tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18642307698545440922024-02-20T04:48:18.945-06:00As For Me and My House...My thoughts about theology, politics, Christianity, family, and perhaps a little bit of everything else.Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.comBlogger135125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-28778758079443137802009-09-16T21:46:00.002-05:002009-09-16T22:10:46.778-05:00Children and Salvation - a follow-up<span style="font-style: italic;">It's been just over two years since I first blogged about the issue of children and salvation. In my first post on the subject (you can read it </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2007/07/children-salvation-and-confusion.html">here</a><span style="font-style: italic;">) I mentioned specifically the struggle that our oldest son had been having regarding the issue of salvation. This post covers some of the same subject matter but also tells the story of Trey finding resolution to this struggle that's been going on inside him for years.</span><br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />_______________________________________________________<br /><br />Salvation can be (and often is) an extremely confusing subject for a child. I struggled greatly with the issue as a child (and even into my adult years). The main cause of my struggle was a fundamental misunderstanding regarding the essence of salvation. For my part, I remember clearly many of the times that I made a profession of faith. From the time I was 5 years old until the time I was 20 years old I made numerous “salvation decisions”. The first time was when a drama team from a Fundamentalist University came to our church. The drama scared me to death and I went forward at the invitation. The next time was when a musical group from a Fundamentalist College came to our church….same deal. Then there was the “hellfire and brimstone” evangelist. He said that if I wasn’t <i>”absolutely sure”</i> that I was saved that I needed to come forward and take care of it. So I did. Nearly the entire decade of the 80’s had me at summer camp every year. During my teen years (mid-80’s and forward) the camp experience was at a well-known Christian camp in another state. We always scheduled our camp week to coincide with one of the weeks that the biggest name amongst Fundamentalist Evangelists was there. Every year it was the same story….I’d get <i>”saved”</i> (and then go home and promptly destroy all my CCM tapes!). My confusion about salvation continued on into my young adult years. I spent three summers working at two different large Christian camps. During each of the first two years I again made professions of faith. I didn’t do that the third year but I found myself praying nearly every day that the Lord would show me that I actually was saved….I was so desperate during this time that the memory of those emotions is still very real to me.<br /><br />I always came back to “the prayer” I prayed at my most recent salvation experience. I would rehearse it over and again in my memory desperately trying to recollect whether or not I had said the right words in the right order. I had a rather unfortunate view of God at the time. Despite my brokenness, I figured that if I hadn’t got the prayer <i>right</i> then God hadn’t really saved me. This stressed me out – it caused me to lose sleep – it made me view God as some sort of a “trickster”.<br /><br />I’m now 36 years old. My oldest son is a lot like me in the way he thinks about things. He began struggling with this issue of salvation when he was barely 4 years old….that was 7 years ago. I’ve struggled during that time to be so careful with how we dealt with the subject whenever it would come up. Never pushy – never leading him to pray some “words” – just watching him struggle with it and helping him through as I was able. He came to me last night with more questions. It was fairly easy to see that his long struggle with this issue was coming to a head – his tears and the anxiety on his face bore all that out. I asked him to do what I always have. I told him to read John 3 slowly and carefully using either his ESV Bible or my NIV (so he could understand more clearly). He spent a great deal of time reading through the chapter and then came back to me still crying and trembling. I asked him to tell me about the chapter which he did in a beautiful way. We then began talking about what salvation is and is not. I had Trey do most of the talking – explaining it to me in his own words.<br /><br />As I quoted and paraphrased some other passages of Scripture in John, Romans, and 1 John, I would ask him again to explain the passages to me. In the end he acknowledged that he needed Christ as his Savior. So, he prayed….inaudibly. When he was d<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtVh7b3IHosyEk-U_-k25yHQFl0jZIzzts0jXZRdqXtZWoqLTKZ6-S5zcadsNYDXmX32ePPaLf64utlKwx20IFbrdyX5fHiD5LplQotRtrY4mUuAx7f-ghj8CI1gJ6uoXJnkFbH9SX7tc/s1600-h/P1030703.JPG"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 295px; height: 221px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjtVh7b3IHosyEk-U_-k25yHQFl0jZIzzts0jXZRdqXtZWoqLTKZ6-S5zcadsNYDXmX32ePPaLf64utlKwx20IFbrdyX5fHiD5LplQotRtrY4mUuAx7f-ghj8CI1gJ6uoXJnkFbH9SX7tc/s400/P1030703.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5382268285258535026" border="0" /></a>one, I didn’t ask him what he prayed simply because he has always struggled with the issue of “saying the right words”. Instead I spent some time with him showing how he could know from Scripture that God had saved him. I shared with him that salvation is not about some formulaic prayer, but rather about God’s love and mercy. As I was talking I noticed that he was crying more fervently than before and I asked him why. He said, “because I’m so happy”.<br /><br />My prayer for him as we ended our conversation (as well as going forward) is that he grows in God and becomes the Christian man that God wants him to be; that God would continue to work in his life and that He would constantly remind him that he is an adopted child of the King; and that his faith in God would grow and would be unshaken by anything that might happen here on this earth.<br /><br />I think that adults can do a lot of long-term damage to children if these matters aren’t handled carefully. It is <i>so</i> important that people base their salvation on the Person and work of Jesus Christ rather than some “1-2-3” formula. It is important that, rather than trying to “scare the hell” out of someone, we explain the love and relationship that Christ offers freely to all who will believe. My heart goes out to those who never seem able to get this matter of salvation nailed down. As we share the Gospel with others and, by God’s grace, have the opportunity to lead some to Him, we need to take great care in teaching them that their assurance – their confidence – is to be in Christ and Christ alone. Not some prayer; not some stake hammered into the ground behind their house; not anything of their own merit; but in Christ. His goodness, His love, His great mercy. Him, and Him alone.<br /><br />With the heavenly choir I rejoiced last night as God brought one of His own to Him!<br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-68456615128395282272009-08-27T12:00:00.004-05:002009-08-27T16:28:31.198-05:00Things that annoy me.<div align="justify">Just a random list here of a few things that tend to irk me...<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVBrgm0vuwIlJA8SBoR0nD8IinQxCLhJSEP-RqCuX2FiE1CTWwX9x7xtLi-aCbvk_MVBmPiwF8EbQ8DD2NWLfXn_cTZUBgCaQ4RM5WveDe3M11yG4lB_pzwRPf2ipigDF4MUKdRKJkFGY/s1600-h/annoyed.jpg"><em><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5374689865249740898" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 218px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 208px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgVBrgm0vuwIlJA8SBoR0nD8IinQxCLhJSEP-RqCuX2FiE1CTWwX9x7xtLi-aCbvk_MVBmPiwF8EbQ8DD2NWLfXn_cTZUBgCaQ4RM5WveDe3M11yG4lB_pzwRPf2ipigDF4MUKdRKJkFGY/s400/annoyed.jpg" border="0" /></em></a><em>(actually, some of these things are more than annoying.....they tick me off!!!!) </em>I'll have something more substantive coming soon......</div><br /><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"></div><br /><ul><li><div align="justify">People who drive too fast.<br /></div></li><li>People who drive too slow.<br /></li><li><div align="justify">“To” being used where “too” ought to be.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Red lights….especially when there are no other vehicles on the road.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The word “ideal” being used in place of the word “idea”.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The first syllable of “water” being pronounced “what”.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People who attempt to claim they aren’t racist by citing the fact that they used to have a really close friend who was black.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">When I’ve got an itch on my back that I can’t quite reach.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People who refuse to admit that they are wrong…particularly when they are disagreeing with me!<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Parents at sporting events who act like complete idiots when a call doesn’t go a direction that favors the team that their kid is on.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People smoking in a vehicle that has kids in it.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The sight of Brett Favre wearing that hideous purple uniform.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People texting while driving.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Texting.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Twitter.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">99% of all status updates I’ve ever read on Facebook.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The parent of one of the kids on my sons’ 6th grade football team who thinks it’s completely appropriate to yell out any profanity that happens to come to his mind.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The constant elevation of athletes as role models.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Road construction.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The unhealthy focus on entertainment in our society.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Sexually suggestive commercials.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People who think that a four-wheel drive vehicle somehow makes them invincible on the road no matter how hard it’s raining, how deep the snow is, or how thick the ice is.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The fact that there is a television network called “Cartoon Network” yet I can’t allow my kids to watch most of what airs there.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">That I can’t watch national news without some story about Michael Jackson or Jon and Kate.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Politicians….nearly all of them.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Christians who think they are righteous in their laughter when calamity and / or death comes to some political figure with whom they disagree ideologically.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People who attempt to use the Bible to justify their own wickedness.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Athletes who are Christians only when their team wins a game.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The idea that God actually cares whether or not your team wins a game.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The idea that just because a thing isn’t expressly forbidden in Scripture that it must be acceptable.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">People driving right on my rear bumper.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">The fact that great programs like “The Andy Griffith Show” have been replaced by crap like “Family Guy”.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">MSNBC pretending to be a news organization.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Some conservative talk show hosts pretending to be non-partisan.<br /></div></li><li><div align="justify">Lists that go on for far too long. </div></li></ul>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-31061469887235248242009-08-05T14:15:00.000-05:002009-08-05T14:16:56.880-05:00Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer!<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOjSs0IMOBRxsdXhvhyphenhyphen8eiSaRn7Ap9FdaI2JRYDb-B54CUFh-Z1SBYUGh6I8QKU3m7tyz3yC6MBLXmq5GIgSYsQQ2cm5KFurfTWi8NsDk8mePMm9XwAR51ucTuiVfPdcg-bEgv19DnIuM/s1600-h/jesushand.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5366560372503144002" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 240px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 182px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOjSs0IMOBRxsdXhvhyphenhyphen8eiSaRn7Ap9FdaI2JRYDb-B54CUFh-Z1SBYUGh6I8QKU3m7tyz3yC6MBLXmq5GIgSYsQQ2cm5KFurfTWi8NsDk8mePMm9XwAR51ucTuiVfPdcg-bEgv19DnIuM/s400/jesushand.jpg" border="0" /></a>Your sacred head bowed down in pain. A cross your resting place.<br />Your nail pierced hands blood hath stained. Your visage blood hath traced.<br />Your thorn crowned brow – so much pain. Your bruised and battered face.<br />Such selflessness – love defined… You freely took my place.<br /><br />They beat you and they mocked you and they called you evil names;<br />Willingly ignoring the reason that You came.<br />Maliciously they whipped You – Your back they opened wide…<br />Your reaction was astounding! – “Forgive them”, was Your cry.<br /><br />Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!<br />You loved Your own and prayed for them. You loved them to the end.<br />Alone and battered, bruised, rejected. A wounded, bloodied man.<br />Was <em>this</em> the scene You had in mind? Was <em>this</em> salvation’s plan?<br /><br />This ugly scene of sacrifice – we cannot comprehend;<br />My precious Jesus, loving and faithful, endured all to the end.<br />The Perfect Lamb, unspotted – untainted out and in,<br />Took my place through suffering - He died there for my sin.<br /><br />I gaze with awe at Calvary’s cross as questions flood my mind:<br />Propitiation? Substitution? Atonement for my sin?<br />My questions turn to tears – my sorrow turns to joy;<br />He loves me! He forgave me! My penalty destroyed!<br /><br />Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!<br />Your grace and startling mercy! Your love that knows no end!<br />You sought me and You found me and You said I am Your own!<br />Your nail scarred hands now hold me. Your righteousness my robe!<br /><br />I kneel in shame and gratefulness, my blind eyes opened wide.<br />I understand, though mystified, it was for me He died!<br />This tragic death now glorious to me it doth appear.<br />He changed my life! He paid my debt! He brought salvation near!<br /><br />The debt I owe to You, my God, is one I’ll ne’er repay.<br />It’s greater than the former one – the one You washed away.<br />You elected to redeem me. How astounding! How sublime!<br />I’ll live for You, dear Jesus, though unworthy of Your name.<br /><br />Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Guide!<br />I long to know You better…with You I would abide.<br />Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!<br />I long to understand Your love…Your love that knows no end. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-10938715246183334612009-08-04T17:01:00.000-05:002009-08-04T17:01:01.099-05:00"Sin Myths" or "Why I hate the color grey"<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmClYIaEhQ9NDVZ0bS6plHl48GXScPK5qcCm-19njaPtgGv7rT7GcBiXp3sdqXeAf9wcg60PdPd0RymjMoT2eZgMrTayF0yU0Al0DeUKHte1gJ3jpIhfwDBussG7Np7D2jr547RsnbEzc/s1600-h/VCAGZWZWICAMEKJJMCAECGR9ACA0080XHCAWA43BACAX22LJICAK40WMGCARBLPA4CA4ZL65WCA7YC65UCAXYG8FACA2CR4GOCAEQQXAWCADM032DCA0968JRCAPNR04PCAH7GXSKCADMF197CA5QBQBU.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5366216753451476898" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 163px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 144px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmClYIaEhQ9NDVZ0bS6plHl48GXScPK5qcCm-19njaPtgGv7rT7GcBiXp3sdqXeAf9wcg60PdPd0RymjMoT2eZgMrTayF0yU0Al0DeUKHte1gJ3jpIhfwDBussG7Np7D2jr547RsnbEzc/s400/VCAGZWZWICAMEKJJMCAECGR9ACA0080XHCAWA43BACAX22LJICAK40WMGCARBLPA4CA4ZL65WCA7YC65UCAXYG8FACA2CR4GOCAEQQXAWCADM032DCA0968JRCAPNR04PCAH7GXSKCADMF197CA5QBQBU.jpg" border="0" /></a>Just because something is <i>stupid</i> doesn’t necessarily mean that it is sinful. Smoking half a pack of cigarettes a day is absolutely stupid. It is also unhealthy. It also makes you smell bad. It might even indicate that you have some lack of self-control. <b>BUT</b> it is most certainly <i>not</i> a sin to smoke. I will concede that addiction (to anything really) is sinful. Since cigarettes contain nicotine, they can potentially become addictive. So smoking your half a pack a day is (to state it again) <i>stupid</i> in that it could certainly lead you to the <b>sin</b> of addiction.<br /><br />I used to smoke cigarettes….a pack or so a day. I coughed all the time and I smelled bad. After doing this for a few years I decided to stop (with the exception of the occasional cigar on the golf course). I have no desire to smoke ever again. Mainly because of the smell and the fact that there is a chance that it could put me in an early grave. Both of those things aren’t really all that appealing to me. All that said, I respect your foolish decision to smoke. I’ll tell you it’s stupid and I might even tell you that you stink, but I won’t tell you that it’s a sin….because it’s not.<br /><br />Now, please do not confuse these statements as a defense of smoking. Do not view them as an encouragement to take up smoking. Do not view them as my attempts to justify some behavior of my own. Take them for what they are….statements of fact regarding one of the “sin myths” in Conservative Christianity.<br /><br />Whether the issue is drinking, smoking, divorce, dancing, a man having long hair, or a woman wearing pants, there are a number of “sin myths” that have taken an almost <i>doctrinal</i> status within Conservative Christianity. When one attempts to offer up a biblical perspective on these things he is often demonized for attempting to justify his own sin if he doesn’t come to the “Party line” conclusion. It makes one wonder at times if they are in the right “Party”.<br /><br />The many discussions I’ve involved myself in (or simply witnessed) on 10 or 15 different websites around the internet over the last several months regarding the alcohol issue have reminded my of this. Some of the discussions have been profitable. Some have been educational. Some have been challenging. However, most have ended up digressing into utter foolishness with one or both sides attacking the motives and character of the other. Why do disagreements over “grey areas” have to get so shallow and ugly? </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com13tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-65232574399871461052009-07-29T16:45:00.001-05:002009-07-29T16:45:00.691-05:00Pharisees versus Freedom Freaks<div align="justify">There are two common approaches to issues of “Christian liberty”, both of which can be damaging. I term these two (1) Pharisees (not exactly original, I know), and (2) Freedom Freaks. Let me explain.