of the ornate pagan temples and high places that had existed at that time? Why did God tell them to do this? Perhaps it was to keep the focus on God and not on the work of men's hands, which could lead to idolatry. Holiness is not about gold, wood, or stone and what you can fashion it into.

Later in Israelite history, many Israelites began to treat the temple like an idol, thinking if they performed the right rituals and incantations that they would be invincible because it was the Temple of Yahweh. They had not circumcised their hearts, therefore worship was either a duty or merely a means to try and be manipulative and satisfy their selfish desires through their worship.

What about the other end of the spectrum. Should we try and whip all the worshippers up into an excited frenzy so it can be more upbeat and outsiders will see that our faith is indeed real and we are happy to be there? This can be just as artificial. In fact, if it is artificial, outsiders will see it for what it is. How tragic it is when outsiders can see artificial worship for what it is and insiders do not! I have been in worship services that were frenzied like this. It seemed forced, orchestrated, and phony. On the other hand, I have also been to worship services that were very upbeat, but were not forced, orchestrated or phony. I have been to more formal worship services in buildings that were made with the utmost care, artistry, and dignity, including sculpted trim, stained glass, and things of this nature. Yet the worship services were lifeless and dead. On the other hand, I have been to other worship services in the same type of structure that was beautiful, dignified, full of awe, majesty, and life. I walked away as a believer declaring, "surely God is among you."

What was the difference? It surely wasn't about orchestrating a frenzy. Nor was it merely about creating an aesthetically majestic and awe-inspiring space. It had more to do with the people. You can tell when they love God and truly believe that he is the living God and not just some character in a book. It is clearly evident when you are among a group of people who are theists rather than deists, who believe that God has been and is still working out his plan and reject the idea that God has merely wound up the clock and leaves us on our own.

I am reminded of Exodus 15, the very first act of worship by Israel. It came as a "response" to God's mighty act of salvation from bondage. They sang a song declaring Yahweh as a mighty warrior who rescued them from the clutches of Pharaoh. This worship was meaningful, heartfelt, and moving.

True worship does not begin with us. It doesn't begin with, "what shall we do?' or "how shall we worship?" It begins with God himself. Worship is response to God. If worship does not begin with God, then it will either be dead or orchestrated.

Isn't it appropriate to begin worship with a declaration or reminder of who God is and what he does? Many of the Psalms give us the language, words, and images to call to mind what God does for his people and what kind of God he is. No matter how bad things get, no matter how much enemies persecute, no matter how much it seems the world no longer needs God, God is still on his throne and is still God. He is our shepherd; we are the sheep of his pasture. When we come before his throne, remembering who our God is and who we are, we kneel, we pray, we give thanks, we praise, we worship. Pride diminishes. Humility with joy increases. Fear shrinks. Strength and courage expands. We are reminded that God is with us and all is well.

In Exodus 3, God tells Moses, "I am who I am." In Hebrew, it is "ehyeh asher ehyeh." This could also be translated, "I will be who I will be." The exact same word in the exact same form is used earlier in the chapter when God tells Moses "I will be (ehyeh) with you." The difference is huge. God is not merely telling Moses that he exists, but that he will be who he will be…for them. God will be the Lord of Hosts, Deliverer, Warrior, Provider, etc… God is not a mere watcher, but is the living God who is active in his creation. He came and tabernacled in the midst of Israel and dwelt symbolically enthroned above the cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant. He tabernacled among us as Jesus, our savior and deliverer. Jesus sent the Spirit when he departed, and we as God's people have become God's temple. Since we are God's "mobile" temple, you could say in a sense that God still tabernacles in us. Our Lord is with us to the end of the age. If we believe that, then our natural response is to worship him. If we do not believe that, worship may be a little more difficult. I suppose that what you "actually" you believe about God and what he is like will affect how you worship.

I do not merely see God as "I AM" (that here merely exists 'out there' some place far away), but as "I WILL BE" (God will be for us and with us as our rock, our salvation, our strength, provider, our song, etc.). He is not just our God, he is our "Father." Doesn't that just want to make you sing a song, to give thanks, to worship?

The Center of our Faith

2008-03-20T16:34:00.013-05:00

My wife and I recently attended a theology lab for church planters. Even though it was geared for church planters, it was pertinent to anyone involved in any kind of ministry. This theology lab was a good time to re-focus and rejuvenate. My wife and I got a clearer picture of how God is leading us in our ministry. In order for this to happen, we needed to refocus on the center of what Christianity is all about. If we are not centered properly, then peripheral things often can take center stage and crowd out what is supposed to be at the center. Good theology is like a rudder than guides not only church planting ministries, but all of ministry.

What is it all about? There was a time in my early Christian life when I would have said it was all about salvation. The end goal was to be saved. The first person that I had the opportunity to bring to Christ was scared to death of Hell. He did not want to go there. Who does? I certainly did not want to go there. So we sat down together and went over the steps to salvation and the things he needed to do and believe in order to stay out of hell. When we were through, he was eager to do it all as soon as possible. He didn't want to take a chance that if he didn't do it right away, he might not get a change and therefore go to Hell. So, I called up the preacher who opened the building for us so that we could get him into the water. That was the goal, to get as many people in the water as possible so that they can be saved. I have come to realize that salvation is not the end all be all. It is not the ultimate goal. It is a means to the goal.

I had also thought at one point that the ultimate goal was to go to Heaven. Salvation was the means by which we could go to Heaven. It was comforting to know that after we die, that existence doesn't just end. There is so much more awaiting for us after we die. Death for the saved person is merely a transition, a graduation into eternity. We move many places throughout life and live in many places. But the final home will be in Heaven. What is Heaven? Some think of mansions over the hilltop. Others think of streets paved with gold. Some think of a glorious, beautiful garden. The Bible describes a time when the tree of life is restored, and there will be no more death or sickness. I used to think of Heaven as a calm, peaceful place where there was lots of light and everyone wore robes. It was a nice thought, but I have also come to realize that Heaven is still not the ultimate goal. If I understand Heaven merely as a "place" to go to, then I have missed the whole point.

All of life, all of Christianity, all my faith, and my ministry stems and is centered not in salvation, not in Heaven, but in God. The end all be all is fellowship with our creator, our God, our Father. This is the core, or the center of all Christian theology. That may sound strange because I used to like to do theology by "list." I suppose that is a product of my Western, scientific culture in which I love that likes to categorize, describe, and list things. So I wound up with the five points of salvation, or the three points of the Lord's supper, the five acts of worship, the four characteristics of the Holy Spirit and such.

One of the drawbacks in doing theology "lists" is that we tend to make everything on the list of equal importance. There are some things that are more central than others, and then there are some things that are peripheral things. Sometimes doing doctrinal studies by "lists," obscures this fact. Another drawback is it tends to be reductionistic. God didn't reveal himself through lists. The majority of the Bible is narrative, history, or story, which cannot be reduced to lists. These reveal who God is, what he is like, and what the implications for us are.

So, a better way to think of theology is that it has a core, and everything radiates from that core. This is especially necessary when you run into situations that the Bible doesn't directly address. This is necessary when you run into cultural challenges to the way we have always done things. How are we to do ministry? How are we to serve? How are we to "do church?"

As the world changes and challenges our mode of operation, what should we do? There are typically two reactions. One is to get defensive, take an adversarial stance, retreat into a spiritual bunker and protect our traditions. Anyone that deviates from these traditions is suspect at best, or labeled a heretic at worst. Change is a bad word. This is traditionalism.

The other reaction is to look at all of our practices, identify what no longer works, and to adopt practices that work. On the surface, there are those that have tried this and have appeared to be successful. Some famous mega-churches have grown out of this. They have identified what "works," and have done it. This is pragmatism.

Neither one of these is a theologically sound reaction. If we are not theologically grounded, then we slide into a default mode, whether it is traditionalism or pragmatism. Leaders in many of the pragmatic churches have found that they have grown a mile wide and an inch deep. The traditionalist churches are often an inch wide and an inch deep. Neither have much depth to them. For one type of church, the center is tradition. For the other, the center is the ABC's of church - "attendance, buildings, cash." These are just a couple of example of the default mode you can slide into if you are not theologically grounded.

So, what lies at the center and what radiates from it? Go back to the very beginning. What do you have? In the beginning God. It all starts with God. Who is God? What is God? God is not whoever you want him to be. For thousands of years people have tried to make their gods in the image of whatever they wanted, but that is not God.

Let's go back to the beginning. Genesis is such an important document. It introduces us to who God is, what He is like. It introduces us to ourselves, what we are and what we are like. In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the earth. God's Spirit, God's "breath" was hovering above the waters. The "breath" of God is what gives true life. So, God created man in his own image and breathed into him the breath of life. He did this with no other creature. God walked with man in the garden that he prepared for him. Everything was in perfect harmony. There was harmony in the creation. There was harmony between man and God. There was harmony between man and creation. Man had dominion over all the creation and was the keeper of the garden. He could eat from any tree, except one. If they ate of that one, they would die. But they could eat from any of the others. It was all very good. The God who is good created something very good.

One day man came across a serpent. The serpent pointed to the tree that God had told them not to eat. He told them that God had lied. They wouldn't "die" if they ate of the tree. He told them that they would become like God, they would know the difference between good and evil, they would be smarter.

Imagine what might have gone on in the minds of Adam and Eve. Wow! Could it be? Is there more to life than this garden? Is God withholding something from me? I could become greater than I am? I could become more independent. I could become….well, I am not sure, but I sure wouldn't have to be so reliant on God….. But God said not to, that I would die. Maybe the serpent is right…..

So, man ate the fruit. Then came the guilt, the shame. They knew what they had done. Like that serpent said, they really "knew." They had become "smarter," and now they wanted to go hide. Then they heard God walking in the garden. Any other time, they might have run to him like children run to their father when he comes home. Instead, they went the other way. They hid from him. They could hear God calling, "where are you?" Adam, Even, where are you?

Why does God call? Because God is a relational God. The Bible tells us that God is our Father. The Bible tells us that Jesus is God. The Bible also seems to say that the Spirit is God. Bible tells us that God is three in one…one God, three "persons." This is what the word, "trinity" refers to. God is eternally three in one. What this means is that He was already a God of fellowship, a God of love, a relational God even before he created us. He did not NEED us to be relational. He is inherently relational within himself. He didn't create or redeem us because he so needed us, but because he chose to love us. So, God calls to man.

The serpent was wrong…and he was right. They did not die, at least not in the way many think of death. They went on "living," but it wasn't really "life." They suffered the worst kind of death, the death that comes from alienation from God. Instead of harmony, love, peace, security, fellowship, beauty, and all of the things that comes from the very character of God, there was something they never could have quite grasped…until now. Now there is alienation, pride, hate, war, violence, murder, anger, deceit, and other things which are the exact opposite of God. This result of being alienated from God disrupted the beautiful, relational harmony of God's creation.

But the story doesn't end there. God promised to destroy the power of sin and re-unite mankind to himself. God continues to "call" to man. He called to Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Israel, and he calls us. Why? Because God is inherently a relational God.

This really hit home with us at the theology lab. We hit the major mega-themes of the Christian faith. We spent some time trying to identify the core. Stacey and I identified it as our God who is a relational God. This is the core. The makes the Bible a book about relationship. This is why the greatest command is love. This is why the Bible tells us that God is Love. God is a relational God and we see that throughout the Bible. Everything radiates from this and identifies those core, non-negotiable aspects of Christian theology.

Our personal reflection put relational God at the foundation, and scripture as connected to it all, since we would not know much without scripture. From there is Jesus who is God, the incarnation which demonstrates God's relationality, his death and resurrection, atonement and sin. There is baptism with is intimately tied to atonement. These are right next to the core. Jesus said, "unless you believe I am, you will die in your sins," in John 8:24.

There is humanity, made in the image of God. Because we are all made in God's image, all human beings are worthy of the inherent dignity and worth that comes from God. This is why Jesus says that when we serve others, we are serving him.

As humans, we carry the breath of God. All life comes from the breath of God. In the beginning, the breath of God brought life, beauty, and harmony. Sin disrupted that life, but God breathes new life into us. He has given us his spirit, new breath. The flesh profits nothing, but the Spirit, the breath of God is what gives life. What does this mean? All around we see the worse kind of death, the death that came as a result of Adam's sin. We see the hatred, pride, fear, shame, murders, etc. Where do people find the breath of God? We are a temple of the breath of God, a temple of his Spirit. Life….true life exudes from us as we reflect the very life of God in love, peace, mercy, kindness, and goodness. The breath of God, his Spirit, sanctifies us and transforms us. The Spirit renews us and is restoring the image of God in us. The spirit restores harmony, unity, and beauty.

Jesus came to reconcile. He came to restore what was lost. He is God in the flesh. God, because he is relational, came from Heaven to earth. He came alongside us. He became one of us. He experienced our hurts, our temptations, our human nature. He became weak, he poured himself out, he became vulnerable. He had to live by faith as a human. He had to trust that when he was put to death, that God would not abandon him to Hades and would raise him from the dead. I can hardly get my mind around it! God. Crucified as a common criminal. Died. Buried. Forgiveness. Love. Resurrection. Life. Because of the forgivness Jesus offers, we now have the ability to forgive anything no matter how heinous. We have the ability for reconciliation, for unity, for renewed life in him. Jesus died, rose, and gives the Spirit.

But this restoration work is not finished. God's kingdom is near, it is here, but it is also still to come. Jesus said the world is like a field with both wheat and tares mixed together. God has already established his kingdom alongside the kingdom of this world. The kingdom of God overlaps this world. It is a parallel community of justice, peace, and mercy. It is a kingdom of light and salt. It is a kingdom where our whole lives become worship and service to God. God places us alongside the world for a redemptive purpose. As people experience the breath of God, the Spirit of God, true Life of God in us in our love for each other, then the world will know Christ.

The time is coming, when the kingdom of this world will become the kingdom of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever. God will once again walk in the presence of man as in the beginning. That is the goal, fellowship with God.

Since God is inherently relational, that means our relationship with God is not grounded on some "legal" requirement. You see it in Abraham, in Israel, in Job, and in Christ. God cannot be appeased or paid off. That is not who he is. The basis of our relationship with God is the love of God. This is why Jesus became flesh. This is why he went to the cross. This is why he prayed for his enemies.

The strength of this type of theological reflection is that it allows us to allow the "weightier matters" to have weight. Theology by lists have a tendency to treat everything of equal importance. There are things that are close to the core and are non-negotiable items. They stem from the core character of God. These have a strong bearing on the direction and nature of our ministries. These are the values that shape our direction. The chart above visually expresses our theological framework for ministry. I am just now beginning to reflect on how the affects our attitudes and how we are to relate to God, to each other, and to the world. The greatest command is love. It is about love. If you strip this away, if this is not the center or the core, it all tumbles down. It is foundational.

There is so much more that can be said, but this in a nutshell describes where we are. We are seeing this as sort of a new beginning in our ministry. I think all ministry training should begin and end with this type of theological rudder, but it typically does not. There is sort of a default mode even in many of our ministry training schools that needs to be evaluated in light of good, sound, biblical theology.

We are thankful to God for what he is showing us. We are not sure how that will take shape, but we are excited about it.

I have recently felt a certain restlessness, and a certain inadequacy, a longing, but wasn't sure what it was. This theology lab along with other recent classes and workshops have been instrumental in putting some better perspective on myself, on the kingdom, and on ministry. So, we are renewing our commitment to God not to merely slide into a default mode with our faith. It is about relationship, first and foremost with God, and also with others. This includes ALL who are made in the image of God. I need to connect with God, with my brethren and with those who have not yet entered into the Kingdom. This means being more relational. Not only is there reading and praying, but also sharing and encouragement. There is togetherness, joy, and fun! Yes, fun! We need to learn to enjoy the fellowship and togetherness that comes from our relational God.

As the Kingdom, we are living alongside the world for a reason. Jesus didn't bring the kingdom near the world so it can be isolated, but so it could be a kingdom of life. As a temple of the Spirit, we have the breath of God, we have life. I have come to realize that I am most energized when leading people into the Kingdom. So, I am looking to discern how God will accomplish this through us.

This is an exciting sense of new renewal and beginning. I realize that we are always learning, always being formed, and therefore always need to be as clay in the hands of the master.

Rites of Passage

2008-03-08T16:29:00.007-06:00

After discussions in church planting workshops, readings associated with it, and further discussion with others with a passion for discipleship and church planting, I have been spending some time in reflection and prayer on the idea of "rites of passage" in our walk with God. So, here are some more of my rambling thoughts on all of this.

In many societies, there are time honored rites of passage. Whether it is a Jewish Bar-Mitzvah or a Graduation Ceremony, they mark important transitions in a person's life. They give order and stability to the process of personal growth.

I find it interesting that the early church had such rites of passage. The most obvious rite of passage is Christian baptism. This is not merely a human tradition, but one that begins in the ministry of Christ. The meaning of baptism was transformed by the atoning work of Christ on the cross and his resurrection. The association of baptism with Christ's atoning work as what made it "Christian" baptism."

In the book of Acts, most of the converts came from Jewish backgrounds. They already had a history and background with Yahweh, the God of Israel. Many were familiar with biblical ethics, worship, and lifestyle. When they accepted the Christian message, they were converted quickly, usually being baptized on the same day. They typically did not need instruction on morality, ethics, worship, and things of this nature. They needed instruction on the Messiah who has fulfilled, or made full the Torah of Yahweh.

After the destruction of the temple, the church quickly became gentile in flavor as the "Jewishness" of the church began to wear off. In fact, the Jewish liturgy after the fall of Jerusalem changed in such a way that it became impossible to remain both a Jew and Christian. With the addition of a prayer that basically pronounced a curse on Christians, Christians could not longer participate in Jewish worship. Even though gentiles had been flooding into the church, the church still was in touch with its Jewish roots until this time.

As the church increasingly became more gentile and less Jewish, more and more people were coming who had no Jewish background. Their world-view was either pantheistic or henotheistic. Their ethics, morality, and worship were awash with pagan ideals. Conversion to Christianity was not merely a simple matter of accepting Jesus as the Messiah because gentiles had little point of reference for this concept. The term Messiah, or "Christos" in Greek did not resonate with pagan Gentiles at all because it was solidly a Jewish concept. For the pagan, to be "anointed" meant nothing more than to be medicated with some sort of oil or ointment.

It was perhaps for these types of reasons that the situation in the second century was different. Quick baptisms were not longer the case. In fact, it was not unusual for there to be a considerable instructional period before catechumens were admitted for baptism. The four stages in this period included Seeker, Hearer, Kneeler, and Faithful. There was a rite of passage that marked the end of one stage on the beginning of the next that included such things as the rite of welcome, or ultimately the rite of baptism and communion when people officially became a member of the body. It is interesting that in the early church, the hearers were separated from the faithful at some point in their worship. The hearers received instruction pertinent to their stage in the journey while the faithful received communion.

