As For Me and My House...

Children and Salvation - a follow-up

2009-09-16T21:46:00.002-05:00

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 here) 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.

_______________________________________________________

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 ”absolutely sure” 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 ”saved” (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.

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 right 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”.

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.

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 done, 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”.

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.

I think that adults can do a lot of long-term damage to children if these matters aren’t handled carefully. It is so 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.

With the heavenly choir I rejoiced last night as God brought one of His own to Him!

Things that annoy me.

2009-08-27T12:00:00.004-05:00

Just a random list here of a few things that tend to irk me...(actually, some of these things are more than annoying.....they tick me off!!!!) I'll have something more substantive coming soon......

People who drive too fast.
People who drive too slow.
“To” being used where “too” ought to be.
Red lights….especially when there are no other vehicles on the road.
The word “ideal” being used in place of the word “idea”.
The first syllable of “water” being pronounced “what”.
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.
When I’ve got an itch on my back that I can’t quite reach.
People who refuse to admit that they are wrong…particularly when they are disagreeing with me!
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.
People smoking in a vehicle that has kids in it.
The sight of Brett Favre wearing that hideous purple uniform.
People texting while driving.
Texting.
Twitter.
99% of all status updates I’ve ever read on Facebook.
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.
The constant elevation of athletes as role models.
Road construction.
The unhealthy focus on entertainment in our society.
Sexually suggestive commercials.
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.
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.
That I can’t watch national news without some story about Michael Jackson or Jon and Kate.
Politicians….nearly all of them.
Christians who think they are righteous in their laughter when calamity and / or death comes to some political figure with whom they disagree ideologically.
People who attempt to use the Bible to justify their own wickedness.
Athletes who are Christians only when their team wins a game.
The idea that God actually cares whether or not your team wins a game.
The idea that just because a thing isn’t expressly forbidden in Scripture that it must be acceptable.
People driving right on my rear bumper.
The fact that great programs like “The Andy Griffith Show” have been replaced by crap like “Family Guy”.
MSNBC pretending to be a news organization.
Some conservative talk show hosts pretending to be non-partisan.
Lists that go on for far too long.

Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer!

2009-08-05T14:15:00.000-05:00

Your sacred head bowed down in pain. A cross your resting place.
Your nail pierced hands blood hath stained. Your visage blood hath traced.
Your thorn crowned brow – so much pain. Your bruised and battered face.
Such selflessness – love defined… You freely took my place.

They beat you and they mocked you and they called you evil names;
Willingly ignoring the reason that You came.
Maliciously they whipped You – Your back they opened wide…
Your reaction was astounding! – “Forgive them”, was Your cry.

Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!
You loved Your own and prayed for them. You loved them to the end.
Alone and battered, bruised, rejected. A wounded, bloodied man.
Was this the scene You had in mind? Was this salvation’s plan?

This ugly scene of sacrifice – we cannot comprehend;
My precious Jesus, loving and faithful, endured all to the end.
The Perfect Lamb, unspotted – untainted out and in,
Took my place through suffering - He died there for my sin.

I gaze with awe at Calvary’s cross as questions flood my mind:
Propitiation? Substitution? Atonement for my sin?
My questions turn to tears – my sorrow turns to joy;
He loves me! He forgave me! My penalty destroyed!

Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!
Your grace and startling mercy! Your love that knows no end!
You sought me and You found me and You said I am Your own!
Your nail scarred hands now hold me. Your righteousness my robe!

I kneel in shame and gratefulness, my blind eyes opened wide.
I understand, though mystified, it was for me He died!
This tragic death now glorious to me it doth appear.
He changed my life! He paid my debt! He brought salvation near!

The debt I owe to You, my God, is one I’ll ne’er repay.
It’s greater than the former one – the one You washed away.
You elected to redeem me. How astounding! How sublime!
I’ll live for You, dear Jesus, though unworthy of Your name.

Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Guide!
I long to know You better…with You I would abide.
Precious Jesus! Glorious Savior! My Redeemer, Lord, and Friend!
I long to understand Your love…Your love that knows no end.

"Sin Myths" or "Why I hate the color grey"

2009-08-04T17:01:00.000-05:00

Just because something is stupid 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. BUT it is most certainly not 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) stupid in that it could certainly lead you to the sin of addiction.

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.

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.

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 doctrinal 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”.

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?

Pharisees versus Freedom Freaks

2009-07-29T16:45:00.001-05:00

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.

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 abstain 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: “Those Pharisees aren’t going to squash my liberty”. 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.

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. “It’s just wrong…you can see all through the Bible that it’s a sin!” 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.

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.

Glorious Savior! Blessed Redeemer!

2009-07-22T17:34:00.003-05:00

Battered and bruised, bloodied and bare
Ridiculed and shamed;
The Son of God bore all my sin.
Oh, praise His Blessed Name!

He became sin for us
Though no sin He knew.
He cloaked us in His righteousness;
He washed us white as snow.

The ugly mount called Calvary,
Wretched, vile, and stained,
Became a place of love and grace.
My sins were washed away!

Oh, glorious Savior, oh blessed Redeemer
We stand in awe of You!
You died for us. You live for us!
Your blood has made us new!

Slipping and Sliding...

2009-07-14T16:44:00.000-05:00

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…..

I absolutely abhor 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, per se, it will just lead to some erroneous position down the road. Like I said…nuts!

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.

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!

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.

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.

Lessons from 1 Corinthians: Part 4 (The End)

2009-07-11T08:20:00.000-05:00

(Part 1 - Introduction)

(Part 2 - Characteristics 1 - 5)
(Part 3 - Characteristics 6 - 9)

We’ve been examining the characteristics of love as laid out for us in the first eight verses of 1 Corinthians 13. 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.

10. Love bears all things
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.

11. Love believes all things
This doesn't speak to being gullible; however, we are to “unsuspiciously” 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!

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.

12. Love hopes all things
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.

13. Love endures all things
In Job 13:15, Job proclaims, “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him”. 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!

14. Love never fails
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, agape love will not.

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 is love leaves us with good reason to believe that Christ perfectly demonstrated agape in His time on earth….let’s take a look at a few examples I’ve tossed together:

1. Jesus suffered long (I Peter 2:23)
2. Jesus was kind (Luke 8:40-56)
3. Jesus was not envious (Matthew 8:20) Jesus just accepted the fact that all his creation was taken care of, but He had nowhere to lay His head.
4. Jesus was humble. (Phil 2:5-8)
5. Jesus acted appropriately (Matthew 22 - render to Caesar)
6. Jesus was selfless (John 13 - he washed the feet of his creation – including those of the man whom He knew would betray Him later that night.)
7. Jesus was not easily provoked (The Passion)
8. Jesus didn't “keep score” (Praise the Lord for that!) (In Matthew 9:24, we hear the people laughing Him to scorn. In Mark 15:29-33 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 John 10:20, we hear people saying, “Why would you listen to Him? He’s got a demon.” Yet, what does He say in Luke 23:34? “Father, forgive them…”
9. Jesus rejoiced only in that His Father was glorified (John 13-15)
10. Jesus covered our sins (I Peter 2:24)
11. Jesus forgets our transgressions (Psalm 103:12)
12. Jesus forgives us every time (I John 1:9) "Hopes" (Luke 7:37-46)
13. Jesus is never exasperated by us (I John 1:9 again)
14. Jesus never fails!

That concludes this series....I hope you received some good from it. It's certainly been an educational study for me!

The shame of it all....

2009-07-06T16:25:00.000-05:00

I know a lot of things. I know about 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.

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 that?” 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.

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.

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.

“Be ye holy; for I am holy”….grasping hold of what that phrase means should radically impact the way we live our lives….

Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13: Part 3

2009-07-01T17:45:00.000-05:00

(Part 1)
(Part 2)

In my last post I began examining the first 8 verses of 1 Corinthians 13. I looked at the first 5 attributes given in this passage of biblical, agape 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.

6. Love is not selfish
Galatians 6:2 commands us to “bear one another's burdens”. I Corinthians 12:25 gives us the formula for ensuring that there is no “schism” in the body of Christ – “care for one another”. This is the most descriptive attribute of love. It is not selfish. It is completely selfless. Philippians 2:3-4 reminds us to “esteem others higher (or better) than ourselves”. It's this type of selfless love that the Apostle John writes about in I John 3:16 where he writes, “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.”

In another recent post here 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.

7. Love is not provoked
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 NOT provoked to anger against another. James 1:19 reminds us to be “swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath”. To be able to listen selflessly requires love!

There is nothing wrong with debate. There is nothing wrong with disagreement. There is nothing wrong with anger. We are, however, cautioned to “be angry and sin not”. 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. 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. 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.

8. Love does not keep score
This term “thinks no evil” 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.

9. Love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth
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!

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 (paraphrased), “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?

I'll have one more post on this passage soon looking at the last 5 attributes of love from 1 Corinthians 13.

Wasting time. Wasting life.

2009-06-29T11:56:00.001-05:00

There are so many things in this world that call for our attention. It’s easy to loose focus on the big picture 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 sneaks up 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.

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, live. 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.

May we all commit ourselves to a deeper pursuit of God and to a life marked by sacrifice of self for Him.

Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13:Part 2

2009-06-24T21:13:00.006-05:00

(See Part 1 here).

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 I Corinthians 13:4-8, I’m going to be looking at the14 characteristics of true love. In this post I’ll concentrate on the first 5.

1. Love is patient
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 ANY PROVOCATION. 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 all the time. If we are to forgive these deliberate offenses, how much more so the inadvertent offenses?

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, “Love covers a multitude of sins”. Love suffers long - it covers.

2. Love is kind
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 – “love your enemies”. 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 agape - a love that would die for these people.

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.

3. Love does not envy
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.

4. Love does not boast
Proverbs 13:10 tells us that ”only be pride comes contention”. 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 “more excellent way” 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 EVERY 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 “gave his body to be burned” (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 anything, regardless of how noble, righteous, or selfless it may appear to be, is anything other than love…it is worthless.

5. Love is not arrogant or rude
Love is not rude or willingly offensive to ANYBODY! 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 “made all things to all men that I might by all means save some.”

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.

Lessons from 1 Corinthians 13 :Part 1 of 4

2009-06-24T21:11:00.004-05:00

In Matthew 22:34-40 we find an occasion where Christ is once again tempted by the Pharisees. One of them asks Jesus - “What's the greatest commandment in all the law?” 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 (“thou shalt’s”) - as many as the bones of the human body. They said that the Law contained 365 negative precepts (“thou shalt not’s”) - 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 these 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 type 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 – “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind.” Then he says something rather startling – “Number two is that you should love those around you as yourself.” This was Christ's message. In Mark 12, this same occasion is recorded and in verse 31 we find this addition, “There is no commandment greater than these”.

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: storge - 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 eros. This was a very selfish, possessive, erotic and sensual love. The third type - and most common - is phileo. 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 agape 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.

Agape love is that self-giving love that is not merited. An interesting side note here - this word agape 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 agape 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.

Now, we sometimes have this view of agape 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.

Growing up I was taught that this type of love was descriptive only of the love that God shows man and that man is incapable of displaying this love himself. However, over and over again, we are commanded in the NT to exhibit agape love to one another. Christ said often - you can look all through the Gospels - particularly the Gospel of John - and find Christ saying, “love one another”. He told the disciples in John 13 that He was giving them a “new” commandment – “Love [agape] one another". In I John 4 we read a great description of God: “God is love [agape]”. 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” [agape]. All the other components of this fruit are the natural by-products of love. In essence, if we exhibit true, Biblical agape love, the characteristics of joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance will also be exhibited.

If we are to have agape 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 agape 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 agape. 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.

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:

“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.

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.

Love never fails.” (NKJV)

Jon and Kate Gosselin: A predictable tragedy.

2009-06-23T16:50:00.000-05:00

Jon and Kate Gosselin announced last night on their hit show, Jon & Kate plus 8, 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.

First of all, they have claimed the name of Christ often. Bob Bixby blogged about the issues with this some time ago. Rather than spending any time discussing this, I will simply urge you to read his very good article on the subject.

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.

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.

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.