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5GEJIsgIEnOHK4dXpka7XzoeBEXc49V-j8Cb6ZGStrMqEVgQphWlxyTHq-JR-xCKjsDQO7Yfo8tnZ6XnTLzGmN-cvydgQZ08CBOCBKbEBd19BGbRyXNNCT6ocEgSWkvWyMBMU8kUcupY/s1600-h/FF.bmp"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5363909173424960962" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 203px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 254px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5GEJIsgIEnOHK4dXpka7XzoeBEXc49V-j8Cb6ZGStrMqEVgQphWlxyTHq-JR-xCKjsDQO7Yfo8tnZ6XnTLzGmN-cvydgQZ08CBOCBKbEBd19BGbRyXNNCT6ocEgSWkvWyMBMU8kUcupY/s400/FF.bmp" border="0" /></a>First, the “Freedom Freak”. This is commonly found in mainstream Evangelicalism but is practically nonexistent in Fundamentalism. The Freedom Freak does everything in excess and out loud. He is often unconcerned with how others might find some of his “liberties” offensive. For instance, it’s not enough for this guy to simply say that he cannot in good conscience support a tee-totaller view on alcoholic beverages based on what Scripture has to say on the subject: he feels compelled to proclaim his favorite beers and rate his top ten favorite mixed drinks on his Christian blog. It never occurs to him that there is a point where Christians might need to take advantage of the liberty they have to <i>abstain</i> from certain things in order to not violate the conscience of a fellow believer. This guy will draw no distinction between peripheral issues and truly contentious ones. In his mind, whether the subject is dress, hair length, music, alcohol, entertainment, language, worship style, or any number of other things, the answer is the same: <i>“Those Pharisees aren’t going to squash my liberty”</i>. The “Freedom Freak” usually understands that Christianity is about a relationship with Christ, but he often neglects to view Christ as a holy and mighty God, choosing instead to focus on the fact that Christ had relationships on earth with some “undesirable” people. They will often paint Christ as kind of a “happy go lucky” guy who would probably avoid most Christians in favor of hanging out at the local pub if He were on earth today.<br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE2dFKsdmIz78tQX5uGZq0G6JOYYX40hinOno9vM2WuZoaxqUFJCCv8rHMyLvEEC52m-oodetTO54iU4HACy0_oNWowGG1Ja9CRFNJr9mlgrzP0CTIqCBbX7V3WoiDu9rR_h3rrvD7L6k/s1600-h/pharisee.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5363908973666239090" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 211px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 250px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE2dFKsdmIz78tQX5uGZq0G6JOYYX40hinOno9vM2WuZoaxqUFJCCv8rHMyLvEEC52m-oodetTO54iU4HACy0_oNWowGG1Ja9CRFNJr9mlgrzP0CTIqCBbX7V3WoiDu9rR_h3rrvD7L6k/s400/pharisee.jpg" border="0" /></a>Then there is the “Pharisee”. This guy is the antithesis of the “Freedom Freak” and is more commonly found in Fundamentalist circles. The “Pharisee” cannot process the idea that some people examine Scripture thoroughly and simply come to a different conclusion about certain things than he does. To the “Pharisee” the Christian life is about a fairly detailed list of do’s and don’ts. Even in matters in which scholars through the ages have differed, this guy sticks to his rules. After all, he probably knows better than some guy who lived 200 years ago and studied Scripture for his entire life in the languages in which they were originally written. The Pharisee tends to not engage in any sort of debate or conversation about the controversial issues. <i>“It’s just wrong…you can see all through the Bible that it’s a sin!”</i> is a summary of the best argument this guy will tend to lay out to defend some of his more difficult positions. The heart of the Pharisee tends to be on target…sort of. He has a desire toward righteousness…toward becoming more like Christ. However, in his zealous approach to sanctification, the Pharisee tends to relegate the Christian life to something that is more about a “look” and a “list” then it is about a relationship. Indeed, a relationship with Christ is more about reading the Bible every day than it is about anything else as far as this guy is concerned. The “Pharisee” tends to paint a horrible picture of God as some angry ogre in the sky who is going to punish you for any misstep you might make.<br /><br />While there is plenty of good and bad to say about both the “Pharisee” and the “Freedom Freak”, they both tend to miss the mark. They both have an incomplete and, consequently, a distorted view of Christ. They also both have a horrid understanding of the liberty and freedom that we enjoy in Christ. One makes the Christian life impossible and the other makes it look no more difficult than eating a snow cone. Both are horribly selfish in that they ultimately make life about themselves. Both would do well to lock themselves up in a room for a month or two and carefully study Romans and 1 Corinthians. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-1865508639691868322009-07-22T17:34:00.003-05:002009-07-22T17:38:28.736-05:00Glorious Savior! Blessed Redeemer!<div align="left"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcdmQf-zujg8Oy2x4vwfiFeDnZxqbuCzA6jyZ63HuYtSQZv6UVvl_58OPlkfR9GQnjUMKyX5taPccTSK3K0E6m5Y9LpSkjclCGvqW7wD4hDoBR-l4h-Nu9RnLPyLcqTLu0_x4lVuCVSt4/s1600-h/jesus-on-cross-01.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5361417015039116098" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 207px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 345px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjcdmQf-zujg8Oy2x4vwfiFeDnZxqbuCzA6jyZ63HuYtSQZv6UVvl_58OPlkfR9GQnjUMKyX5taPccTSK3K0E6m5Y9LpSkjclCGvqW7wD4hDoBR-l4h-Nu9RnLPyLcqTLu0_x4lVuCVSt4/s400/jesus-on-cross-01.jpg" border="0" /></a>Battered and bruised, bloodied and bare<br />Ridiculed and shamed;<br />The Son of God bore all my sin.<br />Oh, praise His Blessed Name!<br /><br />He became sin for us<br />Though no sin He knew.<br />He cloaked us in His righteousness;<br />He washed us white as snow.<br /><br />The ugly mount called Calvary,<br />Wretched, vile, and stained,<br />Became a place of love and grace.<br />My sins were washed away!<br /><br />Oh, glorious Savior, oh blessed Redeemer<br />We stand in awe of You!<br />You died for us. You live for us!<br />Your blood has made us new! </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-40097185561533959572009-07-14T16:44:00.000-05:002009-07-14T16:45:13.909-05:00Slipping and Sliding...<div align="justify"><b>The following rant brought to you courtesy of an unfortunate email exchange I recently endured. The subject matter of said email has been avoided in the rant below in order to avoid it being spilled out onto my blog…..</b><br /><br /><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguncSm-JRNOuaJljVYa0AeOWDvBO4SL2Y6HWgK4kOTkr2V2PvgR5uBDtSYqXVpKqDJWjZ8L7E6zPufUhvM2wye8GKIttGRmvqO8uQclYJFoO6sGRnv_gU7FIoIuVRV_ShzYiCi4lNUduk/s1600-h/untitled.bmp"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5358359901737200370" style="margin: 0px 0px 10px 10px; float: right; width: 266px; height: 320px;" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguncSm-JRNOuaJljVYa0AeOWDvBO4SL2Y6HWgK4kOTkr2V2PvgR5uBDtSYqXVpKqDJWjZ8L7E6zPufUhvM2wye8GKIttGRmvqO8uQclYJFoO6sGRnv_gU7FIoIuVRV_ShzYiCi4lNUduk/s400/untitled.bmp" border="0" /></a>I absolutely <b>abhor</b> the “slippery slope” argument that some use to “prove” their point. The basic idea of the slippery slope argument is that if you take some liberty / engage in some activity, etc it will ultimately lead to something much more egregious and sinister. For instance, embracing certain music forms (such as Sovereign Grace Music) will eventually lead you to sympathizing with the most profane forms of music (just so long as the “message” is good) and ultimately to an complete abandonment of any discernable separation from worldliness. Obviously this form of argumentation is nuts. The inadvertent effect of one making the slippery slope argument is that the thing with which they disagree isn’t wrong, <i>per se</i>, it will just lead to some erroneous position down the road. Like I said…<i><b>nuts</b></i>!<br /><br />While I fully support boundaries and rules, I think that often we attempt to make hard and fast rules where we don’t necessarily have to. I guess it’s easier to make a rule than it is to teach a biblical principle coupled with discernment in application. The application of the “slippery slope” argument caused my quite a bit of consternation during my childhood and young adult years: Listening to music with a pronounced beat would cause me to worship Satan. Holding hands with a girl would cause us to have sex. Wearing shorts would cause some innocent girl to lust after me – this would lead to premarital sex. A girl wearing pants would cause me to lust after her – this would lead to wicked thoughts and a broken relationship with God. Going to a “G” movie at the theatre would cause someone who saw me going in there to abandon Christianity. Not wearing a coat and tie to church would cause me to abandon all forms of separation from worldliness in my dress and conduct. One sip of wine would lead me to alcoholism. Missing one morning of personal devotions would cause all sorts of problems…God would punish me for it throughout the day until I got “back on track”…after all, if I didn’t have devotions this morning I was completely out of God’s will.<br /><br />Not all of those examples necessarily fit the “slippery slope” mentality, but I was on a role! You get the point though….bizarre and unexplained leaps of logic to “prove” that you ought not do something that I don’t like. Recently I’ve heard more of these “slippery slope” arguments (although some are disguised). At times the argument is simply, “Embracing Calvinism is part of the slippery slope”. At times the argument goes more like, “The problem with Calvinism is that it eventually leads to a denial of the inerrancy of Scripture”. Either way, the slippery slope argument leaves out important details. In one form you aren’t told where the slippery slope lands you – you just know that you’re on it. In the other form you are told that “A” always leads to “B” without any explanation or proof….even if “A” and “B” seem to be completely incongruous!<br /><br />In fundamentalism the slippery slope argument is almost always applied to matters of “personal liberty” or matters where the Bible is silent or vague. In most cases where the slippery slope card is tossed on the table a solid biblical principle will be the stake in the pot. Again, it’s the application (or misapplication) of said principle that is the issue.<br /><br />To be completely honest, I’m willing to be corrected when I’m shown to be wrong. I’m willing to concede that my point of view might be incompatible with what the Bible has to say when I’m shown so. All I ask is that you demonstrate to me where I’m wrong. If you utter the words “slippery slope” you will lose me every time. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-35904719171134264802009-07-11T08:20:00.000-05:002009-07-11T08:21:18.924-05:00Lessons from 1 Corinthians: Part 4 (The End)(<a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/06/lessons-from-1-corinthians-13-part-1-of.html">Part 1 - Introduction</a>)<br /><div style="text-align: justify;">(<a href="http://www.blogger.com/Part%202%20-%20Characteristics%201%20-%205">Part 2 - Characteristics 1 - 5</a>)<br />(<a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/06/lessons-from-1-corinthians-13-part-3.html">Part 3 - Characteristics 6 - 9</a>)<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgsGAULLiZZ77gNJhxbjzJlfHUm8VBEQ6NbVnwpBmZrVeRbriaGJNfmOvX7zhv1NaAB_4ux9ogHl8yBxXj_7uoBTgQPmBEgBjVsPHcFk27tSkeHQweAd9Ux8H0YmuevF39MMq4rLT-xVs/s1600-h/bible_open_glasses.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 359px; height: 269px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgsGAULLiZZ77gNJhxbjzJlfHUm8VBEQ6NbVnwpBmZrVeRbriaGJNfmOvX7zhv1NaAB_4ux9ogHl8yBxXj_7uoBTgQPmBEgBjVsPHcFk27tSkeHQweAd9Ux8H0YmuevF39MMq4rLT-xVs/s400/bible_open_glasses.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5357191888247928418" border="0" /></a>We’ve been examining the characteristics of love as laid out for us in the first eight verses of <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2013:%201-8;&version=50;">1 Corinthians 13</a>. In the last few posts on this chapter we looked at the first nine characteristics. In this post we will conclude this series by examining the last 5 characteristics of love from this chapter.<br /><br /><b>10. Love bears all things</b><br />This is the second time that this concept is mentioned in this passage. The first time in vs. 4. The thought is the same - love provides a covering. No manner of evil - no amount of evil - should deter us from loving God and man. I think this is a difficult concept to catch hold of.<br /><br /><b>11. Love believes all things</b><br />This doesn't speak to being gullible; however, we are to <i>“unsuspiciously”</i> believe the best about people. Some people are always ready for somebody to fail. In Christianity, why did the news about Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Baker make such national news in the 80's? How about Ted Haggard a couple of years ago? In Fundamentalism, nearly everybody knows about Bob Gray - even those who didn't know the name before know it now. You can look at pop culture and see the same thing: Peewee Herman and Hugh Grant in the 90's - Brittney Spears a couple of years ago....and I could go on. There have been names through the years that nobody would know if they hadn't fallen. Why? People like a good car wreck!<br /><br />Why don't many churches grow? In many cases I think that one could make the argument taht they are suspicious of outsiders. If somebody looks a certain way, we automatically assume the worse. This isn't love - it's just the opposite. It is a type of hateful legalism that has no place in Christ's Church.<br /><br /><b>12. Love hopes all things</b><br />This follows “believing all things”. Sometimes a person just treats us wrong. We love them, love them, and love them some more. In return, they take advantage of us again, and again, and again. Our reaction, even when there is no more room for assuming the best is to “hope”. Regardless of how low a friend or family member has sunk, we are NEVER to give up on them.<br /><br /><b>13. Love endures all things</b><br /><a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=job%2013:15;&version=50;">In Job 13:15</a>, Job proclaims, <i>“Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him”.</i> This idea of enduring all leaves us with the impression that regardless of the troubles that come our way - at the hands of God or man - our love is to remain steadfast. Stepping away from the Job passage for a moment…love has the capacity to never get “rocked” by whatever may happen. I’ve seen so many seemingly strong marriages end because the couple wasn’t able to “endure” some tragedy – the loss of a child, an accident that leaves a child or one of the spouses disabled, financial struggles…A biblical approach to love endures these things and comes out better for it!<br /><br /><b>14. Love never fails</b><br />As we “bear, believe, hope and endure all things” this love will remain steadfast. As Paul begins to draw comparisons to end this passage, we see that nothing else is as sure as love. And, although everything else might crumble and fail, this true, biblical, <i>agape</i> love will not.<br /><br /><br />A pastor friend once challenged me to read through this passage in I Corinthians 13 while substituting the name of Christ for the word “love” throughout the passage. The fact that God<span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;"> is</span> love leaves us with good reason to believe that Christ perfectly demonstrated <i>agape</i> in His time on earth….let’s take a look at a few examples I’ve tossed together:<br /><br />1. Jesus suffered long (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20peter%202.23;&version=47;">I Peter 2:23</a>)<br />2. Jesus was kind (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%208.40-56;&version=47;">Luke 8:40-56</a>)<br />3. Jesus was not envious (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew8.20;&version=47;">Matthew 8:20</a>) Jesus just accepted the fact that all his creation was taken care of, but He had nowhere to lay His head.<br />4. Jesus was humble. (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=phil2.5-8;&version=47;">Phil 2:5-8</a>)<br />5. Jesus acted appropriately (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mat22.15-22;&version=47;">Matthew 22 - render to Caesar</a>)<br />6. Jesus was selfless (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jn13;&version=47;">John 13</a> - he washed the feet of his creation – including those of the man whom He knew would betray Him later that night.)<br />7. Jesus was not easily provoked (The Passion)<br />8. Jesus didn't “keep score” (Praise the Lord for that!) (In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mt9.24;&version=47;">Matthew 9:24</a>, we hear the people laughing Him to scorn. In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mk15.29-33;&version=47;">Mark 15:29-33</a> we hear the scoffers walking by a crucified, bloody mess of a man and saying – “come on! Save yourself! Look at you now! HA!” In <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jn10.20;&version=47;">John 10:20</a>, we hear people saying, “Why would you listen to Him? He’s got a demon.” Yet, what does He say in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=lk23.34;&version=47;">Luke 23:34</a>? “Father, forgive them…”<br />9. Jesus rejoiced only in that His Father was glorified (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jn13-15;&version=47;">John 13-15</a>)<br />10. Jesus covered our sins (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1pet2.24;&version=47;">I Peter 2:24</a>)<br />11. Jesus forgets our transgressions (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ps103.12;&version=47;">Psalm 103:12</a>)<br />12. Jesus forgives us every time (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1jn1.9;&version=47;">I John 1:9</a>) "Hopes" (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=lk7.37-46;&version=47;">Luke 7:37-46</a>)<br />13. Jesus is never exasperated by us <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1jn1.9;&version=47;">(I John 1:9 again</a>)<br />14. Jesus never fails!<br /><br />That concludes this series....I hope you received some good from it. It's certainly been an educational study for me!<br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-64210741393607446712009-07-06T16:25:00.000-05:002009-07-06T16:25:00.691-05:00The shame of it all....<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5H_A2d26SJY8OQD1J1IxsWWTGdufC-fvUYA6YX4lh6m5vfFKgwxbns3PVvkN5WGoogNpAlqZGee29ds9Dp3qIj4AyvN9S19x8iOy6u6Yy5_EAgYVswkhfIsr3lPFKLb5OsgSO6-d_sHU/s1600-h/pic.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5355446760158586514" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 300px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 225px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5H_A2d26SJY8OQD1J1IxsWWTGdufC-fvUYA6YX4lh6m5vfFKgwxbns3PVvkN5WGoogNpAlqZGee29ds9Dp3qIj4AyvN9S19x8iOy6u6Yy5_EAgYVswkhfIsr3lPFKLb5OsgSO6-d_sHU/s400/pic.jpg" border="0" /></a>I know a lot of things. I know <i>about</i> a lot of things as well. Frankly, there are a lot of things that I know that I wish I didn’t know. There are places, people, activities, entertainments, etc., about which I know many things that I wish I didn’t. I’ve seen things, heard things, said thing, and been to places that cause me shame. More importantly, these things have brought shame to name of my God. I have knowledge of things about which no child of God ought to have knowledge. I have said things, laughed at things, and viewed things over the years that ought to grate like sandpaper on my sensibilities, yet I have done these things without even blinking.<br /><br />Five years ago or so I got to spend an afternoon with an old friend. I grew up with this man. He is currently a fairly well-known and public figure in a large Christian ministry. We grew up in the same church and attended the same school. We were both in single parent homes. We both attended Bible College. We have both been in leadership roles since our teenaged years. He’s a bit older than me and a man whom I’ve always respected and looked up to as a “big brother”. During this day we spent together some years ago I popped a joke without even thinking about it. My friend didn’t get it, as he had never heard one of the words before. As I was trying to explain the word to him I realized that it was something best left unsaid and I apologized for the joke. His ignorance about this matter truly stunned me. At the time I remember thinking to myself, “how can a man in his mid 30’s not know about <i>that</i>?” Recently however, I’ve gained a deeper respect for him in this area. The fact is that he has attempted to live a life separated to his God. His “ignorance” in this matter is more properly called “innocence”. There is a language that he doesn’t understand because, as a Christian, he has sought to live a life that is separated to holiness.