I will not go into great detail, because the details of theses practices were pertinent and relevant to their particular time, which is far removed from us today. However, I am wondering if the baby was not thrown out with the bathwater. The Protestant movement slowly distanced itself from the medieval church, rejecting many practices that were either neutral or even beneficial. Then came American Christianity which fractured into many, many religious groups, each distancing themselves from each other. Our own "Restoration" movement, as we typically call it now, began as a unity movement, but also has given that up in favor of distancing itself from anything that looks or feels like practices that exist in other religious groups. In effect, the faith, life, and practice of the church became reduced to the lowest common denominator. Anything not expressly commanded in scripture is rejected, especially if it is a practice found in other religious groups.

I have to wonder, do we honestly believe that something is bad simply because it exists in some other religious group? Is something that is neutral in itself to be rejected simply because some other religious group has it? What about something that is a positive practice that exists elsewhere? Should we turn away from it simply because it looks like something someone else does? Shouldn't our faith and practice be rooted in good, sound, biblical theology rather than reactionary theology? I think most of us would agree with this…on the intellectual level. However, I have seen the emotional reactions to practices which is "like what those (insert the name of the religious group) do." Our emotional reactions tend to overshadow our intellectual ones. So even though we say that there is nothing wrong with certain practices that may be found in other religious groups, our actions say otherwise. We treat some practices and those who do them as though they were wrought of Satan.

We need to realize that some practices in various religious groups pre-dates those religious groups. Some practices go back to the 2nd century church, and perhaps even to the first century church, which is prior to many of the deviations that degenerated into the problems, abuses, and heresies in medieval Christianity. If we get past some of the baggage associated with some of these practices, we may be able to re-claim the baby and still leave out the bathwater.

I am thinking specifically about the practice of formal instruction in preparation for Christian baptism. Many that still practice this today call it "Catechism." The word itself came from a Greek word, katachizein, which means to teach or instruct orally. Even though there were some variations from area to area, the overall instructional practice of the pre-Nicene church was pretty much standard. There was extensive and fairly standardized teaching that included intense discipleship training for all believers as a prerequisite for baptism . One could not straddle the fence and still be considered faithful. The process of instruction had definite, identifiable stages with definite rites of passages going from one stage to the next.

To most older evangelicals, this seems archaic, a step back to what we have tried to get away from. It smacks of authoritarian Christianity. What many do not realize is that this is older than they think. This did not originate with the medieval Catholic church. It goes back to the early church fathers in the first three centuries of the church. This practice of instruction is likely a major contributing factor to the ability of the church, though marginalized, illegal, and persecuted, to not only be able to survive, but to also inundate the Roman empire in such a short amount of time. This is probably why the church was able to stay pure in the midst of so much defilement. This would have been a major factor in the church remaining holy. The church didn't become flooded with pagan ideas until after the legalization of Christianity and the outlaw of all other religions, which made virtually everyone in the empire a "Christian." The culture paganized the church and the church Christianized the culture. The two became indistinguishable. This was such a far cry from the biblical perspective that affirms that Christ's kingdom is not of this world, that we are aliens, that our citizenship is in Heaven, that familial relationships have to do with faith rather than genetics or nationality. The church became married to the powers, authorities, and principalities that were supposed to have been hostile to it. With the paganization of the church also came the "worldly Christian," which is the Christian who worships, prays, performs various Christian rituals, but whose way of thinking, interactions, attitudes, and affections are still of this world. No wonder it became "respectable" in the world's eyes to become a Christian. But from the beginning, it was not this way.

I believe that we are returning to our rightful place, which is out of the mainstream of this world. This was the church of the first three centuries. Contrary to what many believers think, the church is not the chaplain to society, which is the role it received as the result of its paganization. Even when the church was "officially" decoupled from government in America, the church still remained a "chaplain" to it in an unofficial sense, though this has been changing over the last forty years or so. We need to understand that the church is not the "pastor" of the community, but is the body of Christ. The church is salt and light. It is a counter cultural community of people who has aligned their allegiance to Christ and Christ alone. This is why early Christians did not take oaths of allegiance. They had already declared their allegiance when they were converted to Christ. They saw the world clearly for what it was and knew clearly what their role in the world was. There was no confusion in the first three centuries. Why? A major reason was the instruction and training they received.

Curiously, it is often the younger evangelicals that want to go back to the "old days," or to use a biblical term, the "old paths." There are some people that use the term "old paths" to refer to the way things were 50 years ago. But these younger evangelicals are thinking of the practices and faith of the apostolic church. They are thinking of faith and life in the first three centuries when the church was at its best. I ran across a term that has become popular for many evangelicals under 30 that seems to express their perspective. That term is, "ancient-future." The "ancient" faith (not the faith of the 1950's) provides the compass to face the challenges of today and the future as God would have it. Some ancient practices are being recovered, such as Christian rites of passage, intense discipleship, a greater emphasis on the holy in worship, the devotional and not just academic reading of scripture, a passion for social justice, and the idea of every Christian as a minister. Getting away from the modern paradigm for Christianity which really began with the emperor Constantine, a growing number of younger Christians are identifying their faith not with a place or building, but with Jesus himself. They are seeing the church as themselves rather than a locality. They don't strive to "go to" church, but to "be" the church.

Most sociologists and anthropologists recognize the impact of rites of passage on the growth and socialization of people in a given society. All societies have them. It is an integral part of personal growth. Even here in America, we go from Junior High School to High School. Jewish children do a Bar-Mitzvah. And there are countless others. It is what defines the end of one stage of life and the beginning of another. Even scripture recognizes that we are at "stages" in our growth. We start out as babes, we long for milk, we grow in grace and knowledge, we reproduce, etc. The early church embraced this idea and with a formal training program that involved what we would call a mentor, the elders, and the congregation (usually a house church). Christians grew strong. Whether we call the stages seeker, hearer, kneeler, and faithful, as the early church did or call it something else, it should be clear to see how this idea along with rites of passage can be immensely helpful. Whether you call it "catechism" or use some other name, it should be clear to see how this would be helpful and almost necessary.

Yes, these are man made. Yes it would be a tradition. Keep in mind, though, that traditions are not inherently bad. Most of us have family traditions that we cherish. They order life, help give it meaning, and help us to remember where we have come from and face the future with confidence. Whether we recognize it or not, our life is full of traditions. Our churches are full of traditions. We are blind to many of them as being traditions, but they are traditions none-the-less. We need to not be so afraid of "tradition" that we avoid what is needed and could be immensely helpful.

For church leaders to employ a definite program of discipleship with identifiable stages and transition points is beneficial. When they "give an account" of their ministry as shepherds, they would be able to say that this is one of the ways they ensured that the sheep were healthy and fed.

As I continue to reflect on all of this, it occurs to me that this is easier said than done, especially in a church that is already established. I have heard some people say that it is easier to start a new church than to renew an old one. It is also easier to kill a church than revive it. Is this pessimistic or realistic. If we love God and are dedicated to knowing him and carrying out his purpose, how could this be? Lord, I pray that you give me wisdom, give us all wisdom to see clearly. I am still looking forward to some further workshops in the near future, Lord I pray you bless me, my family, and my ministry through these. Help me to understand the nature of the kingdom, your purpose in it, and my place in it. Help me to be devoted to kingdom purposes, not to a "job," to a single "congregation," or to merely "getting a paycheck." Help me to capture your vision. In the name of Jesus, Amen.

Ancient Perspective on Evangelism

2008-02-12T17:07:00.001-06:00

Over the past few years, I have read some interesting studies on the evangelism of the church in the first three centuries. What really jumps out at me is the high level of unyielding expectation alongside the proclamation of the Kingdom of God that brings true freedom, community, and joy. The early Church preached Christ as the ultimate victor.

In contrast to conversion of Jews which took place in a very short period of time, conversion of pagan gentiles usually took more time. Unlike Jews, pagans had little concept of God, his word, biblical ethics, godly virtue, etc. The church tended to classify pagans in the process of conversion as moving from being a seeker to a, hearer, to a kneeler, to faithful. The time of being a seeker was a time for Christian inquiry. The time of being a hearer was the time of receiving Christian instruction. The kneeler phase was the time of intense spiritual preparation for baptism. After baptism, the faithful were completely incorporated into and nurtured to mature faith by the church. So the early church had developed a clearly defined process of discipleship for those seeking to become a Christian.

Hippolytus was an elder in the church who was born in the later part of the 2nd century. He was a disciple of Irenaeus who was a disciple of Polycarp, elder of Smyrna, who in turn was a disciple of John the Apostle. His writing, known as "The Apostolic Tradition," was an attempt to maintain the practices of the 2nd century church, which he saw being corrupted. Therefore, his writings give a window into the practice of the 2nd century church.

When Hippolytus writes about evangelism, the picture we get is that no one was in a hurry to get pagans into the water. Since they were so clearly enmeshed in pagan thought, belief, world-view, and lifestyle, there would be a period of instruction and clear guidance as to what repentance means. It is clear that considerable thought went into what repentance means for pagans who wished to become Christians. Keep in mind that this is before the time of Constantine when Christianity became fashionable. At the time of Hippolytus, the church was still on the margins of society. Here is an excerpt from Hippolytus' The Apostolic Traditions, concerning those who were in the process of converting to Christianity:

"15:1 Those who are newly brought forward to hear the Word shall first be brought before the teachers at the house, before all the people enter.
2Then they will be questioned concerning the reason that they have come forward to the faith. Those who bring them will bear witness concerning them as to whether they are able to hear.
3They shall be questioned concerning their life and occupation, marriage status, and whether they are slave or free."

What follows is a long list of various acceptable and unacceptable occupations and marital situations. Those involved in unacceptable situations or occupations were to change or "be rejected." Those involved in Romans entertainment, whether gladiatorial shows, dramatic shows, or other types of entertainment had to be rejected. Christian took a dim view of Roman entertainment because so much of it involved killing. A government official who wore purple had to resign or be rejected, probably due to his duty of carrying out capital punishment and the required allegiance to Ceasar. In fact, anyone involved in an occupation involving allegiance to Caesar or activity that was contrary to Christian ethics had to cease. If one was a military man in authority, he was not to execute anyone and was not to take military oaths. Christian's not already in military service were not to seek it. Then there are the more obvious changes that needed to take place, such as the pimps, prostitutes, pagan priests, or the one who is living in sexual sins.

This clearly demonstrates the early church's attitude toward the world. It was very clear that conversion meant a turning away from commitment to the rulers and authorities of this world and turn allegiance to Christ as Lord, living in community with his people. They were the Kingdom of God under the eternal lordship of Christ the victor king, and therefore refused any activity or occupation that either demanded allegiance to Caesar or involved activity contrary to Christian ethics. Expectations were clearly high. Their negative view toward Roman entertainment and their rejection of many, many "respectable" trades due to their connection with paganism, and their rejection of public office put Christians on the margins of society. Repentance was not merely saying one believed Jesus is the Son of God, but is was also about declaring allegiance to him. Anything and everything that conflicted with that allegiance was rejected. The Kingdom was social, political, and spiritual. It meant re-identification as a citizen of the kingdom. They didn't worry so much about public "respectability" and acceptance as they did about walking with Christ in his Kingdom which transcends this world.

Would setting the bar so high dampen the desire to become a Christian? It did not. In spite of the fact that Christians were marginalized at best and persecuted or killed at worst, a steady stream of genuine converts entered the church.

But there was another side to this picture. Christians were among the most compassionate people due to their conviction of the sanctity of life. The regularly rescued abandoned babies, rejected abortion, which often killed the mother along with the baby or rendered the mothers infertile. When pagans ran from disease, danger and other such things in an attempt for self-preservation, Christians sacrificially stayed behind and cared for the sick, destitute, and the helpless. Christians had a close bond with each other and took care of each other. There was a "social security" among Christians that amazed the pagans. If a seeker quit his trade in preparation to becoming a Christian because it was unethical or ungodly, he could rest assured the church would help him get on his feet so he could support his family. In fact, several early church writers referred to the church as "mother." What they meant by this is that the church's role in addition to evangelism was the nurture of believers into a mature faith.

As I reflect on all of this, here are some good qualities I see in the early church that we can learn from:

1) Clarity: The early church had a clear understanding of what their place in life was. They were not of this world and had been transferred to the Kingdom of God, which re-characterized their affections, loyalties, beliefs, and attitudes. They were citizens of Heaven, not of this world. They were very specific about what this meant in daily life. The Gospel of liberty freed them from bondage to the principalities of this world and united them to Christ as their ruler. Repentance was literally a change in life, not just something to be done "at church." No one coming to baptism would have been unclear as to what "conversion" meant.

2) Conviction: The early church was passionate about their loyalty to Christ as King, Lord, and Victor over the rulers, powers, and authorities. They were passionate about living as loyal citizens of the kingdom in a hostile world. Unlike many of the pagan religions, Christianity was not just a series of religious rituals, it was a lifestyle, a philosophy, and true template through which to view all of life.

3) Openness: The process of discipleship revealed that the church was open to outsiders. Among them were those who were "seeking" or "hearing" but not yet converted and fully incorporated into the church which happened at baptism

4) Compassion: The church had a reputation for compassion. Unlike pagans, they cared for their own and even cared for outsiders. Ministry to the poor, caring for the outcast, adopting children that were discarded, caring for the elderly, and the equal status among slave and free, men and women, foreigner and native all as brethren stood in sharp contrast to the pagan culture around them. This was perhaps the strongest apologetic for the Christian faith.

5) Nurture: The church had very clear steps for outsiders, especially for those with a pagan background. The classifications, seeker, hearer, kneeler, and faithful made it clear what stage they were at and white kind of nurture they needed. The rigorous instruction, mentoring, and nurture firmly grounded believers in the faith in a world they were no longer of. They taught them how to live in two worlds with their loyalty clearly in the next.

So, here is something to reflect on. What can we learn from our brethren 1800-1900 years ago?

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

For further Reading:

Bosch, David J. Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in the Theology of Mission.

Green, Michael. Evangelism in the Early Church.

Webber, Robert E. Ancient-Future Evangelism: Making Your Church a Faith-Forming Community.

______________. Journey to Jesus: The Worship Evangelism, and Nurture Mission of the Church.

White Light and Black Light

2008-02-12T16:51:00.001-06:00

It couldn't have happened at a better time. I had just finished preaching a sermon about light and darkness earlier that day. Jesus is the true light who "lightens up" everything (Jn 1:9). There is nothing to do in the darkness except grope and stumble.

And there I was after dark, running across the yard with the dog. Well, running until I stepped in one of his ongoing projects - a hole that he has been digging on. POP! I felt something snap in my angle…and the pain! Never felt pain quite like that. I was completely helpless laying in the yard. I couldn't get up. To top it off, the dog was climbing on me. He is just a puppy, so I don't know whether he thought I was playing or he was concerned.

The world is in darkness, and many do not even realize it. Oh, there is light, but it is not the true light. It will light "some" things up, but not everything. I like to use a blacklight to illustrate this. It will light some things up, but not everything. What it does light up does not appear as it really is because the colors will be off. There will be dangers that do not show up.

Some examples that I can think of include such things as the current way of dating. It seems rather harmless on the surface. A new boyfriend or girlfriend every week? What could be the harm? Everyone is doing it. Yet, I wonder how continuing a pattern of using people until they are used up will affect a person? I wonder how the casual going together followed by break ups desensitize people to the ravages of divorce? Whether it is for popularity, to fit in, or some other reason, is this really a good thing? A better question - is this a godly thing?

Then there is the "faith is private" message so prevalent today. I hear it often these days. "Religion should have nothing to do with public policy." Whether it is the ethics of medical research, the direction of public policies, or the education of our young people, religion no longer has a public place. God has been replaced by science, psychology, sociology, and other things of this nature. The result is voodoo science that no one sees as voodoo science. Whether embryonic stem cell research, abortion, cloning, so called' euthanasia, and other such things, the guiding principle seems to be pragmatics. But is pure pragmatics good? Many of the Hitlers and the Stalins of the world sure seemed to think so. The sad thing is that when Hitler was committing some of his most atrocious acts, much of the religious community did nothing. Faith was a private, not a public matter. In matters of public policy, the church took a hands off policy.

The scary thing is that in our country faith is considered a private matter much more so than in Europe a century ago. Professing Christians often do not see God as a relevant part of their world, only in their religious devotion. That is why you can have contradictory public figures who profess faith in God and the Bible as his word yet hold social and political ideologies that are contrary to the nature and will of God. They have divided truth up into secular truth and religious truth. Secular truth is the truth of science, history, medicine, etc. It is seen as public, objective, universal truth. Religious truth is seen as private, subjective, and personal. This is not "true" light. It is black light.

I have come to realize that "secularism" is an illusion of supposed enlightened minds. The word "secular" is less than 200 years old, so you will not find it in scripture. The concept does not even exist in scripture. Why? According to scripture, God is the creator and sustainer of the world.

"For by Him all things were created, {both} in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together" (Col 1:16-17).

This is God's world, it all belongs to him.

"The earth is the LORD'S, and all it contains, The world, and those who dwell in it" (Ps 24:1).

Many today use a world that comes from the field of anthropology, "World View." In primitive places in the world, they speak of an "animistic worldview" that sees the world and all of it objects as full of spirits who need to be appeased. In our country, there is the secularist world view that divides the world up into religious and secular. But the Biblical world view is that the world and everything belongs to God and is accountable to God.

"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse" (Rom 1:20).

God was involved in world affairs of people other than Israel. Some more well known examples come from Nineveh through Jonah and Babylon followed by the Persians and the Medes through Daniel. In fact, God refers to Cyrus as his "anointed" (Isa 45:1). Amos 6:2 seems to imply that God had done something among places we know nothing about.

A biblical world-view is a huge subject to tackle. There is a biblical and theological view of everything, whether it is medical ethics, politics, history, science, philosophy, or mathematics. Most classes on these subjects, even in Christian schools, do not begin with God as the foundation of whatever discipline is being studied. There was a time when biblical theology was considered the "Queen of all the sciences." This world view no longer dominates the world of academia.

The question always to ask is this - where is God in this? How does God view this? How does the nature and character of God affect this? If you are not used to thinking this way, then it will be hard. Resist the inclination to try and avoid or explain away uncomfortable conclusions, especially conclusions that suggest you need to do an overhaul in your thinking or practice. If not, then you have blacklight. It may look cool, it may draw more attention, it may be more acceptable. However, at best that will lead you into the potholes rather than the glory of the Kingdom of God. Jesus is the true light, and we need to see our lives, activity, our world through his eyes.

Musings About What is Important

2008-02-04T13:51:00.001-06:00

I have been spending a lot of time lately reflecting on the nature of love. There are those that define love in so many ways. There was a time when I would have automatically thought of unbelievers as being the ones who have all of these various ways of defining love. But I have come to realize that many Christians have unknowingly fallen into the trap of defining love according to their own pre-conceived notions, friends, culture, etc.