Separation, Cooperation, and Confusion: A Rambling Rant by Yours Truly!

2009-06-18T16:42:00.000-05:00

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 do’s and don’t’s 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.

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 primary 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 secondary separation….it’s all 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…

I’m actually getting off what I want to be the point of this post, so I’ll take a step back.

Separation from sin and separation to 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

The "worship issue": a clarification (I hope).

2009-06-16T16:20:00.000-05:00

I just got around to reading a blog article that linked unfavorably to a post of mine from several weeks back. The blog 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 failed at making my point!

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.

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.

This church had a huge 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.

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”.

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.

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 might 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.

Frankly, I have little use for both styles that I’ve mentioned above.

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.

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!

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”.

Don't call me a Fundamentalist....I'm a fundamentalist!

2009-06-15T17:05:00.001-05:00

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…

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 Fundamentals whereas some tend to forget that being a “Fundamentalist” is more than just an issue of separation.

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).

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 Fundamentalists refuse to acknowledge or fellowship with other fundamentalists 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.

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!).

I say all that to get to this point: the idea of “leaving Fundamentalism” is more about identification with a movement (or nonidentification) 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 always remain a fundamentalist (the idea)…this is by conviction.

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!

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…

A new baby, a big scare, and the Good Shepherd.

2009-06-04T09:23:00.005-05:00

Excuse the rambling nature of this post....I'm a bit tired and my brain isn't quite working right just yet!

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 extremely rapidly. But the hospital staff assured as that everything was OK, so we quickly dismissed the concerns from our minds.

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.

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.

Sunday 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.

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!

I've learned a few lessons about being a child of God during this week. In my sleep deprived sate I'm going to attempt to mention a coupled them...

First of all we have the ability to cast all our cares at the feet of our God. Not only are we able to do this, but we are actually expected to! Leaving our cares at the feet of the Almighty is one of the most amazing privileges we have as children of God.

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.

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 PSALMS CD from Sovereign Grace Music and is based on the 23rd Psalm. It is entitled "The Lord Is":

The depths of Your grace who can measure?
You fully supply all I need.
You restore my weary soul again and again;
And lead me in Your righteousness and peace.

You’re with me through every dark valley.
There’s nothing that I have to fear.
You are there to comfort me again and again;
Protecting me, assuring me You’re near.

The Lord is
The Lord is my shepherd!
The Lord is
The Lord is my shepherd!
I shall not want.

You gave Your own life for my ransom;
So I could rejoice at Your side.
You have shown Your faithfulness again and again;
There’s nothing good that You will not provide.

The Lord is
The Lord is my shepherd!
The Lord is
The Lord is my shepherd!
I shall not want.

I will dwell in Your house
All the days of my life.
I will dwell in Your house
All the days of my life.

And You watch over me;
You take care of all my needs;
Lord, You provide in every situation.
So I'll sing:

The Lord is
The Lord is my shepherd!
The Lord is
The Lord is my shepherd!
The Lord is
Lord, You are my shepherd;
I shall not want.

So, why are they REALLY leaving Fundamentalism?

2009-05-26T18:59:00.002-05:00

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve had a question running through my mind…why are the young guys really 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.

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.

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:

The KJV issue. 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 more 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 TRANSLATION – 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.

The standards issue. 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.

The preaching issue. 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 feeling, but a strong conviction on this subject. Rightly dividing the word of truth demands a faithful exposition of the text.

The worship issue. 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, emotion, 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.

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.
The “grass is greener” syndrome. Some guys leave just because it’s different. 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.

The Calvinism issue. 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.

The Jack Hyles/Bob Gray/Bob Jones, Jr./John R. Rice, etc. issue. 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 primary 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).

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.

Fundamentalism versus Conservative Evangelicalism

2009-05-25T08:59:00.005-05:00

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 root, 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.

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.

	A	B	C
1	Specific Belief	Fundamentalism	Conservative Evangelicalism
2	Belief in Inerrancy of Scripture	yes	yes
3	Belief in Divinity of Christ	yes	yes
4	Belief in Virgin Birth	yes	yes
5	Belief in the Substitutionary Blood Atonement	yes	yes
6	Belief in the Bodily Resurrection of Christ	yes	yes
7	Belief in the Imminent Return of Christ	yes	yes
8	Belief in a Triune God	yes	yes
9	Church Polity	Congregational rule and Pastor rule. There are generally deacons that work closely with the pastor	Most generally practice elder rule
10	Baptism	Immersion only	Generally hold to Immersion only, though some other forms might be acceptable in some quarters
11	Lord's Table	"Closed" - only members of the local church, or "Close" - "likeminded" members of other local churches can join	"Open" to all believers
12	Church Discipline	Taught but not practiced	Generally practiced
13	Worship style	Music "prepares the heart for worship. Generally there will be corporate singing without commentary, an offering, a choral number, a "special", and then the preaching. Congregation not really lead in worship.	Heavy focus on corporate worship. Variety of musical styles and other medium to completely engage the congregation in group worship. Heavy focus on worship before, during, and after the preaching.
14	Preaching style	Primarily Topical	Primarily Expositional
15	Evangelism	Consists primarily of church members being encouraged to and engaged in inviting others to church.	Church as a whole tends to be heavily involved in community. Not uncommon to see addictions recovery ministries, troubled teens ministries, various counseling ministries and the like. Focus on "meeting people where they are".
16	Separation from Apostasy	yes	yes
17	Fellowship	Fellowship only with "likeminded" believers, i.e., churches that are more or less "carbon copies".	Willingness and desire to fellowship with all believers.
18	Calvinism versus Arminianism	Mostly 4 point Arminian	Mostly 4 - 5 point Calvinist
19	Bible Versions	Generally will have a radical adherence to the KJV. Some have transitioned to the NKJV.	Multiple versions used.
20	Small Groups	Disdained	Strongly encouraged - primary place for fellowship with other members.
21	Dress Standards	High standards in the Church and encouraged outside the church service as well. The "pants on women" debate is still underway.	Focus on modesty and appropriateness.
22	Drinking	Alcohol consumption is a sin.	Drunkenness is a sin. Alcohol consumptions is OK.
23	Personal Holiness	Primary focus on outward conformity to certain "standards of conduct" (i.e., no drinking, smoking, listening to rock music, dancing, etc)	Primary focus on a personal relationship with a Holy God.
24	Church Activities	Lots of them. Local church tends to be very tight knit as a result.	Not many for just the church. Most activities are geared towards community outreach. Small groups serve as the primary socialization arm for members.
25	Community Involvement	Limited to none.	Heavily involved in community.
26	"Sign" gifts	Strict cessationists	Not dogmatic on cessationism, but do NOT practice speaking in tongues.
27

I am a Calvinist...well, sort of.....

2009-05-22T15:20:00.002-05:00

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.

“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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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”.

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.

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.

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.

The King James Version Debate

2009-05-18T18:26:00.012-05:00

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.

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 THE Bible in the English language. I certainly object to the unorthodox and sometimes heretical views that would claim some sort of a process of “secondary inspiration” in regards to the KJV, but I have no issue with folks using the KJV exclusively and attending only churches that do the same.

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^rd or 4^th 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.

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.

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 (for instance, one marginal note in Revelation 11:7 reads: "The beast that cometh out of the bottomless pit is the Pope, which hath his power out of hell and cometh thence.") and the Christian response to corrupt Kings (a 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). These overt doctrinal statements were not exactly popular sentiments as far as the King of England was concerned!

The Geneva Bible, in addition to being the most scholarly work available, was also the most “current”. Where the Geneva 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 new translation…but one without notes.

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.

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.

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, "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."

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!

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.

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.

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, “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." 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.

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.

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’ Textus Receptus 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 Textus Receptus was based on the Byzantine text which represents a revision of the New Testament made in the 4^th century A.D. and later. The Johannine Comma 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 Textus Receptus 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.

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.

"Westcott and Hort: 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.

"Ezra Abbott: According to his estimates the text is 99.75 percent pure.

"A. T. Robertson: 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.

"Sir Frederic Kenyon: “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.'"

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.

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.

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 "secondary inspiration" that requires some ridiculous leaps of logic to buy into. Don’t refer to it as “God’s Word for the English speaking people” either, as those sorts of statements smack, not only of ignorance, but of bibliolatry.

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.

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!

Just call me "sir", thank you....

2009-03-04T18:03:00.002-06:00

To Whom It May Concern:

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.

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! This bothers me more than a little!

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!!!!

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, “Will that be all, my wittle honey-bunny?”, you could simply say, “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?”

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.

Now obviously I write some of this in jest……I would never – and I mean never – go to any 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!!!!!!

Sincerely,

Ellis “sugar lips”, “honeybun”, “sweetie pie”, “apple dumplin’”, "schmooky bear" Murphree

Racism at the Inauguration

2009-01-21T10:31:00.003-06:00

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 racist 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:

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.

“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.

The incredible part is that moments before the statements above, Lowery says the following: 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 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.

And now, Lord, in the complex arena of human relations, help us to make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance.

And as we leave this mountaintop, help us to hold on to the spirit of fellowship and the oneness of our family. Let us take that power back to our homes, our workplaces, our churches, our temples, our mosques, or wherever we seek your will.

“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”.

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:

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 deliver us from the exploitation of the poor or the leastof these and from favoritism toward the rich, the elite of these.

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.

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.

Oh well…..that’s all I’ll say on this subject. It makes me uncomfortable and, at the same time, angry.

Anxiety, stress, and .... "tomorrow"...

2009-01-10T09:59:00.003-06:00

The economic woes that the U.S. 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.

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.

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?

My thoughts keep going back to the 6th chapter of Matthew’s Gospel beginning in verse 25 and continuing through verse 34 (ESV):

"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 kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

"Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.”

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^th 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.

It’s so easy to worry about creature comforts, isn’t it? During the worst 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!

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!

Straight No Chaser - 12 Days of Christmas

2008-12-24T08:29:00.003-06:00

Do you like to laugh? Do you like Christmas music? How about acapella Christmas music? Well if you've answered yes to all three of those, have I got a treat for you! Well, even if you answered no to one or more of the questions, I can still guarantee that you will enjoy this video from Straight No Chaser! If you've seen this before, go ahead and click on the link anyway....they add a new twist to "Dreidel"..... Enjoy!

On Celebrating His Birth....

2008-12-23T18:21:00.003-06:00

I sometimes think that Christmas can become overly sentimental….almost to the point of being “syrupy”. We get so focused, at times, at beholding the birth scene…..pointing all of our attention towards a baby in a manger. Now certainly there’s something here that ought to grab our attention and hold captive our imagination, if only for a short time. First of all, there was never before, nor has there been since, a birth like this one. The woman who gave birth was a virgin – indeed, this birth was a physiological impossibility! Furthermore, there has at no other time been a birth that caused an eruption from a multitude of the heavenly hosts! And then (and I say this at the risk of fostering further syrupy sentimentalism) there was the child himself…..God in the flesh. Upon His birth Mary did something that had never been done before: she kissed the face of God. We don’t know all that much about Mary and Joseph….but what must have been going through their heads as they held this infant…..the Messiah….God in the flesh? When they heard his cry, did they consider the fact that this voice spoke and the world came into order? When they felt his breath on their cheek, did they ponder that this is the same breath that breathed into Adam’s nostrils so that he would become a living soul? Certainly, these (as well as many others) are questions worthy of pondering briefly as we gaze upon this scene in Bethlehem. It gives us some grasp of the significance of the whole thing. But this birth, the birth that we celebrate more than any other event in the life of the Christ, is nothing more than an introductory note to the Gospel records. But what an introduction!

In the brief paragraphs given to us in Scripture relating the occasion of Jesus’ birth, there is a great deal of significance in the sheer number of Old Testament prophecies fulfilled. Indeed, this night was the beginning of that to which all the prophets of old pointed. But let us keep in mind this fact…..it was only the beginning. As we read through the New Testament, we find that there just isn’t much time spent in dealing with the Birth of Jesus – amazing as it was. No, there is much more time spent in dealing with His life, His message, His ministry, His death, and His resurrection. As a matter of fact, after His birth we only see Christ for a couple of brief moments prior to his entering public ministry as a man in his 30’s. After this, His birth is only referenced in the sense that it occurred. In Philippians we are told to look at His birth as an example of the extreme humility that exemplified His life…..a humility that we are to try to imitate.