<br /><br />It seems to me that many of us – me included – have no qualms about defiling ourselves with the pervasive wickedness of this world. Speaking for myself, I have become so desensitized to sin that it doesn’t even give me pause at times. Some in Christendom have taken passages like Paul’s proclamation of “becoming all things to all men so that I might by all means save some” and perverted them to justify our own desires to look and smell a bit more like the world. Unfortunately it’s not too difficult to find someone who will help us to blur the lines between “light and darkness” either. For instance, there are well-known, orthodox, evangelical expositors who are willing to wallow in the filth of this world all in the name of “relevance”. I am a proponent of reaching the lost right where they sit, but the idea of sacrificing purity to appear “relevant” is twisted at best.<br /><br />I think that we, too often, will drag the name of Christ along with us into places we ought not. Our eyes behold things that grieve our Savior. With our mouths we say things that bring shame to His name. The frightening part, at least for me, is that I can often do these things without a moment’s hesitation. At times I don’t even realize what I’ve done.<br /><br /><i>“Be ye holy; for I am holy”</i>….grasping hold of what that phrase means should radically impact the way we live our lives…. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-90338753437952332132009-07-01T17:45:00.000-05:002009-07-01T17:47:59.325-05:00Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13: Part 3<div style="text-align: justify;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgL-JH1AB0Wf1yff7TOAKIM99_QlxDWI0_BDqmacvNwAesTwIqdmwVE7kimxDy0OoAN-Bc00rSaf_I9TgaFLR6wUxMrwikBTShvV_3MMuFeqHTqBtFdkoGhxCKglJT1LoHkveHfuk9udEo/s1600-h/dscf7522_edited-1.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 362px; height: 271px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgL-JH1AB0Wf1yff7TOAKIM99_QlxDWI0_BDqmacvNwAesTwIqdmwVE7kimxDy0OoAN-Bc00rSaf_I9TgaFLR6wUxMrwikBTShvV_3MMuFeqHTqBtFdkoGhxCKglJT1LoHkveHfuk9udEo/s400/dscf7522_edited-1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5353626852822902018" border="0" /></a>(<a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/06/lessons-from-1-corinthians-13-part-1-of.html">Part 1</a>)<br />(<a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/06/lessons-from-1-corinthians-13part-2.html">Part 2</a>)<br /><br /><br />In my last post I began examining the first 8 verses of <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2013&version=50">1 Corinthians 13</a>. I looked at the first 5 attributes given in this passage of biblical, <i>agape</i> love. It is patient and kind. It is not envious or boastful. It is not arrogant or rude. In this post I will examine the next 4 attributes of love.<br /><br /><b>6. Love is not selfish</b><br />Galatians 6:2 commands us to <i>“bear one another's burdens”</i>. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2012:25;&version=50;">I Corinthians 12:25</a> gives us the formula for ensuring that there is no “schism” in the body of Christ – <i>“care for one another”</i>. This is the most descriptive attribute of love. It is not selfish. It is completely self<i>less</i>. Philippians 2:3-4 reminds us to “<i>esteem others higher</i> (or better)<i> than ourselves”</i>. It's this type of selfless love that the Apostle John writes about in<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20john%203:16;&version=50;"> I John 3:16</a> where he writes, <i>“hereby perceive we the love of God because he laid down his life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.”</i><br /><br />In another <a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/06/jon-and-kate-gosselin-predictable.html">recent post here</a> I mentioned that this issue (selfishness) is at the root of all marital issues. Whether that selfishness manifests itself in a sexual affair with another person or in never thanking the marriage partner for their fidelity and for the things they do on a daily basis to demonstrate their love, the result of selfishness is often disastrous. When looking at how we deal with other people the same thing can be said.<br /><br /><b>7. Love is not provoked</b><br />The word “easily” that we find in the KJV is a bit misleading. The literal reading of this verse leaves us with the impression that we are <span style="font-weight: bold;">NOT</span> provoked to anger against another. <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James%201:19;&version=50;">James 1:19</a> reminds us to be <i>“swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath”.</i> To be able to listen selflessly requires love!<br /><br />There is nothing wrong with debate. There is nothing wrong with disagreement. There is nothing wrong with anger. We are, however, cautioned to <i>“be angry and sin not”</i>. In my life I have seen too much infighting in the church as a whole (and have engaged myself in plenty of it). We get caught up in petty issues and preferences and end up deliberately offending people. We are ready to go to war over issues that we have had to read into the Bible, instead of humbly remaining silent where the Word of God is silent. <b>Some will do anything they can to stifle an individuals Christian liberty, while others will do whatever they can to demonstrate their “liberty” - even if it offends another.</b> This is one of the chief problems I see with the mindsets of many in Fundamentalism as well as her critics. When these sorts of attitudes are displayed, I believe that we grieve our Heavenly Father. Love in not easily provoked, nor is it provocative. If we were able to get our arms around this thing called love, many hostilities end.<br /><br /><b>8. Love does not keep score</b><br />This term <i>“thinks no evil”</i> is really an accounting term. At the risk of sounding a bit naive, I'll say this: love has amnesia! Can you imagine going into a conversation without preconceived opinions about somebody? How often have you decided you didn't like somebody because of something they did to you years ago? From that point on, we just keep track of all the “stupid things” they do! We question their motivation. We become haters. Again that cancer called bitterness has gotten hold of us. Have you ever been involved in an argument with somebody and one or both parties end up dragging up “ancient history” in order to make a stronger case? This attribute of love is closely tied in with several of the earlier ones.<br /><br /><b>9. Love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth</b><br />We are to never take pleasure in sin. When somebody does evil, or evil comes upon somebody, we are not to take pleasure in it. True love as expressed to our God leaves no room for laughter at sin. This could be displayed in the things we say and give audience to. It could also be displayed in the way we react to events. We should be grieved at sin - ours and others. We should be grieved when tragedy strikes others. Yet we should applaud and rejoice when Truth triumphs!<br /><br />We’ve seen some tragic things in the last number of years. You can look at the events of 9/11 or, here in Kansas, some of the tornadoes of the last several years. Recently, making national news, was the murder of Dr. Tiller, the infamous abortionist. In all of these situations I’ve heard some Christians express something that I can only describe as joy, or at least some dangerous speculation. Last year a town that is just a few miles away from us was leveled by a tornado. I was present at a service where one preacher said (<span style="font-style: italic;">paraphrased</span>), “I don’t know what’s going on in that town that it needed to be destroyed, but I hope they got the message that God is sending them”. I’ve heard several people express joy at the murder of Dr. Tiller…how can a Christian react like that?<br /><br />I'll have one more post on this passage soon looking at the last 5 attributes of love from 1 Corinthians 13.<br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-58405043923340961662009-06-29T11:56:00.001-05:002009-06-29T11:58:16.617-05:00Wasting time. Wasting life.<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEFb594Zc7p57A0WGTTNEYojDangv5Mcu9GIHaZ2Qf7gLGGxnvhmV1EAtMgxU2rJOD-tU793UEmB0g5hahtopoK9VPCe9ffob-943XT2MJDf0spGgMNiNhNspAZduFbKCR0XMv1lYnRKQ/s1600-h/time.bmp"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5352794723962677922" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 189px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 303px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjEFb594Zc7p57A0WGTTNEYojDangv5Mcu9GIHaZ2Qf7gLGGxnvhmV1EAtMgxU2rJOD-tU793UEmB0g5hahtopoK9VPCe9ffob-943XT2MJDf0spGgMNiNhNspAZduFbKCR0XMv1lYnRKQ/s400/time.bmp" border="0" /></a>There are so many things in this world that call for our attention. It’s easy to loose focus on the <i>big picture</i> and to get caught up in the “here and now”, isn’t it?. While we rattle off passages like Matthew 6:21 with ease – reminding ourselves that our heart will always be with what we treasure – it is still easy to get sidetracked from time to time. We begin treasuring things we ought not and it just kind of <i>sneaks up</i> on us sometimes. The issue of treasuring up heavenly things is something that I struggle with as much as anyone…maybe more so at times. Work, family matters, friends, entertainment, hobbies, sports, idle time…these are all things that, at one time or another in my life, have drawn most or all of my attention. There is nothing inherently wrong with most of these things, but in excess they have all proven to be self-inflicted gunshot wounds to my soul.<br /><br />It is too easy to forget that we are, as Peter reminds us in 1 Peter 2:11, merely sojourners and pilgrims in this world. Our desire should not be to “make it” here, but to serve our Lord. It’s so easy to get trapped in this rut of life and forget that we have a higher calling than to just…well, <i>live</i>. As I’ve looked at my life recently I can point to many things – mostly good – that have drawn my affections and my attention. The sad part is that I so easily slide into a rut…I can often justify through my very busy lifestyle a temporary abandonment of the pursuit of a deeper relationship with my God; yet I never miss an episode of a few of my favorite television programs. At times I’ve left off of pursuing a deeper knowledge of the Almighty, choosing instead to catch up with friends on a social networking site and reading the 30 or 40 blogs to which I subscribe. It’s not that those things are bad or unhealthy….at times I’ve simply allowed them to become that way.<br /><br />May we all commit ourselves to a deeper pursuit of God and to a life marked by sacrifice of self for Him. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-82926935017896263572009-06-24T21:13:00.006-05:002009-06-25T20:33:00.695-05:00Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13:Part 2<div style="text-align: justify;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXaiA2ZM_A1lH0JoUxYSQh-O61CoYeYkH1Ql_xkvV2GKyhHV392zlYhXXzv9xybCqAcYBrnNIU6f2SX_pvOkuuumaLfxGBRUOrxcEmZJgVxU3RIVoEdy6_PxcEuartpdHl3xkbQuxG2fY/s1600-h/1corinthians13-1.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 282px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXaiA2ZM_A1lH0JoUxYSQh-O61CoYeYkH1Ql_xkvV2GKyhHV392zlYhXXzv9xybCqAcYBrnNIU6f2SX_pvOkuuumaLfxGBRUOrxcEmZJgVxU3RIVoEdy6_PxcEuartpdHl3xkbQuxG2fY/s400/1corinthians13-1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5351443100114970146" border="0" /></a>(See Part 1 <a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/06/lessons-from-1-corinthians-13-part-1-of.html">here</a>).<br /><br />A friend once told me that 100% of all marriage counseling can be done from I Corinthians 13:4-8 and I completely agree with him. If we can catch hold of the truths of this passage and put them into practice in our own lives it will radically impact how we do everything in our daily lives. From <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2013:4-8;&version=50;">I Corinthians 13:4-8</a>, I’m going to be looking at the14 characteristics of true love. In this post I’ll concentrate on the first 5.<br /><br /><b>1. Love is patient</b><br />There is no “last straw” with love! In Matthew 18:22 the Lord says that if a brother offends you; you should forgive him 70 times 7 times. What does that mean? Well, an offense is a deliberate, wanton, malicious assault without <b><i>ANY PROVOCATION</i></b>. I doubt that any of us have been offended 490 times in our entire lifetime (given this definition); much less 490 times at the hands of one individual! The point is that we are to forgive <span style="font-style: italic;">all the time</span>. If we are to forgive these deliberate offenses, how much more so the inadvertent offenses?<br /><br />There is utmost patience with love. No offense, no attack, no sin, is to find a response that is not motivated by love. Proverbs 10:12 puts it like this, <i>“Love covers a multitude of sins”</i>. Love suffers long - it covers.<br /><br /><b>2. Love is kind</b><br />This is the positive side. First we see that love can take the negative, but it reacts by showing kindness. Think of the command that Christ gave in Luke 6 – <i>“love your enemies”</i>. Love those that seek your destruction. Love those that hate you. Love those that don't agree with you. Love the sinner. Love the saint. Love the homosexual. Love the heretic. Love without end! Love with <i>agape</i> - a love that would die for these people.<br /><br />One of the most unnatural things for us to do is to react in kindness to those with whom we disagree. However, not doing so is to fall short of the mark that is laid out for us.<br /><br /><b>3. Love does not envy</b><br />When we see God blessing somebody...when we see someone getting an opportunity that we wanted; we should not envy them that. Instead we are to rejoice with them and for them. Envy leads to bitterness - the cancer of the soul. Bitterness leads to hatred.<br /><br /><b>4. Love does not boast</b><br />Proverbs 13:10 tells us that <i>”only be pride comes contention”</i>. Love is humble. It does not act rashly nor is it brutish. It is never motivated by pride. In the first few verses of this text, the apostle Paul was following up on how he had finished the previous chapter. He was showing the Corinthians a <i>“more excellent way”</i> to true worship. He said that even if he had the gift of speaking fluently in every known tongue (some 70 languages at that time); and even if he were gifted in the higher language of the angels so that he could converse with them; and even if he could understand <i>EVERY</i> mystery in life - that is to say that he had all the knowledge that could be obtained; and even if he had a faith that could work miracles; and even if he parceled out all his possessions to the poor; and even if he <i>“gave his body to be burned”</i> (referring to the branding of slavery in order to redeem another); if he was motivated by anything other than love - it was all worth nothing! The hard, cold fact is that you and I are either motivated by love or by pride. If our motivation for <b>anything</b>, regardless of how noble, righteous, or selfless it may appear to be, is anything other than love…it is worthless.<br /><br /><b>5. Love is not arrogant or rude</b><br />Love is not rude or willingly offensive to <i>ANYBODY</i>! There are some people that just grate on my nerves. I tend to be very short with them. They ask me a question and I'll respond with as few words as possible and never even make eye contact with them. THIS IS NOT LOVE! It is not respectful. It is “unseemly” to use the word that the KJV uses here. Love is always respectful. It is ever ready, as the Apostle Paul so eloquently stated in I Corinthians 9:22, to be <i>“made all things to all men that I might by all means save some.”</i><br /><br /><br />We've barely gotten through a third of the attributes of love given in this passage and I can already see where I consistently fall woefully short of the standard laid out here. In the next installment of this series I'll look briefly at four more attributes of love.<br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-58817923574361687682009-06-24T21:11:00.004-05:002009-06-24T21:23:40.514-05:00Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13 :Part 1 of 4<div style="text-align: justify;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1Cd53ziV1wOP8ShGyyXrLuNsQoo3eqevkGXMXKqeRrURe3Bc0E9a0cNOnK-JxbgfF23pMdNDosKw7fhi0rRjmx602fQuLD8oGIoahQXzCXWT8U-G4vSH8IPQ5UN7HGki-QTSsrm-sq38/s1600-h/bible-1.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 330px; height: 247px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1Cd53ziV1wOP8ShGyyXrLuNsQoo3eqevkGXMXKqeRrURe3Bc0E9a0cNOnK-JxbgfF23pMdNDosKw7fhi0rRjmx602fQuLD8oGIoahQXzCXWT8U-G4vSH8IPQ5UN7HGki-QTSsrm-sq38/s400/bible-1.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5351084883167953282" border="0" /></a>In Matthew 22:34-40 we find an occasion where Christ is once again tempted by the Pharisees. One of them asks Jesus - <i> “What's the greatest commandment in all the law?”</i> Now it must be understood that he wasn't merely referring to the “Big Ten”! Some scholars tell us that the Pharisees of the day said that the Law contained 248 affirmative precepts (<i>“thou shalt’s”</i>) - as many as the bones of the human body. They said that the Law contained 365 negative precepts (<i>“thou shalt not’s”</i>) - as many as the days of the year. That left 613 total laws - the number of letters in the Decalogue. This lawyer asked Christ which of <b>these</b> commandments was number one. Now, some of the learned religious men of the day would say that the mandates about the number of fringes on the bottom of their robes were the most important. Some thought that the laws governing cleanness were of most importance. For one to not keep oneself ceremonially clean was akin to homicide in some of their minds. I suppose that, in a sense, this man was asking which <b><i>type</i></b> of commandment was the greatest. Christ's response is interesting. He says that the first and most preeminent command is the first one of the Decalogue – <i>“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind.”</i> Then he says something rather startling – <i>“Number two is that you should love those around you as yourself.”</i> This was Christ's message. In Mark 12, this same occasion is recorded and in verse 31 we find this addition, <i>“There is no commandment greater than these”.</i><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />This was the message of Christ. This was the mission of Christ. The subject that our Lord said was the most important of all is LOVE. In the ancient Greek language there were three primary words for love: <i>storge</i> - this was a familial love - it was natural. It was often unmerited, but was quite natural and protective - like the love that a mother has for her child. The second type of love that we find in the ancient Greek language is <i>eros</i>. This was a very selfish, possessive, erotic and sensual love. The third type - and most common - is <i>phileo</i>. This is the word that is the second most common found in the NT. It is used some 30 times and refers to a “brotherly love”. These are the only three words that the ancient Greek language contained pre-Christ. Yet, when our Lord entered the scene, there was a new word for love introduced. The earliest Greek writings that contain the word <i>agape</i> are Scripture. I think it was Mark Minnick who (humorously) speculated that when God came to earth in the flesh, He was moved to create a new word describing His love to man.<br /><br /><i>Agape</i> love is that self-giving love that is not merited. An interesting side note here - this word <i>agape</i> appears in the NT more often than any of the other words for love. It is used over 300 times. A small portion of those times is describing God's love to man. Another relatively small number of times, it is used to describe the way we are to love God - only a few times is it used in that manner. Most often, it is used to describe the way we are to interact with other humans. This idea of <i>agape</i> love sums up the ministry of Christ. His coming to earth in the flesh to die for humanity is the greatest expression of love that we can ever know.