In a recent teen gathering, one of the young men made the distinction between what he described as "Love," and "Lo-----ve (said with oogly emotions)." The former is true love, the love that Christ commanded in John 13 when he said, "I new commandment I give to you, that you love one another as I have love you…" It is not "lo-----ve" that puts butterflies in your stomach, that might be hear this week and gone the next. It is not the puppy love that star struck people have experienced. It is the love that God has demonstrated. I was glad to hear that these young people already beginning to have a good handle on what real love is.

But in my experience, I have both seen and heard twisted definitions of love. I still remember Steve's dad, Larry. He was gruff and emotionally abusive. I am not sure if he was every physically, abusive, but it wouldn't have surprised me because sometimes there was evidence of what looked like physical abuse on his wife. This was a man who regularly yelled at his wife and kids. If they didn't get good enough grades, didn't act polite enough, didn't come home on time, or when the kids were younger, if they went across the street, he would yell at them, lecture them, and often demean them in his tone of voice and in what he said. Most of us without hesitation described him as mean and self-centered. Most of his conversations were full of himself. He rarely truly listened to what other people were saying unless it was to use it against them, win an argument, or something like that. The befuddling thing about Larry is that he thought this was okay. He used to tell people that he was trying to care for his family, and at times he would even say it was because he loved them. In reality, he was trying to justify his meanness under the guise that it was love. The reason he was such a hot-head, the reason he could be so mean, the reason he was an unsafe person, according to himself, is because he loved.

I eventually learned that his wife, Tammy, had grown up with a Father not unlike Larry and an emotionally and physically distant mother. Tammy never really understood what love was. Her Dad "loved" her so much he used to abuse her. It wasn't until Tammy became a Christian that she began to experience Christian love. To make a long story short, she tried to get into some counseling, but Larry refused. Out of concern for her children and herself, for their physical, emotional, and spiritual health, Tammy separated from Larry. Tammy and her kids began to experience Christian love from brethren in the church. It was not harsh, but gentle and kind. At first it frightened her. But as her faith grew, her love grew as well.

Love. What is it? Tammy only began to understand it after experiencing it through the kindness of Christians and through spending regular time in God's word. She began to see Jesus as the perfect husband, and how she could be a godly mother to her children by following his example.

Love is not what we say it is. Love is what God demonstrates. Love is what God says it is. One interesting feature about the most common word for Christian love in the New Testament is the word chosen to express it, "agape." It is interesting that this word is used very, very little in secular Greek literature of the day. In secular literature, things like "philia" (affection) and "eros" (fleshly love) are commonly found. But in scripture, agape is used profusely for Christian love and the love of God. The fact that many writers did not use the more common "philia" for love, but chose the rarely used "agape," itself shows that the godly concept of love differed from what the culture at large thought of.

This is why it is so important to spend time in the word. The word of God is the "sword of the Spirit," according to Ephesians 6. The word will help to combat worldliness. It will help fight off acceptance of a worldly concept of love.

1 Corinthians 13 gives an explicit description of "agape." This "agape" chapter tells us first of all that, "Agape is patient, agape is kind." Tammy experienced patience and kindness in that group of Christians. The harsh "love" of her husband and father was not Christian love, in spite of the fact that Larry called it "love." 1 Corinthians 13 also says that "agape does not act unbecomingly." Another way to put it is that it does not act in an ugly way. It is kind. Larry was one of the most unbecoming men we knew at the time.

When it comes to love, I think Christians everywhere need to remember that it is the greatest command and that all of our service, all of the Bible hinges on love. Jesus said the entire law and the prophets rest on the command to love God and love our neighbor. I recall that Jesus was a kind and loving person. Usually when he was harsh, it was with the abusers, such as the Pharisees, whom he described as "white-washed tombs." But overall, the scriptures tell us that Jesus was righteous and full of compassion and kindness. Jesus demonstrated the love of God. Jesus demonstrated real and genuine love.

One of my favorite illustrations of the nature of love is to talk about fake plastic food that you sometimes find in food displays in the store. Sometimes they are very real looking. I remember picking up a block of cheese, only to discover it was not real cheese. It was rubber! Let's say you look at a barbeque grill and there is a steak on it. You can't tell whether it is real or not. One way to test it is to light up the grill and start grilling the steak. If it were a real steak, what would happen? It would first start to sizzle. It would let off a pleasing aroma. Juices would start running off the steak as it begins to turn into a golden brown color. You stomach would start growling as you anticipate a good steak. And if you like a good steak, it would still be pink in the middle and brown on the outside and served with… well, you get the picture.

Now, lets say it is a plastic steak. What would happen then? It sure wouldn't sizzle, but would start to melt. Instead of a pleasing aroma, it would let off toxic fumes. Instead of your stomach growling, you would probably get sick to your stomach at the fumes. Instead of turning brown, the steak would melt and turn into an ugly, sticking, useless black lump of burnt plastic.

That is the different between "real" love, the love of God, and other kinds of love. When the heat gets turned up, when things get ugly, when it gets hard, self-defined plastic love gets ugly. It can even make you sick, just as we were sickened at Larry's brand of love. However, "real" love turns into something even more pleasing. There is no more powerful demonstration of this than Jesus at the end of his ministry washing the feet of Judas, comforting one of the thieves on the cross, or praying for his persecutors as he hung there. In the words of 1 Corinthians 13:8, "Agape never fails."

I believe that if we as husbands, wives, brothers, sisters, co-workers, friends, and brethren base our relationships on this so very different "agape," then our relationships will never fail.

How important is love? Here are some clear answers:

"And He said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God will all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets" (Mt 22:37-40).

"If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have {the gift of} prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. And if I give all my possessions to feed {the poor,} and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing" (1 Cor 13:1-3).

What is love? Here is a very good description:

Love is patient,
love is kind
and is not jealous;
love does not brag
and is not arrogant,
does not act unbecomingly,
it does not seek its own,
is not provoked,
does not take into account a wrong suffered,
does not rejoice in unrighteousness,

but rejoices with the truth;
bears all things,
believes all things,
hopes all things,
endures all things.
Love never fails;…" (1 Cor 13:4-8).

What is love? Here is an excellent definition to spend reflection time on:

"…God is love" (1 Jn 4:8).

A Godly Perspective on Wisdom and Strength

2008-01-17T10:10:00.001-06:00

Paul spends time defending his ministry. Evidently there were eminent "super-apostles (2 Cor 12:11), who were sharp in every way. Paul was unimpressive and even contemptible in comparison. These other leaders apparently had letters of commendation (2 Cor 3) which was impressive, they apparently boasted in their success, knowledge, and accomplishments (2 Cor 10-12), they apparently were skilled (2 Cor 11:6), unlike Paul, they were paid by the people they taught (2 Cor 11:7), which is what any eminent teacher/philosopher/etc. would do. Paul could have easily used many of these same methods but chose not to (2 Cor 2). He intentionally "de-exalted" himself. Apparently his trainees did the same(2 Cor 12:18).

There is a theme of spiritual warfare that seems to run through much of what he says, but it is a war that runs upside-down and backwards to conventional thought about ministry, strength, power, and success.

2 Cor 1:5 - "For just as the sufferings of Christ are ours in abundance, so also our comfort is abundant through Christ."
2 Cor 1:12b - "… not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God we have conducted ourselves in the world, especially toward you."

Paul rejected conventional wisdom and chose to operate in the grace of God instead. He recognized that God's grace is sufficient. He does not need anything else, and anything else may actually be detrimental.

2 Cor 3:fb - "…but our adequacy is from God."
2 Cor 3:18 - "But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory (or, with ever increasing glory"), just as from the Lord, the Spirit.

The goal of his ministry was not amassing a large following like some of the "super-apostles" of the day. The goal came from his Lord - it was lives that are being transformed into the image of Christ. In other words, people lived like, thought like, and had the attitude of Christ. It was never about the greatness of the vessel, but the greatness of God.

2 Cor 3:7 - "We have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves;"
2 Cor 4:18 - "…we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen…"
2 Cor 5:7 - "…we walk by faith, not by sight…"

Paul and his disciples had 20/20 spiritual vision. They could see, perceive, and understand the world around them. They also understood their own inadequacy, weakness, and brokenness. This is why Paul was able to correctly say "I am a nobody (2 Cor 12:11).

2 Cor 5:16 - "…from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know (Him - this word supplied by the translators and not in the original text) in this way no longer…"

Paul does not look at anyone or anything from a fleshly point of view. He operates out of a different paradigm that is not of this world, which redefines greatness, success, and wisdom.

2 Cor 10:1-4 - "Now I, Paul, myself urge you by the meekness of gentleness of Christ - I who am meek when face to face with you, but bold toward you when absent! I ask that when I am present I need not be bold with the confidence with which I propose to be courageous against some, who regard us as if we walked according to the flesh. For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses."
2 Cor 10:7-10 - "You are looking at things as they are outwardly. If anyone is confident in himself that he is Christ's, let him consider this again within himself, that just as he is Christ's, so also are we…For they say, 'His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is unimpressive and his speech contemptible."

Only a fraction of what a person can communicate gets across when he puts his words in print. Body language, tone of voice, and other things do not come across. Paul's words were powerful because he was speaking the will of God. However, his personal presence was unimpressive and contemptible. Yet this did not stop God from using Paul. In fact it appears that God uses Paul not in spite of his weakness, but through his weakness.

2 Cor 11:6-9 - "But even if I am unskilled in speech, yet I am not so in knowledge; in fact, in every way we have made this evident to you in all things. Or did I commit a sin in humbling myself so that you might be exalted, because I preached the gospel of God to you without charge? I robbed other church by taking wages from them to serve you"
2 Cor 11:21 - "To my shame, I must say that we have been weak by comparison."
2 Cor 11:30 - "If I have to boast, I will boast of what pertains to my weaknesses."
2 Cor 12:10 - "Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ's sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong."

Compared to those "super-apostles," Paul has been weak. Paul never shied away from his weakness, brokenness, or his failures. In fact, he seems to embrace them so that God can use them as tools for his mission. Paul often uses his weakness to build up the church. I wonder what the effect might have been if Paul had highlighted his strengths, successes and made use of every skill he had, trying to outdo those super-apostles?

2 Cor 13:3-4 - "…since you are seeking for proof of the Christ who speaks in me, and who is not weak toward you, but mighty in you. For indeed He was crucified because of (out of, or in - Greek is "ek") weaknesses, yet He lives because of the power of God. For we also are weak in Him, yet we will live with Him because of the power of God directed toward you.

For Paul, modeling weakness was not just the result of being honest and mature enough, but it was also a matter of following in the footsteps of Christ who himself was crucified in weakness. Paul lived in weakness with Christ so that the power of God would work in his weakness.

The lesson for us in all of this is clear. If we are going to walk according to the Spirit and not the flesh, if we are going operate out of the grace of God rather than worldly wisdom, if we are going to walk by faith and not by sight, then it is imperative that we be honest enough with ourselves and those around us to embrace our weakness and failures so that God will work through them. If we simply do nothing, we, like the first generation of Israel, can find ourselves wandering the wilderness for a whole generation. If we become defensive, argumentative, or combative about it, we may find ourselves in the same boat as the Pharisees who were like whitewashed tombs but full of death inside. Instead, God worked people like those bumbling, rag-tag group of Galileans that didn't seem like they would ever get it. God worked through one who persecuted and killed Christians. God worked through those who persecuted and scattered everywhere. God worked through messed up people.

Yet how often do we have the tendency to see things through the eyes of conventional wisdom? I remember years ago visiting a church building that had over 1,000 in the congregation. We were impressed at the building, the counseling center, the foyer with looked like a mall, and the gifted multi-staffed ministry team. Boy! This was a healthy church that was going places. Or was it? That little church in a small town in Arkansas is in a tiny, aging building, the parking lot is gravel or dirt, the carpet and pews are worn, and they only have a semi-retired farmer to "preach." Some may find this little church contemptible compared to the big, slick church. Yet those people in that little church do all kinds of meaningful ministry. They fed their hungry neighbors, were involved in World Bible School, and were always more than generous in the name of Christ whenever there was a need. They were truly godly people. In fact, percentage-wise, there was much, much less sin, scandal, gossip, dishonesty, pride, etc. at this little church without all of the ministry specialist than there was at the large church with the impressively trained staff and resources.

Seeing things according to the flesh is to look at all of the worldly indicators of success which was gained through skill, training, and the right management principles. However, seeing the unseen is to look deeper. No one needs advanced degrees, training, or impressive skill for God to work through them. In fact, it could wind up being counter-productive in so many ways. Maybe this is why Jesus told his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit before they went out. They needed to go out in the power of the Spirit rather than the flesh. As a result, they never tried to downplay, "clean-up," or make more palatable the foolishness of the cross. They gloried in it not only as they means of their salvation, but also as a pattern of live. They died with Christ an live according to his model.

My flesh wants what makes me look good. I sometimes want to have a contingency plan for everything before moving forward, which tells me I may be relying on my flesh rather than on the power of the Spirit. I sometimes make ministry more complicated than it really is. I need to be filled with the Spirit and walk according to the Spirit and think according to the Spirit rather than the flesh.

It is an illusion to think that we need to have it all together before we can serve God. This illusion stems from a lack of faith, from pride, and from worldly wisdom. Whether it is something that looks a silly as a group of untrained ex-slaves marching around a walled city like Jericho, or a warrior whose military plan involves love, turning the other cheek, loving your neighbor, and ultimately being executed through a contemptible torture method like being hung on a cross, what is important is faithfulness to God. Sometimes I just need to step forward in faith and do what God wants me to regardless of how it looks from a worldly point of view. This is true wisdom.

I believe that one of the key ingredients to spiritual health, spiritual growth and transformation is a keen understanding of this.

Time for What is Important

2007-09-09T21:48:00.001-05:00

For the first time I attended the Dads-N-Lads retreat at Nebraska Youth Camp. It was a lot of fun and good, clean, quality time to spend with the boys. It dawned on my just how limited my time is with my boys. The oldest will be graduating from High School soon, and the others will not be far behind him. They asked me last year to take them, but I was "too busy." For the life of me, I cannot remember what was so all-fired important that I couldn't take my boys to a father-son retreat. There are a lot of things that seem "important" now, but who is going to care a year from now? On the other hand, we will remember this weekend for a lifetime. There were several firsts for us, such as paintball.

"As Iron Sharpens Iron." That was the theme. Fathers sharpen sons, and yes, sons can even sharpen fathers. So much personal, emotional, and spiritual growth comes through raising sons. No wonder the Psalmist writes concerning sons, "Blessed is he who has a quiver full of them."

Nothing can take the place of "quantity time" together. I have heard people say, "Even though we can't have quantity time together, we still have quality time together and that is what counts." That seems to be a bunch of hogwash. When I go rent a go cart in go cart races with my boys, we want as much time as possible. If all we get is 10 seconds of "quality" racing time, we feel like we have been ripped off. We want the full 15 minutes of race time. Why would it be any different with time spent together with the ones you care about?

The passage from Deuteronomy six about passing your faith on to your kids assumes both quality and quantity time:

"These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up" (Dt 6:6-7).

This tells me that I need to be a prevailing presence in the lives of my boys. Isn't my Heavenly Father a prevailing presence in my own life? I do not think that He gets so busy that he doesn't have time for me. There are so many other things he could attend to that are larger than I am. Yet he blesses me every day with His nearness. God Almighty, my Father. What a model for me to follow! There are many big, important things I could do. Perhaps the biggest is the smallest -- like my three boys.

Preacher's Book Club - Raising the Level of Conversation

2007-08-14T13:36:00.000-05:00

A couple of months ago, one of my brethren in the congregation where I currently serve noted that I had a lot of insight that comes from the graduate classes I periodically take and the books that I read. While not everyone can take graduate classes in ministry or theology, anyone can make the time to read a good book. He suggested that I start a reading group or book club so more in the congregation can digest the wisdom, insights, and experience of authors who distill it into a book to share with others who do not have the privilege of physically being with them.

What a marvelous idea! It occurs to me that leaders, ministers, preachers, and people who do a lot of reading could turn their reading into a more effective ministry by reading a book alongside others and processing it together. That is one of the components involved in several of the graduate classes that I have taken.

Having never been a part of a reading group or book club of this nature, I did a little investigating on how to put together a reading group and what would be involved. I found that many reading groups focus on fictional literary works rather than non-fiction or theology, but I finally found some help in how to organize. It is not all that complicated.

Then it dawned on me that the Internet could cast the net wider. Incorporating things such as email or a blog would enable those who lived in other parts of the country to participate in a discussion online.
Since I already had a web site, it would be easy to add a "Preacher's Book Club" section and start a blog. I obtained a new sub domain at: http://books.epreacher.org for the Preacher's Book club and am now looking forward to raising the level of conversation not only among members of the congregation where I currently serve, but also of other people around the country.

The Theological and Practical Reality of Christian Fellowship

2007-07-02T16:39:00.001-05:00

I have been doing some reflection about the nature of Christian fellowship and implications regarding occasions when brethren do not get along, act in an immature way, offend each other, or are self-centered.

Theological Foundation

The theological reality, according to Ephesians 2, is that God has formed the church with each of us as an integral part. Each of us are an important part of the body. Each of us are living stones in God's house. Ephesians 4 stresses that we are "one" body and therefore need to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Thus, our relationship to God is tied to our relationship with each other. That is why Paul makes the point in 1 Corinthians 12 that no parts of the body can say to other parts, "I have no need of you (1 Cor 12:21)," or "Since I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body (1 Cor 12:15)." Regardless of how anyone sees themselves, by God's design, they are a part of the body. Therefore, when we feed, clothe, visit in prison, and care for the "least of these brothers of mine (Matt 25:40)," we are doing it for Christ because they are a part of the body of Christ. This is why Jesus instructs us to go and be right with our brother before coming to worship God (Mt 5:23-24).

Based on this theological truth, Jesus instructs us to reconcile with our brother if he sins against us (Mt 18:15)[1]. If he doesn't listen, you involve a brother or two, and eventually the whole church. If there is no change, then fellowship is to be withdrawn. What this demonstrates is that fellowship between brethren is tied to fellowship with God. Fellowship severed from your faithful brother is severed fellowship from God and vice versa. You cannot be right with God and wrong with your brother, and you cannot be wrong with God and right with your brother.

Practical Implications

What then, are the practical implications of all of this when brethren are angry with each other, when they distance themselves, when they back bite, offend, or leave the family in a huff? It is tempting to sometimes say "good riddance," especially when the one who leaves is a factious brother. In that case, there should have been discipline exercised in order to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. That is why Paul urged the Roman Christians to reject a factious man after a first and second warning.

As I reflect on this, I remember brethren in the congregation where I grew up quoting passages of scripture in support of getting rid of people they didn't like (such as 1 Cor 11:19 stating that there MUST be divisions in the church), to passages to bash the church for not doing more to keep the sheep from being scattered (such as Mt 5:23-24 - saying this was only a one way responsibility, a brother goes to another if that brother has something against him, but when it is the other way around, going to the brother is not required). As I look back, I realize they were proof-texting and disregarding the overall theological picture of what fellowship was about in the interest of their own agenda. I too, have been tempted to do the same thing. It is too easy to ignore problems in fellowship because it is not always a pleasant thing to deal with.