This birth offers a moving and beautiful scene and we ought to look at it and marvel. However, let’s not forget the real story…the fact is that without the death and (more importantly) the Resurrection that occurred less than 40 years later, this scene that we now celebrate would be lost to history….insignificant in its standing. If He were not the Lamb of God here to take away the sins of the world, there would be no star, no heavenly hosts celebrating, and no virgin birth. There would be nothing significant to celebrate. It would have been just another birth – most likely occurring some months later in Nazareth rather than in Bethlehem.

Excuse the rambling nature of this article – bear with me as I get to my point now. While we celebrate this birth of Christ – no doubt the most significant birth in human history – let us keep in mind its true meaning: This is salvation from Heaven. Redemptions plan, put in motion in eternity passed, is coming to fruition. The fulfillment of all prophecy is He Who lies wrapped in that rough crib. His purpose in coming is to show us what perfect godliness and love looks like….to show us the one way to God….to introduce us to an adoption like no other. Let our emotion-filled wonder not be fixated on this tiny babe in a manger, but rather on the life He lived and the death he defeated.

My friends, I urge you to celebrate this season, but not because of the small baby that lies in the manger in a cave in Bethlehem. Rather, because of the path that leads from this cave to the Cross. We celebrate because this birth has marked the beginning of His death, His Resurrection, and our life!

The Sanctity of Life

2008-12-20T09:04:00.002-06:00

I came across an article last night discussing the case of a 14 year old girl. Some time ago she was brought into a hospital with severe brain trauma and she has spent the last two years of her life in an "irreversible vegetative state". The courts ruled that her condition was hopeless and that she should be removed from life support....she was no longer vital and had, essentially, ceased from being a human being. They removed the life support....and she lived. She's now recovered and in court testifying about the abuse of her parents that landed her in the hospital in the first place.

As a I read this, I was reminded of an article I wrote for another website before I launched this blog. I wrote it on the heels of the murder of Terri Schiavo in Florida several years ago. What follows is my article entitled "Life vs. Death".
____________________________________________________________________

The Terri Schiavo case has been filled with emotion. It has caused all of us to ask ourselves some difficult questions, requiring us to find a deeper, more meaningful reaction than our first instinct, knee-jerk reactions. We’ve had to face the tough questions and then come to a conclusion that satisfies our emotional, logical, moral, religious, and social consciences. What is life? When does it begin? When does it end? What is quality of life? All of these questions have been asked and answered from many different perspectives, but there is one lingering question to which I’ve not heard a proper answer. Why were some folks so set on seeing this young woman die? I don’t just mean her husband – I’m talking about the tens of thousands of people around the country who supported him and just wanted to see this young woman die.

I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised. One of the worst punishments of God that we see in the Bible occurs when He simply gives men up to their own desires. It’s almost laughable, but James 1:15 and Romans 8:13 both leave us with the harsh reality that, left to ourselves, we will absolutely and completely self-destruct.

Jeremiah 17:9 records these words when talking about the nature of man: “The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is incurable; who can know it?” Another translation states that the heart of man is “desperately wicked”. We should never be surprised at the wicked actions that wicked men perform when lost in their wicked natures. However, there is something in us that wants to say that man is basically ... okay. We understand that there is “none righteous, no not one”. We understand that ALL men have sinned and are, therefore, sinners. We know that because of that sin all men are rightfully destined for hell. We know that even after salvation there is a battle raging within us between the old sin nature and the new nature – the righteousness of Christ. We know that the only thing that restrains us is the Spirit of God, but even without that restraint, there is something in us that wants to believe that all men are basically good. And then, something happens to snap us back into reality.

I remember in September of 2001 that what reminded us of the desperate, incurable, deep-seated wickedness of man was the terrorist attacks on the U.S. This year it was, once again, man’s attack on the sanctity of human life, namely, the life of Theresa Marie Schiavo.

The strange thing about the legal sparring is that nobody ever disputed the FACT that Terri Schiavo was alive. There were questions raised about the quality of her life, about her wishes, about many things, but NEVER about her classification as being a living human being. This fact should have fostered many discussions about euthanasia, but those conversations were strangely lacking.

Throughout the 1990’s there was one name that dominated conversations about euthanasia: Dr. Jack Kevorkian. He assisted in over 100 suicides of mostly terminally ill patients. Some called him an agent of death, and others called him an angel of mercy. Regardless, he was sentenced to prison in 1999 for second-degree murder, and he won’t be eligible for parole until 2007. Throughout the legal wrangling over the fate of Terri Shiavo, I kept going back in my mind to this man that people dubbed “Dr. Death”.

Here was a man that was acting “on behalf” of the terminally ill in an effort to end their lives – with their consent. He would provide the means, and the patients would ultimately end their own lives. Yet he is in prison.

The purpose of this article isn’t to call for the vindication of Jack Kevorkian. Rather, it is to ask a question or two. Why is Kevorkian – a man who was clearly acting under the direction of the patients – in prison today? Perhaps a better question is, “why aren’t the judges, lawers, and Micheal Schiavo – the people who are directly responsible for the death of Terri Shiavo - in prison today?” These people fought to kill a woman that couldn’t speak for herself. Ultimately they succeeded, and in doing so, they starved her to death. This was a much more heinous act than any that Kevorkian ever committed. These folks ended another human life by denying her sustenance. They weren’t merciful in the way they destroyed her. It wasn’t instantaneous – it took nearly two weeks. It wasn’t without pain – Terri was administered morphine to deal with the pain that she was feeling as her brain dried up and her body began to shut down.

It occurred to me that the differences between Terri Schiavo and the men that saw to it that she was put to death can be boiled down to one simple fact: she wasn’t able to feed herself, these other men are. Oh yes, there’s one other difference now….Terri’s dead. We can sugar-coat it any way we choose, but the fact of the matter is Terri was executed. Why? Well, she was no longer vital. Her life no longer qualified as being a life that had any worth to it. I read an article recently on MSNBC that referred to her as “no more than the vessel in which her spirit once lived, like a music box that no longer plays”. It troubles me how boldly some can simply dismiss a human life. In fact, it makes my blood boil a bit. Who are we to determine whether a human life has lost its value and usefulness?

These proponents of death are in for a surprise. This life that they have so callously dismissed as being of no importance is proving to be of utmost importance. Never in my lifetime has there been such a rallying around the nature and sanctity of human life as there has been around Terri. While the death brigade won a small victory in this case, the war continues. Terri is dead, but the fight is far from over.

Feasting on the Battlefield.

2008-11-28T08:15:00.002-06:00

The 23rd is truly a magnificent Psalm. Perhaps the most familiar of all the Psalms, it is one that most people have known since their childhood. People who have never been to church are familiar with the phrase, "The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want". This week I've pondered several things in this beautiful Psalm, but one of the last portions of it contains a concept I've not considered before. Psalm 23:5a (ESV) says, "You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies...".

Have you ever thought about this phrase before? There is such a protection, care, and provision offered by the Lord that, in the midst of the battle, He spreads out a feast and says, "Enjoy!". I think that, too often in my life, I get caught up in the battle....the daily events of life, that I forget to feast on the goodness of our Savior. It's easy to get sidetracked, isn't it? When there are enemies on every side and foes attacking in the areas where we are the weakest, we need to remember the feast that's sitting there for us.

But there's more! That first part of this verse tells us Who prepares the feast for us......our Shepherd. It's not just a quick "grab and go" meal, either. There is a thoughtful preparation....a huge spread....a real feast. When my Dad was still alive one of his favorite phrases when he was ready to go somewhere was, "make that soup into a sandwich and get your butts moving" (that's slightly edited :) ). This is something he picked up in the Army when he was a drill sargeant. The idea was that there is something important to do or someplace pressing to go. In the military sense, there just isn't time to sit and eat...we have to scarf the food down and continue the battle! But that hurriedness isn't present in the 23rd Psalm, is it?

Right in the sight of the enemy, our Savior carefully prepares a table for us....He serves us....and we get to sit down and slowly enjoy all of it!

Another musical treat...

2008-11-09T17:02:00.003-06:00

This may surprise some of you who have read me regularly over the last couple of years, but I don't really like CCM (Contemporary Christian Music). The underlying philosophy of the movement as a whole is flawed; much of what the industry produces is theological tripe; and many of the performers themselves seem to want to relegate Christianity to a big emotional gush-fest. No, I honestly dislike CCM as a whole. Now having said that, there are certain singers / groups / "artists" linked with CCM who I absolutely love. These are people who tend to focus heavily on the theology of their music and not so much on the cotton candy crap that tends to define most of CCM. Some of these I've spoken of on here before, while others I haven't. In this blog entry, I just want to highlight one that I've recently discovered.

Sovereign Grace Music is a ministry of Sovereign Grace Ministries, which is led by former pastor C.J. Mahaney. Now if that name sounds familiar, he is also one of the founders of the Together For the Gospel (T4G) Annual Conference. Now, Sovereign Grace features a plethora of contributors - most of whom I've never heard prior to looking through their website. The one contributor I had heard of was one of the founding members of GLAD - another old favorite of mine. I'm not so sure that SG Music would readily identify themselves with CCM, so much as they would use terms like "worship". They have a variety of sounds and styles, but they are consistent in their pursuit of pleasing God through their music. One of the statements they make regarding this is:

"For more than twenty years, Sovereign Grace Ministries has been producing songs for congregational worship. Our goal is to provide local churches with new songs characterized by biblical truth and consuming passion that honors God. While our lyrics cover a broad variety of Scriptural topics, we continually return to God’s glory revealed in Christ’s atoning sacrifice on the cross—the gospel. Our hearts and lives have been transformed by the Savior, and we can’t help singing about what is “of first importance” (1 Corinthians 15:3–4). Like Charles Wesley, we wish we had “a thousand tongues to sing our great Redeemer’s praise.” We pray the songs we write will produce the same desire in you and your church, for the glory of God."

I would encourage you to check them out some time. I've purchased and dowloaded several of their songs from both I-Tunes and Walmart online....obviously you can purchase them directly from their website as well. Enjoy!

Everything's going to be OK.

2008-11-05T08:46:00.002-06:00

He won. I doubt anybody was really surprised at the results….it seemed inevitable. In my opinion, there are three things that sealed the fate of Senator McCain (aside from a campaign that seemed poorly managed). First of all, there was the selection of Sarah Palin as running mate. While this certainly energized the base, it seemed more like a stunt than a well thought out decision. Secondly, there was the George Bush factor. Aside from being the least popular President in history, he is arguable the second worst in modern history (Jimmy Carter topping the list). While people like to point fingers at outside circumstances, Party leaders, and other things; the fact is that under his Presidency America has become a less stable country than it was 8 years ago. Job markets are down, bankruptcy is up, the housing market collapsed, the national debt is at an all-time high, and we are engaged in two separate wars. His message to Americans the day after 9/11 was “take a vacation and spend some money” – during the last great American war, the message was “sacrifice”. I could go on, but you get the picture. The fact that McCain is a member of the same political Party as Bush handicapped him from the get-go. Frankly, it would have been shocking for America to elect a Republican President again this year. The third thing that hurt McCain was really the death blow to his chances – he seemed to be overcoming these other two items fine (against all odds). That third issue was the melt-down of our financial markets. I’m not sure that it’s fair for McCain to have taken the hit for this, but he did and it sealed the deal for Senator Obama.

So, what now? I’ve been reading Christian bloggers as well as comments to Christian blogs around the internet and there seems to be an overwhelming fear, sadness, and even anger over the fact that, in a couple of months we will be saying the words “President Obama”. I’m going to make a bold prediction here, folks…..are you ready for it? Here it is:

IT’S ALL GOING TO BE OK!!!