<br /><br />Now, we sometimes have this view of <i>agape</i> love that says that we can never achieve it. That is to say, it is just some “pie in the sky” of which we can never partake. To a point, I suppose that's true. We are limited by our flesh - so we always reach a point of selfishness, retaliation, etc.<br /><br />Growing up I was taught that this type of love was descriptive <i>only</i> of the love that God shows man and that man is incapable of displaying this love himself. However, over and over again, we are <b>commanded</b> in the NT to exhibit <i>agape</i> love to one another. Christ said often - you can look all through the Gospels - particularly the Gospel of John - and find Christ saying, <i>“love one another”</i>. He told the disciples in John 13 that He was giving them a “new” commandment – “Love <i>[agape]</i> one another". In I John 4 we read a great description of God: “God is love <i>[agape]</i>”. In Galatians 5:22, the Apostle Paul tells us of this thing called the “fruit of the Spirit”. The first thing that he lists is “love” <i>[agape]</i>. All the other components of this fruit are the natural by-products of love. In essence, if we exhibit true, Biblical <i>agape</i> love, the characteristics of joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance will also be exhibited.<br /><br />If we are to have <i>agape</i> love; if this type of love - to God first, and then to man - is the absolute most important thing we are to put on as Christians, I suppose we had better find out what it is! One definition of <i>agape</i> love that I found is “an intense desire to please God, and to do good to mankind; the very soul and spirit of all true religion; the fulfilling of the law, and what gives energy to faith itself.” However, I think it is difficult to formulate a concise and precise definition of <i>agape</i>. Instead, I’m going to use my next several posts to examine a passage of Scripture that perfectly defines this love for us by means of description.<br /><br />In the first 8 verses of I Corinthians 13, we begin reading about the nature of love. In these 8 verses there are 14 characteristics of love described. It’s these that I will focus on in the next several blog posts:<br /><br /><i></i><blockquote><i>“Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.</i><br /><br /><i>Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.</i><br /><br /><i>Love never fails.”</i> (<span style="font-weight: bold;">NKJV</span>)</blockquote><br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-15567762027467614792009-06-23T16:50:00.000-05:002009-06-23T16:50:01.687-05:00Jon and Kate Gosselin: A predictable tragedy.<div align="justify">Jon and Kate Gosselin announced last night on their hit show, <a href="http://tlc.discovery.com/tv/jon-and-kate/jon-and-kate.html">Jon & Kate plus 8</a>, that they were separating. A bullet flashed on the screen at the end of the episode announcing that legal proceedings to dissolve the 10 year marriage were initiated yesterday. Now I rarely talk about television programs but this has my attention for a variety of reasons.<br /><br />First of all, they have claimed the name of Christ often. <a href="http://weblog.wordcentered.org/">Bob Bixby </a>blogged about the issues with this some time ago. Rather than spending any time discussing this, I will simply urge you to read his <a href="http://weblog.wordcentered.org/archives/2009/06/02/plus_eight_minus_gospel_thoughts_on_tv_testimonies_like_duggars_and_gosselins.php">very good article </a>on the subject.<br /><br />Secondly, this “celebrity” couple demonstrates some horrible thinking in regards to marriage and it is put on display for the entire world to see. Comments such as, “I need to do what’s best for the kids and for me” were uttered by both parties in various ways during the interview segments of the program last night. This demonstrates a basic misunderstanding regarding an approach towards marriage and it betrays a fundamental selfishness. By the way, there has never been a marriage that broke up that didn’t have, at its core, selfishness (by one or both parties) as the catalyst for the breakup. Our first focus in the family is to be on our spouse. If both spouses in a marriage are committed to putting the others needs and desires in front of their own, the marriage will be a strong and thriving one. When that focus shifts, regardless of the reason, the marriage is a failure regardless of whether or not it ends in divorce. Jon and Kate laid that out in the open for the entire world to see last night.<br /><br />Finally, the ultimate selfishness was in their determination to keep “the show” going. I would have been thrilled if their announcement was something along the lines of, “We are quitting the show in order to work on our marriage and to begin working on healing our family.” Instead, they are choosing to keep themselves and their children in the public eye for as long as they can continue to collect.<br /><br />While this show has always been interesting to me and I’ve watched it off and on over the years, I was grieved at what I saw last night. Regardless of how it was worded, two individuals who have made a habit out of putting their selfish wants ahead of their spouses needs chose to continue doing so and to continue to keep their kids “exposed” to the world. Horrible decisions. I would say that I hope the money is worth it, but I don’t. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-90078704753066571162009-06-18T16:42:00.000-05:002009-06-18T16:42:00.823-05:00Separation, Cooperation, and Confusion: A Rambling Rant by Yours Truly!<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz_BWamfkgHkqeNV4FgbPHhW5MOknK_i5yNc67UKqzPtqO0mZ_F_I9ScIE_sDbF1SXf04H9D1HhRefWPj3qDgisrpVYSARky69TnS3bNoDgm9yW0XCM14ikDjcts6UAetdHdLAcnHyjMc/s1600-h/untitled.bmp"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5348755411521082338" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 260px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 241px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz_BWamfkgHkqeNV4FgbPHhW5MOknK_i5yNc67UKqzPtqO0mZ_F_I9ScIE_sDbF1SXf04H9D1HhRefWPj3qDgisrpVYSARky69TnS3bNoDgm9yW0XCM14ikDjcts6UAetdHdLAcnHyjMc/s400/untitled.bmp" border="0" /></a>I’m starting to understand more and more that the term “fundamentalism” means something different to nearly everyone who claims to be a fundamentalist. To some it is best described as a separation from certain things or a separation to God. Both these views tend to end up being described by rather large “lists” of <i>do’s and don’t’s</i> which differ depending on the person, the church, the culture, etc. To others fundamentalism is more of a philosophical system of earnest contention for truth and radical separation from error. This is the best approach in that it can certainly serve to keep one’s feet firmly planted under them in an ever-changing world. What I mean by that is that there is no need to constantly address whatever new “thing” might be out there and to modify your “list” accordingly. This is because the focus will tend to be towards an inward commitment rather than an outward conformity. But even amongst those who view “fundamentalism” as a philosophical approach to life and church, there is still plenty of disagreement.<br /><br />One of the main areas of disagreement amongst many fundamentalists comes down to the ever-controversial issue of separation. My experience is that the overwhelming majority of fundamentalists will teach and practice <i>primary</i> separation but beyond that things begin to get controversial and murky. Some on one side will say that there is a call to separate from anybody who doesn’t separate from the people / groups that we clearly need to separate from. On the other side there is a call of “foul” claiming that secondary (and beyond) separation is a downward spiral that, ultimately, leads us to have to separate even from ourselves! Then the first group will come back and say, “we don’t advocate this so called <i>secondary</i> separation….it’s <b>all</b> primary separation in that the brother who isn’t separating from those we are separating from is in disobedience….”. And it goes on and on…<br /><br />I’m actually getting off what I want to be the point of this post, so I’ll take a step back.<br /><br />Separation <b>from</b> sin and separation <b>to</b> holiness….this is the call that we all hold dear and the goal towards which we all strive. The scope of our cooperation and fellowship is with others who have this as the overarching philosophy to why they do what they do. But we all know that, even within the same stated goals, there are differences. So where do we draw the line. I think this is important and it gets awfully sticky.<br /><br />I find myself drawing lines at different places than I thought I would several years ago. For instance, a man-centered philosophy – whether that’s demonstrated by a purely hyped-up emotional approach towards “worship” or by a shallow and “issues” dominated approach to preaching – is a place where I might draw a line. However, when it comes to the opportunity to be involved in a joint endeavor to present the Gospel to an entire community, I might not stand so firm on this (this seems like a consistent stance with early Fundamentalism, by the way). I would personally separate from any church who takes a radical KJVO approach as quickly as I would a church that embraces the pragmatism of the Emergent Church scene.<br /><br />As a family we are making difficult decisions in this realm right now. I find myself asking questions like, “is it any better to associate with the irresponsible and liberal approach to the scriptures that leads one to believe that a woman who wears pants is in sin than it is to associate with the liberal and irresponsible approach to the scriptures that leads one to question the inerrancy of scripture?” We tend to wink at certain travesties when they occur in our own ranks; however, the method that gets one to an asinine belief on women’s dress that I mentioned above is not merely a matter of interpretation. It’s a fundamental flaw in thinking and is indicative of deeper issues - such as putting one’s personal hobby horses above true fidelity to the scriptures.<br /><br />One of the issues that I see in fundamentalism is that we are quick to separate from anything that doesn’t “look right”, but we will rarely do anything about the liberalism that has infiltrated our own ranks. We slammed Billy Graham’s brand of “easy believism” for years, but the “superstar” fundamentalist evangelists were given a free pass in this regard. If Graham had never left Fundamentalism he would be a hero in the movement today – even with his approach. We are quick to call out men like Bill Hybels for the pragmatic approach he has taken and for the lack of any real doctrine in the churches that have come out of there, but we turned a blind eye to Jack Hyles and the lunacy that came out of Hammond for decades. If a group questions the inerrancy of the Scripture we are quick to point them out as liberal compromisers, but those who take the extreme position on the King James Bible and engage in bibliolatry are generally winked at. We point to the liberalism that leads some to abandon all standards when it comes to modest dress, yet we say nothing about the liberalism that leads some to claim that a woman wearing pants is an abomination.<br /><br />Personally I think all these things need separated from. I no more wish to be associated with some church that has a Saturday night service complete with a heavy metal band and a mosh pit than I do a church that takes a radical KJVO position and doesn’t “allow” women to wear pants. Both are liberal. Both have perverted the issues of personal liberty. Both do a great deal of harm to the cause of Christ. I don’t mean to harp on the same sets of issues, but they are weighing on me today.<br /><br />With that said, where is the line to be drawn? Is there a place for fellowship or, more accurately, cooperation with some groups who are skewed on some of the more “minor” issues? I think there is, but I think that great caution needs to be used. I’m of the mind that cooperation on some levels can serve to righteously further the cause of Christ without “tainting” us. It seems that some want to equate cooperation with endorsement and agreement, but those terms are not synonymous. A practical example would be to go back to the last World War. The United States and the Soviet Union were in “cooperation” with one another for a common purpose, but that cooperation was certainly not indicative of a deeper agreement…maybe not the best example, but a practical one when it comes to this issue of cooperation versus agreement. I would wager that most people – inside and outside the church – understand that.<br /><br />Forgive my rambling. Actually, I think that most of my posts are nothing more than extended periods of rambling….I just don’t always recognize it! </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-69746888128389588592009-06-16T16:20:00.000-05:002009-06-16T16:26:13.115-05:00The "worship issue": a clarification (I hope).<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkoGuygwhmxBRL1-8lwp6F5oScRXdABeR7pFU4vQ3pSngCsuiaX0FZTXMTiQxSJvfiesZWdtyo1epMhyphenhyphenIhXMriwPvV39KjqA2UMaXkCCKv8yPH-5BqwCGSZTaEmz5IWYKTAuL0eLNYnH4/s1600-h/ThatsWorship.gif"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5347974132652629650" style="margin: 0px 0px 10px 10px; float: right; width: 271px; height: 281px;" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkoGuygwhmxBRL1-8lwp6F5oScRXdABeR7pFU4vQ3pSngCsuiaX0FZTXMTiQxSJvfiesZWdtyo1epMhyphenhyphenIhXMriwPvV39KjqA2UMaXkCCKv8yPH-5BqwCGSZTaEmz5IWYKTAuL0eLNYnH4/s400/ThatsWorship.gif" border="0" /></a>I just got around to reading <a href="http://jackhammer.wordpress.com/2009/05/26/side-effects-of-revivalism-part-one/">a blog article that linked unfavorably</a> to a <a href="http://ellismurphree.blogspot.com/2009/05/so-why-are-they-really-leaving.html#links">post of mine from several weeks back</a>. The<a href="http://jackhammer.wordpress.com/"> blog</a> that linked back here is one I’ve read a time or two since it was launched. The writers there are all pastors (I think) and they have, from time to time, some great insight on some matters, although they are certainly part of a more “hyper” strand of Fundamentalism as far as I can tell. That said, I want to readdress something I’ve hit on several times here over …worship style. I’m not sure that I have managed to make my point effectively....as a matter of fact - judging from comments both here and elsewhere - I'm certain that I've absolutely <span style="font-style: italic;">failed </span>at making my point!<br /><br />I’ve often been critical of the worship style that typifies Fundamentalism. Actually, at times I’ve been fairly critical of the entire liturgical style that typifies the movement, but that’s not the point here. In a couple of my recent posts I mentioned the lack of emotion and “realness” in the typical fundy worship service. I mentioned this as a major issue in my criticisms of the movement and one of the chief issues that are serving to drive many of us away. Now, I’ve had difficulty articulating my thoughts on this one, so I’m going to attempt to be a tad more thorough in my explanation this time around. I’ll start with a story about the very first contemporary worship service I ever attended.<br /><br />Nine or ten years ago I was given tickets to go hear a very well-known preacher speak at a large non-denominational church in Wichita, KS. If I mentioned the name of the man most of you would know who he is. He can be heard on most conservative Christian radio stations and I’m guessing that most of the folks who might come in contact with my blog would have a favorable opinion of him (as do I). I arrived at this service in eager anticipation to hear the Word of God opened and exposited….but first I had to “endure” a very painful “worship” service.<br /><br />This church had a <b>huge</b> platform and they had a rather large band and 8 or 10 worship leaders. I was not familiar with most of the songs that were being sang but I was invited to sing along as the lyrics appeared on the several large screens scattered throughout the gargantuan auditorium. I found most of the lyrics to be “fluffy” with a song here and there that actually contained some deeper theology. About 20 minutes into the song service the mood suddenly changed. The guy sitting at the drum set put his sticks down and walked off the stage. The grand piano began playing some very soft music. The lights in the auditorium were dimmed slightly and, in unison, about 70% of those in attendance raised their hands (I would estimate that there were approximately 3,500 people there). The words came up on the screen and I realized that we were exiting the “praise” portion of the music service and entering the “worship” portion.<br /><br />The whole thing was so contrived and rehearsed that it instantly set me in an extremely bad mood. The emotional manipulation was as bad as anything I’ve ever seen from the most “Finneyesque” evangelist that Fundamentalism can offer up. It ticked me off! I walked away thinking that I’d rather be around the rote, regimented, emotionless services found in Fundamentalism than to be seen as one who embraces this brand of emotional “trickery”.<br /><br />Now I share that story because I want any who read this to understand that I don’t view “emotions” as the end all in worship. Nor do I believe that open displays of emotion are the only real signs of true worship. That type of thinking would be ludicrous and it’s certainly nothing to which I subscribe.<br /><br />So, you might be asking, what’s the big criticism of the typical worship service in Fundamentalism? My big criticism is that we have typically done all we can to eliminate any emotional engagement whatsoever (until invitation time). We do this in several ways. First of all, we insure that there is no music that might get one to “tapping the toe”. Secondly we break things up with announcements, offering, greetings, a “stand-up routine” from the pastor, and very few comments from the music director (except those designed to get a laugh). The closest thing to continuity that the typical fundy music service has is that there <i>might</i> be a central theme to the chosen songs. But oft-times there is so little thought given to the songs being sang that anybody could get up and lead the music – just pick three or four songs that are in 4/4 time and everything’s OK.<br /><br />Frankly, I have little use for both styles that I’ve mentioned above.<br /><br />Now let me be clear on something here…I don’t wish to remove personal responsibility from the parishioner in regards to an engagement of the heart in worship. Those who know me best know that I take these matters seriously. For years I’ve practiced a careful and prayerful preparation of my heart prior to entering the worship service. I attempt to focus on the words of the songs being sung and will often sing them as my hearts prayer (should the lyrics lend themselves to that). Often I will leave off singing with the congregation in order to meditate a bit on the words we are offering up. I personally get “choked up” regularly when attempting to sing songs like “Alas, and did my Savior die?” or “Amazing Love”, or “Amazing Grace” or the like. However, just as the attempted manipulation at the service I first described upset me, so too does the constant interruption in the typical Fundamentalist service. Unfortunately we aren’t typically led in worship….we are just led in singing.<br /><br />Four years ago I was sitting in a church service at a Fundamentalist church. The regular song leader was not there and neither was the backup. The pastor asked another man if he would take care of the music and he indicated that he would. Now this man wasn’t a particularly good singer and he didn’t know how to “wave his arms” correctly, so he just got up and did what he knew how to do. He spoke to us of the great love of our Savior and how amazing His grace really is. He spoke of forgiveness and how incomprehensible it all is. As he led us in songs about these truths he paused often to read the lyrics to us and to reference supporting scripture. In other words, he did all he could to engage us in worship…he helped us to focus our minds on our God. No drums, no hand raising, no emotional plea, no 45 minute invitation….just worship. This brother – without saying the words – urged us to engage our intellect as well as our emotions in corporate worship. It was a wonderful time with God’s people!