The fact that fellowship between God, my brother, and myself are intertwined means that there is a mutual responsibility. God gave of himself sacrificially to provide the means for fellowship, but he does not force us to come to him. Coming to him is our responsibility. In the same manner, there is a mutual responsibility we have toward one another. We should give of ourselves to each other sacrificially in the interest of preserving the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. But like God, we cannot force our brother to do so. That is our own personal responsibility. In other words, there is a mutuality of responsibility in maintaining, strengthening, and preserving Christian fellowship. The numerous "one-another" passages demonstrate this mutual responsibility. It is not a one-way street.

Our practice should reflect our theology. Our connection to each other is based on the redeeming work of God and his acceptance of us into his kingdom. It is not based on whether we "like" what is going on the church. Nor is it based on 100% agreement on every detail of doctrine, but on God's acceptance (Rom 14:1-6). If God accepts someone, then naturally we are to accept them as well (Rom 15:7), or we will find ourselves putting a filter in place God has not.

We should never be so quick to write brethren off, even if they are hard to get along with or we disagree with them on something. If someone is upset, there is a mandate for both of us to work through it. If someone is being hurtful, mean, or ungodly, it jeopardizes the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is a mandate to work through it. Preserving fellowship is so important, that in the case of someone who continues to be factious, fellowship is to be withdrawn. If someone is distant, there needs to at least be some sort of effort to mutually confront this problem and remedy it. If someone leaves in a huff, there is still a mandate to at least attempt to work through it. This is preserving the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. However, we cannot force them to stay or to reconcile. They will give an account of themselves to God (Rom 15:12), not of us. This is why Jesus did not spend an inordinate amount of time with the uncommitted. When people who had been following him no longer followed him, they were free to go (Jn 6:66). He asked his disciples if they were going away too. They had a choice, go or stay. This was not a time to straddle the fence.

Keeping all of this in mind, it would seem that the following considerations would help to put "feet" in the theology of fellowship:
1. Each member is to take the initiative to be connected to the body
2. There should be teaching of the theological basis of fellowship and the inherent responsibility each person has in it. It is not optional.
3. A self assessment tool should be used to assess understandings, attitudes, and practices regarding fellowship
4. Leaders and members should work to strengthen the weak links in the body
5. Leaders and members need to recognize that expressions of fellowship have a functional aspect. We are incorporated by God in the body as a body part with a function. Expressing Christian fellowship is fulfilling the function, not individually, but as a part of the body in order to carry out God's mission.
6. Leaders and members should candidly work through various scenarios involving challenges to fellowship and apply the theology of fellowship in working through solutions.
7. When one becomes a member of the congregation, an introduction to the responsibilities involved with fellowship should be part of the incorporation process. It is not optional.

This helps to get out in front of fellowship challenges and to be proactive in promoting fellowship. It is a mutual practice. It will not suffice to point a finger at other brethren and blame them for the lack of your own fellowship if you have made no effort to strengthen the bonds with your brethren. At the same time, it does not suffice to be distant simply because you may not feel an overwhelming need to have a connection with the brethren. Fellowship is not optional.

Fellowship is an integral piece in the missional purposes of God. With a healthy and vibrant fellowship, the energies of the church can be focused on mission rather than refereeing. It would be difficult if not impossible to carry out God's missional purposes with an ailing fellowship.

[1] Some manuscripts add "against you" in this verse, making it more personal.

Examine Yourselves

2007-06-20T23:21:00.002-05:00

"Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith; examine yourselves! Or do you not recognize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you--unless indeed you fail the test?" (2 Cor 13:5).

"But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good" (1 Thess 5:21).

It is no secret that God wants us to examine ourselves. I remember growing up and hearing messages from the pulpit that reminded us we need to examine ourselves. Everyone nodded in agreement. I assume that most of the people that were present did just that; they examined themselves.

We live in a culture defined by among other things individualism. Due to this individualism, I, like many others in the congregation, had applied this to myself individually. I am responsible for myself, and therefore I needed to examine myself and only myself. I did not believe that there was anything more to it than this.

However, we collectively have been brought together as the body of Christ. Once we were not a people, but now we are the people of God (1 Pet 2:10). This means that we are a family, a community, and a body. Collectively, we pool our resources to carry out God's mission.

From the very beginning when God formed his people, he formed not a bunch of individuals, but a collective. As a result, there was a collective and communal responsibility among the people of God, such as the defeat of the people at Ai due to Achan's sin at Jericho (Josh 7:1-24). In our western individualism, such a thought is completely foreign to us. Yet there were also times of national examination, reflection, and repentance as well, such as the rainy day everyone came to the city square to repent in Jerusalem (Ez 10:9). Not every individual was guilty, but every individual was connected. So it appears that examining ourselves is not just an individual responsibility, but a communal one as well.

There is an example of this communal, heart-felt, authentic national repentance during the days of Hezekiah.

"They stood at their stations after their custom, according to the law of Moses the man of God; the priests sprinkled the blood which they received from the hand of the Levites. For there were many in the assembly who had not consecrated themselves; therefore, the Levites were over the slaughter of the Passover lambs for everyone who was unclean, in order to consecrate them to the LORD. For a multitude of the people, even many from Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun, had not purified themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than prescribed. For Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, 'May the good LORD pardon everyone who prepares his heart to seek God, the LORD God of his fathers, though not according to the purification rules of the sanctuary.' So the LORD heard Hezekiah and healed the people. The sons of Israel present in Jerusalem celebrated the Feast of Unleavened Bread for seven days with great joy, and the Levites and the priests praised the LORD day after day with loud instruments to the LORD. Then Hezekiah spoke encouragingly to all the Levites who showed good insight in the things of the LORD. So they ate for the appointed seven days, sacrificing peace offerings and giving thanks to the LORD God of their fathers. Then the whole assembly decided to celebrate the feast another seven days, so they celebrated the seven days with joy" (2 Chr 16-23).

What a joyful time that must have been! Honest, reflective, communal self-examination not only pleases God, but it leads to joy as well. It is a positive process.

So why is it so difficult? Rarely does a congregation reflect in communal self-reflection and examination. It is perhaps more rare than individual self-examination. Instead of true self-examination, many people in the pews seem more content to engage in Bible classes where the goal is to amass more knowledge. What about putting what knowledge to use? What about responding and acting on what comes out of Bible study? That usually does not really happen. Expectations are usually very low in the traditional Bible class. Part of the shortcoming with the typical format of Bible classes is that they remain in the realm of theory. Unlike Jesus who spent more time on practice than theory when training his disciples, Bible classes usually remain comfortably in the theory stage. Many congregations do not intentionally move beyond this.

It occurs to me that perhaps some of the reasons why people balk on communal self-examination are the same reasons people balk at individual self-examination. If there is a skeleton in the closet, issues that have not fully been dealt with, emotional scars, and things of this nature, self-examination can be painful. Even though self-examination can result not only in freedom, but also personal growth, many people prefer to stay where they are at emotionally. Is it possible that a congregation can suffer from the same things? Perhaps it is. Perhaps self-examination seems too painful and too threatening.

What makes a sound and healthy congregation is not merely that it is committed to the Bible. It is about a church that practices God's will. Jesus clearly said that not everyone who says Lord, Lord would enter the kingdom (Mt 7:21). Only those who do the will of the Father will enter the kingdom. Kingdom living is not just about believing, but about doing. Cerebral faith is no faith at all. It is useless and vain. Churches defined by cerebral faith are useless and vain as well. Ouch! Yes, self-examination can be uncomfortable. But with God's grace, we can have the grace to engage in honest reflection. The kingdom is a safe place where hurt people do not get re-hurt.

Congregational self-reflection is a much needed, God-honoring, God-mandated process. It is something that takes time, patience, honesty, humility, and especially prayer. Self-centeredness, fear, and pride get in the way of self-reflection.

Every activity, program, and physical item needs to be evaluated in light of God's mission and how it serves that mission. We should not be afraid of where it may take us. God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, love and self-discipline (2 Tim 1:7). So if self-evaluation suggests that a program, tradition, or practice no longer meets God's mission, commitment and allegiance to God dictates it be discarded without fear. Change is not a bad word. Self-reflection and examination go along with change. One of the key words that New Testament writers use is metanoia. It is usually translated "repentance," but it means change or retraction.

God calls us to examine ourselves as a people. Therefore we need not fear where that will take us.

A Renewed Gospel

2007-05-21T11:45:00.001-05:00

Jesus came to "save" people. It seems quite natural to understand this as saving us "from" our sins. Everyone is lost and doomed to spend eternity in Hell, therefore Jesus came to "save" us by dying on the cross for our sins. I had heard this for so long that anything else seemed unnatural. What more could there be than this?

I have recently discovered something interesting. The language that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John use for Jesus healing is not always therapeuo or iaomai. These two words both mean to "heal" or to "cure." Often times, the Gospels will use these words to refer to the healings that Jesus performed. However, the Gospels also use the word, sozo, "to save," for the healings and miracles of Christ. (Mt 9:21-22; Mk 3:4; Mk 5:23, 28, 34; 6:56; 10:52; Lk 6:9; 7:50; 8:36, 48, 50; 17:19; 18:42; Jn 11:12; Acts 4:9; 14:9)! Some English Bibles render this verb "made whole, made well, healed," or something like that, which obscures that this is the same word, "save." Here are some examples:

"… for she was saying to herself, 'If I only touch His garment, I will get well.' But Jesus turning and seeing her said, 'Daughter, take courage; your faith has made you well (Greek: from sozo, 'saved you').' At once the woman was made well" (Mk 9:21-22).

"And answering him, Jesus said, 'What do you want Me to do for you?' And the blind man said to Him, 'Rabboni, I want to regain my sight!' And Jesus said to him, 'Go; your faith has made you well (Greek: from sozo, 'saved you').' Immediately he regained his sight and began following Him on the road" (Mk 10:51-52).

"When the herdsmen saw what had happened, they ran away and reported it in the city and out in the country. The people went out to see what had happened; and they came to Jesus, and found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting down at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they became frightened. Those who had seen it reported to them how the man who was demon-possessed had been made well (Greek: from sozo, 'been saved')" (Lk 8:34-36).

The passage could have said "you are healed," using one of the Greek words for healing or cure, rather than a word that means, "to save." This suggests that saving someone from sin or physical ailment was part of the same package. There was no tension between the two. Jesus did not come merely to deal with what will happen to us after we die. He was not merely interested in our souls as a disembodied entity separate from our bodies. He was interested in us as a whole person.

The way Jesus conducts his ministry from the very beginning seems to bear this out. When Jesus first announces that the Kingdom was near in both Matthew and Mark, he begins an assault on evil, sickness, demon oppression, religious oppression, and everything related to sin and oppression.

In Matthew, Jesus begins his ministry preaching that the Kingdom of Heaven was near and began preaching the Gospel, or "good news" of the Kingdom (Mt 4:17). Then he calls his first disciples and begins an all out assault on oppression from sickness, disease, and demonization (Mt 4:23-25). He continued his assault, even attacking religious oppression at the hands of people such as the Pharisees. One thing that often goes unnoticed in this passage is that his ministry also included gentiles.

Mark follows the same pattern. Jesus begins by announcing that the Kingdom of God was near and that people must repent and believe the Gospel, or "good news (Mk 1:14-15)." For the next several chapters, he begins an assault on the oppressive strongholds by healing the sick, casting out demons, and befriending tax collectors and sinners, people whom the religious elite saw as unfit for the kingdom.

In Luke's account Jesus begins his ministry with a quotation from Isaiah 61.

"And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. And the book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He opened the book and found the place where it was written, THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS UPON ME, BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO THE POOR. HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES, AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND, TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED, TO PROCLAIM THE FAVORABLE YEAR OF THE LORD" (Lk 4:16-19).

Jesus begins to do this after he leaves the synagogue that day. He engages in ministries of compassion by healing and befriending hurting and broken people. He brought freedom, dignity, hope, and joy to those who had been oppressed and downcast.

He was anointed not only to announce the good news to the poor, but also to free the captives and the oppressed, which he begins to do after leaving the synagogue that day. Jesus preaches the "Good News of the Kingdom" with ministries of compassion, healing the sick and the demonized, feeding hungry people, touching the outcasts, and getting involved in the lives of the marginalized. The purposes of his miracles appear to be much more than merely confirming his message. He could have done wondrous feats, such as making the temple disappear and reappear, but he didn't. He was demonstrating what the Good News of the Reign of God was all about. God was bringing wholeness to broken people. His holistic ministry incorporated a fractured people into a beautiful patchwork that he called the body of Christ. Jesus establishes a group of disparate people that are fiercely devoted to each other out of their devotion to God. This is why some pagans made comments about the church such as, "see how the love each other" or "there is not a beggar among them" or "they along know the right way to live." This is a testimony to the healing, compassionate, holistic ministry of Christ.

This ministry does not end with Jesus. He commissions the 12, and latter 70 to do what he had been demonstrating. In Luke 9, Jesus commissions the twelve to go out with healing ministries, proclaiming the Kingdom of God. Later, in Luke 10, he commissions seventy people to go out and do the same. The central message was the Kingdom of God. It is in the kingdom where there are no beggars. It is in the kingdom where there is healing. It is in the kingdom where wholeness can be found. In the end, Jesus sends out his disciples into the entire world to do as he has done (Mt 28:19-20), to engage people with the Gospel (Mark 16:15), which will involve ministries of compassion. Of course, the model for how this is to be done is found in ministry as Jesus demonstrated it. Jesus was training his disciples and leaving us a model to follow. This is why he says, "As the father has sent me, so also I send you (Jn 20:21). Jesus is our model.

This demonstrates that there is a clear social dimension to the Gospel. In years past, the term "Social Gospel" has received criticism from evangelicals. Some of the criticism of is warranted, especially in the cases where social concern is not rooted in the character and mission of God. However, this does not mean that God is not socially conscious. It does not mean that God is not concerned about the poor, the outcasts, the marginalized, and the oppressed. Jesus confronted oppressive powers and principalities not with a worldly revolution of power and coercion, but with a revolution of the heart. An apt image as to how Christianity confronts the world is the image of leaven (Mt 13:33). Jesus said the Kingdom of Heaven is like leaven. It is hidden in the dough and works from the inside out. As kingdom people, are to be engaged so that we can be that leavening influence.

The Good News of the Kingdom is proclaimed not merely by profession, but by practice. It is to do as Jesus did, and get involved. It is to walk as he walked, and be willing to get our hands dirty. It is to act as he acted, and be willing to take risks. Jesus does not call us to something "safe." He made in clear in Luke 10 that we are sent as sheep in the midst of wolves. But the image of the slain lamb that rose from the dead and was exalted in Revelation 4-5 gives us strength, because in God's kingdom, sheep are stronger than the wolves and are victorious.

As Jesus was engaged, so to the church, the Body of Christ must be engaged as leaven with ministries of compassion, proclaiming the Gospel both in words and in practice, which gives credibility to our message.

Anyway
From the wall of the Children’s Home in Calcutta of the Missionaries of Charity,
the Order of Mother Teresa

People are unreasonable, illogical and self-centred

Love them anyway

If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish, ulterior motives

Do good anyway

If you are successful, you win false friends and true enemies

Succeed anyway

The good you do will be forgotten tomorrow

Do good anyway

Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable

Be honest and frank anyway

What you spent years building may be destroyed overnight

Build anyway

People really need help but may attack you if you help them

Help people anyway

Give the world the best you have
and you’ll get kicked in the teeth
Give the world the best you’ve got anyway

On Principalities and the Spirit of the Age: Avoiding the Pitfalls of Caring Ministries

2007-05-09T11:56:00.001-05:00

"In our day and time it is the language of the market that governs the way of the world in Paul's sense of that term. The vocabulary of commerce and the syntax of consumption not only distort our relationship with God and thus with each other, they also miscast the church in the role of retail vendor, trading in spiritual goods and services. Thus the market conforms the member's of Christ's body to its ways precisely at the point where the risen Lord summons them to be transformed." [1]

As I read and ponder this quotation, I am reminded just how subtle culture is. Unless we are on the outside looking into our culture, values and assumptions of the culture will usually go unnoticed. I used to be disturbed by some of the language I used to read in evangelism material and in church growth literature of the 1980's. I had trouble articulating why it bothered me so much, it didn't seem quite right. Terms such as "marketing" the church or "closing the study" or finding "prospects" to have an evangelistic Bible study with all sounded too similar to what salesmen who came to my door did. It had a sales and business feel to it. What could be wrong with that? I remember hearing preachers say we need to learn from the business world. Many businessmen built successful organizations and there is much we can learn from this.

I agree that there are things we can learn from outsiders. However, it can become a problem when kingdom people who are not of this realm uncritically adopt methods and ways of doing things their cultural context. The fundamental problem lies in the values, assumptions, and worldview that underlie the structures and activities that exist in the culture.

The underlying values and assumptions in our culture are connected to individualism and consumerism.

Americans are often called "consumers." We no longer consume to live, but live to consume. Our culture seems to accept this as the way things are without questioning it.

Individualism assumes that people are basically autonomous. The focus in life is on self-actualization or personal fulfillment. Therefore, people will look for ways to improve their lives, raise their self-esteem, and find some sort of meaning in life. This should result in happiness and fulfillment.

On the surface, there seems to be nothing really wrong with any of this. However, it is very self-centered. It seems that individualism and consumerism can have a tendency to turn everything into a commodity, even human relationships and God!

Since the Kingdom of God is not of this realm, then it seems that kingdom people would cease to be kingdom people if they buy into individualism and consumerism. Rather than seeing themselves as part of God's church and inherently as agents of God's mission to engage the world selflessly, Christians may see the church as a place to "meet their needs, whether it is esteem needs, physical needs, or self-actualization. The church becomes the vendor and the people become the consumers. The church becomes an institution to attract people to their products and services, and the people become a means to build the organization.

If this is the paradigm, it is any wonder that many people cannot find happiness even in church? Some "shop around" for churches, until they find the one that suits their needs. A particular church may have better social activities. It might have a better children's program. It may have better singing, or more interesting preaching. And the list goes on and on. As consumers, some church members begin to look to other sources that provide similar services for them to consume. Sometimes it may be a civic organization, a club, or something else. As a vendor, the church works to satisfy its customers. It tries to compete with other churches or organizations. The church as a vendor has a hard time competing in the market with other organizations that provide better entertainment, a wider array of social activities, and greater expertise at what they do.

Is it any wonder that the Church Growth phase is now shriveling? Fuller Theological Seminary, once known for its education in Church Growth principles, has recognized many of the shortcomings in the Church Growth movement and has been transitioning to what people are calling a "Missional" model. Many folks like those at Fuller have recognized the weaknesses of the Church Growth model in our changing culture. The success stories associated with the Church Growth model obscured some of its theological shortcomings that stemmed from a blending of some of the underlying assumptions of the times with Christian faith. But that is another story.