Presidents tend to go toward the center once in office. Even Senator Obama became more and more “centrist” as the campaign wore on. Granted, he will push some clearly leftist social policies, and he will almost certainly offer up some extremely liberal fiscal policies (not exactly a major change), but our world will likely not change all that much. Think about the last 6 or so Presidents. Outside of Jimmy Carter all these guys worked hard with the other side. Even President Bush did that during his first term (not so much during his second term, though). We’ll know more about how Senator Obama’s Presidency will look in the next week or so as he begins to name his Cabinet. I think you can expect to hear some names like Joe Lieberman and some moderate Republicans and Democrats named to it. If I’m wrong and he names a completely liberal Cabinet….well, we’ll only have him in office for one term.

In the mean time, friends, take heart! The world was supposed to end when President Clinton was elected, but that ended up not being so bad after all. I’ve heard and seen people make claims that President-elect Obama is a radical, Israel hating, un-American, socialistic, communistic, United States hating, terrorist loving, fanatic. I have news for you…..those sorts of guys don’t get elected to become President. Besides, if all that were actually true, his Presidency wouldn’t even last a full term.

On the positive side of this whole thing, it was certainly a privilege to be able to witness such an historical election during my lifetime. Despite all my major quibbles with Obama’s stances on several key social and moral issues, I wish him well. He’s inheriting perhaps the biggest messes that any President has inherited during my lifetime. He’s got a tough job ahead of him, not the least of which is attempting to live up to all the hype. I hope and pray that his is a good Presidency…one of peace and prosperity to this nation.

On a personal note, not many people know that I was born in Mississippi. As a child I spent nearly every summer in one of the more racially intense parts of the state – “Mississippi Burning” territory. Racial segregation was still a way of life down there even 20 – 25 years ago. When I was 10 years old (25 years ago) all the pools in town were “private”. That meant that only paying “members” were allowed in. I was a white kid who wasn’t a member, but I could get in to any pool I wanted. During my teenage years I made several black friends there on the basketball court. When I would go to the pool to swim, these friends would always come by, stand outside the fence, and talk to us….it was normal to them. The white kids got to swim in the nice pools in town; the black kids got to swim in the rivers and creeks. This was indicative of the attitudes of the time….the black man was simply not on the same level as the white man.

When I was back there last year for my Grandmother’s funeral, I noticed that a lot had changed. The old remnants of hard-core segregation are a little more difficult to see now. While there are still some racial tensions there, it’s not as overt or intense. The black man is generally not treated as a second-class citizen there these days. All that said, I’ll have to admit that there’s a part of me that is truly thrilled to see a black man elected as President of the United States of America. It’s historic. While I didn’t stay up to watch many of the election results come in last night, I caught some of the morning news shows this morning. It was moving to see the emotional reactions. A camera panned to Jesse Jackson – a man who spent a lot of time working with MLK during the height of the Civil Rights movement. He was in tears as he was hit with the realization that the first black President of the United States had just been elected. Regardless of how I feel about Jackson or Obama, it was a moving picture. This moment in American history is one we can applaud…one that, when our grandchildren ask about it, we’ll be able to say….”I was there”.

Take THAT!!!

2008-10-23T17:51:00.004-05:00

I often wonder how and why those in Christendom have become so critical and, dare I say, hateful towards others. I’ve seen it so often over the years – be it in “back room meetings”, or with off-handed comments, or even with direct assaults from the pulpit – many Christians seem to take a perverse glee in the failure and short-comings of others. There is a condescending, smug, “I told you so” attitude….almost a sense of validation when an “enemy” falters. I remember three and a half years ago, when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans right in the mouth, there was a reaction in many Christian circles that was somewhat akin to rejoicing! This is perverse, un-Christian, and downright uncharitable.

Before someone indicates otherwise, I’m not trying to construct some straw-man so that I can attack and systematically tear apart some faceless stereotype. These wicked reactions are reactions that I’ve seen first-hand. Unfortunately, I see it with increasing regularity. I don’t wish to politicize this particular blog entry, but can you imagine what the “Christian” response would be should Barack Obama win the election and then have something tragic happen to him? The only reason there wouldn’t be dancing in the streets is because we don’t dance!

I heard of a situation recently where a small church had an “enemy” within the community leadership. When it was revealed that this community leader had done some illegal and unethical things, and had subsequently lost his job and was facing some legal repercussions, the reaction of the pastor and congregation in that church wasn’t exactly charitable. Rather than reaching out in love to this disgraced man, there was an announcement made in the church regarding the specifics of the situation. While there wasn’t “applause”, per se, there was laughter from the congregants and a peculiar smugness from the pulpit. Several words come to mind when I see and hear of this sort of behavior: Words like, reprehensible, disgraceful, wicked, fleshly……The only upside in this situation is that it occurred during a church service in which there weren’t any “non-regulars” in attendance.

So why have so many of us come to the place where we have forgotten one of the most basic concepts of Christianity – love? We don’t “love our enemies”, neither do we “bless those that seek our destruction”; instead, we hate them. We long for their destruction and we laugh at their calamity. Unfortunately, it gets even worse when those that fall into ruin (or just go a different way) happen to be some of the “good guys”.

A family leaves a local church because the church leadership has taken a hard line stance on something like music and the family finds that the stance of the church leadership is beyond the bounds of Scripture. Regardless of how “quietly” the family leaves, the first reaction of many is, “Well they weren’t really serious about serving the Lord anyway. They’ll learn in a few years when they lose their kids”.

A prominent Bible college closes and the first reaction of some Christians is, “Well if they hadn’t let their standards slip all those years ago…”

I wrote an article recently lamenting the fact that we just don’t seem to be involved in our communities….we don’t tend to make a difference. I think that maybe I’ve come to understand why. We aren’t involved and making a difference because we don’t care! It’s much easier to lob grenades and echo (in a more pious way) the words of the Pharisee, “Thank God that we’re not like them.” It’s hard to reach the world for Christ when we are too busy staring down our noses at it. We criticize those that are different and, quite frankly, we just watch them….waiting for them to fall. And as soon as they do, what’s the reaction? We pounce on them!

I’ll be honest, friends….I’m tired of the whole mess.

"Who should I vote for?" or "Does it really matter?"

2008-10-14T11:36:00.003-05:00

With Election Day only 3 weeks away, the rhetoric is soaring to new heights for this election cycle. Expect more mud slinging, more dirt, more snippets from the past of the all four individuals involved (as well as their families in some cases), more denial, more deflection, and more cries of "foul". In the end, someone will win their bid for the White House, and someone will lose. Democracy will win out once again, as the will of the American people is enacted.

Around the country there will be lots of sad people on November 5th. Many will complain about the winner and see it as an opportunity to proclaim that things are going to get worse than ever before. We will see a new crop of bumper stickers with the clever quip, “Don’t blame me…I voted for _____________” (whoever loses this one). But in this election – just like 2004 – there is no way that any of us actually wins. What we will end up with is a different manifestation of the same old crap: bigger government, more socialism enacted, and the continued demise of capitalism.

When it comes to this election and who to vote for, the question is, “which guy is not quite as unpalatable as the other guy?” Is it the guy who will hit us square between the eyes with a socialist agenda that is completely undisguised; or is it the guy who will let it creep in slower? Is it the guy who wants massively big government from day 1 and will mince no words about it; or is it the guy who says he wants smaller government while voting to expand governmental authority into an increasingly larger portion of the private sector? Is it the guy who favors all abortions; or is it the guy who favors only some abortions? Is it the young black guy with an old white guy at his side; or is it the old white guy with a young white girl at his side? Is it the guy who has questionable relationships with some shady characters in his past who were terrorists; or is it the guy who has questionable relationships with some shady characters in his past who defrauded tens of thousands of people out of their money? Is it the guy whose wife has said some very unfavorable things about the USA; or is it the guy who began dating his wife while he was married to another woman? Is it the guy who will say anything to get elected (I’m raising taxes, but nobody will actually be affected); or is it they guy who will do anything to get elected (Sarah Palin for VP???)? Will you vote for Barack Obama, or will you vote for John McCain?

The rhetoric swinging around Christian circles right now about which candidate to vote for is somewhat humorous to me. People (some good people, by the way) are actually contending that there is no way that a Christian can vote for Barack Obama and still maintain a right relationship with God! In other words, the only option for the Christian vote is the McCain / Palin ticket…..this is so laughable that I actually chuckled out loud when I typed it out! Now the logic goes something like this, “God certainly wouldn’t want a Christian to vote for Obama – he wants to make all abortions legal, for goodness sake! So we have to vote for McCain so that Obama doesn’t win.” Now the only issue I have with this “air tight logic” is that one is left with the notion that God would want us to vote for McCain – in other words, we have managed to put God in the position of endorsing John McCain and not Barack Obama – both wicked men with lies, deception, and half-truths carefully woven into the very fabric of their advertising campaigns and stump speeches. I think we’d better be careful before making assertions that a vote for Obama is essentially a mark of defiance toward God.

So the question of this blog entry is, “Can a Christian vote for Obama?” My short answer is….“Why not?” I for one am choosing not to vote for the Obama / Biden ticket. But I’m also not voting for the McCain / Palin ticket. I’ve got major quibbles with both of these choices. Frankly, I don’t know enough about any Third Party candidates to make an informed choice there, so I’ll be exercising my option to not vote at all this election. When it’s all said and done and all the smoke has cleared, we’re all going to wake up to a new President who can’t possibly make us any worse off than our current one has. The sun will still rise, we’ll still be able to go to church and preach the Gospel, and the politicians will all still be what they are. In the meantime, let’s not presume to be able to judge another’s spiritual condition by their vote this election.

Life on an island....

2008-09-25T20:05:00.002-05:00

I’ve struggled for some years now through the issue of what “church” is supposed to be all about. Now I understand that, as a general rule, the church service(s) is typically a time for edifying, equipping, encouraging, and educating the members of that particular assembly. What I’m speaking of in this blog entry however, is the actual mission of the local church.

I’ve spent most of my life sitting in churches that are, more or less, islands unto themselves. The problem with this is that, although the view is great, the only interaction tends to be with the few people that already live on your little island. Even the churches I’ve been part of that have a bus ministry and visitation program tend to be the same types of islands. If somebody actually joins the church, they will typically look like the rest of the people who are there, and they will typically be part of the same basic income class as that of the general membership of that particular assembly. I don’t mean any of this as a criticism; this is merely my subjective evaluation and an opinion based on 30 years or so of observation. But I find myself asking, with increasing regularity, some version of the same nagging question: “what are we doing?”

The ministry of the typical local church (IFB) tends to be primarily geared towards the membership of that particular local church. Now, I’m not speaking of the regular weekly services here…..obviously, those should be geared towards the membership. However, if we take a look at the standard church and analyze the various ministries of that church, I think we will find that, even in her ministries, the local church is not typically attempting to fill any real need within the community. In my church for instance, we have activities for young adults, married adults, teenagers, and seniors. In the summer months we have camp, VBS, and teen VBS. While all of these are good things and often centered on a time looking at the Scriptures, they are not really geared towards meeting any needs within the community. Lest you think that I am criticizing these ministries, let me say that I appreciate these types of ministries and I view them as vital for the local church. The sense of community as well as the fellowship offered in these informal times is extremely valuable.

What I’m driving at is this: Why aren’t we getting involved in the community? Why is there not a concerted effort at reaching those who need reached most and attempting to fill a need by meeting the people where they are? How many churches have you seen that are involved in addictions recovery programs and teen pregnancy crisis centers? How many are reaching out to the outcasts and hurting in the community? You know, the people who nobody really wants. How many are involved in hard-core prison ministries – not just preaching once a month, but working with the inmates to get them ready for society? We tend to get so focused on making everything look so perfect within our own house that we miss the fact that the surrounding neighborhood looks like a war zone with all the consequential devastation, poverty, and ugliness that accompanies it!

Outreach is more than leaving a tract on the restaurant table with your tip. To tell you the truth, I dislike the term “outreach” because of the images that immediately pop up in our minds. Instead, I prefer the term “true ministry”. True ministry involves reaching out to the hurting, helpless, and hopeless. It involves getting dirty. It might involve getting out of your comfort zone a bit. It’s easy to sit in our church pew and “amen” the notion that the world has gone to hell and we need to avoid all the damnable trappings that come with it. It’s quite another to get out into the world and do something that makes a difference for Christ.