<br /><br />I called for a balance in this area in one of my recent articles. I suggest that, perhaps, we need to rethink our approach to worship. We need to rethink our roles as parishioners as well as leaders. Find the balance! While there is a danger in falling into a rehearsed and “forced” worship, there is an equally egregious danger in falling into a regimented, emotionless, dead “worship”.</div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-45517437484162418732009-06-15T17:05:00.001-05:002009-06-15T17:05:00.489-05:00Don't call me a Fundamentalist....I'm a fundamentalist!<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjL8r2x2cQzqoz82kMUHP03XZBYadlkYI4afs2hZ36af89B8fBXTQ5zkrvZ9n33jnGdH-z3TDksfWIula_Dzm9cyVAzeXT_K4ZU4JN57TFIPoxFsuyFVggEFrh8PRGTMecGJkCuN_iwfZ8/s1600-h/403_question%2520mark.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5347648402439210834" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 285px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 255px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjL8r2x2cQzqoz82kMUHP03XZBYadlkYI4afs2hZ36af89B8fBXTQ5zkrvZ9n33jnGdH-z3TDksfWIula_Dzm9cyVAzeXT_K4ZU4JN57TFIPoxFsuyFVggEFrh8PRGTMecGJkCuN_iwfZ8/s400/403_question%2520mark.jpg" border="0" /></a>Is it possible to be a fundamentalist without being a Fundamentalist? Let me try that question again… Is it possible to be a fundamentalist without being in Fundamentalism? I think that’s a better way of asking my question…<br /><br />I think that people on both sides of the never-ending “IFB / CE” debate tend to forget some key points. We “young guys” for instance tend to forget that being a “fundamentalist” means something more than just an adherence to the <em>Fundamentals</em> whereas some tend to forget that being a “Fundamentalist” is more than just an issue of separation.<br /><br />In the last 150+ years Fundamentalism has adopted separation as one of her major hallmarks. This is a righteous stance insofar as it coincides with biblical teaching. Too often those of us who have grown more and more enamored with Evangelicalism want to assign the moniker of “historic fundamentalist” to everybody we like regardless of whether or not they actually fit the bill (i.e., practice separation).<br /><br />Now I realize that, in the beginning, Fundamentalism was a movement designed to correct and reform rather than to separate, but that ship has long sense sailed. The downward spiral of mainstream “religiosity” demanded a more robust response, and Fundamentalism responded appropriately with a stance of radical separation. Now this separation wasn’t from folks who just did things a bit “differently”; rather, it was from apostasy, doctrinal error, disobedient brethren, and theological compromisers. These days of course, “separation” has taken on completely different meanings. Some <strong>F</strong>undamentalists refuse to acknowledge or fellowship with other <strong>f</strong>undamentalists based on things like: denominational affiliation (Fundamentalism was a non-denominational movement until the last 80 years or so), music standards, bible versions, and even issues of dress. These things notwithstanding, the doctrines of personal and ecclesiastical separation are both important and vital.<br /><br />In recent years it seems to me that some groups who are decidedly outside of the Fundamentalist movement practice a more biblical separation model than many of those who are part of Fundamentalism. Taking it a step further, I think that there are as many groups outside of Fundamentalism who legitimately fit into the mold of “historical fundamentalist” as there are within the movement (btw, some of these groups aren’t even Baptists!).<br /><br />I say all that to get to this point: the idea of “leaving Fundamentalism” is more about identification with a movement (or <em>non</em>identification) than it is about a change in philosophy and ideals. While I can make a statement to the effect that I will one day leave Fundamentalism (the movement), I will<em> always</em> remain a fundamentalist (the idea)…this is by conviction.<br /><br />If our brothers who depart from Fundamentalism are still practicing fidelity to the Word, exhibiting separation from the world and worldliness, remaining sound in there doctrinal beliefs, practicing separation from apostasy and disobedient brethren, maintaining and exhibiting a belief in the inerrancy of Scripture, demonstrating a passion for souls and working to reach the lost for Christ, holding to an orthodox theology, and living a life that demonstrates a deepening relationship with the Savior, we need to encourage them, rejoice with them, and maintain a proper fellowship with them…..not spit on and separate from them!<br /><br />I guess that this is the most frustrating part of this conversation as far as I’m concerned. Too many of us are more concerned with keeping guys in a loosely defined, non-structured movement than we are in encouraging them to remain faithful to the things that actually matter. Fundamentalism (the movement) may well shrivel up and die; however, fundamentalism (the idea) will not. As a matter of fact, fundamentalism (the idea) has been alive and well for much longer than has the movement… </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-62371577886907867182009-06-04T09:23:00.005-05:002009-06-04T10:27:23.547-05:00A new baby, a big scare, and the Good Shepherd.<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNzDYKwdnouWRD_BVJNSOZOw3Q8vw4qz34y7Y7-LFE2CiRSA9jExoyM0g_msjHrt7TLKqsgrqhzq23UGag-NHBt7NdZ9xzFCIH9wQFcRN5OKbIfJ6A91ESGPtKY9PjBZLblzWcnPAdfF4/s1600-h/P1030690.JPG"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 319px; height: 239px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNzDYKwdnouWRD_BVJNSOZOw3Q8vw4qz34y7Y7-LFE2CiRSA9jExoyM0g_msjHrt7TLKqsgrqhzq23UGag-NHBt7NdZ9xzFCIH9wQFcRN5OKbIfJ6A91ESGPtKY9PjBZLblzWcnPAdfF4/s400/P1030690.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343492520315592162" border="0" /></a>Excuse the rambling nature of this post....I'm a bit tired and my brain isn't quite working right just yet!<br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />This has been a unique week around the Murphree house. A week ago today we welcomed our fourth child, Liam Sean Murphree, into the world. His mom, dad, and three siblings immediately fell in love with him. We spent all day Friday taking turns holding him and just looking at him. We had some minor concerns since he just wouldn't eat and seemed to be breathing <span style="font-style: italic;">extremely </span>rapidly. But the hospital staff assured as that everything was OK, so we quickly dismissed the concerns from our minds.<br /><br />Saturday morning at about 4:30 I was awakened by a ringing phone. My wife called me and, with tears, told me that something was wrong with Liam and that I needed to get up there. When I got there I found him alert but on oxygen. The doctor told me that he thought he had pneumonia, but that they were going to transfer him to another hospital as a precaution. Within 90 minutes I was on the interstate following an ambulance to a different city with a larger hospital that was equipped with an NICU unit. Within 60 minutes of arrival they had shot x-rays, put him on a high dose of nitrogen rich oxygen and hooked him up to an IV. What they had found was a severely dehydrated boy who was having difficulty breathing due to limited lung capacity. His right lung was perforated and, as a result, air had escaped the lung. The escaped air had gathered around the outside of both lungs and had began to compress them. His right lung was compressed enough that the doctor used the word "collapsed" in describing it to me. He had likely developed the issue during birth and every breath he had taken had actually made the problem a little worse. In essence, every time he took a breath he was actually losing lung capacity.<br /><br />Over the next couple of days we had a lot of ups and downs. My wife wasn't able to get released out of the other hospital and get to the new one until Liam and I had already been up there for about 6 hours. By the time she got there, Liam was under a large hood on a heating table and completely "out of it". Every time he would wake up and cry there was nothing we could do about it but rub his arm.....we wouldn't be able to pick him up for several days.<br /><br />Su<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaSDJrWqAufiKI8NSuNtIDfVWXrMlEClCROCECQ6xPtQAhqKkl_vwzctWQnwOKBXJf-TrZYqetDf4hHOW6w1P7B3vN6DwICudaS4cbHZNEVG8wfvQNWM0RNriiDx-dWbH7iOBW39vH4C4/s1600-h/Liam.aspx"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; float: left; cursor: pointer; width: 383px; height: 287px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaSDJrWqAufiKI8NSuNtIDfVWXrMlEClCROCECQ6xPtQAhqKkl_vwzctWQnwOKBXJf-TrZYqetDf4hHOW6w1P7B3vN6DwICudaS4cbHZNEVG8wfvQNWM0RNriiDx-dWbH7iOBW39vH4C4/s400/Liam.aspx" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343494013561073874" border="0" /></a>nday the doctor informed us that the oxygen mix they had him on wasn't remedying the problem and his lungs were getting worse. So the next step was to put a tube into his chest to begin to pull the air out and, hopefully, assist in healing the perforation. So less than three days after his birth, our son was going to surgery. Needless to say, Sunday was a bad day.<br /><br />Over the next couple of days Liam began to gain lung capacity back. Soon the chest tube was able to come out, the oxygen hood came off, and we were able to hold him again. On Tuesday he finally started to eat. Today they pulled him completely off of oxygen and we found out that he is recovering so well that we may get to bring him home before the end of the upcoming weekend!<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">I've learned a few lessons</span> about being a child of God during this week. In my sleep deprived sate I'm going to attempt to mention a coupled them...<br /><br />First of all we have the ability to cast all our cares at the feet of our God. Not only are we <span style="font-style: italic;">able</span> to do this, but we are actually <span style="font-style: italic;">expected</span> to! Leaving our cares at the feet of the Almighty is one of the most amazing privileges we have as children of God.<br /><br />Secondly, we have this wonderful "freedom" from anxiety. It would be foolish for me to claim that I wasn't concerned through most of this week. However, I didn't find myself "stressed" or worried. On the contrary, I found myself fleeing to the Psalms and then singing praises to my mighty God! The fact that we can praise the Lord for difficult times and enter into prayer to Him with a heart of thankfulness is amazing to me! Even when our hearts are heavy, the Great Comforter reminds us to be thankful for the bountiful benefits that the Lord shows to us daily.<br /><br />There's a song that has been a tremendous encouragement to me this week and I've been singing it nearly nonstop. It's from the<a href="http://www.sovereigngracemusic.org/albums/category/sovereign_grace_music/psalms"> PSALMS</a> CD from <a href="http://www.sovereigngracemusic.org/">Sovereign Grace Music</a> and is based on the 23rd Psalm. It is entitled "The Lord Is":<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription"></span></span><blockquote><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The depths of Your grace who can measure?</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">You fully supply all I need.</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">You restore my weary soul again and again;</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">And lead me in Your righteousness and peace.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">You’re with me through every dark valley.</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">There’s nothing that I have to fear.</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">You are there to comfort me again and again;</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">Protecting me, assuring me You’re near.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is my shepherd!</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is my shepherd!</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">I shall not want.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">You gave Your own life for my ransom;</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">So I could rejoice at Your side.</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">You have shown Your faithfulness again and again;</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">There’s nothing good that You will not provide.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is my shepherd!</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is my shepherd!</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">I shall not want.</span></span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">I will dwell in Your house</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">All the days of my life.</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">I will dwell in Your house</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">All the days of my life</span></span>.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">And You watch over me;</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">You take care of all my needs;</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Lord, You provide in every situation.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">So I'll sing:</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is my shepherd!</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is my shepherd!</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">The Lord is</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription">Lord, You are my shepherd;</span></span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;font-size:100%;" ><span id="lblDescription"> I shall not want.</span></span></blockquote></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-7961808988286969512009-05-26T18:59:00.002-05:002009-05-26T19:28:34.788-05:00So, why are they REALLY leaving Fundamentalism?<div style="text-align: justify;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKLXk58UbEImxwhXhNHL6Abk-AtEtSfx2wrBZExE3BYb-cqtcOAW3TQ51AONrgpr2zCHOsvtL1V_h4J5CbP7vabWId5WaeaHlXbrT63KjmRA3vPjxNve3Pjm5Top4T3Eshwa5ufmHiafE/s1600-h/glowingexit.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 240px; height: 181px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKLXk58UbEImxwhXhNHL6Abk-AtEtSfx2wrBZExE3BYb-cqtcOAW3TQ51AONrgpr2zCHOsvtL1V_h4J5CbP7vabWId5WaeaHlXbrT63KjmRA3vPjxNve3Pjm5Top4T3Eshwa5ufmHiafE/s400/glowingexit.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5340293917639962546" border="0" /></a>Over the last couple of weeks I’ve had a question running through my mind…why are the young guys<span style="font-style: italic;"> really</span> leaving Fundamentalism. Most of us know about the hullabaloo caused by the reasons offered up to this question by a keynote speaker at a recent FBFI regional meeting back east. His contention is that Calvinism, coupled with young men becoming enamored with some of the popular leaders in Conservative Evangelicalism, serves as the main catalyst. I think he’s way off the mark. But rather than just claiming that and ending it all there, I’d like to offer up my thoughts on why the young guys are leaving.<br /><br />I’m still one of the “young guys” in Fundamentalism although, at the age of 36, I’m on the verge of no longer fitting the original definition of “Young Fundamentalist”. Not only am I one of the young guys, but I’m one of the young guys who is going to leave the movement. I’ve stated before that the church I’m in now is likely the last IFB church I’ll ever attend. Now for me there have been several key factors contributing to my desire to leave the movement. I’ll mention those and then move on to some other factors that I think may be contributing to the current trend of bashing and/or leaving Fundamentalism. To be clear here, by “leaving Fundamentalism” we are discussing the movement – not the principals. I am and will continue to be a Fundamentalist in the historic sense of the word; however, I – like so many others – have grown increasingly frustrated with what fundamentalism the movement has become.<br /><br />By the way, for the purpose of this blog entry I’m differentiating between young fundamentalists and young fundamentalist preachers. While many from both groups might be leaving for some of the same reasons, I believe that what might cause a young pastor to leave is ofttimes something that might not cause a typical parishioner to leave and vice-versa. Now, my reasons first:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The KJV issue.</span> This has been a burr under my saddle since I was 15 years old (with a brief exception in my early adult years when I joined up with the KJVO crowd). The KJVO movement has, in my opinion, caused more harm and disharmony in the church in general, and Fundamentalism in particular, than any other singular issue. This crowd has hurled some wicked insults at other reliable (sometimes <span style="font-style: italic;">more</span> reliable) translations of God’s Word – calling them translations from the pits of hell and the like. Their vitriol notwithstanding, the radical side of the KJVO movement has so permeated Fundamentalism that any church that uses any other translation – regardless of what it is – is generally deemed “liberal” by Fundamentalism Proper. Even our institutions of higher learning are forced to pander to the rabid KJVO crowd. While only a few will go so far as to claim that the KJV is anything more than what is – a fairly reliable <span style="font-weight: bold;">TRANSLATION</span> – nearly all of them state that it is to be the only Bible used from the pulpit and in the classroom. The KJV issue is truly indicative of a larger issue in the realm of scholarship, but perhaps that’s another topic altogether. While I certainly respect those folks, both inside and outside Fundamentalism, who hold to the KJV as their Bible of choice, the KJVO movement has been a horrible blight on Fundamentalism. Another unfortunate result of this movement is that, too often, folks who use only the KJV but do not view it as something other than what it is are unwittingly shackled to maniacs like Riplinger and Ruckman.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The standards issue.</span> Whether you refer to it as personal holiness or sanctification, the results are the same. Too often, Fundamentalism focuses purely on an outward adherence to certain “standards” and ignore the need to actually develop an intimate and personal relationship with a living and holy God. Even the more progressive portions of IFB-dom struggle with things such as whether or not a woman should wear pants and whether or not boys can wear shorts for sporting activities. In many IFB summer camps you will see girls wearing long skirts and boys wearing blue jeans for outdoor sports activities even in temperatures greater than 100 degrees. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard pastors tear the crap out of a text in order to defend their ridiculous notion that a woman wearing pants is immoral. But it’s not just that. Whether we want to talk about dress, hair length and style, jewelry, facial hair, church dress, music, alcohol, or any number of other things the story is the same: Fundamentalism tends to have hard and fast rules based loosely on biblical principals and proof texting but with little hardcore support for their position. The result is that people who look right are too often deemed righteous regardless of whether or not they are bearing any fruit. By the way, another aspect of this is that, all too often, people who don’t already look the part are shunned. This is why there are more IFB churches shrinking than there are growing. I believe that this key issue is at the core of the lack of involvement of the typical IFB church in the community. Where the Evangelicals are very active in reaching out to the community and reaching them where they are, the Fundamentalists have a desire to make people become like them. Now I’ll be the first to admit that there needs to be balance here. Ofttimes, just like the Fundamentalists go too far one direction, the Evangelicals will fall of the other extreme.