I reflect on all of this as a reminder of the pitfalls of engaging the people around us. We want to meet their needs in the way Christ did, not in the way our consumerist culture does. Our mission is not to vend spiritual goods and services, but to engage the hurting and the broken with the holistic good news of Christ, and invite them into the Reign of God. We do not invite them to become customers or consumers, but to be formed into the image of Christ. It is not really about self-actualization. In fact, the whole concept of self-actualization is a fallacy. Theologically, there is only "God-Actualization," if you can call it that. God-Actualization comes not from individualism, but from communion. It doesn't come from consuming, but from giving. It comes from transformation into the image of Christ and participating in his mission from the same motive and heart as God.

I think that if I understand this, then I will be able to do what I can for the sake of the mission of Christ, for the kingdom without worrying about if it benefits my particular congregations directly. I will not be disheartened when I expend energies and resources to help people and there appears to be little "success." I can be free from high-pressure tactics of evangelism and love people in the way Christ did. I can recognize that being socially conscious and being faithful to the Gospel of the kingdom go hand in hand. Perhaps we would eventually be able to shed the opinion by outsiders that all we are interested is "getting me into your church," and that like God, we are interested in them personally. I believe that understanding God's heart and how it is in conflict with the spirit of the age, I can be free to love authentically and have a credible witness.
____________________

[1] James V. Brownson and others, StormFront: The Good News of God, The Gospel and Our Culture Series (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 29.

Church and Culture

2007-04-12T11:23:00.001-05:00

Note: This might be unsettling, so before you read on, please understand this is part of my journey of faith, and you many not see or understand the spirit of our age and its affect on us in the same way I do. I am so thankful that God is a gracious God and does not require perfect understanding, but faithfulness. I love my Lord, and I love the church that he love so much that he died for. This is not meant to be conclusive, but I share it here to spark introspection and discussion about what is happening among us.

Nearly all sociologists agree that the Western world is in the midst of a huge cultural shift that began over four decades ago. Just as there was a huge cultural shift two hundred years ago with the enlightenment which in part fueled many revival movements, six hundred years ago with the Renaissance which in part fueled the reformation, and sixteen hundred years ago with the Constantinian system which gave rise to "Christendom," so we are now undergoing another shift. No one quite knows what the next shift will look like in years to come.

The interesting thing is that these shifts enable us to look with a more critical eye with the strengths and weaknesses of the previous paradigms and cultural assumptions. While Christians in the west are still affected by the Christendom and Reformation paradigms, the most recent Enlightenment paradigms has had the most profound effect. In fact, it was the enlightenment paradigm that produced the greatest amount of division among churches in the United States. This was far from the intent of many of the religious leaders of the 18th and 19th centuries. The goal was unity of the Christian church. The enlightenment led to a thought in the west that there was a scientific methodological solution to everything. We only had to investigate and test all the available data to improve the human condition. There was a very positive feeling in the air that gave the West a feeling of destiny and progress. This affected the church deeply. The same scientific mindset was applied to Christianity. Since scientific truth was deemed to be objective and true, what was needed was a scientific study of the scriptures to produce an objective truth to which all Christians could subscribe to, thereby producing unity. The Bible became more of an object to be analyzed and dissected. If rational logic and science produced advances in other disciplines, it was thought that the same would apply in Biblical studies. Not only would enlightenment ways of thinking with its rational thought, logic, and scientific outlook improve the human condition, it promised to improve the religious condition as well. The assumption that humans were capable of much led to little need for the power of the Spirit or of grace. The inherent sinfulness of man and the need for grace and faith that dominated reformation thought melted away in the enlightenment years. Many Christians believed that their effort to improve the human condition and religious condition was going to usher in the millennial reign of God. Many today call this "post-millennialism," which dominated most religious movements, including churches of Christ. This belief was heavily affected, like so many others, by the spirit of the age. Due to the civil war and two world wars, we don't hear much about post-millennialism any more. It has given way to the more pessimistic pre-millennialism, which believes things will get worse rather than better, as post-millennial thought did.

In part, the project failed. Instead of unity, more division resulted. Various religious groups used the same scientific, objective mindset in approaching the scriptures and believed they found a blueprint for true Christianity and for the church. Some codified them in the form of creedal statements and "confessions of faith," others merely propagated them in journals, which many people regarded as almost authoritative. There arose a certain dogmatism among many religious groups. They arrived at their "truth" using commonly accepted methods, yet not everyone arrived at the same conclusions. The result was that many churches began to emphasize aspects of them that were different than everyone else. In other words, they defined themselves in terms of other churches whom they deemed as incorrect, or even apostate. Their focus was on their distinctiveness in relation to other churches rather than in relation to the Bible or of the world at large. In all of this, there was not a big push for missions or evangelism. The revivals of this period were in part a reaction to all of this. The church began more and more fragmented. Using the same framework, how could so many come up with various conclusions?

This highlights some of the shortcomings of human reason, rationality, and the scientific method. Perhaps this is not the way God intended for us to read the Bible. Perhaps the word is supposed to analyze and dissect us rather than the other way around. Perhaps we need to read and meditate rather than merely scrutinize and analyze. Is it up to us to find the key or method in order to understand the Bible? Is it only by our intelligence and enlightened minds that we can apply the "correct" hermeneutic and interpretive principles or have the message of the Bible shut out to us? It is interesting that indigenous cross-cultural churches that have not been indoctrinated with western Christianity do not treat the Bible the same way many westerners do.

All of this can understandably and rightly be very unsettling. This is talking about seeing things in a much different way than we are accustomed to. But this is nothing new. Remember how people reacted when they heard the contention that the universe does not revolve around the earth, but that the earth revolves around the sun? Or how people reacted with the contention that the world was round and not flat? The list can go on and on. Some of the same dynamic is at work. Our paradigm is shifting. As a result, the way we read scripture, how we apply it, and the way that will look is also changing. Many are beginning to realize that the message is not an impersonal blueprint, but the message is a person, Jesus Christ. God didn't endeavor merely to give more scripture, but to produce a human model in Christ. He himself IS the message.

Wouldn't this destroy the church? Will it to lead to further fragmentation and division? Not if we understand the nature of Christian unity. Unity is not based on 100% agreement on all points of doctrine (Rom 14). In fact, you can have different convictions on some things and still be unified according to what Paul says in Romans 14. Paul never emphasizes who is right and who is wrong in Romans 14 because that was not his purpose. His purpose was to unite the church in the love of Christ. In fact, Paul explicitly states that when a person is true to his convictions to the Lord, the Lord accepts him, and we have no right to condemn him who the Lord has accepted. We need to understand that unity is first and foremost the work of God (Eph 2). It is God who unites us all together in Christ. We need to strive to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace (Eph 4). If unity is first and foremost the work of God, then that means we do not create it, we preserve it. Indeed, Paul does not say to "create" unity, but to "preserve" unity.

This is not an easy task. A look at the problem the church had from the very beginning with the Jewish Gentile problem demonstrates this is no easy task. One solution might have been the creation of Gentile churches apart from Jewish churches. Two "denominations" if you will. This was unacceptable to Paul. Even though they had different convictions, if they divided, they would not reflect the body of Christ. We serve one God, not two Gods, a God of the gentiles and a God of the Jews. We had to be one. In fact, Paul emphasizes the oneness of God and therefore the oneness of the body and our faith in Ephesians four. Only one people of God. Is it possible to have people in the one body with different convictions? Paul certainly believed so. Paul explicitly says that the principle underlying the preservation of unity in Romans 14 is love.

What does this mean? It does not mean we dispense with Christ, his atoning work on the cross, or his resurrection. That is anathema and the spirit of the Anti-Christ. It does mean that we need to proceed with love, humility and grace. If we reject someone whom God has accepted because they have differing convictions about certain things, then we are wrong. Jesus was more condemning of the Pharisees and their attitudes than any other people. Many official religious groups have their own traditions of men that they tout as authoritative in a similar way that Pharisees did. It is easy to point a finger at everyone else in this regard, but when you point a finger at someone else, you have three others that are pointing right back at you.

Once again, humility, love, and grace is what we needs to characterize us. If we have this, I believe that we can be much more effective in carrying out the mission of Christ. Instead of focusing on our "distinctiveness" in relation to other churches, we can focus on the mission that Christ has left us with. We can truly begin to walk in his shoes and take his challenges to us seriously. As Jesus left heaven and went to where those in need were, we can leave our distinctive church buildings and go to where the hurting, poor, and oppressed are and invite them into the freedom, peace, and joy found in Christ. We can be a people of peace and joy and love. We can be the city set on a hill. We can engage in what Christ was most passionate about, which were ministries of compassion, which brought good news to the poor, downcast, and the oppressed.

Perhaps the more authentic expression of the Christian faith has more to do with practice than profession.

It is not my intent to be dogmatic about any of this, but merely to attempt to be honest about looking at myself and the tradition in which I was raised. I love Christ, and I love the church that he died for. I am in the process of recommitting myself to the Reign of God and am re-learning what it means to take the challenges and example of Christ seriously and with grace.

Biblical Faithfulness

2007-03-09T13:10:00.002-06:00

One of the distinctive traits of Churches of Christ has been its commitment to Biblical faithfulness. This is why we send our men to ministry training schools that have an emphasis on studying the text of the Bible.

As I consider my own experience, I am challenged by a deficiency that I have both witnessed and been a part of. When I was younger, I remember sitting in countless Bible classes learning what was in various books of the Bible. I also remember studying various doctrines of the Bible in various classes. Often the emphasis was on what made us different than other churches. Most of these had to do with worship practices, baptism, and the institutional structure of the church. Eventually, this became how we identified ourselves as being "faithful."

I didn’t realize it at the time, but the "consumerism" of our culture may have been a contributing factor toward this. There were churches all over town with whom we were competing with. With all the choices in the religious marketplace, which one should a person go to? Every aspect of life in our modern culture presents an array of choices. As a result, the producers of these goods "market" their product. Many churches inadvertently followed the same mindset. Every church had a bit of a competitive marketing involved in its outreach. They all emphasized different things, but we emphasized that we were the purest and trust church of all without all the denominational baggage. We didn't have all the "additives." We were "organic," so-to-speak. "Choose us, we are closest to the original first century church." Were we really, or did we fall short of the full picture of what the church is to be like? Were we truly free of "additives" as we claimed to be, or were there other "additives" there that we were not aware of? I have to wonder, if there were no "competition" in the church market, how would we have identified ourselves then? We certainly would not have emphasized out distinctiveness in the same way.

After re-reading the Gospels, I am convinced that the most important aspects of what the Church of our Lord is supposed to look like was missing. In the studies of the doctrine of the church, I remember very little references to the Gospels, except for Peter's confession and Jesus' response when he said "I will build MY church" in Matthew 16:18. This emphasis came from a desire to identify ourselves as distinct from denominations. This is "Christ's" church, not Luther's church, Wesley's church, etc. I remember a few years ago hearing a preacher say that no one wants to preach Matthew 16:18 any more. As the sermon progressed, it became clear that what he was talking about was more of the same distinctive marks that we have emphasized in the past. However, there is so much more in the Gospels about the church than this. In fact, I am beginning to understand that the heart of what the church is supposed to look like comes from the Gospel writers. The instructions from Jesus in the Gospels were not intended to be individualistic, but communal. The individualism that characterizes our culture usually causes us to apply Jesus' instructions on the individual level but miss the significant of the communal level. As God's people, we are to be a kingdom of priests, a light to the nations, a city set on a hill. That can only happen on a communal level. The message of Christ began and ended with the Reign of God as its central motif, and the Reign of God consists of a "community" of believers that collectively demonstrate the Reign of God as a kingdom of priests.

What are the marks of the Reign of God? That is a different question than "How are we distinct from denominations?" The Sermon on the Mount is a good place to start on identifying the marks of the Reign of God. . In fact, the very first Beatitude identifies the Reign of God as consisting of those who are poor in spirit.

Jesus said there that he did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. Keep in mind that the Greek, nomos, "law" is the translation for the Hebrew word, torah. Torah does not merely mean law, as in a code, but means "instruction." In fact, the verb form of the word, torah, means "to instruct." So when God handed down his Torah in Exodus, he was instructing the people on how to live under his reign. As a "kingdom" of priests under God's reign (Ex 19:1-6), they were to embody God's ideal as a light to the nations. However, Israel failed dismally. They thought like and acted like the kingdoms around them.

Jesus came to fulfill Torah, not abolish it. In other words, Jesus is the embodiment of the ideal subject under the reign of God. When God first established his reign in Israel, Israel failed to demonstrate the ideal. So Jesus came to demonstrate what the reign of God looks like. I challenge you to read through it carefully and list the identifying marks of the Reign of God, especially the last couple of sections of the sermon.

Here is the irony. People like that preacher that said we don't like to preach Matthew 16:18 are themselves probably missing what it is all about. The Church of "Christ" is more than institutional structures. The Reign of God is more than Cappella singing. It is about following in Christ's footsteps in every way. Do we really follow in his footsteps in every way?

Here is where the challenge came. We "knew" a lot of scripture. However, Jesus puts the emphasis in the Sermon on the Mount not just on "knowing," but on doing. Many people are on the broad way that leads to destruction. Not everyone who says Lord Lord will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Those who listen and do the words of the sermon are like a wise man who builds his house on a solid foundation. For those who read and know but do not do….well, does the Reign of God really exist there?

As important as Bible study is, the purpose is not merely to accumulate academic knowledge, but to lean "how to" think, act, and live under God's reign. Knowing AND doing ALL of God's word…that is biblical faithfulness.

The State of the American Church (part 2 of 2)

2007-02-20T23:24:00.001-06:00

In the first part of this piece, I gave my reflections on some of the factors that I believe contribute toward the general decline of the Lord's Church. These included:

1) A misunderstanding of what our calling is to be as a church.
2) Misunderstanding of our relationship to Culture, which is changing.
3) A misunderstanding of what our message should be.
4) A weak spirituality.

The point of this was not merely to be critical of our culture or of the Lord's Church as has become fashionable in recent years. Instead, the purpose of this essay is to assist in moving believers toward a more faithful vision of the Lord's mission in today's time.

Deeper Than Method

I have not explicitly mentioned "methods" in any of my reflections here. It seems that a methodological solution may be more a product of our culture than of Biblical reflection. In the modern Western Mindset, there is the thought that there is a scientific methodological solution to every problem. I would not be surprised to find that many disciplines might have been affected by this mindset. In Psychology, that is probably where the "behavior modification" theory came from. In the 1980's, I think one strand of the Church Growth Movement was fueled partly by the same mindset. The thought seemed to be that if the church is not growing, then we need to adjust our methodology in order to fix the problem. Some churches become more market driven, as though they were the dispenser of religious goods and the members were the consumers. Overall, the Church Growth Movement did not deliver what it promised. I think we learned a lot from the Church Growth Movement, one of which is that the solutions go much deeper than method. Part of the problem may have been we have identified the wrong thing as the problem. Dwindling numbers are not the problem. They are the symptom of a deeper problem. The solution has more to do with our sense of God-given identity, who we are, and what we are called to do. The changes in our culture along with dwindling numbers have forced us to re-examine these questions. A cultivation of a deeper spirituality, which helps us to discover God's answers to these questions, is a step in the right direction.

Over all, I believe that when the church is faithful to its calling to be a sent people, and that when it has the correct emphasis in its message and practice, that the mission of God will be carried out. What is encouraging to me is that I am beginning to see more and more people grapple with these sorts of issues with a commitment to be faithful to the mission of God.

But what should it look like in our particular cultural context? How can the church faithfully carry out the mission of God? Obviously, this looks different in African churches than in North American churches. Missiologists have combined a sound theology with insights from social sciences such as cultural anthropology, which gave birth to "Missionary Anthropology." Their insights on how to contextualize the Gospel in order to establish indigenous, healthy churches that can effectively engage their own culture has proven to be a fantastic success in the last three generations. Their understanding of cross-cultural missions has enabled them to better carry out the mission of God in their culture. It seems to me that the mission of God is becoming increasingly "cross-cultural" right here in North America. Our culture is shifting from its Western Christianized roots. This means that it will take wisdom and insight to avoid doing what early missionaries did in places like Africa, which was to infuse the gospel with western culture and convert people not to just Christianity, but to "Westernize" them as well. This did not work well. Just as a tropical plant that is transplanted to a climate that it is not indigenous to will become sickly, the church in Africa was the same way when missionaries indiscriminately mixed western culture with the Gospel. Could it be that this is now an issue in North America? Is it possible that our ineffectiveness might be due in part to trying to promote withering Western ideas that are no longer "indigenous" to America? Is this why Christians are finding it increasingly difficult to share the message of God with a culture that seems to become increasingly alien to them?

I don't have all the answers, but I do believe that in our effort to be faithful to the mission of God, we are going to have to find new ways to communicate the message of God, and it will not be centered around a "building" or an "institution." What is encouraging to me is that I am now seeing this begin to take place around the country as Christians begin to think more outside the box. At this point in our history, the box of western culture will only limit our effectiveness in carrying out the mission of God. The mission of God is about going where the people are and inviting them into the Reign of God, which the Lord offers to those who truly believe, not about building an institution.

The "Reign" of God

Perhaps an answer can be found in a reexamination of what the Reign of God is supposed to look like while being aware of our cultural biases. "Reign" is a better rendering than "kingdom," because "kingdom" implies geographical and political boundaries. The original Hebrew phrase was Malkut Shemayim "Reign/Rule of Heaven," not "kingdom," which is a different Hebrew word. The English word, "kingdom" came from the Greek language, which translated this phrase using the word, basileia. This word can mean either "reign/rule" or "kingdom." Context identifies which meaning is meant in Greek. The context goes back to the Hebraic image of the "Reign of God," which transcends geographical, social, or political boundaries. Indeed, Jesus said that His reign was not of this realm (Jn 18:36). This is why Jesus said that the reign of God is "in you" (Lk 17:21).

In my experience, preachers and teachers rarely looked to the Gospels in their study of the Lord's Church, with the exception of Jesus' words, "I will build my church." This leaves out a very significant portion of the teaching concerning the Lord's church. Jesus' favorite term was the "Reign of God." It was the centerpiece of his teaching. Everything he taught flowed from that concept. The concept of the Reign of God goes all the way back to creation where God instructed mankind to "rule" the earth, which mankind failed at. Jesus, the ultimate son of man (human), and also the Son of God, inaugurated a new Reign of God, which was the fulfillment of God's promises. What does life look like under the Reign of God? What are the identifying marks of the Reign of God? You come away with a very different picture from the Gospels than some of the studies I grew up with that stressed more of the "institutional structures," such as the "plurality of elders" the "Bible as its only constitution," and things of this nature. The Reign of God is subtle yet pervasive. It is quiet yet subversive. It redefines every aspect of thinking, motivation, and actions. For example, the Sermon on the Mount is an exposition of the Reign of God. Like the instructions for kingdom life in Deuteronomy, which spells out the blessing of living under the rule of God, Jesus spells out the blessedness of living under the Reign of God for the Christian in the Sermon on the Mount. A fresh reading of the Gospels with a heart to truly participate in the Reign of God does not allow one to be a "nominal Christian."