We pray for our leaders and we pray for our communities, but we make no relationships with them. As a matter of fact, most of the churches with whom I’ve been identified for most of my life have earned a solid reputation of not being involved in the community. The pathetic part of it is the fact that we take some sort of twisted pride in that reputation. The fact that the surrounding community knows us by what we don’t do rather than what we do is something we wear as a badge of honor. We’ve taken a principle of being separated from worldliness and twisted it to mean that we need to be completely uninvolved with the world. I’ve known of precious few local churches in my life that have made true inroads and made legitimate impacts in their communities…at least within IFB-dom. Instead, we tend to sit on our butts and criticize the churches who are trying to make a difference in the community as being liberal, compromising, false teachers who have no concept of holiness.

I guess this article is meant to be more of a challenge than anything. What am I doing to impact my community for Christ? What is my church doing to impact this community for Christ? These are good and convicting questions for each of us to ask. Unfortunately, I’m afraid that in many more cases than not, the answers to those questions is “nothing”. I’ve gotten some very “righteous sounding” answers to these questions before….answers about being “salt and light”. However, being salt and light in a community involves much more than good, clean, moral, ethical living…..that’s not all that difficult. As a matter of fact, I run into good, moral – yet unregenerate – people all the time. Being salt and light involves taking the extra step in order to effect major change in the lives of those around you. It involves people seeing the Lord Jesus reflected in your every action. How can we attempt imitate Him without a concentrated effort of reaching out to the dredges of society? The picture we see of Christ in the Gospels involves Him reaching out to some of the saddest, most desperate characters out there…..the “least of these”, so to speak.

My Take on the Republican National Convention...

2008-09-06T13:46:00.005-05:00

The Republican National Convention (RNC) was the news topic of the last week. Although the Convention was shortened and modified as a result of Hurricane Gustav, it was, overall, a solid Convention. My review will be similar to my last article on the DNC. The GOP didn't put up nearly as many "non-primetime" speakers as the Dem's did. Most of the lesser known speakers were much more difficult to listen to than were the Democrat's choices. That was due in large part to the placement of the teleprompters I think. They were spread so far apart that the speakers had to turn their entire bodies to be able to see each teleprompter on queue.

I will make one other observation here. This is kind of humorous, yet maybe not so much. The Convention had the "look" of your typical fundy church: a whole bunch of well-dressed white people. The men had their hair parted perfectly, the two main families had 12 children between them, and nobody had any rhythm....as a matter of fact, when music with a beat started, everybody looked a bit uncomfortable trying to figure out how to respond! So with that:

Monday

Monday night was given to fund-raising efforts for Hurricane relief as well as some of the obligatory formalities to mark the Conventions official start. I didn't catch the speeches, but First Lady Laura Bush as well as potential First Lady Cindy McCain both spoke. Nothing political though. The entire evening was given to Hurricane relief and concern for other Americans. This really served to set the tone for the entire Convention as the organizers set out to present this Republican Party as the truly American Party.

Tuesday

Tuesday was highlighted by two speakers: Senator Joe Lieberman and former Senator Fred Thompson. Thompson spoke first and delivered a solid speech on the life and service of John McCain. Before he got to that, though, he spoke briefly of Governor Sarah Palin. One of his statements, "Let's be clear ... the selection of Governor Palin has the other side and their friends in the media in a state of panic. She is a courageous, successful, reformer, who is not afraid to take on the establishment", began a theme that would resonate through most of the Convention.....the negative treatment of the GOP in general, and Palin specifically, by the media. More on that later.

Thompson went on to spell out in great detail some of the specifics of John McCain's imprisonment in Vietnam. The story was moving and shocking in its detail. Thompson summed it up with these words: "Now, being a POW certainly doesn't qualify anyone to be President. But it does reveal character. This is the kind of character that civilizations from the beginning of history have sought in their leaders. Strength. Courage. Humility. Wisdom. Duty. Honor. It's pretty clear there are two questions we will never have to ask ourselves, 'Who is this man?' and 'Can we trust this man with the Presidency?'" Thompson's speech wasn't especially dynamic, but it was effectively done. He laid out the groundwork for several themes that would be present in the coming days. He presented McCain as, not just a "maverick" but as a man of character, bravery, dignity, strength, and courage. His speech was convincing and solid.

Next up on Tuesday night was Senator Joe Lieberman. Now this was one of the most intriguing speeches of either Convention and certainly one for the history books. Lieberman, a registered Democrat who caucuses with the Dem's in the Senate, was the Democratic nominee for Vice-President 8 short years ago. During his speech he even managed to get the delegation to applaud (ever so politely) former President Bill Clinton! But aside from the remarkable nature of his even speaking at the RNC was the nature of his speech. Word got out from McCain's people that Senator Lieberman's speech would be like nothing you've ever seen at a Convention before, and they were right. Lieberman, who was expected to give a plea for unity between the two parties, actually went further than that. He addressed Independent and Democratic voters specifically and said he understood their unease with Obama and then he explained - quite well - why he thinks they should vote for McCain. In one brief sentence he put an argument that the Democrats spent their entire week trying to make, square on its ear: "My Democratic friends know all about John’s record of independence and accomplishment. Maybe that’s why some of them are spending so much time and so much money trying to convince voters that John McCain is someone else. I’m here, as a Democrat myself, to tell you: Don’t be fooled." The entire week of the DNC, speech after speech tried to paint McCain as being nothing more than an older version of President George W. Bush, yet Lieberman - a Democrat himself - states that it's just not so. He concluded with an appeal to his fellow Democrats who, he claims, are very uneasy about Obama: "I ask you whether you are an Independent, a Reagan Democrat or a Clinton Democrat, or just a Democrat: This year, when you vote for President, vote for the person you believe is best for the country, not for the party you happen to belong to." In all, Lieberman's speech was powerful. Time will tell just how effective it was, but I was certainly blown away as I watched this man (who reminds me of the dad from that old television show "Alf") deliver a speech that might have effectively ended his political career.

Wednesday

Four key speakers were given the platform on Wednesday night - three of them the key competition that McCain had throughout the Republican primaries; Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Rudy Giuliani. The fourth - and most intriguing - speaker was Alaskan Governor and Vice-Presidential nominee, Sarah Palin. I'll mention briefly Giuliani's speech and then Palin's.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani struck me as more of a "roastmaster" than he did a Convention key-note speaker, but he made some very good points drew a stark contrast between McCain and Obama. Calling this a race of "substance versus style" and "experience versus inexperience". In speaking of Obama's lack of leadership experience, Giuliani concluded that "...This is not a personal attack ... .it's a statement of fact - Barack Obama has never led anything. Nothing. Nada." In speaking of Obam's decision making ability, Giuliani said, "Obama was going to take public financing for his campaign, until he didn't. Obama was against wiretapping before he voted for it. When speaking to a pro-Israel group, Obama favored an undivided Jerusalem. Until the very next day when he changed his mind. I hope for his sake, Joe Biden got that VP thing in writing." Clever! I think the best statement of his speech had to do with the Russia / Georgia crisis of a few weeks ago. "When Russia rolled over Georgia, John McCain knew exactly how to respond. Having been to that part of the world many times and having developed a clear worldview over many years, John knew where he stood. Within hours, he established a very strong, informed position that let the world know exactly how he'll respond as President. At exactly the right time, John McCain said, "We're all Georgians." Obama's first instinct was to create a moral equivalency - that "both sides" should "show restraint." The same moral equivalency that he has displayed in discussing the Palestinian Authority and the State of Israel. Later, after discussing it with his 300 foreign policy advisers, he changed his position and suggested that the "the UN Security Council," could find a solution. Apparently, none of his 300 advisers told him that Russia has a veto on any UN action. Finally Obama put out a statement that looked ... well, it looked a lot like John McCain's. Here's some free advice: Sen. Obama, next time just call John McCain." Good stuff....Giuliani concluded and had given what I expected to be the best, most exciting, rousing speech of the RNC. I was wrong.

After Giuliani spoke, America was to get her first view of Governor Sarah Palin on the national stage. She absolutely delivered. The Vice-Presidential nominee is generally used at the Party Conventions as a an "attack dog" for the other parties Presidential nominee. Senator Biden was extremely successful in this role at the DNC, but Sarah Palin was certainly not going to be outdone. Most of us were hoping she would just get through the speech without falling on her face...well, I guess you could say that she managed to stay upright!

Palin gave a very brief biography of herself and then moved in for the attack. Her best soundbites were spoken early in the speech and were absolutely terrific. In the now famous paragraph, which began her litany of statements ripping on Obama, she said, "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a "community organizer," except that you have actual responsibilities. I might add that in small towns, we don't quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening, and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren't listening. We tend to prefer candidates who don't talk about us one way in Scranton and another way in San Francisco." This was absolutely priceless in that she, not only made her perceived lack of experience to appear as being greater than Obama's, but she also made one of Obama's top selling points look ridiculous and then she brought back to our minds one of the more foolish statements that any Presidential candidate has ever made. After this, Palin really got wound up, "We've all heard his dramatic speeches before devoted followers. "And there is much to like and admire about our opponent. "But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform - not even in the state senate. "This is a man who can give an entire speech about the wars America is fighting, and never use the word "victory" except when he's talking about his own campaign. But when the cloud of rhetoric has passed ... when the roar of the crowd fades away ... when the stadium lights go out, and those Styrofoam Greek columns are hauled back to some studio lot - what exactly is our opponent's plan? What does he actually seek to accomplish, after he's done turning back the waters and healing the planet? The answer is to make government bigger ... take more of your money ... give you more orders from Washington ... and to reduce the strength of America in a dangerous world. America needs more energy ... our opponent is against producing it. "Victory in Iraq is finally in sight ... he wants to forfeit. "Terrorist states are seeking new-clear weapons without delay ... he wants to meet them without preconditions. "Al Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America ... he's worried that someone won't read them their rights? Government is too big ... he wants to grow it. "Congress spends too much ... he promises more. "Taxes are too high ... he wants to raise them."

In all, Palin gave the most dynamic speech of the RNC. As a matter of fact, I think that her speech was more dynamic than any given at the DNC. The most significant part of the speech to me was the fact that, without really saying the words, Palin essentially told the media that they weren't going to get to her. I would say that she shocked the political world and definitely set herself up as a chief player in the political scene for years to come. I've always assumed that Hillary Clinton would be the first woman President of the United States.....I'm not so sure anymore.

Thursday

This was John McCain's big night. His wife introduced him and he appeared in grand fashion. Senator McCain delivered a speech that was largely - and predictably - boring. About 20 minutes into the speech, however, he began to tell his story. I've heard bits and pieces of McCain's POW experience over the years, but I've never heard it from him. As he told of the beatings and of them breaking him and his shame and pain....well, it was one of the most moving moments of either Convention.

Before he told of his Vietnam experience, Senator McCain spelled out some of the differences between him and Senator Obama and, indeed, between the Republicans and the Democrats: "I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them. I will cut government spending. He will increase it. My tax cuts will create jobs. His tax increases will eliminate them. My health care plan will make it easier for more Americans to find and keep good health care insurance. His plan will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor." Throughout this first portion of the speech, McCain never used the word "socialist" when referring to Obama, but it was pretty easy to catch the drift! His comparison of his education plan to that of Obama was powerful and brilliant.

Some of the more brilliant lines of McCain's speech were lines that showed his humanity. Statements such as, "I've been an imperfect servant of my country....", and "I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else's", and the very powerful statement, "I’m not running for president because I think I’m blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God." McCain successfully, in my opinion, did away with the notion that he would be "more of the same" by acknowledging that the Republican party has let the American people down. He didn't openly criticize the Bush Administration, but he certainly hinted at it strongly.

Senator McCain ended his speech with a rousing chorus that got the "troops" all worked up. It was an extremely powerful, dynamic, and moving scene as he spoke the following words above an increasingly loudly cheering delegation:

"I’m going to fight for my cause every day as your President. I’m going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank Him: that I’m an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on earth, and with hard work, strong faith and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me. Fight with me. "Fight for what’s right for our country. "Fight for the ideals and character of a free people. "Fight for our children’s future. "Fight for justice and opportunity for all. "Stand up to defend our country from its enemies. "Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America. "Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We’re Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history. "Thank you, and God Bless you."