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The preaching issue.</span> My experience is Fundamentalism has been that there is precious little exposition coming from the pulpit. I attended a Fundamentalist college and spent three years working at two of the premier Fundamentalist camps in the country and I just didn’t see much exposition from any of the IFB “celebrities”. Most generally when the regular speakers on my college campus (faculty members) spoke, it was expositional in nature, but the guests were most generally topical guys. My experience in IFB churches since those days has been the same - 90% or more topical versus exposition. I’m one of those guys who has, not just a strong<span style="font-style: italic;"> feeling</span>, but a strong <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">conviction</span> on this subject. Rightly dividing the word of truth <span style="font-style: italic;">demands</span> a faithful exposition of the text.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The worship issue.</span> While worship can certainly be “overdone” and focused purely on emotions in more contemporary services, Fundamentalism goes to the other extreme. There needs to be balance here and, unfortunately, I’ve attended exactly 2 services in any Fundamentalist church that managed to strike this balance. One was a very conservative church with a worship leader (now a pastor of another church) who carefully and reverently led the congregation in worship. The other instance was on an occasion where there was a guest musician in for a church service I was attending. He led the congregation in true worship. These are clear exceptions to the Fundamentalism I’ve always known. We don’t worship. We sing, listen to announcements, take up an offering, listen to the choir, sing some more, listen to the special, listen to some topical preaching, and have an invitation. This may sound like I’m describing a service at a specific church, but in reality this is the model for every single IFB church (with one exception) that I’ve ever attended. I don’t know how many churches that is, but I would estimate that number to be somewhere over 100 during the course of my life. 100 different churches, 100 different pastors, 100 different song leaders, yet the same service. We are careful to ensure that the emotions are not engaged during the song service because we believe emotional engagement is wrong….unless of course it’s time for the invitation. The command to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind (these address the will, <span style="font-style: italic;">emotion</span>, and intellect) doesn’t seem to apply in the church service. We want to engage the will and intellect, but the emotions need to be put down. You will never see hands raised in worship in an IFB church (unless there is an "outsider" visiting), nor will you see anything other than dry eyes at any point during the “worship” service. The church service tends to be a very regimented, dry, rote, obligatory occasion.<br /><br />I would say that these, although not representative of all my thoughts over the last 6 or 7 years of looking at things, are the main four items for me. Quickly I want to examine some other possibilities for why young guys are leaving – some good and some…not so good.<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The “grass is greener” syndrome.</span> Some guys leave just because it’s <span style="font-style: italic;">different</span>. I believe that this reason represents a very small (nearly nonexistent) minority of the young preachers who are leaving, but a larger percentage of the young, non-pastors who are leaving. Now there are several issues that contribute to this, but I think the main one is that, from the outside, Christianity can appear to be much “easier” in Evangelicalism. What people realize eventually however, is that, regardless of the type of church you are in, you are still a wicked sinner trying desperately – and failing miserably – when it comes to pleasing a holy God.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Calvinism issue.</span> I said in my opening statements that I think it is a misplaced logic that leads one to this conclusion. However, when it comes to the young non-pastor types who flee Fundamentalism, this can certainly be a contributing factor. There is little doubt that Evangelicalism is a much more “Calvinist-friendly” entity than is Fundamentalism. All that being said, I’ve been very Calvinistic for nearly 20 years and a 5-pointer for nearly 10 and I’ve managed to live peaceably within Fundamentalism that entire time. This, in my opinion, would be a lousy reason to abandon Fundamentalism and it is certainly not a stand alone reason. It might be a good reason to leave a particular Fundamentalist church, but not a good reason to leave Fundamentalism itself.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Jack Hyles/Bob Gray/Bob Jones, Jr./John R. Rice, etc. issue.</span> I think some guys leave just because, in certain parts of the country, you say the word Fundamentalist and one of these guys pops into your head. While there is quite a bit of good that came out of each of these guys ministries, they were and – even though most of them are now dead – continue to be extremely polarizing figures. To many, these guys represent all that was and is wrong with Fundamentalism. If I was in a place where Fundamentalism equals Jack Hyles, I would never use that term nor would I attend a church that advertised itself as a Fundamentalist church. Now the only problem with leaving for this issue is that, in most of the country, the term "Evangelical" brings names like Osteen, Hybels, and Warren immediately to mind. So which is the greater evil? I think I’d prefer being associated with Hyles over Osteen any day of the week. One presented the Gospel boldly every time he had an opportunity to do so; the other has repeatedly balked even when given national television audiences. In my opinion, leaving (or embracing) any movement simply because of whom you will or will not be identified with is not a good <span style="font-style: italic;">primary</span> reason for a move one way or the other. While I would more readily wish to be identified with the Masters crowd than with the Bob Jones University crowd, this should not be a major consideration for where I land (unless the crowd I’m leaving has slid into major doctrinal error or apostasy).<br /><br />Now there are certainly other reasons that could be examined – some good and some bad – so I acknowledge that this list isn’t complete, nor is it “scientific” in any way. This is just one bloggers opinion of a major issue. I think that young men leaving Fundamentalism will, in the end, be good for the movement. This forces the movement into some critical self-examination. In the end, Fundamentalism will make some changes or it will continue to slowly bleed out.<br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-21901918761921951212009-05-25T08:59:00.005-05:002009-05-25T09:58:32.316-05:00Fundamentalism versus Conservative Evangelicalism<div style="text-align: justify;">As much as I dislike stereotypes, I'm going to engage in stereotypes for the purpose of this post. I've been reading quite a bit lately about Conservative Evangelicalism as compared to Fundamentalism. Much of the debate in the Fundamentalist blogosphere these days has, at its ro<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7H9ISXcdtswycuwwlAsTEP-47hoB3lE57pQXxQRioVN_zbvOe8TsdLKr8mWGC_23F8NH_eXQrFEzwQPn8Pz1p79QTzjfy5-HJyhVeyUsY0dwxgQltmfKjE3ovmDQSJoR6je4d2bWN3ns/s1600-h/ist2_5606272_christian_grunge.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 222px; height: 146px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg7H9ISXcdtswycuwwlAsTEP-47hoB3lE57pQXxQRioVN_zbvOe8TsdLKr8mWGC_23F8NH_eXQrFEzwQPn8Pz1p79QTzjfy5-HJyhVeyUsY0dwxgQltmfKjE3ovmDQSJoR6je4d2bWN3ns/s400/ist2_5606272_christian_grunge.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5339775797640969154" border="0" /></a>ot, a frustration regarding the exodus of many "Young Fundamentalists" from the movement to Conservative Evangelicalism. For "fun" I decided to create this chart that highlights some of the major stances of both these groups. There are several things that aren't on here. For instance, Fundamentalists are generally hard-core Dispensationalists, whereas Conservative Evangelicals will have "soft" dispy's and some Covenant guys. But even with some of these things lacking, I think you'll find a number of key things addressed in this chart of 26 items.<br /><br />Enjoy and please comment on any mistakes or mischaracterizations I may have made. By the way, I had a difficult time with the code to get this up here in chart form. Any of you computer wizards out there that can help me out, just email me at eli51773(at)hotmail.com.<br /></div><br /><table border="2" cellspacing="0"><br /><tbody><tr valign="bottom"><th width="22" bgcolor="#b0b0b0"><br /></th><br /><th width="142" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0"><b>A</b></th><br /><th width="142" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0"><b>B</b></th><br /><th width="142" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0"><b>C</b></th></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="31"><b>1</b></th><br /><td bg="" style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);" valign="middle" width="114" align="center"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:100%;" ><b>Specific Belief</b></span></td><br /><br /><td bg="" style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);" valign="middle" width="114" align="center"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:100%;" ><b>Fundamentalism</b></span></td><br /><td bg="" style="color: rgb(192, 192, 192);" valign="middle" width="114" align="center"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:100%;" ><b>Conservative Evangelicalism</b></span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>2</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in Inerrancy of Scripture</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>3</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in Divinity of Christ</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="12"><b>4</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in Virgin Birth</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="38"><b>5</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in the Substitutionary Blood Atonement</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>6</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in the Bodily Resurrection of Christ</b></span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="38"><b>7</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in the Imminent Return of Christ</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>8</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Belief<br />in a Triune God</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="63"><b>9</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Church<br />Polity</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Congregational<br />rule and Pastor rule. There are generally deacons that work closely<br />with the pastor</span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Most generally<br />practice elder rule</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="63"><b>10</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Baptism</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Immersion<br />only</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Generally<br />hold to Immersion only, though some other forms might be acceptable<br />in some quarters</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="51"><b>11</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Lord's<br />Table</b></span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >"Closed"<br />- only members of the local church, or "Close" - "likeminded"<br />members of other local churches can join</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >"Open"<br />to all believers</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>12</b></th><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Church<br />Discipline</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Taught but<br />not practiced</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Generally<br />practiced</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="102"><b>13</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Worship<br />style</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Music "prepares<br />the heart for worship. Generally there will be corporate singing without<br />commentary, an offering, a choral number, a "special", and<br />then the preaching. Congregation not really lead in worship.</span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Heavy focus<br />on corporate worship. Variety of musical styles and other medium to<br />completely engage the congregation in group worship. Heavy focus on<br />worship before, during, and after the preaching.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="12"><b>14</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Preaching<br />style</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Primarily<br />Topical</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Primarily<br />Expositional</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="140"><b>15</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Evangelism</b></span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Consists<br />primarily of church members being encouraged to and engaged in inviting<br />others to church.</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Church as<br />a whole tends to be heavily involved in community. Not uncommon to see<br />addictions recovery ministries, troubled teens ministries, various counseling<br />ministries and the like. Focus on "meeting people where they are".</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>16</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Separation<br />from Apostasy</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >yes</span></td></tr><br /><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="63"><b>17</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Fellowship</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Fellowship<br />only with "likeminded" believers, i.e., churches that are<br />more or less "carbon copies".</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Willingness<br />and desire to fellowship with all believers.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>18</b></th><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Calvinism<br />versus Arminianism</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Mostly 4<br />point Arminian</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Mostly 4<br />- 5 point Calvinist</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="63"><b>19</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Bible<br />Versions</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Generally<br />will have a radical adherence to the KJV. Some have transitioned to<br />the NKJV.</span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Multiple<br />versions used.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="38"><b>20</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Small<br />Groups</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Disdained</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Strongly<br />encouraged - primary place for fellowship with other members.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="89"><b>21</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Dress<br />Standards</b></span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >High standards<br />in the Church and encouraged outside the church service as well. The<br />"pants on women" debate is still underway.</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Focus on<br />modesty and appropriateness.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="38"><b>22</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Drinking</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Alcohol<br />consumption is a sin.</span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Drunkenness<br />is a sin. Alcohol consumptions is OK.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="76"><b>23</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Personal<br />Holiness</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Primary<br />focus on outward conformity to certain "standards of conduct"<br />(i.e., no drinking, smoking, listening to rock music, dancing, etc)</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Primary<br />focus on a personal relationship with a Holy God.</span></td></tr><br /><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="102"><b>24</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Church<br />Activities</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Lots of<br />them. Local church tends to be very tight knit as a result. </span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Not many<br />for just the church. Most activities are geared towards community outreach.<br />Small groups serve as the primary socialization arm for members.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="25"><b>25</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>Community<br />Involvement</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Limited<br />to none.</span></td><br /><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Heavily<br />involved in community.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0" height="51"><b>26</b></th><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" ><b>"Sign"<br />gifts</b></span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Strict cessationists</span></td><br /><td valign="middle" width="114"><span style=";font-family:Arial;font-size:85%;" >Not dogmatic<br />on cessationism, but do NOT practice speaking in tongues.</span></td></tr><br /><tr valign="bottom"><th width="18" align="center" bgcolor="#b0b0b0"><b>27</b></th><br /><br /><td width="114"><br /></td><br /><td width="114"><br /></td><br /><td width="114"><br /></td></tr><br /></tbody></table>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-33374533495902744572009-05-22T15:20:00.002-05:002009-05-22T15:32:48.339-05:00I am a Calvinist...well, sort of.....<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi15kIqx6lEr03tpkDwkmR95rFmhyphenhyphenaIGWnrxNy2ovIk-J-XSLsnDJ-EYz5L6I52Me_WfxqT6H86JecU34lmV2SCJXgQ0_EbDlTwBV2LUWGTrRNFu7opdoDXc3ZxxiKnsY4BZhbQK94yTXc/s1600-h/tulip2.JPG"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5338748765794472898" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 231px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 300px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi15kIqx6lEr03tpkDwkmR95rFmhyphenhyphenaIGWnrxNy2ovIk-J-XSLsnDJ-EYz5L6I52Me_WfxqT6H86JecU34lmV2SCJXgQ0_EbDlTwBV2LUWGTrRNFu7opdoDXc3ZxxiKnsY4BZhbQK94yTXc/s400/tulip2.JPG" border="0" /></a>I am a Calvinist. I don’t think this is too awfully revelatory to anybody who knows me through the internet or personally. But just in case you didn’t know, I’ll say it again….I am a Calvinist. But not that kind of Calvinist. You know the kind I’m talking about, don’t you? The kind that some men like to preach against…the kind that you often see attacked in some portions of the Christian blogosphere….the kind that hates evangelism and thinks that all babies go to hell….the kind that, in counseling people who aren’t sure whether or not they are saved, will often tell people that they might need to consider the fact that they are not one of the elect……no, I’m not that kind of Calvinist. While I have no doubt that particular strand of Calvinism is alive somewhere (it must be, or why would people always argue against it so vehemently?), I’ve never personally encountered it.<br /><br />“So”, you might be asking yourself, “if Ellis isn’t the type of Calvinist that fits into every type of strawman that’s ever been erected, then just what type of Calvinist is he?” I’m thrilled you asked and, as luck seems to be on your side, I happen to have this little blog in which I can quickly answer your question!