What does the Reign of God look like? Jesus' picture of the reign of God looks very different than many of the "institutional" structures we have been passionate about in the past. What is interesting is that Jesus takes many concepts that were taken for granted and turns them on their head. Here are some examples. Jesus was crowned with glory and honor not by conquest, but through suffering. In God's reign, the nobody becomes somebody and the somebody becomes nobody. In the Reign of God, kindness is returned for insults. In the Reign of God, one gives up everything in order to become rich. One gives up his life in order to live. One receives gifts in order to give. In the Reign of God, the greatest thing is to tend to the "least of these." In the Reign of God, those who are persecuted for righteousness are the blessed ones. In the Reign of God, everyone is equal and shares alike. Their hearts, minds, and souls no longer belong to the system of the world, but belongs to the Lord and King. These are the sorts of things Jesus demonstrated as being marks of the Reign of God. Truly, the Reign of God is not of this realm.

Rather than spell it out any more than this, my humble advice is to re-read the Gospels and note the marks of the Reign of God, and compare it to the culture in which we live, and especially to our local congregation. This is an important exercise because it causes to re-evaluate everything. I once read that, "We do not know who discovered water, but we are pretty sure it wasn't a fish." We live immersed in our culture, which makes us hardly aware of it. This includes both our national culture, and even the subculture of our own congregation which has been shaped by the larger culture. Many of the subtle values of the system of this world we accept and are hardly aware of it.

Ultimately, the challenging and humbling question that should arise from all of this is this: What marks of the Reign of God do are evident in our lives? What will it take for us to be faithful to the mission of God?

The State of the American Church (part 1 of 2)

2007-02-19T11:37:00.001-06:00

I recently read a couple of articles in the "Currents" section of the Christian Chronicle that dealt with the current condition of the Lord's Church in America. Overall the church appears to have leveled off in growth, and shows signs of declining in some places. I began to do my own reflection on state of the church, and I will share them here. This is a two part series, the first deals with what I see as challenges, the second part deals with moving in the direction of solutions.

Most congregations that I know of are declining, and the members they have are aging. Overall, it seems to me that the church is sick. I believe that this has been the case for some time, but it has only become recently apparent due to dropping numbers. From my perspective, it seems that it boils down to basically these elements.

1) A misunderstanding of what our calling is to be as a church.

Our love affair with our church buildings along with an institutional mindset contributed to the church building paradigm for Christianity. Many believe our mission and purpose is to manage the organization. Missions, outreach, evangelism, and a number of other activities take a back burner to building centered activities. Our budgets are also a reflection of this mindset. The majority goes toward maintaining the building and building related activities, and if there is not enough left over, missions and outreach get cut. Even though it is not stated this way, this practice seems to demonstrate that the building is primary and things such as missions, evangelism, outreach, etc. are optional.

We are influenced by our culture's view of "institution." We have similar language and practices as those who belong to an "institution." We often speak of "going to church" as one might go to a board meeting. We speak of being a "member" as one might be a member of a lodge. In theory, church membership is much more than this. But in practice, membership is primarily expressed by attending meetings in the building. Staff and leaders are managers and CEOs of the institution, everyone else are members, consumers, and attenders. The result is a nominal Christianity that for many may not be a whole lot different than membership in some other institution. In this way, the church has accepted as "normal" what can only truly be characterized as "nominal" Christianity, while it views what the Bible characterizes as "normal" Christianity as something "extraordinary."

With our institutional mindset, we have lost the biblical emphasis that the church is the body of Christ. The emphasis has typically been that we are the "one and only body." What has been missing is the biblical emphasis that the church is the body of Christ, and therefore represents Christ in the world and his mission. The church's mission is not to send people, but to be a sent people. We are his hands, feet, and mouth to carry on the mission of Christ. Christ did not come to establish church buildings, but to establish the reign of God in the hearts of people. Often our priorities are backwards. Outreach, missions, etc. should be first and foremost. Anything we construct or do should support that mission and not the other way around. If, as the body of Christ we are to be ambassadors of Christ, representing his mission, it must be more than maintaining a meeting place.

From my perspective, I see a positive trend all over the world with the Lord's church. This mindset is slowly changing. It has been painful but positive. We are reexamining many of our dearly held pre-suppositions and are slowly becoming better equipped to engage the world incarnationally as Christ did.

2) Misunderstanding of our relationship to Culture, which is changing.

As I understand it, much of our emphasis over the last 100 years has been on doctrinal purity and the "distinctiveness" of the church. That distinctiveness was usually defined in terms of how we are different than the denominations rather than how we are set apart for Christ. This seemed to work well in a culture that was saturated with Christian ideas, symbolism, and language. I am not sure that the emphasis was so much on Christ as it was that we were the one true correct church. It seems that many were winning people to the church rather than to Christ. This was a reflection of our culture's emphasis on various "institutions," which affected us in ways we didn't realize. Much of our literature printed during this time period demonstrates this emphasis. Many articles and books concerning salvation approached it in terms of an idealized and oversimplified version of church history that highlighted the divisions in Christianity and our plea for unity with a call to become a member of "the one true church," namely, our church, through baptism. The church seemed to receive more emphasis than Christ. As a result of this cultural influence, the church as an institution remained squarely at the center of evangelistic writing. This mindset with its language seemed to resonate with a Western, Christianized culture. Our "Christianized" culture held institutions in high regard and was full of denominations and sects, and we engaged it head on.

However, since the culture has become increasingly secular, many of the ways we identified ourselves culturally are now lost to the citizen who has not been "Christianized." The fact is, we do not know how to engage a culture that has become increasingly secular. We do not realize that we have been shaped by our culture and that many of our practices are an expression of our culture as much as it is an expression of our faith. We have trouble separating the two, not realizing that Christianity stands above culture and therefore is translatable to many cultures, whether it be African, South American, or our North American Culture, which is currently undergoing huge changes. Like more recent missionaries who recognize the need to import the Gospel but not Western Culture, we need to recognize that our efforts in our own back yard need to be the same. Some of what we promote and hand on to is probably a form of Western Culture that is antiquated and passing away. Western Culture is not Christianity as the Bible defines it. Some of the ideas and values of Western Culture squarely contradicts the ideas and values of the Reign/Kingdom of God. If we are coming across as "irrelevant," it may be that we are promoting an older, dying form of Western Culture more than the Reign of God. This is why I believe we need to think like missionaries in our own back yard. According to statistics, there are now more Christians in Africa then there are in North America. Africa can no longer be called the "Dark Continent" as it was 100 years ago. We are (and have always been) a mission, therefore we need to think missionally.

3) A misunderstanding of what our message should be.

Since our way of doing things and our message was shaped by our culture, we speak a language that is stranger than ever to the "Un-Christianized" person. Even when we are able to communicate it in a way that can be understood, it seems irrelevant. Indeed, it often is. I believe that this is because we have not kept a biblical emphasis. While the church is important and biblical, it is not what the early church emphasized in its preaching to those outside. As I see it, themes such as the Fulfillment of the Reign of God, the Gospel, The Return of Christ, The Holy Spirit, and a Call to Faith and Repentance were all part of the Apostolic preaching of the cross. These are not themes that we have typically emphasized. Some of these themes as the Bible portrays it are foreign to us. Our emphasis has often been to highlight what makes us different than the denominations. Whether it was baptism, Communion every first day of the week, instrumental music, denominationalism, multiple elders, etc., we emphasized those things that made us correct in comparison to the denominations. As a result, many people were won to a form rather than to a person. In a culture where a positive institutional loyalty still existed, the church appeared to thrive in numbers with this emphasis.

However, institutional loyalty no longer characterizes our culture. In fact, the general feeling in our culture now is a general distrust of institutions. In the past, the church has operated as an "institution" with all of the many of the same institutional structures and mindset, which worked well when there was a positive view of institutions. However, people do not want to be converted to an institution anymore. Indeed, God does not want anyone to be converted to an institution either! We are called to Christ, not an institution. Historically, when the "institution" was overemphasized in the church, all kinds of problems followed. There are numerous examples of this in the medieval church with all of its institutional forms.

4) A weak spirituality.

There is a mystical element to the Christian faith. That makes many of us in North America very uncomfortable even though African, Asian, and South American Christians do not have a problem with this. The reason is that we have been shaped by Western Culture along with its rationalism and empiricism. We have a tendency to reject anything that cannot be observed, tested, and explained. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the power of the word of God and things of this nature are usually de-emphasized or reinterpreted to mean nothing more than a rational exercise of our mind and will informed by a reading of the Bible. There is little mystery in the daily life of a Christian and little emphasis on the disciplines that create the right conditions for spiritual growth. For some, Bible study is not a whole lot different than reading a philosopher and becoming his "student." Much of faith is very academic in nature and a personal relationship with the Lord is little more than knowing correct doctrine. Religion is reduced to a set of rules and preaching often becomes moralizing on certain topics. There is little need for fasting. Praying is a duty rather than an expression of love and desire for God. Bible reading, if it takes place at all, is for the purpose of knowing the Bible rather than knowing God. Spirituality is where we may be the weakest of all. While we often speak of spiritual growth, we often cannot define what that means. Rather than defining spiritual growth as learning to grow in our love for God in all things, it is usually defined more in terms of the amount of Bible reading one does, the service one renders, or then number of events one attends. All of these are good, but are secondary to loving God.

This weak spirituality, I believe, lies at the foundation of the other three items I mentioned above. A weak spirituality probably leads to the difficulty for seeing the world as it really is and our assigned place in it. Without this clearer vision of our identity, we find it a very difficult challenge to know how to engage our world with the mission of Christ.

Sabbath for Christians

2006-12-14T00:21:00.001-06:00

I am struck by the fact that there are more instructions concerning Sabbath than say, the day of atonement in the Bible. When God created the word, he rested on the 7th day. There is a reason why this is included in the account of creation. The narrator in Genesis explains that God set apart the seventh day as special. He commanded Israel to rest on the seventh day because he himself rested on the seventh day.

Did God need to rest? Was he tired? It would seem that an omnipotent God would not need to rest. However, I do know that he was "refreshed" on that seventh day of rest according to Exodus 31:17. I am not sure what that means for God, but I do know what it is supposed to mean for God's people. They were to take time to be refreshed on a regular basis.

When God commands a Sabbath rest for his people in Deuteronomy 5, he reminds them that they were slaves in Egypt, but he freed them and joined to a merciful and benevolent owner, God himself. Every seven days, everyone was to rest, including slaves, servants, visitors, and animals. Even the land itself was to receive a Sabbath year (Lev 25:4). After fifty years, there was to be a special Sabbath year in which all slaves were set free and all debts forgiven (Lev 25:10).

Sabbath was to be a rhythm that penetrated all of life. Every week, God's people were to rest, giving them an opportunity to reflect on the meaning of their work in light of God's redeeming work. God gave them Sabbath as a gift to refresh their bodies and their souls.

It seems to me that Sabbath is a time for us to interpret our work in light of God's work. Whether it was freedom from bondage to an Egyptian taskmaster, or freedom from bondage to sin, God's work results in freedom. Sabbath was a time to reflect on God's work.

There was a time when I would have said, "So what? That is in the Old Testament and we are not under the Old Testament." The extent of any study I had done concerning the Sabbath was merely to refute Sabbatarians.

While it is clear that we as Christians are not under the law (Rom 7:1ff; Heb 7-10), there is still a lot to learn from the law. In fact, Paul calls the law our "tutor" to lead us to Christ (Gal 3:24). The law teaches us lessons about the nature of holiness, sin, worship, and a number of other topics.

What are the numerous instructions concerning the Sabbath rest supposed to teach me as a Christian? Even though I as Christians am not under law, the need for Sabbath still remains. It is to be a special time for reflection, renewal, and recommitment. It seems that for so many who do not observe a periodic Sabbath in their life wind up slaves. They often become slaves to work, measuring their worth in terms of the amount of work they do or their earnings rather than in terms of the God in whose image they were created and recreated.

I suppose this means I need to take my periodic Sabbaths and they need to be non-negotiable. I understand that Sabbath rest is not the same as mere leisure. One refreshes only the body, but the other refreshes both body and soul. I need to take time to rest, refresh, reflect, reconnect, recommit, and renew. I would think this would give me the spiritual fortitude God intends for me to have for the sake of my Lord, my family, and my ministry.

The Sabbath tutors me concerning Christ. Jesus said,

"Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light" (Matt 11:28-30).

Jesus himself offers "rest." What is curious is that he offers rest even as he invites me to take his yoke and his burden upon myself. That tells me that if I am weary and heavy laden, I need to put down that load and come to Christ. My self worth does not come from how much money I can make, the level of expertise I have, or the position I hold in my vocation. Rather, my self worth is connected to the God who created my in his image. It is rooted in my savior who gave the very best he could give to redeem me to himself. It is on the basis of his redemptive work that I enjoy fellowship with my Lord.

This frees me from the burden of trying to measure up. He gives me the grace to work and serve for no other motivation other than to love my Lord. Indeed, his yoke is easy and his burden is light!

If I do not take time to celebrate a Sabbath periodically, I may miss this. If I do not take the time to reflect on the meaning of my work, I may work for the wrong motivations. Even if I take time off for leisure without Sabbath, I may still miss out on the meaning of what I do. Living without the Sabbath principle may cause a certain spiritual fatigue in my soul even if my body is rested. Sabbath enables me to interpret my work in light of God's work.

Lord, I wish to nurture my soul because it is what will be eternal. It is where I commune with you. I wish to feed my soul as much as I feed my body. I await the ultimate Sabbath when I am in your presence in eternity (Heb 4).

The Model Father

2006-11-20T11:17:00.003-06:00

I recently read about Rick Hoyt, a man who has been severely disabled from birth. During birth, the umbilical cord wrapped around his neck and strangled him, leaving him severely brain damaged. He is unable to talk, walk, or use his hands. Doctors told his parents that he would never be anything more than a vegetable and that they should just put him in an institution.

Rick's father, Dick Hoyt, was unwilling to accept this. He could see in his son's bright eyes that he was not a vegetable. After taking him to the engineering department at Tufts University and fitting him with a computer that he can use to communicate by tapping a button with the side of his head, they began to communicate in a way they hadn't before. This enabled Rick to do so much more. Not only did Rick graduate High School, he also went on to college and got a degree in special education.

When a classmate was injured and the school organized a charity run for him, Rick typed out to his dad, "Dad, I want to do that."

Dad was not an athlete and not in shape, but he did it anyway. When they started the five mile race, many of the people watching thought that Dick would push his son down to the corner and come back. But he didn't. He ran the entire five miles. Afterward, Rick typed out, "Dad, when we were running, it feels like I'm not even handicapped!"

So began the first of many races, which not only included marathons, but triathlons as well. Some have told Dick that he ought to try racing on his own without Rick, since he does well even towing his disabled son around. But Dick never does. Dick makes it clear that the motivation for his running is for his son Rick to be able to live a normal life. Rick cannot race without his Dad, Dick, and Dick will not race without his son, Rick. They are called "Team Hoyt." Rick's father has become his arms and his legs in the race.

Here are a couple of videos that chronicle the highlights of this amazing journey.

(Note: You will need Flash Player to play these videos. Click here to download it)

Part 1 (click arrow twice to start video)

Part 2 (click arrow twice to start video)

After watching these videos, I was stuck by a father's love for his son. Dick gave up so much for his son, but never does he ever regret it. Rick can do none of this without his father, so his father has become his arms, his legs, his strength. Dick outputs and amazing amount of time, effort, and energy for his son. They do everything together. What an amazing father!

It occurs to me that this is sort of the way it is with my Heavenly Father. My sins, which twisted my life, rendered me a powerless and slave to them. He took those sins and bore them upon himself. He bore them out of love for me. I can do nothing without my Father. Without him, I would still be enslaved. It is my Father who is at work in me both to "will and to work for His good pleasure" (Phil 2:13). Truly, I can do nothing without him. I can neither will nor work to please Him.

I am still weak, but his power is demonstrated in my weakness. He carries me through life with his strength. When I sin, I remind myself that I can do no better without Him, and that I need to reconnect with Him. I cannot do it on my own. Without him, I would be stuck right where I was. The strength that I now have is really not my own. His power is demonstrated in my weakness. He gave and continues to give to me endlessly.

What a challenge this is for me! God is the model Father, and I want to be a Father like Him. As a Father like God, I need to model selfless, sacrificial love that seeks the good of others before myself. If God is the model Father for me and I try to model myself after him, perhaps my kids will get a small, imperfect glimpse of God in me. Godliness. What a rich word, full of love.

How I Use God's Time

2006-11-19T20:38:00.001-06:00

"There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven--A time to give birth and a time to die; A time to plant and a time to uproot what is planted. A time to kill and a time to heal; A time to tear down and a time to build up. A time to weep and a time to laugh; A time to mourn and a time to dance … (Eccl 3:1-4)."

And on and it goes. I used to think that this was a passage that reminds us merely that there are various season of life that come and go. However, when I read the passage in context, I see something different. At the conclusion of this section, the preacher asks, "What profit is there to the worker from that in which he toils?" (Eccl 3:9). This is not a rhetorical question. The overall tone in the book of Ecclesiastes is ironic. The author seems to highlight the limits of traditional wisdom and the general meaninglessness of much of what humans do. The opening of the book portrays the endless cycle of life that goes on and on and on in weariness (Eccl 1:3-9). There is a circular view of time with little meaning to it. Sure, there is a time for everything. So what?

There is meaning to time, and it will not be found "under the sun." It is found it the God whom we were created to honor, serve and love. Time only has meaning in him. The time that my God has allotted to me needs to be ordered according to him. That is what a passage in Ephesians reminds me of.

"Therefore be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil. So then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is (Eph 5:15-17)."

Making the most of" your time literally is "redeeming" the time. I looked up the Greek word used in this passage, "exargazo," and it means to "redeem, deliver, or purchase the freedom of." This tells me that my time can be held captive. Dominant forces in my life can take my time hostage. Therefore, I need to "redeem" it, or "deliver" it from captivity according to "what the will of the Lord is."

As I reflect on this, it occurs to me that we all have been given 1,440 minutes every day. We all use the time that has been allotted to us. We really have no choice but to use it. But to what end do we use it for?

There are many demands placed on my time. By what criteria do I determine how I allocate it? If I do not give this any prior thought, then my time will probably be hijacked by every perceived emergency or desire of the dominant people in my life. Whether it is a neighbor, friend, boss, or something else, my time may be up for grabs to whoever is the most dominant, demanding or loudest. It may be a boss, a demanding friend, a task, or something else.

Unordered time leads to a disorganized life. Gordon MacDonald shares some traits of a disorganized life, which are indications of unordered time. Some of these hit close to home, such as clutter in my life, including on my desk, in my car, on my dresser, etc. I still remember Joe Jones, one of my teachers at Harding University, who use to say, "If you have to spend more than 10 minutes looking for something, you are not a good steward of your time." Another symptom is the difficulty of enjoying intimate relationships with others, including God. God usually doesn't shout when I neglect my spiritual disciplines. My family understands when I am too busy to go to a ball game or participate in a family activity. There are other forces in my life, which can be more demanding a less understanding. However, I recognize that those forces are often not the most important thing in life and can wait.