It was a moving a scene and a great end to the Convention. I don't think that the RNC was nearly as exciting and fluid as the DNC, but it certainly had it's moments. The "one-two punch" of Giuliani and Palin on Wednesday was better than any combination that the Democrats put together. Palin's speech was more exciting than any of the speeches from the DNC and McCain's speech was the richest speech that either Convention offered. I think the next 60 days will certainly be exciting and, for the first time in a while, I'm thinking that the GOP might just pull this one out!

My take on the Democratic National Convention.

2008-08-30T18:05:00.009-05:00

This entire last week was devoted (news-wise) to the Democratic National Convention (DNC) and the anointing of their candidate, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois. As a whole, I thought the convention went quite nicely for the Dems, despite a pretty boring first day. I doubt that the enthusiasm and intensity of the last night will be duplicated by the GOP next week, but that remains to be seen. I've undergone some interesting changes in the last several years. I've always followed politics somewhat and I've been watching the Conventions (both sides) since I was a teen. However, this is the first time that I've watched the Democratic Convention without getting ticked about everything they said! There are two reasons for this, I think:

First of all, I've come to realize that these are not "bad people" - at least no worse than anybody else. As a matter of fact, I've come to appreciate the passion they have for their country. Granted, I think they are missing the mark on several key issues, but these are people we are truly love their country and want it to be the best it can be. Secondly, the Democrats (at least this go around) are bringing up some extremely valid points. I find myself aligned more closely with the Democrats on some issues than I am with the GOP. This is not enough to get me to cast a vote their way, but I do cheer as they make their case on some issues. Bringing these things to the debate floor is certainly healthy and will (hopefully) bring some much needed reform to several parts of our government regardless of who wins this year.

I watched as much of the DNC this last week as I could. I caught a lot of speeches from people I'd never heard of - some good, some lousy, some outstanding. The only "headliner" I didn't get to hear was Al Gore, but I read the entire text of his speech later. What follows are my thoughts from each day.

Monday

There was only one "non-headlining" speech that got my attention. But before I get to that one, I'll mention one of the more disappointing "under card" speeches. I had never really heard her speak before, but when the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi of California, came to the lectern....I guess I was expecting something exciting. I was sorely disappointed. Her speech was mind-numbing, both in content and delivery. How she continues to win her seat back each election cycle is a mystery to me.....

The one under card speech that got my attention was Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr. of Illinois. I liked his enthusiasm and delivery and, while he only spoke for a few minutes, he delivered a very encouraging and upbeat speech. Towards the end he said, "I know that while America may not be perfect, our union can always be perfected. I know what we can achieve when good people with strong convictions come together around a common purpose. And I know what a great leader can do to help us find common ground." Good stuff.

The mains speech of the night was supposed to be Michelle Obama (wife of the candidate) but she ended up getting "upstaged" by the surprise appearance of Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. The tribute to Senator Kennedy was moving and his subsequent appearance on stage gave the night a much needed emotional boost. I have a lot of respect for Senator Kennedy. He's a reminder of a different era in America. He had that ringside seat as his brothers guided us through the Cuban missile crisis. He's seen tragedy after tragedy after tragedy in his family. One brother killed in a war, two others slain by the assassins bullet, and a nephew tragically killed in a plane crash. Yet through it all, Senator Kennedy has continued to serve his country. Off hand I don't know if I can think of a single social issue upon which the Senator and I could find common ground, but that doesn't detract from the respect I have for this individual who has given his entire life to public service. His speech was powerful and surprisingly energetic. You could almost seem the life rushing into him more fully as the audience cheered him on. This was likely the last DNC that the Senator will be alive to take part in, but it may well have been his most memorable performance. His strongest line was, "Yes, we are Americans. This is what we do. We reach the moon. We scale the heights. I know it. I've seen it. I've lived it. And we can do it again. There is a new wave of change all around us- and if we set our compass true, we will reach our destination-not merely victory for our party, but renewal for our nation." Poetic and motivating.

The headliner on Monday was Michelle Obama. Frankly, I found nothing remarkable about her speech. She speaks extremely well - terrific delivery and expression, although she seemed uncomfortable with the teleprompter. We learned a bit about her and how she met her husband, but not much else. Although all the networks seemed to be gushing over her and her delivery, I think it quite forgettable. But I also know that she's not the politician in the family! The scene that played out afterwords with her little daughters on stage with microphones talking to their father (via satellite) was precious and quite cute. That moment may well have saved her speech!

Tuesday

I'll only mention a couple of speeches from Tuesday.

First of all, Tuesday was the day that my Governor, Kathleen Sebelius, spoke. I thought she did a horrible job. She's given better performances and better speeches.

One speech that I enjoyed, not so much for delivery or content, was that of Robert Casey, Jr. A decidedly pro-life Democrat who touched briefly on that position. He spoke close to the prime-time speeches, so it was certainly a calculated move by the Dem's to show that the pro-choice stance isn't necessarily something that all Dem's need to follow in lock-step.

Now obviously, Tuesday night was dubbed "Hillary's night". But right before she got up to speak a little-known Governor from Montana spoke. His name was Brian Schweitzer. He is a rancher who came to the lectern with cowboy boots and loose bolo tie. He had too many good lines to pick just one to put on here, but his energy and enthusiasm was great! I found myself laughing out loud as he started to get the crowd energized. The C-Span camera kept going to former-President Clinton during Schweitzer's speech and you could see his interest changing the longer the speech went. When Governor Schwietzer first began to speak very few people were paying attention (this is pretty common at these conventions....most folks carry on their own conversations until the headliners take the stage). But the longer Schweitzer spoke, the more people listened. Pretty soon they were all cheering and chanting along with him, "4 more years? How about 4 more weeks.....4 more weeks....4 more weeks.....". By the time he left the lectern, people were cheering, laughing, yelling, and whistling. And nearly everybody who saw the speech thought, "Wow! I'd like to make friends with that guy!" He breathed life into a convention that was, up until that point, fairly flat.

The headliner of the night was Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. This was a much anticipated speech, given the nature of the tight run she had against Obama throughout the primaries. This was maybe the best speech she's ever given. Her delivery was phenomenal and she seemed to connect with the entire assembly there. Her speech seemed almost Presidential and, indeed, some even said afterward that she was "hedging her bets" so to speak....ensuring that she had a clear path for 2012 should Obama lose this year. She didn't have a whole lot to say about Obama, but instead focused on her achievements. She said just enough about Obama to make it appear that the speech was about supporting him. I'm guessing that, by the time she was done, the majority of Democrats around the country collectively said, "Oops"!

Wednesday

Wednesday was "officially" the night that the Democratic candidate for Vice-President was to speak and accept the VP nomination. However, it was perhaps the most memorable night of the convention highlighted by 3 of the best speeches.

First of all there was Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts. Senator Kerry was the Democratic nominee for President who lost to President Bush 4 years ago. I never heard him give a speech during that election that was as good as the one he gave on Wednesday night. His comparison of "Senator McCain" to "Candidate McCain" was absolutely brilliant! The best line of the speech was, "Candidate McCain now supports the wartime tax cuts that Senator McCain once denounced as immoral. Candidate McCain criticizes Senator McCain’s own climate change bill. Candidate McCain says he would now vote against the immigration bill that Senator McCain wrote. Are you kidding? Talk about being for it before you’re against it. Let me tell you, before he ever debates Barack Obama, John McCain should finish the debate with himself." This was brilliant! He even managed to turn one of his most colossal mis-statements of the '04 election around on McCain.

My nest favorite speech was actually two speeches. Both Beau Biden and his father Senator Joe Biden of Delaware - the Democratic VP nominee. Beau Biden's speech, when coupled with the tribute video to his father, was powerful. It would be impossible not to watch those scenes without respecting Senator Biden's dedication to his family - even above politics, it would seem. When Senator Biden got up to speak, I found myself wanting him to do well.....and he did. As the speech kept going and you saw the depth of the man, you began to think that maybe Democrats should be running a ticket that has Biden on top rather than Obama. He ended his speech with these words, "Millions of Americans have been knocked down. And this is the time as Americans, together, we get back up. Our people are too good, our debt to our parents and grandparents too great, our obligation to our children is too sacred. These are extraordinary times. This is an extraordinary election. The American people are ready. I’m ready. Barack Obama is ready. This is his time. This is our time. This is America’s time." Biden did a great job of showing the stark differences between the two parties. It was an impressive speech.

Perhaps the greatest speech of the entire Convention took place earlier in the evening. It was a short speech, but a good one. The last Democratic President and the only two-term Democratic President still living, Bill Clinton. There was a lot of intrigue leading up to his speech because of the various news leaks detailing the fact that Obama and him just do not like one another. Reportedly, both the Clinton and Obama camps were afraid that there was a chance that the former President might actually get booed when he took the platform.....such fears were quickly put to rest by a three-and-a-half minute standing ovation. He delivered several powerful lines and towards the end of the speech had his most memorable, "They actually want us to reward them for the last eight years by giving them four more. Let’s send them a message that will echo from the Rockies all across America: Thanks, but no thanks. In this case, the third time is not the charm. My fellow Democrats, sixteen years ago, you gave me the profound honor to lead our party to victory and to lead our nation to a new era of peace and broadly shared prosperity. Together, we prevailed in a campaign in which the Republicans said I was too young and too inexperienced to be Commander-in-Chief. Sound familiar? It didn’t work in 1992, because we were on the right side of history. And it won’t work in 2008, because Barack Obama is on the right side of history." Like him or not, Bill Clinton can certainly deliver a speech.

Thursday

This was Obama's night. It was to be an historic occasion marked with much pomp. I missed most of the speeches, but have heard soundtracks and read transcripts. Al Gore seemed more animated than he did during the 2000 election...his many plays on words seemed to border on the ludicrous (at least in the transcript of the speech). I was a bit disappointed to see and Susan Eisenhower - a woman with blood ties to both Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon - giving a speech in support of Obama. It would be like Caroline Kennedy showing up at the RNC next week.....it's just not right.

Barack Obama was the star on Thursday (obviously). The moved the Convention out to the open air Invesco Field on this night. One of the unspoken reasons, in my opinion, was to move the Convention from being a "Clinton Convention" to being an "Obama Convention". The immaculate set was a bit over the top and there was certainly a "rock star" quality to the entire spectacle. I listened to many of the analysts at the more liberal networks fawning over Obama after the speech saying that he'd finally answered his Republican critics who said that he never tells us how he is going to get anything done. His supporters in the media said that he listed nearly 30 specific policy items in detail. In actuality, Obama listed a lot of things he would do, but there was little detail to it. The speech was unremarkable, but the display was quite remarkable. A lavish set complete with fireworks and Stevie Wonder - it was certainly made for television. Some of Obama's soundbites were quite good. For instance, when he said, "Enough!", I said, "Ooohhhh, that was good." Later, in speaking about McCain voting with Bush 90% of the time he said, "Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush has been right more than ninety percent of the time? I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a ten percent chance on change." Well that was quite clever.

While Obama didn't get into too much detail about any of his stances, he certainly did a decent job of drawing a clear line between what McCain stands for versus what he stands for (at least on selected issues). I was honestly expecting a more enthusiastic speech than he delivered. There was one point where it appeared he was about to beginning "channelling" Dr. King, but he quickly backed off. I suspect that McCain is going to cream Obama in the debates....Obama is the better speaker, but McCain won't let him get away with his "cotton candy" approach to an answer (all fluff with no real content).

I am eagerly anticipating the RNC this upcoming week. The McCain/Palin ticket is an interesting one, to be sure. I'm a bit nervous about Sarah Palin.....we'll see how she does this week with her first real "big stage" speech. And in case some of my remarks here have made you curious......McCain / Palin 2008!!!!!

"We've got spirit, yes we do....."

2008-08-29T23:41:00.002-05:00

Back in the early - mid 90's I spent several years working at Christian camps. One of the things I enjoyed most was the cheering.....we would always try to get our team to drown out the sound that the other team was making by utilizing high-octane, loud, annoying screaming.....we had words and rhythm to go along with the screaming and that was enough to allow us to call it cheering!