<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who believes in intense evangelizing. I don’t understand why God chooses to use the “foolishness of preaching” as a means of drawing unregenerate man to Him, but He does. I’m humbled at the thought that God actually wants to use me to impact others for eternity. He commands evangelism and my understanding of the doctrines of grace leads me to a desire to take an aggressive stance in regards to reaching the lost for Christ. We must do it.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who is humbled and awed at God’s grace. I don’t understand why God would ever reconcile a vile man to Himself, but He does. One of the many strawmen arguments I’ve seen regarding Calvinism is that realizing that you are one of the elect inevitably leads to a type of arrogance (“God chose me and not you”). Nothing could be further from the truth. As we catch even a glimpse of the glory, majesty, and holiness of the Almighty, the thought of Him saving lowly worms like us is beyond anything that my vocabulary can express. Even a narrow understanding of God’s grace and mercy is incapable of producing anything but profound humility and unspeakable thankfulness in the hearts of those whom He saves. I have never, even in jest, uttered that idiotic phrase, “ain’t it great to be one of the elect”. That’s a phrase I’ve only heard from those who deplore and misrepresent Calvinism. The response of the poor soul to whom the Lord shows mercy should be nothing less than awe and wonder.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who believes that “world” means “world” and “whosoever will” means “whosoever will”. This may be difficult for some non-Calvinists to understand, but I can say (without reservation) that any person who wants to be saved WILL be saved. I’m in danger of wading into deeper waters than I want to here, but I’ll say that this speaks to an understanding of what biblical salvation is: a complete turning away from sin and a complete surrender to Christ as Lord.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who has preached “evangelistic” sermons on several occasions. I not only do this without reservation, I do it with enthusiasm.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who believes that those who die in infancy go to heaven. John MacArthur lays out a brilliant argument for this point of view (google it). Some say this is inconsistent with Calvinism, but it’s not. While the Bible doesn’t explicitly answer this question, there is ample biblical evidence to support this position.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who doesn’t tend to “proselytize”. I’ve always heard the argument that Calvinists always try to “recruit” others into their little Calvinist fold, but I don’t know that I’ve seen that. I’ve been in the same church for 4 years now. During that time the fact that I’m a Calvinist has come up in only 2 or 3 conversations. In the last year I discovered, quite by accident, that there are other Calvinists in this church. While we are certainly in the minority here, it’s not prevented us from sweet fellowship with these other wonderful Christians. And to my knowledge, there has not been a single case of some poor unsuspecting non-calvinist getting confronted by a Calvinist seeking to “straighten them out”.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who is still a dispensationalist. While I would call myself a “soft” dispensationalist, I am a dispy nonetheless. Believe it or not, there’s a lot more of us than you might think! Not all Calvinists are adherents to Covenant Theology. As a matter of fact if you look real hard you will find that there are flavors of Calvinism out there that break all sorts of stereotypes. I’ve spoken to Calvinists who are Charismatics, amillennialists, pre-trib, post-trib, preterist, partial preterist, cessationists, non-cessationists, drinkers, tee-totalers, and, believe it or not, I actually know several Calvinists who are also part of the KJVO camp….now since that thought might actually cause some of you to black out for a second, I’ll try to wrap this up.<br /><br />I am the type of Calvinist who believes in Total Inability, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. While I might certainly have some minor quibbles with other Calvinists over some of the finer points of these 5 tenants, I fully embrace them.<br /><br />I first began to embrace Calvinism when I actually began to study it. I was one of those guys who thought that John Calvin was nothing more than a pawn of Satan to bring disharmony to the church (I thought the same thing about all modern Bible translations back then, too). As I began to study what Calvinism actually was, and as I began to actually study Scripture, I came to find that the “Calvinism” I’d always thought existed was nothing more than a figment of my (and many others’) imagination. And therein lies the rub. The whole point I’m attempting to make with this blog entry is that, perhaps, it’s best not criticize something you may not actually understand.</div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-37160277936195494402009-05-18T18:26:00.012-05:002009-05-19T14:59:35.683-05:00The King James Version Debate<div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbm-NrbtjDuYOwgSkZ53E_ykHgxw5j0VJrBOQpjKWjU_fYf7dGfk9DlmilRS0ZXjct8ChQiM-SNhiAZ-WrHhsanRMI4vfJbSnJnCXUEELwJHTKyDMgzuXRzvv6yVsF0RaTvtpvBqdNXqk/s1600-h/bibleInfo003.jpg"><span style="font-size:0;"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5337310970625457010" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; WIDTH: 267px; CURSOR: pointer; HEIGHT: 177px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjbm-NrbtjDuYOwgSkZ53E_ykHgxw5j0VJrBOQpjKWjU_fYf7dGfk9DlmilRS0ZXjct8ChQiM-SNhiAZ-WrHhsanRMI4vfJbSnJnCXUEELwJHTKyDMgzuXRzvv6yVsF0RaTvtpvBqdNXqk/s400/bibleInfo003.jpg" border="0" /></span></a>The King James Version of the Bible is one of the most beloved translations in the English language. The language contained therein is beautifully poetic. The translation is remarkable in its form as well as in its historical significance.<br /><br />I recently taught a “history of the biblical canon” series to our adult Sunday School class and I finished the series up with a section on the history of the English Bible up to the King James Version. I intentionally stopped there out of deference to the many folks in this particular assembly who hold to an extreme position regarding the King James translation. I don’t mean that to sound harsh, as I have no ill will to those who hold to the KJV as <strong>THE</strong> Bible in the English language. I certainly object to the unorthodox and sometimes heretical views that would claim some sort of a process of <em>“secondary inspiration”</em> in regards to the KJV, but I have no issue with folks using the KJV exclusively and attending only churches that do the same. <br /><br /></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">I personally admire the King James and its place in the history of the English bible; however, (as I’ve noted in more than one instance) it ranks 3<sup>rd</sup> or 4<sup>th</sup> on my list of preferred English translations available to us today. The ESV and NKJV both surpass the King James in quality, accuracy, and fidelity to the original texts, as well as in readability. But I’m not really writing this article to explore that particular portion of this subject so much as I am wishing to examine some of the history surrounding the King James translation. <br /><br /></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">The paragraphs below are somewhat of a summary of some of my studies on this subject over the last 5 or 10 years. I’m certain that bits and pieces here and there can be found to be “cut and paste” excerpts from somebody else’s work. As I’m studying something I will often take a note or copy a paragraph for later study. I suppose I should begin to do so with some reference to the original author! All that said, this information is available in any number of places to anyone who wishes to take the time to dig it up for themselves.<br /><br />The King James Version of the Bible was originally developed to address several pressing concerns of the day….at least pressing as far as the King of England was concerned. First of all, there was an increasing amount of “disharmony” (for lack of a better word) in the Church of England. There were multiple Bible Versions in use in the early 1600’s: Tyndale’s Bible, Coveredale’s Bible, and of course, The Great Bible and the Bishop’s Bible (those two were “authorized” by the Crown). However, the Geneva Bible was, far and away, the most popular one in use. The Puritans had been using it for half a century (and would continue to do so for more than 30 years after the 1611 KJV was introduced) and many of the local “reformation-minded” churches were also using it. This was obviously a problem for both the King of England and for the Church of England given the nature of the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible was the most scholarly translation of both Testaments and the Apocrypha that had been produced in the Anglo-Saxon tongue up to that point in history. The marginal notes, eloquent in their expression of the views of John Calvin and the Reformation, had much to say about the papacy (<em>for instance, one marginal note in Revelation 11:7 reads: <span lang="EN">"The beast that cometh out of the bottomless pit is the Pope, which hath his power out of hell and cometh thence."</span></em><span lang="EN">)</span><span lang="EN"> </span>and the Christian response to corrupt Kings (<em>a <span lang="EN">marginal note for Exodus 1:9 indicated that the Hebrew midwives were correct in disobeying the Egyptian king's orders, and a note for 2 Chronicles 15:16 said that King Asa should have had his mother executed and not merely deposed for the crime of worshipping an idol</span></em><span lang="EN">)</span>. These overt doctrinal statements were not exactly popular sentiments as far as the King of England was concerned!<br /><br />The Geneva Bible, in addition to being the most scholarly work available, was also the most “current”. Where the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 /><st1:city><st1:place>Geneva</st1:place></st1:city> had been revised as late as 1599, the Tyndale, Coverdale, Great, and Bishop’s Bibles had not been revised or reprinted for more than a generation. The King of England (King James I) desired a new translation. And not merely a <em>new</em> translation…but one <strong><em>without notes</em></strong>.<br /><br />Back to the reasons for the new translation....most would say that there were three major reasons that James wanted a new translation made. First of all, the Reformation had spawned in the hearts of God’s people a desire to get back to the true meaning of scripture. While James was, by most historical accounts, a very wicked man, he did have a desire as king to find some common ground with his subjects. A translation of the Scriptures that was a more scholarly work than what was currently available would certainly accomplish that.<br /><br />Secondly, and closely related to this first reason, was a renewed interest in scholarship in general. With the Renaissance Age there was a greater desire for true scholarship than had been around for some time. During the period leading up to James’ reign, there had been some groundbreaking work done to this end. For instance, both Hebrew and Greek had begun to be publicly studied in universities. Hebrew and Greek grammars and lexica were now readily available. Erasmus had published a very important work in his Greek New Testament in the early 1500’s. As a King reigning during a time of great advancements in scholarship, James was somewhat obligated to encourage and even commission more scholarly work. </div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">A third reason, and I mentioned this several paragraphs ago, was the fact that James (somewhat understandably) hated the current bible…the Geneva translation. During a discussion leading up to the decision to formally commence with a new translation, James said, <em>"I profess, I could never yet see a Bible well translated in English; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva is the worst."<br /></em><br />The king's opinion notwithstanding, the Geneva Bible was extremely popular. It was much smaller than previous works (even with all the marginal notes), and, with the advent of the printing press coupled with cheap paper, it was relatively affordable. As a result it was the first translation that found its way into most homes. As a matter of fact, for nearly 50 years after the King James Version was first released in 1611, the Geneva Bible continued to be “the Bible of the home”. As I stated previously, the marginal notes of the Geneva Bible reflected the views of the Reformation…including extensive diatribes against corrupt kings. James, by all accounts, was extremely corrupt morally. Therefore, this translation didn’t really appeal to him!<br /><br />Dr. John Reynolds made the initial formal proposal for a new translation to King James. James liked the idea and got many of the top scholars of the day involved. There were 54 translators involved in the process....these were men who were skilled in the Hebrew and Greek languages. They were dived into six groups – 2 at Cambridge, 2 at Oxford, and 2 at Westminster. Three of these groups worked solely on the Old Testament; two on the New Testament; and one on the Apocrypha. As small sections were completed by each group, they were then carefully reviewed by the other five groups. In this way, it was truly a collaborative effort of the scholars and not the work of a single man or group. An interesting aside is that 80% of Tyndale’s translation, which was done completely by him except for the last portion of the Old Testament, passed on into the 1611 KJV word for word. I find this interesting for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that William Tyndale is a personal heroe of mine.<br /><br />Now while it is true that the 54 men on this panel of translators were reputable scholars, their hands were somewhat tied. Aside from there just not being the manuscript evidence available to them in the 1600’s that we have available to us today, the instructions they were given had them truly offering up a scholarly “revision” of the Bishop’s Bible. Nearly 80% of the Bishop’s Bible passed on into the KJV. This was by design as the translating committee was instructed to follow the Bishop’s insofar as it was faithful to the original texts. As a result, the KJV was not actually a literal translation from the Hebrew and Greek. If you were to compare word for word the 1611 KJV to the complete English works that preceded it, you would find that it was somewhat of a “cut and paste” effort throughout.<br /><br />There was a tremendous amount of resistance to the King James Bible early on. Many of the more preeminent scholars of the day had some strongly worded objections to it. One of the most well-known (and somewhat humorous) of these responses was by Dr. Hugh Boughton – a Puritan scholar – who wrote, <em>“The late Bible...was sent to me to censure: which bred in me a sadness that will grieve me while I breathe, it is ill done. Tell His Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses, than any such translation by my consent should be urged upon poor churches...The new edition crosseth me. I require it to be burnt."</em> So, far from being openly embraced and accepted, the KJV met with a good amount of criticism from some of the more prominent Bible scholars of the day.<br /><br />Over the years the KJV has gone through many changes and some major revisions. There have been many thousands of changes from the 1611 KJV to the 1769 KJV that we have today. These thousands of changes have been primarily to update spelling, some grammar, punctuation, and chapter headings. The most major of the content changes has obviously been the removal of the Apocrypha in 1638 as well as the subsequent removal of all cross reference notes linking back to passages in the Apocrypha.<br /><br />With the abundance of manuscript evidence discovered in the 400 years since the work on the KJV first began, there has been a renewed effort to lend more “precision” to the texts. While the KJV is a wonderful translation and, as I’ve already stated, one of my favorites, it does have some weaknesses. For instance, Erasmus’ <em>Textus Receptus </em>serves as the underlying Greek text for the New Testament. While Erasmus was a brilliant scholar, he had very few Greek manuscripts available to him in the early 1500’s when he was producing his text. His <em>Textus Receptus</em> was based on the Byzantine text which represents a revision of the New Testament made in the 4<sup>th</sup> century A.D. and later. The <em>Johannine Comma</em> in 1 John 5:7-8 as well as the addition of passages like Mark 16:9-20 are great examples of some of the major errors in the <em>Textus Receptus</em> that passed on to the KJV. While many of my friends will say that they are not KJVO, but "Byzantine text only", the increasing scholarship and advancements in textual criticism are proving that the Byzantine text family is inferior when compared to the discoveries of the last several hundred years.<br /><br />In addition to a questionable approach to translation and the use of an inferior text family, there are also other issues with the KJV – issues such as some translation errors and the cumbersome nature of using a language that has changed so significantly over the last 4 centuries are a couple that come to mind. However, I want to be clear that these things do not make the KJV a poor translation! It has been stated that there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 200,000 variants when comparing all the extant texts of the New Testament. However, the vast majority of these variants are very minor and affect, in only a very few cases, the meaning of a text. None of the variants have an impact on any major doctrine of Scripture. I’ll quote an article by Mike Vlach in discussing what several scholars have to say about these variants.<br /><br /></div></span><blockquote style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">"<strong>Westcott and Hort:</strong> These excellent textual critics believed that only one-sixtieth of the variants in the New Testament rise above the level of “trivialities,” or could be called “substantial variations.” Even before the recent manuscript findings this would amount to a text that is 98.33 percent pure.<br /><br />"<strong>Ezra Abbott:</strong> According to his estimates the text is 99.75 percent pure.<br /><br />"<strong>A. T. Robertson:</strong> He believed that only a “thousandth part of the entire text” was of any real concern. That would make the New Testament 99.9 percent free from real concern for the textual critic.<br /><br />"<strong>Sir Frederic Kenyon:</strong> “The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true word of God, handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the centuries.'"<br /></blockquote><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"><br />All that to say this…while you might often see the terms like “inferior text family”, this is not really cause for alarm! On the contrary, the advances in textual criticism and the increase in manuscript evidence over the years have enabled Bible scholars to offer more pure readings of troubling passages; it has allowed for a more clear understanding of the text; and it has caused us to have a greater appreciation for the lifelong, rigorous, and meticulous work of men like William Tyndale.<br /><br />Now I want to make one more clarifying statement regarding my use of the term “weaker text families”. It should be noted that even these newer, perhaps less reliable texts display a high level of accuracy. As testament to the fidelity of even the “weaker” text families, consider the testimony of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Discovered in the late 1940’s, the Dead Sea Scrolls offered a glimpse of Old Testament manuscripts that were more than a millennium closer to the original manuscripts than anything else in existence (i.e., the O.T. Massoretic texts – the work of the Massoretes, btw, is an incredible study if you have the time). Many critics of the Bible assumed that this important discovery would ultimately serve to completely undermine the integrity of the Bible as a whole. At last the world would see just how far off the Scriptures were when compared with much older manuscripts. These critics were wrong....the Dead Sea Scrolls offered near word-for-word matchups to the other extant texts in 98% of their contents. Again, there was no major doctrine affected by the few minor inconsistencies.