Time is the most valuable resource God has given me. Like my bank account, I need to budget my time according to what is truly important. It has to begin with prayer and it needs to be honest. Stephen Covey has some useful time management tools that can be found easily online. I like table below. Every task and demand of my time will fall in one of the four quadrants, and each quadrant has instruction on how to handle it. It is beneficial to spend some time with this reflecting on your use of time.

	Urgent	Not Urgent
Important	1 - DO NOW - Subject to confirming the importance and the urgency of these tasks, do these tasks now. Prioritize according to their relative urgency.	2 - PLAN TO DO - Critical to success: planning, deciding direction and aims, etc. Plan time-slots and personal space for these tasks. NotImportant
Not Important	3 - REJECT AND EXPLAIN - Scrutinize and probe demands. Help originators to re-assess. Wherever possible reject and avoid these tasks sensitively and immediately.	4 - RESIST AND CEASE - Habitual 'comforters' not true tasks. Non-productive, de-motivational. Minimize or cease altogether. Plan to avoid them.

It occurs to me that for this tool to be even more effective, I need to have some clear cut criteria as to which activity goes into which quadrant. Nearly every successful organization has a mission statement of some sort. It guides how they appropriate, order, and use their resources. What about a personal mission statement? Can I articulate what my God-given mission in life is? If not, I may have a little trouble deciding which activity or task goes into which quadrant.

Here are some steps that seem to be a logical way of going about it.

1) Have a clear sense of mission. I need to have a clear sense of God's mission. My mission should be to love God and love my neighbor. Any particulars of how I carry out that mission needs to flow from this.

2) Identify the Non-negotiable parts of my time. These are things that come first that I do not sacrifice for something else. Things such as my alone time with God, my family time, etc., these are non-negotiable and come first.

3) Budget and prioritize. Ibudget other resources in my life, such as money. Time is something that I need to budget. The chart above is a good tool for this. I need to place the current demands of my time, and any demands that come up in one of the four quadrants and follow the suggested instructions there.

I pray that I can become a better steward of the time that God has allotted to me.

God's Common People

2006-11-14T23:24:00.001-06:00

Having completed a Revival Meeting in my home town of Plattsmouth, Nebraska has caused quite a bit of reflection. It had been nearly fourteen years since I had been in Plattsmouth and preached a sermon. It was there in that little congregation that I first cut my ministry teeth. I preached my first sermon as a teen there. I remember the bus program for which the church was known for around town. I remember the active Youth Group of some 21 teens. I remember the skit group that existed, the Eye Openers. I remember some of the full time preachers in the years I was there such as Clay Ross, Chris Thurber, and Paul Stidham. I remember worship attendance of 120 people. I remember the Youth Rallies, Area Wide Men's Fellowships, Area Singings, and Gospel Meetings we hosted. I remember the regular visitation, the Jule Miller Filmstrip Studies, and the outreach and evangelism that was a part of the congregation. I remember the church growing to the point it undertook a building program to accomodate the growth. I remember the air of excitement and joy I felt. I remember that at one point a majority of the people on Tammy Lane were Christians.

I felt a surge of excitement go through the congregation again. It doesn't matter that there are now less than twenty people in the congregation. God has demonstrated time after time that our size, ability, appeal, etc. doesn't matter. What matters is that we ordinary people believe in an extraordinary God. If God can call an 80 year old man to lead an entire nation out of bondage, then he can lead a common person like me to lead my freind to Christ.

During our revival, I was challenged and encouraged as I watched a small group of us go out into the neighborhood with the Gospel. I watched a young woman who was enthused about serving God go out on our first day and speak to a man about the Gospel. The man agreed to a Bible study. The weather didn't cooperate the next day, so we didn't do a whole lot. On day three, another study took place. We usually had only one team out, and a couple of times we had two. In what amounted to only two and a half days because of the weather, we managed to knock on 86 doors, found 34 at home, and had two Bible studies.

Since there were no baptisms, someone might wonder why I was so happy about that. In 1 Corinthians 3-4, it is clear that we are servants who plant and water, and God caused the increase. In other words, results are not my job. My job is to be faithful. The rest is up to God. I am sure that after we left those two studies, that the Holy Spirit worked on the hearts of those who heard. Essentially God has now placed the ball in their court. We were carrying out God's desire, and we can do no more.

This young woman from Plattsmouth is on fire for God. I learned that she has some health issues which would slow her down. I couldn't tell because she was so passionate about what was happening. I very much enjoyed working alongside her and the other members of the congregation. She is a reminder that when it comes to serving God, there are no excuses. It is not about my abilities or my limitations, about about God and what he can do. All God requires is faithfulness, trust, and commitment. In 2 Cor 12:7f, we are reminded that power is perfected in weakness. If I am limited, if I had shortcomings, quirks, lack of talent, etc. then this is great. God can display his power in me even more.

My Highest Calling

2006-11-04T15:48:00.001-06:00

If God's calling orders my life, then everything else becomes secondary. I think Paul is a good example of a man who made the move from driven to called. When he reflects on his life before he came to Christ, he gives an impressive list of accomplishments and things to be proud of (Phil 3:4-6). Paul was a Pharisee of Pharisees and stood above the rest in his zeal for Judaism's ancestral traditions (Gal 1:14). Saul, as he was called then, was sharp. His accomplishment outshined everyone else. Paul's resume appeared to have given him pride and confidence.

It is interesting to note that Paul calls this having confidence "according to the flesh." He now considered those shining accomplishments as loss (Phil 3:7). In other words, he put them away. They no longer define him. He threw them out as trash for the sake of knowing Christ, the power of his resurrection, the fellowship of His suffering, and being conformed to his death (Phil 3:10). The call of God through Christ changed Paul from the inside out. Paul considers himself to be "least of the Apostles" and "not fit to be called at Apostle" (1 Cor 15:9). Paul made it clear that his motivation was not to be a man-pleaser, because if that were his motivation, he would not be a slave of Christ (Gal 1:10). After all, Christians were on the margins of society, they were ridiculed, hated, and persecuted. Having rank or status was no longer something important to Paul (Gal 2:6). Paul had his share of critics who denounced him for his simple way of ministry (2 Cor 10:10). But this was not a threat to his identity. All that mattered to him was doing God's will (Gal 2:20), which he could do regardless of the critics. So when Paul was thrown in prison, he was not distressed (Phil 1:12-14). He found that he could live out God's calling no matter where he was. Even when some ambitious rivals preached the Gospel, trying to "one up" Paul, who was in prison and probably an embarrassment to them, it did not cause Paul to feel threatened or competitive (Phil 1:15-18). His sense of identity was wrapped up in Christ, not in his accomplishments, which were really not his anyway. He recognized that he could do nothing without God being at work in him to will and to work for Him (Phil 2:13).

What a change we see in Paul before and after! The major difference appears to be Paul's motivation. As a Jew, Paul seemed to be motivated by his desire for personal achievements and success. After being called, his motivation underwent a radical change. Paul's sense of identity and purpose was wrapped up in the person of Christ, not in his job, role, abilities, or anything else. He could comfortably be with people in weakness and fear and much trembling (1 Cor 2:1-4), because it was not about Paul, but about God in him. He recognized that the power of God works through his weaknesses (2 Cor 12:7-10). He comfortably realized he was nothing, and the God whom he had dedicated himself to was everything. In this, he found peace and joy.

As I look at John the Baptist, I see the same sort of thing. At one point, the people had stopped following John and were now following Jesus. John was a popular preacher and many people had been going to him. In fact, Josephus says more about John the Baptist than about Jesus, which indicates the amount of popularity that John had. But now, people were leaving John to follow Jesus.

"And they came to John and said to him, 'Rabbi, He who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified, behold, He is baptizing and all are coming to Him.' John answered and said, 'A man can receive nothing unless it has been given him from heaven. You yourselves are my witnesses that I said, I am not the Christ, but, I have been sent ahead of Him. He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. So this joy of mine has been made full. He must increase, but I must decrease' " (John 3:26-30).

Some of John's followers felt threatened, but not John. John had a clear sense of God's calling in his life, and it had more to do with God and his purposes than about John himself.

One of the characteristics of God's calling that stand out to me in both John and Paul are that they both understood stewardship. John recognized that his followers were not his, that his ministry was not his, and that nothing he had accomplished was truly his. "A man can receive nothing unless it has been given him from heaven." God gave him everything, including his ministry. Because they belonged to God, John was only to happy to give them back when his Lord wanted them. This was no threat to John. The same could be said for Paul. Paul understood his ministry as a "stewardship of God's grace" (Eph 3:2). There was no need to compete with rival preachers for notoriety. His ministry was not his, but was God's.

Losing notoriety was no threat to Paul's identity when rival preachers tried to "one-up" him for selfish ambition. Followers leaving John to follow Jesus was no threat to John's identity. In fact, it is probably that John's role changed some when Jesus began his ministry. His identity was not wrapped up in his "career" so-to-speak. His identity was wrapped up in the calling of God. His role, surroundings, and situation in life changed, but his calling did not. Paul understood this, which he why he never missed a beat, even when thrown in prison.

I suppose my role and situation will change. The time will come when my kids will grow up and leave home. I may get too old to preach from the pulpit. I may get out of what we typically call "full-time ministry," and take a so-called "secular" job. However, if I understand my calling correctly, than any job I do will be sacred, whether it is flipping burgers of preaching from the pulpit. It all belongs to God. His calling remains constant even though my situation in life may change. It all belongs to him, and I serve him through everything I do. Therefore, whatever my hands find to do, I will do with all my heart as for the Lord and not for man. My motivation should always be to please God above all else.

I remember reading some words from brother Lawrence in Practicing the Presence of God. He came to realize that to serve God, you don't necessarily have to change "what" you do, but change "why" you do. All we do should be for the love of God, whether it is something small and menial, or something huge. God is not impressed with "what" we do. God is more concerned with "why" we do. My highest calling, then, is to love God, to be with him, to be like him.

The Driven Life - Good or Bad?

2006-10-30T13:08:00.001-06:00

I can't think of a better word for it. Gordon MacDonald calls it "drivenness." Many folks admire people that are driven. They get things done. They can often be found it key positions in successful organizations.

I used to think of drivenness as a positive thing. I remember reading a couple of books in the past with the word "driven" in the title, such as The Purpose Driven Church and The Purpose Driven Life, both by Rick Warren. However, the way Rick Warren uses the word "driven" is not the type of driven I am thinking of here. What Warren calls "driven" I would refer to as "called," because what motivates us should come from God. So I don't use the word "driven" in the same way. Here are some characteristics of drivenness:

1. Often gratified only by accomplishment. Sees life only in terms of results. Doesn't appreciate the process, only the product.
2. PreOccupied with Symbols of Success. These include things such as a "title," office size, special privileges, and other indications of notoriety.
3. Caught in the Uncontrolled Pursuit of Expansion. He want to "climb the ladder." Doesn't appreciate achievements of the past and is never satisfied. Always wants more and will leave if what he is a part of is not growing fast enough.
4. Limited regard for integrity. Since the driven person is so preoccupied with success and achievement, he will succeed by any means possible. He will spend little time with the inner self. Ethics slide and he can become deceitful, even deceiving himself.
5. Tend to possess limited or undeveloped people skills. Projects and personal goals become more important than the people around him. People are valuable to the driven person for how they can help the driven person fulfill his goals.
6. Tend to be highly competitive. Each effort is a win-lose game. Other successful people are seen as competitors or enemies to be beaten.
7. Often has a volcanic force of anger. He cannot take questions, constructive criticism, disagreement, etc. His anger can come out in ways other than violence, such as verbal brutality, insults, put downs, and general vindictiveness.
8. Tend to be abnormally busy. The driven person is too busy pursue relationships with other people, much less with God. He never thinks he accomplishes enough and is always attempting to do more. Sometimes he tries to impress people with the fullness of his schedule and will even complain about. But he will never accept a way to lessen his work load. His "complaining" is really nothing more than bragging.

When drivenness is described in this way, I can see that it is anything but positive. Even though many organizations value driven people (including churches) because they get things done, it is done at the sacrifice of relationships and other things that are important. It occurs to me that even though King Saul was a driven person and we typically see him as a dismal failure, most of the people under his rule probably saw him as a successful king. He had a string of leadership victories even after we begin to see the signs of drivenness. The call of God is not what motivated Saul, but his own drive to hold on to what he had and to accumulate more. As I look over the characteristics of drivenness in this list, and can point to events in Paul's life that can be placed under all eight of them.

I have spoken to people that worked long hours into the evening because they wanted to be successful. It is humiliating for your boss to indicate that he thinks you are not dedicated enough. I remember reading a book several years ago by Paul Faulkner entitled, Achieving Success Without Failing Your Family. It never really became a popular book in the business world because Faulkner makes it clear that you cannot have it all. Contrary to what others had been saying, you cannot be a huge success in your career AND a huge success in your family. You have to choose. If you are going to be a huge success in your career, it will cost you. I have also met ministers who were driven. I met a guy whose goal in ministry was to become a minister at the Richland Hills Church of Christ, one of the largest Churches of Christ in the country. It was all he ever talked about. Everything he did was geared toward that. There were signs of drivenness in his ministry. His family paid the price. I have known students who were driven by the desire to be better than everyone else in whatever they did. They chose their friends on the basis of their status. They dated people who would help their image. They fought tooth and nail for the lead parts in the play, or on the cheerleading squad. I have known a housewive who were driven by the desire to have the postcard house and the postcard family. This is what mattered more than the emotional well being of her children. And the list could go on.

There were those in scripture that were driven. In addition to King Saul, there was Peter, James, John, the Apostle Paul, and others. Out of these folks, we probably have a clearer picture of Peter and Paul. Both of them had agendas. Both of them were go getters. Paul was a Pharisee of Pharisees and had an immaculate record. He was sharp. However, Paul calls his pride and confidence in these things as putting confidence in the "flesh." Paul experience a transformation from being driven to being called. Paul's motivation was no longer the desire to accumulate success and notoriety, but the desire to know Christ, the power of his resurrection, the fellowship of his suffering and be conformed to his death. There is no notoriety in these things. He endeavored to live as Christ did. He wanted to humble himself as Christ humbled himself. He wanted to become the least of these. This was the call of God. If someone tried to overshadow Paul and his accomplishment from self-centered motives, Paul could rejoice because the name of Christ was still being preached. The call of God is not about Paul's accomplishments, but about God's accomplishments, regardless of who God accomplishes them though.

It occurs to me that if I have the right attitude God can use me in a more effective way. But then again, he may choose not to. I don't want to be like King Saul with all his driven tendencies. I want to be motivated by God's call, not my desire for significance as the world defines significance. It seems that what this boils down to is a question of motivation. Am I motivated by the call of God, or am I motivated by the desire for my own significance and notoriety? Where is my focus?

Memorial for our Mongee

2006-10-20T15:29:00.002-05:00

For the Telgren family, 2006 is a year we do not want to repeat. In my wife's own words, it has been the year from Hell. We just lost her mother, whom we all affectionately referred to as "Mongee," to a battle with complications related to a stroke she had back in April. The memorial celebration was earlier this week, and it is now sinking in that we will no longer be able to just pick up the phone and talk to her, or drive down to see her.

Her memorial service was "different." She had told us that she didn't want anything that looked like a funeral or felt like a funeral. She wanted us to come in what she was used to seeing us in, even if that meant shorts and t-shirt. We shed tears of both sorrow and joy as we shared stories and memories of Mongee. From water balloon baseball and other numerous games such as Charades, Taboo, and Trivial Pursuit, there was always fun in the house. I remember watching the family dance around together in the kitchen to the tune of "Yakity Yak." I remember listening to her funny stories about family and other people she had known over the years. I remember how she threw herself into the holidays for both the kids and later the grandkids. It didn't matter whether it was Halloween, Thanksgiving, Easter, Valentines or Christmas, anything that had anything to do with the kids was a huge deal. I remember stories about her fierce devotion to her kids, especially when she felt any of them had been unjustly treated. For such a small lady, she sure was a spit fire! The office staff at the school would see here coming and they would scatter. You just didn't mess with any of her kids. If you did anything to jeopardize her family, you had better watch out! Family was of utmost importance to her, which is why she adopted her oldest sister's four children when she and her husband both died. That adoption ran the kid count in their family up to 10! I remember when I was dating my wife going over to her house and it feeling like summer camp because there were so many kids there! For a long time, I couldn't keep straight who belonged there and who the visitors were. There were always a lot of the kid's friends there and they were always welcome. I heard a couple of the kids honestly say that they were really bad kids and that Mongee still put up with them and still loved them and looked out for them. I heard the stories and can only imagine the range of emotions that she must have went through in caring for all those kids. Only someone with a lot of true love in their heart could do such a thing.

I heard several people remark after the service that they had wished they could have known her better. As I reflect on this wish, it occurs to me that there was nothing keeping anyone from this. Distance was not a real issue. I knew my grandmother real well even though we lived four hours away. The reason? My Dad was devoted to driving us out on an average of once a month to spend the weekend with grandma. Time wasn't an issue. We all make time for what we value in life. The issue is that we did not realize the nature of time. Time is the one thing we cannot set aside for later. Once it is gone, it is gone. Mongee was only 55 years old when she died last week. Just a year ago, we buried Papaw, but we never dreamed that a year later we would be saying good bye to Mongee as well. I don't know how much time I have. How will I use my time for what is really important? Time is perhaps the most precious resource that God has given. However, I do not know how much of this resource I will have. Will I maximize my time by investing in what is really important in life, or will I bury it in the ground? God has granted me health, the ability to walk, work, and talk. He has given me wealth, and has blessed me with people who love me. Will I maximize those blessings or will I bury it in career, possessions, work, and things of this nature? Will I be able to enter into the joy of my master by investing in what is truly important, or will I be in the outer darkness with weeping and gnashing of teeth? What is truly important in life, and what do my actions say is truly important?

After the memorial service, several family members came up to me and asked me if I would do their funeral service when the time came. I didn't ask them why they wanted me to do it, but I think it may have had something to do with the fact that this "unusual" memorial was so light hearted, different, fun, and personal. I have to be honest. In a way, it was both sorrowful AND fun doing this memorial because of who Mongee was. I guess the question for me is, who am I going to choose to be? Will the blessing of God shine through me to my kids, their friends, and all who know us, or will I be another guy who has a job and pays the bills? Oh how empty and self centered it would be if I were focused on these things rather than what is really important.

I still have time. I don't know how much, but I still have it. Therefore, it is not too late. I don't have to lament that I didn't get to know someone or someone didn't get to know me. I don't have to lament that I was not able to be more of a blessing or someone was not able to be more of a blessing to me. I don't have to have any of the regrets of wasted time. I can maximize it as the blessing that God intended. I can use it so that my kids and their friends can have fond memories of the Telgrens and how they loved their kids and loved people. It is not too late.