Now I was a natural for this. As a matter of fact, most of the pictures of me during those three years managed to capture me with my mouth wide-open as I was doing my part to keep the intensity surging through our team. It was great fun and it was very important to me that my team was louder than the other team. If the other team was creaming us, we didn't take it for long! We would find some creative way to take the wind out of their sails.

For instance, during my first summer as a camp counselor at a camp in southern Wisconsin, our team was getting "out cheered" during the first two days of the week. So I came up with a brilliant idea to get us in front of the other team. I put my plan in motion on that Wednesday at lunch. Every day at lunch there would be announcements made and videos shown of the cleanest and dirtiest cabins for both boys and girls. There would also be some points awarded for various other things. After the scoring was announced both teams would simultaneously jump up and launch into loud team cheering. I told my team to just keep sitting down and listen to the other team for a while....The other team came out loud and strong.....and then they started to quiet down a bit. I let it go on for 3 or 4 minutes and then I stood up and motioned upwards like a choir director. The entire team stood in unison and then, on my queue, we launched into the loudest version of "Go Bananas" that you've ever heard! We went on to blow the other team out of the water as far as volume was concerned for the rest of the week!

I haven't thought of that story and my various "gimmickry" for a number of years. But for some reason the news coming out of the GOP today regarding the VP selection brought back a flood of those memories. I hope this is more than a gimmick.....

By the way, sometime this weekend I'm going to get an article posted about the Democratic National Convention as well as a few thoughts about the upcoming Republican National Convention. As a teaser, I will say that I thought the DNC was a pretty decent Convention that had an incredible level of "showmanship" to it. Some of the speeches were absolutely terrific and I thought that some of the points made were very good.

Now, for those of you who think I've finally gone to the other side....check back later this weekend!

Stupid little monkey.....

2008-08-23T11:57:00.003-05:00

Christ once said that any who would follow Him must hate their sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers. Of course we know that this is really speaking of comparisons. That is to say, our love for Him ought to be such that our love for all others pales in comparison. The last couple of weeks I’ve been confronted with this. It’s an easy thing to say the words, it’s quite another to do the action.

I recently heard a song by Todd Agnew in which he says that “your creation is a temptation to me”. In the song he is lamenting the fact that Christ has commanded us to love Him, and follow Him, and have faith in Him, and cling to Him with all that we have, yet we allow these other things to get in the way: our comfort, our pride, our lust, our love of life. It would be funny if it weren’t so tragic, I think. If you consider the things that keep you from a fuller, more complete relationship with Christ…… well, it’s a bit ridiculous. We give up the beauty of an intimate relationship with the Creator in favor of something temporal on this earth. I’m only going to be around here for another 50 or 60 years at best and I’ve spent my first 35 years clinging to things and people – preferring them above Christ. It just doesn’t make sense.

It’s like that monkey we’ve all heard about in the illustration. He’ll give up his freedom and everything in his happy little monkey life in order to get that little treat in the empty coconut shell. He clings to that treat even as the hunter approaches him with the club. Pretty soon, the monkey is either on a dinner plate or in a zoo all because he abandoned common sense in order to cling to the here and now. In my own life I’ve given up the rewards, benefits, and freedom found in a full, right relationship with Christ all in order to cling onto something temporal. At times that thing has been money, lust, pleasure, family…..it doesn’t matter what it is. When I’ve held onto it and preferred it above Christ, it has been sin. In truth, those things that seem to bring happiness don’t even come close to bringing the true joy that is only found in Christ. The Apostle Paul got hold of that truth from the moment of his conversion and never let it go. That’s the reason he could pen words like, “everything that was gain to me, I now count as loss”, or “for me to live is Christ and to die is gain”.

I’ve sang songs hundreds – maybe thousands – of times that contained words like, “I surrender all”, and “my life, Lord, is Yours to control”, yet those words have been empty and hollow words as I’ve never let go of everything. In my head I’ve always understood that He is Lord of all, yet in practice I’ve never wanted Him to be Lord of all in my life. What foolishness! What arrogance!

What has frightened me all this time? Am I so arrogant as to think that my plans, my ambitions, my dreams are better than His? Am I afraid that He might take from me what belongs to Him in the first place? Am I worried that the manifold blessings He has allowed me to enjoy in this life will somehow just vanish if I give my all to Him? I wonder….have I thought all this time that following Him fully might bring pain and suffering rather than the true joy and blessings that are found only by abiding in Him?

I look back on wasted years and only one word comes to mind……..”fool”.

Is His Grace Really Sufficient?

2008-08-18T17:48:00.004-05:00

2Corinthians 12:7-10 (ESV): “So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited. Three times I pleaded with the Lord about this, that it should leave me. But he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me. For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities. For when I am weak, then I am strong.”

Philippians 1:21 (ESV): “For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.”

This past Sunday I attempted to preach a sermon on God’s grace and his power being made perfect through weakness…..unfortunately, I was unable to do much talking due to spending much of the message attempting to reel in my emotions. By nature I’m a passionate individual, but I do not display much emotion outside of excitement and happiness. On Sunday however, I couldn’t get the tears to stop flowing. I spent two days preparing a message that, as the Lord impressed the truths upon my heart, caused me to weep. Granted, I also had thoughts of the recent passing of an old friend as well as the passing of a lifelong friend a year or so ago, but those thoughts were not the cause of my emotional reaction to the words of the passage of Scripture listed above. Rather, as I studied this passage I was confronted with the truth that, for one to truly experience God’s grace in full measure, there may have to come a time of deep despair, anguish, hardship, tragedy.

To see the change that the Apostle Paul underwent between verses 7 and 9 above is astonishing. He goes from earnest, fervent, "kneeled-prayer" pleading for Christ to remove this excruciating thing from his life to gladly embracing it because it allowed him to rely more and more on the grace of God. This caused me to face some things in my life in a more tangible way than I ever have.

Often I’ve said that I want to experience God’s working in my life and molding me into what He needs me to be, but I’ve never really comprehended the fact that part of the molding and shaping process might just mean some serious breaking. This last week I faced things in my life that caused me to pause for a second and ask myself if I was really willing to pay the price that absolute surrender might carry with it. I’ve seen the tragedy of parents losing children and husbands losing wives unexpectedly – I’ve seen God’s grace manifest itself in a marvelous way in those situations. I’ve marveled at how He worked through both the dead and the living in those seemingly tragic situations and yet somehow I’ve never caught that those situations might just be a part of absolute surrender to God.

As these truths were being printed more firmly on my heart I began to bend under the weight of it all and I began to understand that I’d never fully surrendered to God and I found myself terrified to do so now. I just wanted to hold on tightly to everything God had given me – my wife, my children, my health – I found myself clinging to these things as if to say, “No, God! You can have everything, but you can’t take the things that might cause me pain. I trust you and I love you, but I need these things”. That’s when I broke.

“When I am weak, then I am strong”.

“My grace is sufficient”.

“For me to live is Christ and to die is gain”.

These three truths – these three promises – are more real to me than they’ve ever been. While I may not have been able to adequately convey this in the sermon yesterday, the Holy Spirit certainly worked me over with this one. I’ve got a peace in my soul and a satisfaction in my spirit today that I’m not certain I’ve ever had before!

On the passing of an old friend....

2008-08-13T01:31:00.003-05:00

Yesterday I found out that an old friend had passed on to Glory. While his passing on has been something that's been expected for 14 years, it still took the wind out of me when I first heard. Tuesday afternoon and evening (and on into Wednesday morning) I've been reflecting on the brief period of my life when I counted myself as a friend of Jeremy. It's brought a lot of smiles as well as tears to my face. Most of my readers here never knew Jeremy although some of you know his brother (or at least know who his brother is). I wish that everybody had had the opportunity to meet Jeremy......it was something you never forgot! What follows are some of my memories of Jeremy Janz, as well as my recollection of the night of his accident 14 years ago last month.

I met Jeremy for the first time my very first night on the campus of Northland Baptist Bible College. His younger brother (Jason) is the same age as I am and we had met during our Senior year of High School. Jason was one of the first people I ran into when I got to Northland and I was thrilled to find a familiar face. Jay quickly introduced me to a number of people including his brother. Pretty soon I found myself in Jeremy's dorm room talking to him like I'd known him forever. As I've read tributes to Jeremy in various places on the internet this evening, I've come to discover that my experience wasn't unique....this was just the way Jer was!

Before our conversation was over that first night, Jeremy invited me to spend Friday night at a cabin down by one of the lakes at Northland with him and about a dozen other guys. I agreed and he helped me get the pass to go. As we were headed down there - on foot, in January, in Northern Wisconsin - Jeremy hung back and talked to me rather than all these other guys who were friends of his. He got my entire life story from me during that 15 minute walk! That night we all stood on the middle of a frozen lake and sang gospel songs, we roasted marshmallows in the fire place, and we had a testimony / prayer meeting that Jeremy lead. I began to realize that God had made sure that I fell in with the "good crowd" at school!

Fast forward 30 months. I was spending my 2nd summer on staff at the WILDS of the Rockies Christian camp in Kremling, Colorado. The previous summer we saw Jeremy quite a bit. He would come up every now and again to see us (his brother was also working at TWR) and we would go down to Denver and stay at the Janz' home on some weekends. Jeremy would keep us busy with things like water basketball and bungee jumping! However, during our 2nd summer at the WILDS, Jeremy was doing a pastoral internship at a small church in Hebron (I think), Utah. One Sunday night in July one of the full-time staffers from camp came into Jason's cabin and woke Jay and I up. Campers were already gone and I was staying the night at Jay's place that evening. The man who woke us up said, "Jason, you need to call home. Your brother's been in an accident. It's bad."

Jay and I hurriedly got dressed without speaking. We began to walk towards the lodge quickly, the only words that had passed between us was Jay saying, "Oh, Murph". Pretty soon we were on a dead sprint for the lodge. You see, Jason and Jeremy were not just brothers....they were closer to one another than any best friends that I've ever seen.

When we got to the lodge, the eldest of the three Janz daughters was already in there (she was working with us that summer as well). Jay went around to the phone and called home while Jocelyn and I stood there waiting. I heard Jason say, "Dad?". Pretty soon all I heard was crying and Jocelyn began to wail. We hugged as we waited for Jason to get off the phone and tell us the news. Jeremy had been riding his bicycle into town and had been struck by a pickup truck going 50 mph or so. He had been taken to a hospital in Salt Lake City, but he wasn't expected to make it through the night.

Well, he made through that night and 14 more years of nights after that, although he never regained consciousness. He has spent the last 14 years in a vegetative state almost identical to that of Terry Schiavo (if you remember all the controversy that stirred several years ago concerning her).

I struggled for a long time with the whole thing, to tell you the truth. At the end of the summer of '94 Jeremy's parents had him moved to Denver where he was put into a nursing home of sorts. I moved to Denver that fall and I went to visit Jeremy nearly every day just trying to understand. This guy was so full of life - more so than just about anybody I'd met before or since. He lived to serve others and to bring honor to the name of Christ. He could preach, teach, sing, and he studied the Word faithfully. He was so driven to serve the Lord , yet mere weeks before his wedding and the beginning of his first full-time ministry as a youth pastor in his home church in Denver, he was cut down. It didn't make any sense to me then.....and I guess it doesn't make logical sense to me even now. However, in a strange way God has used Jeremy in a tremendous way during the last 14 years. Maybe even more so than He did during those first 22 years!

I realize that this post is somewhat rambling and that all the thoughts aren't connected very well, but I'm sorting through a lot of memories and, at 2am, I may not be doing a great job of turning those memories into congruous thoughts!

I'll always remember Jeremy and I'll continue to miss him. When I've thought of him over the years, the pictures that came to mind were rarely the broken, scrawny, out-of control shell that lay helpless in the hospital bed, but rather the loud, happy, smiling, Zubu pant wearing, white high-top and pink suit coat sporting friend of everybody! I remember the guy who always had a great story to tell, and who was always ready to talk about the goodness of God. I only knew him for two-an-a-half years before the accident, but you didn't need to know Jeremy for more than a few minutes before you could call him "friend"!