<br /><br />I will say once again that I admire the KJV and I am profoundly appreciative of its place in history. I use it often and have never attempted to discourage others from using it. If it is your Bible of choice, I wish to encourage you to continue to use it…..often! Just please don’t attempt to convince me of some form of <em>"secondary inspiration"</em> that requires some ridiculous leaps of logic to buy into. Don’t refer to it as <em>“God’s Word for the English speaking people”</em> either, as those sorts of statements smack, not only of ignorance, but of bibliolatry. <br /><br /></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">As for me, I will continue to use the KJV as a companion Bible to the other translations that I prefer. I will continue to preach and teach from it primarily, unless I am in a church that uses multiple Bibles from their pulpit. The purpose of this little blog post is not to dissuade those who read the KJV from using it, but rather to show that, even in imperfection, we have in our English translations something that effectively communicates the will of God to us while maintaining true fidelity to the originals. I can say with a grateful heart that I am truly thankful for the men over the years who have labored tirelessly and oft-times risked their lives for the purpose of getting God’s Word into the hands of God’s people in their native tongues. <br /><br /></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></div><div style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify">Today we are reaping, as never before in history, the benefits of those great men of the last 2000 years. There is no shortage of quality translations available to all in their own tongue. I am grateful that, in America, we are able to have a debate as to which of the plethora translations most accurately reflects the underlying texts…what a wonderful debate to be able to have!<?xml:namespace prefix = o /><o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:130%;"> </span></span></div><p style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></p><blockquote style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify"></blockquote></span>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-44319639923682770632009-03-04T18:03:00.002-06:002009-03-04T18:10:15.217-06:00Just call me "sir", thank you....<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhVvNmvCUkv2BtgospzR_c6bTyj8NmRpZk_3qLVmILMBPjuCuzQW-hLQ58PbCq3o6xf7hZL2-myP71MX2g2BVi4orZKb8a7zAhiUzRxqTcJZH2xCsVtcFJcrsdeBxjxjJ6QfBNRkoQFhw/s1600-h/images.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 111px; height: 114px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhVvNmvCUkv2BtgospzR_c6bTyj8NmRpZk_3qLVmILMBPjuCuzQW-hLQ58PbCq3o6xf7hZL2-myP71MX2g2BVi4orZKb8a7zAhiUzRxqTcJZH2xCsVtcFJcrsdeBxjxjJ6QfBNRkoQFhw/s400/images.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5309489118728152738" border="0" /></a>To Whom It May Concern:<br /><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Frankly I’m annoyed. It seems like every waitress, convenience store attendant, grocery store cashier, etc., that I come across feels the need to call me “sweety”, “honey”, “hon”, or “sweetheart”…well, except for the guys. I’m unbelievably thankful for that….but I digress.<br /><br />Now if every one of these people who choose to use these affectionate terms when speaking to me were 70 years old or older perhaps it wouldn’t bother me that much. For that matter, if I was 70 years old or older it probably wouldn’t bother me that much, either. The problem is, however, that most of these people seem to be around my age and many of them appear to be younger! <span style="font-style: italic;">This</span> bothers me more than a little!<br /><br />Now, all humility aside for a moment, I fully understand the involuntary flirting reaction that many women have when they first meet me. It’s a curse that I’ve come to grips with over the course of my 36 years. These good lucks are indeed a curse at times, but I manage to cope with it. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not asking for your sympathy here, nor do I expect the average person to understand my plight. After all, it would be rude of me to ask for sympathy simply because I am in the “upper crust”, as it were, when it comes to looks. I mean, that would be like a multi-millionaire moaning to the impoverished about his inability to find new things on which to spend his millions. No, I’m not asking for you to feel sorry for me because of these dashing good lucks, and undeniable charm; I’m just asking for a little understanding. Not just understanding, but. to those of you who work in these professions, I’m asking that you exercise a bit of constraint…..you are service industry PROFESSIONALS, for Pete’s sake – ACT LIKE IT!!!!<br /><br />There are several alternatives I could think of to calling me some pet name that I prefer only me wife call me by. For instance, after I’ve ordered my low-cal veggie burger with asparagus spears at the local diner, drive-in, or dive, instead of saying, <span style="font-style: italic;">“Will that be all, my wittle honey-bunny?”</span>, you could simply say, <span style="font-style: italic;">“Thank you for your order, kind sir. I can tell by the fact that you went with a diet soda that you take care of yourself. You seem like such a nice man….could I interest you in a complimentary hot fudge sundae to top off this exquisite meal?”</span><br /><br />See how easy that is? You got a positive message across to me without resorting to using some pet name straight from a 50’s-era diner; I got a free hot fudge sundae; and you end up with a great tip! To tell you truth, if you just called me “sir” rather than “sugar buns”, it would probably get you a better tip…even without the additional pucker power of the free ice cream.<br /><br />Now obviously I write some of this in jest……I would never – and I mean <span style="font-style: italic;">never</span> – go to <span style="font-style: italic;">any </span>restaurant and order a veggie burger with asparagus spears. Aside from that, I’m dead serious. STOP TALKING TO ME LIKE ONE OF US IS IN OUR 80’s!!!!!!<br /><br />Sincerely,<br /><br />Ellis “sugar lips”, “honeybun”, “sweetie pie”, “apple dumplin’”, "schmooky bear" Murphree<br /></div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-9040543842245246342009-01-21T10:31:00.003-06:002009-01-21T10:41:09.747-06:00Racism at the Inauguration<div align="justify"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7lAyiWNKlb4qWzESip3E2R_QCQz-IGa4pL4aZbga2blrzWan_8YHvenA1VKaTrTX4_0HcrVp8cQ7TZXjEzwQNefs1exEKbk-1oexm6YQv7u4QjkNAfkgDrUi-oL-KhKcXjoHDRWUiIWA/s1600-h/lowery.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5293786745106440194" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 94px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 126px" alt="" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7lAyiWNKlb4qWzESip3E2R_QCQz-IGa4pL4aZbga2blrzWan_8YHvenA1VKaTrTX4_0HcrVp8cQ7TZXjEzwQNefs1exEKbk-1oexm6YQv7u4QjkNAfkgDrUi-oL-KhKcXjoHDRWUiIWA/s400/lowery.jpg" border="0" /></a>The Reverend Joseph Lowery was the man who gave the Benediction at yesterday’s Inauguration. I haven’t seen his prayer get a lick of play in the various media outlets today, although I’m sure that the right wing talk shows will pick it up later today. His last comments in this prayer were – well – a tad <em>racist</em> in my opinion. I’m more than a little disturbed by this for a couple of reasons….first of all, President Obama’s people would have received an advanced copy of the text of Lowery’s prayer, yet they allowed it, and secondly, if a white minister had something half as divisive as Lowery at one of Bush’s inaugural ceremonies, the media outrage and the public outcry would have been incredible. Here’s the text of the last portion of Lowery’s prayer: <em><br /></div><blockquote><p align="justify"><em><span style="font-size:85%;">Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around; when yellow will be mellow; when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white will embrace what is right.</span> </em></p></blockquote></em><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">“When white will embrace what is right”? Wow! The fact that the media is not addressing these comments; that the Obama handlers likely knew what was going to be said, and that the President himself hasn’t and won’t issue a statement on this is phenomenal to me. Frankly I view comments like this as the main reason that racism just won’t die in this country. Throughout the last several months we saw John McCain and his campaign bend over backwards to make sure that they didn’t attack Obama on anything that could be construed as being racially motivated…during the primary season, we saw the race card pulled out against (of all people) President Bill Clinton. And now, will all the warm fuzzies that the entire nation is supposed to be feeling about race….with all the high claims being made about the great gains we’ve made, the last thing we hear at President Obama’s Inauguration is comments that allude to how hard it is to be anything but white and how evil the white man is. Awesome.<br /><br />The incredible part is that moments before the statements above, Lowery says the following: <em><em><blockquote><p><span style="font-size:85%;"><em>We thank you for the empowering of thy servant, our 44th president, to inspire our nation to believe that, yes, we can work together to achieve a more perfect union. And while we have sown the seeds of greed -- the wind of greed and corruption, and even as we reap the whirlwind of social and economicdisruption, we seek forgiveness <strong>and we come in a spirit of unity and solidarity to commit our support to our president by our willingness to make sacrifices, to respect your creation, to turn to each other and not on each other. </strong></em><br /></span><em><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">And now, Lord, in the complex arena of human relations, <strong>help us to make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance.</strong><br /><br />And as we leave this mountaintop, help <strong>us to hold on to the spirit of fellowship and the oneness of our family.</strong> Let us take that power back to our homes, our workplaces, our churches, our temples, our mosques, or wherever we seek your will.<br /></span></p></em></blockquote></em><em></div></em></em><em><div align="justify"></em>“Unity”. “Fellowship”. “Oneness”. “Solidarity”. I interpret this as a prayer that we all come to see things his way….that the successful in society begin taking care of those who aren’t taking care of themselves…that no more racism is to exist – unless of course you happen to be a black preacher or some other oppressed minority….because then it’s not racism, it’s just “speaking the truth”. </div><div align="justify"><br /></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">As for the rest of Lowery’s prayer, it smacks of the expectations that many in this country have of a subtle socialistic policy coupled with expectations of some perfect utopia. For instance:</div><div align="justify"><br /></div><div align="justify"><em><em><blockquote><em><em><span style="font-size:85%;">For we know that, Lord, you're able and you're willing to work through faithful leadership to restore stability, mend our brokenness, heal our wounds and </span></em><strong><em><span style="font-size:85%;">deliver us from the exploitation of the poor or the leastof these and from favoritism toward the rich, the elite of these.<br /></span></em></strong></em></blockquote></em><strong><em></div></em></strong></em><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify"> </div><div align="justify">The emboldened line above isn’t all that surprising as Lowery is simply stating in his prayer what President Obama and Vice President Biden have stated publicly over the last couple of months. </div><div align="justify"><br /></div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify">I didn’t intend on critiquing Lowery’s entire prayer, so much as I simply wanted to discuss how he ended it. My take on this is that racism in this country won’t die until those who feel their race has been oppressed stop attempting to demonize everyone else. How can some claim that the black man is still being oppressed when we’ve seen black men and women in nearly every high office in this country? “Political correctness” and “tolerance” (in the connotative sense) have so enveloped our society that nobody even wants to have open dialogue about these sorts of things anymore… I have no doubt that some who read this article will come to the conclusion that I’m racist. The odd part is that not only am I not a racist, I’m simply attempting to point out the obvious and blatant racism of a black preacher. </div><div align="justify"></div><div align="justify"><br /></div><div align="justify">Oh well…..that’s all I’ll say on this subject. It makes me uncomfortable and, at the same time, angry. </div>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1864230769854544092.post-67041834628385666452009-01-10T09:59:00.003-06:002009-01-10T10:12:49.019-06:00Anxiety, stress, and .... "tomorrow"...<o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceType"></o:smarttagtype><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PlaceName"></o:smarttagtype><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>Normal</w:View> <w:zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables/> <w:snaptogridincell/> <w:wraptextwithpunct/> <w:useasianbreakrules/> </w:Compatibility> <w:browserlevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id="ieooui"></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} p {mso-margin-top-alt:auto; margin-right:0in; mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto; margin-left:0in; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]--> <div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLivNgRTVRHf5wktkDwTVjhboMRnuWrbid2hQkKZD5JrfQcbbb-whj7NlzCRNpQQiBDKmwgEqlqliWdHwSW2igrXYd6L2K3CLA2QPCb7FyFshW5mUvNHwarTrbontFaTlr6vOQkCTDX90/s1600-h/tomoorw.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer; width: 136px; height: 108px;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgLivNgRTVRHf5wktkDwTVjhboMRnuWrbid2hQkKZD5JrfQcbbb-whj7NlzCRNpQQiBDKmwgEqlqliWdHwSW2igrXYd6L2K3CLA2QPCb7FyFshW5mUvNHwarTrbontFaTlr6vOQkCTDX90/s400/tomoorw.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5289697928469506626" border="0" /></a>The economic woes that the <st1:country-region><st1:place>U.S.</st1:place></st1:country-region> are experiencing right now is certainly not a big secret. Every domestic newspaper and news channel are covering all the gritty little details and putting forth a steady stream of “doom and gloom”. Words like “depression” are worked into most conversations about the economy with relative ease. Indeed, unemployment is on the rise and, quite frankly, people are a little scared. For most Americans, the global war on terror that has captivated our attention for the bulk of the last seven years is no longer doing so. While we acknowledge its existence, it is generally viewed as a far-away thing....the economy, however, is right here – in our face – threatening to overtake us. It seems like a more ominous force and a more menacing enemy simply because of proximity. This enemy – potential joblessness, homelessness, bankruptcy, lack of job security – is right here, right now….and it’s scary.</p><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal">I’ve been in the manufacturing world for most of my adult life. Part of life in American manufacturing is that you live in a cycle. So the potential for unemployment is always breathing down your neck, it seems. Those of us who have made careers out of manufacturing have been around massive layoffs, plant closings, consolidations, mergers, and sell-offs. But even with that experience, it’s never fun when you are faced with the reality of…..bad times.</p><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal">As I’ve watched the news and conversed with friends I’ve made over the years who are in various positions within different manufacturing companies around the country, I’ve seen a lot of speculation, fear, and just pure uneasiness and anxiety. These are frightening times, my friends, and the reality is that they are likely to get worse before they get better. So what are we to do, as Christians? How should we react? What should our conversation with our unrepentant friends be during these times?</p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal">My thoughts keep going back to the 6th chapter of Matthew’s Gospel beginning in verse 25 and continuing through verse 34 (ESV):</p><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><i style=""><br /></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><i style=""></i></p><blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;" class="MsoNormal"><i style="">"Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life? And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, 'What shall we eat?' or 'What shall we drink?' or 'What shall we wear?' For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first the </i><st1:place><st1:placetype><i style="">kingdom</i></st1:placetype><i style=""> of </i><st1:placename><i style="">God</i></st1:placename></st1:place><i style=""> and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you. <o:p></o:p></i></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;"><i style=""> "Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.”</i></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><i style=""><o:p></o:p></i></p><div style="text-align: justify;"> </div><p style="text-align: justify;">Sometimes we Christians are very good at mindlessly and mechanically quoting this passage when times get tough. But while we can quote these verses, I wonder how much time we’ve spent meditating on the truths contained within them? The 34<sup>th</sup> verse is one of the greatest comments in Scripture regarding the human inclination to borrow trouble! Essentially, Christ says, “Stop worrying about what’s not even happened yet! There’s enough to deal with here and now to be worrying about what tomorrow may or may not bring!” The truth is that God makes a stark promise to us in this small passage…..”Seek me FIRST, and I’ll take care of you”. Friends, this isn’t a promise of comfort, wealth, nice clothing, and shelter….it’s a promise of being sustained by the One who knows what we need…the One who knows us better than we know ourselves….the One who has demonstrated love to us in a way that we will never fully grasp this side of Eternity.<br /></p><p style="text-align: justify;">It’s so easy to worry about creature comforts, isn’t it? During the <span style="font-style: italic;">worst </span>of times that I’ve experienced in my lifetime, I’ve always had it pretty good. While I’ve gone without food before, I’ve never gone hungry. While I’ve been without a home before, I’ve never been without shelter. While I’ve been without money before, I’ve never had my basic needs unmet. I praise His name that I haven’t yet had to deal with truly impossibly hard times during my marriage (three-and-a-half month joblessness, notwithstanding). I don’t know what the future holds, but I do know Who holds the future. As trite and cute as that might sound, there is a confidence and peace in that knowledge that surpasses my vocabulary!</p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:100%;">So Christian, don’t worry! I’m certainly not advocating that we blindly live in the moment and just plow headlong into every day like nothing bad will ever happen to us, but let’s not be….. “stressed out” about things. Remember, the One who cares for the birds and flowers will certainly take care of His own!</span></p>Ellis Murphreehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10366467132733647443noreply@blogger.com3