I love you Mongee and I will miss you. Thank you for taking the Proffitt kids and raising them, especially Stacey. She has been my partner, my lover and my best friend along this journey. Who she is says something about you.

Flesh vs. the Spirit

2006-10-10T11:38:00.001-05:00

I used to think that walking according to the Spirit and not the flesh as having to do merely with moral behavior. I have come to realize that it goes much deeper than this.

"But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth" (2 Thess 2:13).

"He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit" (Tit 3:5),

This tells me that the Spirit sanctifies me and renews me. This renewal means that I put off the old self and put on the new self. It also means that I am no longer conformed to this world, but transformed by the renewing of my mind. The transformation needs to come from the inside out. My mind needs to be renewed. I need to walk AND think according to the Spirit.

Walking according to the flesh can take on the appearance of religion, yet be devoid of the Spirit of God. Several years ago, I remember reading a book by Gayle Erwin entitled, The Jesus Style. In it, he talks about the "style" that Jesus conducted his ministry in. First of all Jesus is born in a barn to a Jewish working class family in a backwater place called Israel in a insignificant town called Bethlehem. That would be like being born in Toadsuck Arkansas. He is given a very, very common name, "Jesus," which is a Greek form of the Hebrew name, "Joshua." Jesus chooses a band of ordinary people to be his disciples, which included people such as fishermen, a tax collector and a zealot, which would be like having a member of the KKK and an African American on the same team. Then there is the way he died - crucified on a cross. In 1 Corinthians, Paul said that the cross is foolishness to the Greeks. I couldn't fully relate to this because we do not use crosses the way they were used in the 1st century world. A modern day equivalent would be an electric chair, gas chamber, or hangman's noose. If people were to hear a preacher say, "Take up your hangman's noose and follow Christ," or sing a song that said, "At the electric chair the electric chair where I first saw the light…" or say, "I am gassed to death with Christ nevertheless I live…" we would be ridiculed and mocked.

My flesh would want to do it all differently. I would want the savior to be born in a wealthy and powerful family with influence where he could receive the finest education and be groomed for being a ruler from birth. He would need to have a name other than something so common as "Josh," perhaps Joseph Witherington III, or something like that. He would need to assemble a dream team worthy to carry out the mission. He would need to go to the finest universities and theological schools and get a couple of Bible scholars and theologians to expound intricate theological questions. He would need to go to Hollywood to find a couple of good-looking guys with charisma to be the front men for his organization. He would also need to go to Wall Street and get a financial guy to manage his enterprise. He would need to get an architect that could build and impressive headquarters with its own zip code. Finally, he would need to go to Gold's Gym and get some body guards and put them in black suits with dark sun glasses. My flesh would want to have him die on a battlefield in a glorious battle, not in a gas chamber or electric chair. My flesh would want to clean it all up and make it socially palatable and acceptable. I would want to make gold jewelry out of the cross. I would want to build ornate, breathtaking, beautiful church buildings. There should be no low-lifes, losers, or people like that in the church. They need to be cleaned up to look "respectable."

I remember meeting a lady who bragged about her church of over 1,000 people. It had impressive architecture, a modern art sculpture out front, a foyer that rivaled a shopping mall, numerous programs, a school, a counseling center, a fleet of buses, and a professional ministry staff that would rival CEO's of any cooperation. One of the guys on the ministry staff had an MBA. What is all of that compared to a little church in Toadsuck Arkansas? I have preached in places like this where the building is aging, little white wood frame building on a hill. The parking lot is gravel, the carpet is worn, the pews are run down, and a retired guy and along with a preaching student serve as the preachers. It appears that there is no comparison between this lowly, backwards church and the huge, successful church in the city. But when I think of that little church in the hills, I don't think of the building. I think of people like Clint, who would drive you over 2 hours to Little Rock if need be. I think of Brenda who would invite you over to her place for lunch. I think of George who had the spare room that he would offer out hospitably. I think of Clara who was wealthy but generous with any need that arose. I think of the bedridden Mrs. Chamblis who couldn't get out of bed, but faithfully sent letters to World Bible School Students. I think of Glenna who would listen to you like you were the most important person in the world. When I think of that little church, I don't think of their aging building, but of wonderful, sweet, godly people.

Isn't this what God looks at? My flesh may look at stained glass windows, ornate decorations, impressive programs and things of this nature. However, if I am in tune with the Spirit, I will see it as God sees it. All the stuff that my flesh sees is invisible to God. He looks past the façade and into the hearts of his people. As Jesus demonstrated, ministry is all about people.

There is a reason why Jesus told his disciples to wait in Jerusalem for the Holy Spirit before they went out. They needed to go out in the Spirit rather than in the flesh. I notice that they didn't try to clean up the foolishness of the cross. They gloried in it and spoke the message boldly. The power of God was displayed in their weakness. This is a challenge for me because my flesh often wants to rely too much on human philosophies of management, leadership and wisdom. I sometimes have the tendency to evaluate spiritual things with fleshly measures of success. My flesh wants what makes me look good. I sometimes want to have a contingency plan for everything before moving forward, which tells me I may be relying on my flesh rather than on the power of the Spirit. I sometimes make ministry more complicated than it really is. I need to be filled with the Spirit and walk according to the Spirit and think according to the Spirit rather than the flesh.

School Shootings and Safety

2006-10-03T11:13:00.001-05:00

"It could happen anywhere!" is the sentiment of several people after a deadly shooting at an Amish schoolhouse. Reporters have been speaking about how the community has been "devastated," and how their sense of safety in this "insulated" community has been shattered. There is no place that is safe.

In other news, there are more discussions about metal detectors, police officers in schools and things of this nature. As people scramble to pass new laws and rules to try and make schools a safer place, it becomes more glaringly apparent that these people do not understand what is going on.

The problem is not lack of security in schools. The problem is, and always has been a spiritual one. Darrell Scott, the father of Columbine martyr Rachel Scott, called the Columbine shooting a "spiritual event." There was more going on than meets the eye. Changing the surroundings without change in the inner person changes nothing. Metal detectors, police officers, locked doors, and such will not solve the real problem. True change comes from the inside out. As tragic as they are, the shootings are really symptoms of a deeper problem, which is a disconnect from the God who created us all. The result of this disconnect is frustration, anger, and hopelessness, which can lead to violence.

We live in a dark world which is under the influence of Satan. The Bible calls Satan the "Ruler of this World." I think these Amish people probably understand this better than most Evangelical Christians who seem to confuse nationality with Christianity, which are very distinct from each other. Jesus said that his kingdom was not of this world, which is why his disciples did not engage in "holy war."

I think it is interesting that in all the news coverage, very little attention was given to how this Amish community was actually dealing with it. Contrary to many a reporter's depiction that they have been "devastated," a counselor who has been with the victims' families says that there is no bitterness or resentment, though there is sadness. In the midst of the sadness, the Amish are already speaking forgiveness. Some reporters almost seem appalled at this.

As a spiritual event, it is plain to see that the gunman really had no power over any of these people. He sent the children to Heaven, and caused sadness in their families, but he did not "devastate" them. "Devastate" is such a strong word. If we truly understand God, the nature of our world and our place in it, we will recognize that there is nothing on this earth that can "devastate" us. Jesus himself said that no one could have any power over him unless the Father has granted it. The book of Revelation tells us that as believers, we have been "sealed" by God, and this seal protects us. Even though Satan, the beast, or some gunman may shoot us dead, he really cannot touch us. Our body is temporal, but who we really are is out of reach of the enemy.

The real battle is not stopping a killer's bullet, because we will always have killers with us on this earth. That is not to say we shouldn't be concerned about it, because God is. The governing authorities are established by God for this very purpose. However, this deals with the external. The real battle is spiritual. What will believers do with this tragedy? The fact that this Amish community is already talking forgiveness shows that the gunman neither devastated them, nor did he ever have any control over them. It was the gunman who was in bondage. He was enslaved to the "old grudge" he was carrying out. These believers will neither be enslaved to bitterness nor to a cycle of revenge. They will display the Spirit of Christ who has set them free.

As I reflect on all of this, it occurs to me that the battle rages around me every day. Although the ways I am wronged cannot begin to compare with what happened this week in Pennsylvania, the warfare is still there behind the scenes. I realize that, like Paul says in 2 Corinthians 4:18, I need to look not at what is seen, but what is unseen. Satan's tools include fear, resentment, hate, selfishness, and a host of other inner attitudes. I have little control over external circumstances. However, with the help of the Holy Spirit that has sealed me, I do have control over my inner circumstances. Surely if they can forgive someone who killed their child and prevent Satan from getting a foothold into their heart, I can also forgive someone who has talked behind my back! If Jesus can forgive those who put him on the cross while he was on the cross, I should be able to forgive anyone!

I suppose it is good to stop on a regular basis and spend some time in solitude and silence. Silent prayer. Being with God. Hanging out with him. It is NOT wasted time any more than being with my wife is wasted time. It is in those silent moments that my inner self comes to the surface. There is no activity or noise to push it into the background. Sometimes I don’t' like what I see, yet God in his love and grace helps me to reorder it, if I let him. He will not force it on me. I have to be willing. Like Elijah in the cave, there are times when I need to listen for his whisper.

And what a powerful whisper it is! It is there that I learn what true safety is on this earth. It is not safety from thieves, robbers, and murderers. It is safety from any of them touching me, who I really am, my inner self. God is there, and they cannot penetrate there. It is a fortress for my soul. There, I am safe in the arms of my Lord.

Non-Conformist Conformity

2006-09-12T11:41:00.001-05:00

I am currently reading a book by Gordon MacDonald entitled, Ordering Your Private World. Over the next few weeks, I am going to reflect on what I believe is the key statement in the book:

"I believe that one of the great battlegrounds of our age is the private world of the individual."

I think that this is a significant observation. Yet I do not think many of us realize it. The Adversary's tactic is one of diversion: placing the scene of the battle where it truly is not. MacDonald talks about sinkholes in our inner lives, which can give way when we accumulate more and more on the surface. It reminded me of my Dad and his garage.

My Dad has a garage behind his house that began to crack and lean. The ground had begun to wash away beneath it. At one point you could actually crawl beneath the garage. I will tell you what Dad didn't do. He didn't repaint it. He didn't try to restructure it to where it looked level. He hired someone to straighten the building, repair the foundation and fill in the gaps.

How easy it is to miss what lies underneath has been slowing eroding and washing away. After all, it is what is beneath the surface that no one notices. In fact, it can be ignored for a large amount of time without any apparent consequence. They fill the garage full of nice cars. They paint it and decorate it and keep accumulating more things in it. Cracks can be merely filled in and painted over to where they are out of sight. It isn't until the something breaks or collapses that you realize how serious a problem there is. The ignored inner life simply cannot withstand.

I have observed that this is the culture in which we live. Our culture prizes the accumulation of success and the symbols of success, such as the fancy cars, the big houses, the designer clothes, and things of this nature. This focus on externals leaves a gaping hole that can often collapse under stress. In fact, I remember reading an article that stated that stress is the number one killer in America. According to this article, 70-80% of all illnesses in medical practice are either caused by or made worse by stress.

I believe that people in general recognize that there is a void in their lives. I have observed that things of a "spiritual" nature have become very popular in the last couple of decades. People have consumed movies, books, items to wear, workshops, and a host of other things of a spiritual nature out of a hunger for something many of them cannot articulate. New Age bookstores and Buddhism have become attractive to many westerners.

One of the things I found strange is that when unbelievers began to crave something spiritual and something transcendent, they didn't go to church. After seeing the wave of books, workshops and classes on spiritual formation in Christian circles in the last five years, I began to understand why. Even believers were craving something deeper than their surface Christian veneer. The emptiness of accumulating more must have plagued Christians, their churches, and their ministers along with the unbelievers around them. Building mega-churches, marketing style ministry, multiple programs and services, the drive and pride of tangible results, and the pressure of the expectation of the minister as C.E.O. produced a large gaping hole beneath the surface of many ministers, churches, and ministries. Many ministers and church leaders were burning out and suffering stress related illnesses just like the unbelievers in the world around them. Marriages in churches were seeing the same divorce rates as the unbelievers in the neighborhoods around them. People in the church were suffering from the same stress related illnesses as people out of the church. Is it any wonder why seekers didn't go to churches? Many churches did not look a whole lot different that what they were trying to escape from, only it was in Christian dress. The veneer was different, but underneath, it seemed to be the same.

No wonder Paul said, "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind" (Rom 12:2). What that means for me is that I need to be transformed inwardly. I need to order my inner self in such a way that I will exert influence on the world around me and not the other way around. I need to spend time on my inner self with God. I like Eugene Peterson's Paraphrase of Romans 12:2 in The Message: "Don't become so well-adjusted to your culture that you fit into it without even thinking. Instead, fix your attention on God. You'll be changed from the inside out."

"The inside out." What does that mean? It has been much easier for me to deal with the outer world. After all, it is what is most visible and measurable. It consists of my work, possessions, accomplishments, and things such as these. It is what is easy to measure and evaluate. But my inner self…. Well, I was not even quite sure what that means. MacDonald says that this is where "choices and values can be determined, where solitude and reflection might be pursued…a place for conducting worship and confession, a quiet spot where the moral and spiritual pollution of the times need not penetrate."

"Need not penetrate"…that is instructive for me. There should be a place that the world cannot touch. This is a place unaffected by the external circumstances and influences of the world. It is a place that is the source of my life: My directions. My aspirations. My decisions. My thoughts. All of these flow from this place within. Painting over the cracks that form from a hollow inner life will only promote the growth of that hollowness. If it is empty, nothing will flow from within. This is what needs to be transformed rather than conformed. This is the most important part of my life that I need to tend to. This is the place from where true life flows.

Perhaps this is what Proverbs 4:23 is all about: "Watch over your heart with all diligence, for from it flow the springs of life."

For me, the key word in this proverb is diligence. I need to beware of the barrenness of a busy life. I need to beware of getting caught up in external things only. I need to ensure that my inner spring is not polluted. The true living water originates with God. As long as the spring is okay, then everything is truly in order. Everything is "okay," regardless of external circumstances. I will not be obsessed over the externals. I will not neglect what is truly important. I will not let the world squeeze me into its mold without me being aware of it.

Practical Apologetics

2006-09-11T23:11:00.001-05:00

I remember sitting in a Christian evidences class at Harding University with Ed Myers talking about apologetics. After talking about the evidences for the authenticity of the Bible and the existence of God, he concluded with this statement. "Love is the strongest apologetic of all."

His point is well taken. When I reflect on the truth of that statement, I am struck by the fact that I know of no unbeliever who was won mainly by a well-reasoned argument. I only know of two people out of countless others for whom apologetics removed obstacles to their faith. It didn't cause their faith, just removed obstacles to it.

When I was a new Christian, I can remember getting into religious arguments with relatives and friends and doing nothing more than alienating them or turning them off from any further dialogue we might have had. What was my problem? It still hadn't sunk in what the greatest thing was. "The greatest of these is love" (1 Cor 13:7), wrote the Apostle Paul. "Whoever loves a brother or sister lives in the light" (2 Jn 2:10), said the Apostle John. "By this (love) will all men know that you are my disciples" (John 13:35), said our Lord Jesus Christ. Living in the light means living in love. Living in love is how unbelievers will see the light of God.

I recently read an account of a problem in many ivy-league schools. These were among some of the intellectually brightest in an upcoming generation. Many of these students were poised to become the next policy makers and shape the direction of the country in years to come. Part of their training involved courses in ethics. As with many other classes, many of these students received the highest marks. One of these students recounts the repeated character problems in many of her fellow students. While they could effectively and intelligently discuss ethical dilemmas to the point of teaching classes on the subject, they often had more character flaws than the blue-collar workers that barely had a high school education in the neighborhoods around the school. Sexual impropriety, lying, cheating, and deception were common practice among many of these students. Yet they all had excellent grades in their ethics courses. Many of these would go on to become doctors, lawyers, judges and politicians. Ethics had become nothing more than an interesting intellectual subject. However, it did little to change their life. If anything, it provided a way to dodge the inconsistencies in their life.

The same thing can happen in my spiritual life. I can get advanced degrees in theology and expound its implications from a sound, intellectual vantage point. I can defend the authority and authenticity of the scriptures with a sound academic method. While it is important to have intellectual honesty and soundness, there is much more to the faith than this. Knowing is every bit a relational exercise as it is an intellectual one. When Jesus prayed in John 17:3, he affirmed, "…this is eternal life, that they might know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." The goal is not for me merely to know scripture, but to know God. The goal is not for me to merely know about God, but to know God. John wrote, "God is Love" (1 Jn 4:8). Since God is love, I am to love (1 Jn 4:7). Knowing God means walking and living in his presence in such a way that his character becomes my character. Since God is love, I am to love. In this way, I walk in the light of God that shines out in my life and draws people to God. To be sure, when others see my godly character, this by itself will not save them. Those who are lost need to hear the Gospel, which has the power of salvation to everyone who believes (Rom 1:16). However, that initial draw to the Gospel comes from seeing the light of God in my life.

Early Christians demonstrated this in their lives. Most were not as intellectually sophisticated as their pagan counterparts. In spite of this fact, Christianity took hold of the world. God worked in the lives of everyone that abandoned themselves to him through a change of character not merely through intellectual arguments. This new freedom to love others without fear of loss made such an impact, that in a short period of time the Gospel had gone out to Rome, Asia, Africa, Britain, and India.

The mighty power of God displayed in the beauty of love could not be contained. Here is a quotation from the pagan emperor Julian that sheds a little light on the outsider's perspective of Christianity.

“Atheism (i.e. Christian faith) has been specially advanced through the loving service rendered to strangers, and through care for the burial of the dead. It is a scandal that there is not a single Jew who is a beggar, and that the godless Galileans care not only for their own poor but for ours as well; while those who belong to us look in vain for the help we should render to them.” -Julian 332-63

Pagans referred to Christianity as atheism because they did not worship the pantheon of gods and did not worship an image. Notice how a Roman, with all of his sophistication views the cause for the spread of Christianity. It wasn't through the mighty intellect of all those Christians, but through their simple, yet powerful acts of God's love.

Truly, love is the greatest apologetic. Through it, people experience something of God. These early Christians have left an example and challenge. Pour as much energy into living out the character of God as in intellectual prowess. Perhaps I need to put more energy into the former than the latter. Instead of "How can I win this argument?" the question for me should be, "How can I represent God and his interests to these people?"

None if this is new to me. It likely may not be new to you. I have no problem expounding and explaining the importance of all of this. In years past, I made good comments concerning these issues in some of the Bible classes I was in. As early as my teen years, I did devotionals and sermonettes on them. The same was true of many of my Christian friends. However, like those Ivy League students, we talked more than we walked. We knew our scriptures well. We had been indoctrinated well, but not educated well. The knowledge we had was not the same as the transformation that we were supposed to have had. I wonder if people saw God in us, or merely a religious argument. There lies the challenge.