I look forward to seeing him again someday. He's in a body that works again and he's in the presence of the God Whom he so loved and lived for!

A little laugh.....

2008-07-21T22:20:00.003-05:00

Sometimes it's good to laugh - even if the laugh is at our own expense. A Recent thread over at SharperIron is taking a rather humorous approach to the subject of "You Might be a Fundamentalist...."

Enjoy!

A letter to Ted Thompson and the Green Bay Packers...

2008-07-18T09:39:00.003-05:00

I've got a three word solution to this entire Brett Favre situation: Take him back.

It’s simple really…..one of the top 5 quarterbacks in NFL history is coming off arguably his best season ever and he wants to throw the ball for another year or so. Take him back. The man had such an incredible season last year that he actually got an MVP vote even with the year that Tom Brady put together and he wants to give it another shot this year. Take him back.

Let’s face reality….without Brett Favre during the last 15 years, the Packers would likely still be mired in meiocrity as they were prior to his emergence as a dominating force in the NFL. Three MVP’s, two Super Bowl appearances, a perennial Pro Bowler, the career leader in every major QB stat…..and he’s still playing at the top of his game! Take him back!

I know it’s tough. Pride’s a rough thing and Favre has gone about trying to get his way in somewhat of an embarrassing manner. He’s all but used the word “liar” to describe you. And while he’s still one of the most likeable individuals to ever don an NFL uniform, he’s been a bit of a drama queen about the whole retirement thing. But in making your decision about this entire situation you should keep one thing in mind…..he’s Brett Favre! Every NFL team would love to have a guy leading their team with the kind of grit, determination, and pure toughness that Favre has displayed season after season and week after week. He’s the closest thing the NFL has to Superman and all you have to do is take him back!

Sure, this Aaron Rogers thing is tough. He’s been on the sidelines for three years (by the way, Steve Young spent 4 years on the sidelines watching Montana) and he’s chomping at the bit to take over this great franchise. Rogers had a great game against Dallas last year. On that particular day he was the better quarterback. He outplayed Favre and went toe-to-toe with Romo….but that was only one game. Other than that, what’s he done? I don’t recall a single preseason game where he’s looked anything other than mediocre. He broke a foot in another regular season appearance and spent the rest of that season on crutches….Favre wouldn’t have used crutches and he would have kept playing. Now I certainly am not saying that Rogers can’t play. Who knows…he might be the next Steve Young. However, he might be the next Ryan Leaf. With Favre you know what you’re going to get: a certified winner.

Listen, you can’t win this battle by any means other than surrender. If you let Favre go things could get real ugly. The only way you win that one is if two things happen: Favre has the worst season he’s ever had and Aaron Rogers leads the Pack to a dominating Super Bowl victory. Now if you are willing to bet the farm on those two things happening….and they both have to happen….then go ahead and send Brett packing. But let’s face it; the notion of Rogers leading the Packers to a Super Bowl victory this season is pretty farfetched. If you let Favre back at the helm this season, you can’t lose – unless of course he has an abysmal year, but that’s not likely to happen given the season he’s coming off of. If you keep Rogers as your starter, every single loss will sting a little bit more. Think about it, what if you go from a 13-3 season that ended with on OT loss in the NFC Championship to a 7-9 season and no appearance in the playoffs? Not likely with Favre at the helm; a possibility with Rogers there.

If you choose not to take Favre back as your starter, I’ll understand. I’ve never responded well to employees dictating terms to me, either. Oh, I’ll mourn a bit if Favre’s wearing a different jersey. I’ll even be cheering for whatever team Favre goes to, but I’ll still support the Pack. And if Favre’s new team meets the Packers this year, you can bet that I’ll be cheering for Woodson and Harris to pick off every pass he throws and for KGB and Hawk to hit him in the mouth a couple of times. But a part of me will be a little sick at the spectacle….Favre needs to be in a Packers uniform this year finishing the job left over from last year. Take him back…….please.

“In Remembrance of Me….”

2008-07-15T20:58:00.003-05:00

Note: Our two oldest children both recently – at different times – made professions of faith. We’ve been extremely careful in not forcing the issue with either one of them and we’ve also been quite cautious with our choice of words. We’ve never told them that they were saved and we continue to proceed with a great deal of caution as we watch for some developing fruit. For additional thoughts on children and salvation, please read a post I added some time ago on the subject - it can be found here.

The other night I had one of those first time experiences that I think is a blessing for every Christian father. We were observing the Lord’s Supper at our Sunday evening church service. My wife and youngest son were both at home sick, so it was just Trey, Ashleigh, and me. I spoke to both of them about Communion on the way to church and asked if they wanted to take part….they did. I asked them to pay "extra-close attention" to what our pastor was saying and to let me know if they had any questions at any time. As the elements were being passed to us I took the opportunity to whisper to each of them individually the significance of each element…what it was and wasn’t, as well as the symbolism involved.

I think they understood and approached it all with a measure of gravity. I certainly approached it much differently than in the past. Explaining to them what we were doing and why….walking through the crucifixion story and reflecting on salvation…..all of it caused me to reflect deeper on the sacrifice and love shown to us by the Savior. In all it was one of those experiences that I’ll always treasure!

A few changes.....

2008-06-29T14:03:00.002-05:00

You'll notice that my "blogroll" on the left hand side of the page is now in a new format. Rather than an alphabetical listing of my favorite blogs, the roll is now set up in more of a "feed" format. As the 20 or 30 blogs to which I link update, their updates will be listed at the top of the roll.

I've also taken the opportunity to add a couple of links that I enjoy but have never linked to from this site. Take the time to check out some of these places. Most of the blogs and sites to which I link have edified, encouraged, or educated me. Some of the others have made me think, while there are some to which I link simply because they make me laugh!

I've also removed a couple of links.....mainly because, while their site still exists, they've stopped updating (yes Hannah.....I'm talking to you :) ).

Why do foolish men claim to speak for an infinite God?

2008-06-19T11:08:00.004-05:00

The first five paragraphs of the following article are preparatory words to get to the main point of the article which starts in paragraph six. I make this statement in hopes that you don’t get bored and leave off reading the article prior to that point!

I’ve spent most of my 35 years of life living in Kansas. During that time I’ve seen several “natural disasters”. Tornadoes, flooding, large hail, ice storms, and damaging winds are simply not all that uncommon in Kansas. Granted, they aren’t an every-day occurrence, but some years bring about more of these types of things than other years. Occasionally you’ll see one part of the state take more of a beating than other parts of the state. Some years back, when we were living in the southern most part of the state, we saw massive flooding and catastrophic hail hit during the same calendar year. One other thing I remember about that year was standing in the parking lot at my job watching a tornado that was hitting the ground about 15 miles to the north…pretty exciting stuff!

Now those of you who do not live in the Midwest might assume that tornadoes are a nearly daily experience around here, but that’s not quite true. Every year that I can remember there have been tornadoes hit somewhere in the state, but most generally they hit in outlying areas and cause little property damage. While Kansas has a goodly number of tornadoes some years, we also have plenty of open land upon which those tornadoes can run amuck without posing any immediate threat to life and property.

I say all that to get to this point: The last 12 months have been unusually volatile as far as the weather is concerned. During that time I’ve seen flooding that nearly had me trapped in town; an ice storm that knocked some outlying areas out of power for weeks and placed my family and I in a Red Cross shelter for a short time; softball-sized hail that destroyed my (under-insured) automobile; and a record high for tornadoes that have touched down. The most uncommon aspect of the tornado season thus far this year is the damage it has brought to many communities and cities. Last week a town that is 10 miles down the road from us was all but leveled and a larger city also saw an incredible amount of damage (including more than 20 million dollars worth of damage to the campus of Kansas State University). Additionally, there 2 people killed and several more hospitalized as the result of the tornadoes that dropped last Wednesday night. This years tornado season has brought about more deaths in a shorter period of time than any other on record.

My Uncle and Aunt’s house was destroyed by a tornado last week. They’ve been in the house for 40 years and their two youngest children were raised there – all four of their children spent at least some portion of their teenage years there. They certainly weren’t the only folks in that town who lost their homes, as some 70% of the city was completely destroyed and another 15% suffered varying levels of damage. It was somewhat heartbreaking the first time I entered town and saw how torn up it was. As I was watching the news that night and reports were coming in of the damage and deaths caused by the tornadic activities, I shed some tears. I called my Uncle as soon as the tornado had left his area and asked if they were OK. “We’re fine”, he said, “but the house is destroyed, the garage is gone, and our cars are smashed.” As I’ve been in town a couple of times now, it’s been difficult to see some of the raw emotions. So many memories lost forever….many folks were still attempting to process it all.

Now to the point of this article…..When it comes down to it, sin is the root cause of all “natural disasters”. Without sin, the earth wouldn’t be behaving like this, I suppose. I doubt seriously that Adam and Eve ever had to climb into a tornado shelter before the Fall, or worry much about outrunning lava from a volcanic eruption…..there’s no doubt about it, sin is the reason behind these sorts of things.

That being said, nothing makes my angrier than wicked men claiming to know God’s “motivation” behind these sorts of disasters. On two different occasions during the last week I’ve heard men claim that this tornado that destroyed Chapman, Kansas last week was simply God dealing with some wickedness (one of these men was a preacher). I’ve heard many people claim that the disaster in New Orleans several years ago (Hurricane Katrina) was God judging a wicked city. One man I heard this week even alluded to the idea that 9/11 was God’s judgment on New York City and he hopes that God takes out San Francisco next. Aside from the shear idiocy and hate-mongering of these ridiculous statements, I am most amazed at the audacity of any man who would brashly assign motivation to a God whose thoughts are beyond ours. How on earth does any man find justification for this sort of thinking and speech? Who are you that you attempt to speak for God? What revelation is this which you claim?

I certainly would never dismiss the idea that God could use this sort of thing as a judgment for sin. The Noaic Flood, the earth opening up to swallow Korah and his cohorts, the fire and brimstone that rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah, not to mention the plethora judgments of Egypt in Exodus are all examples of God using “nature” to judge. But in each of these instances, the “disasters” were exta-ordinary. While many of the weather-related disasters of the last 5 or 6 years have left an extra-ordinary amount of damage and an atypical loss of property and life, they have certainly not been the result of anything that is outside of the natural course of things. Every time I see the results of a weather related disaster, it causes me to marvel at the power of God, but it wouldn’t be proper for me to ever assign motives to God for allowing it to happen. I would be a fool to do so.

The fact is that nobody is surprised when a hurricane leaves a swath of destruction on many coastal cities and states. There has never been surprise when a tornado touches down and causes damage in the Midwest. Earthquakes along fault lines are expected to occur every now and again. The only question about these things is whether or not the damage will be severe and, in the instance of hurricanes and tornadoes, will there be significant property damage and loss of life, or will the damage occur in less populous are open-range areas? The idea that God is arbitrarily taking out certain cities because of their wickedness is a foolish one. If God is going to destroy a place because of sin, why did He allow the tornado to pass right over the top of the adult bookstore outside of town and instead destroy a city that boasts one church for every 300 residents?!

I refuse to leave with the conclusion that God destroyed Chapman last week, or New Orleans 3 years ago, or Greensburg last year as a judgment for the specific sins of the specific people in those specific cities. Could He have? Certainly. Is there precedent for such a thing? Not without warning. Is it OK for a pastor, evangelist, or any other Christian to claim anything else? Absolutely not – those people would serve the cause of Christ better if they kept their mouths shut and committed themselves to studying the Scriptures a bit……

More Hail Storm pictures

2008-06-03T09:27:00.005-05:00

FOR SALE: 1 car....slight hail damage.....

2008-06-02T13:53:00.005-05:00

A small, destructive storm cell passed directly over my place of employment today. For nearly an hour it was so dark outside that, had I not known better, I would have thought that it was 9:30pm. With the darkness came some rain, tornado sightings, and then some pretty serious hail. As a matter of fact, it hailed nearly non-stop for some 20+ minutes. Some of the hail was larger than baseballs....I've never seen anything like it. When the storm finally subsided, there was significant damage. As a matter of fact, of the 350 or so vehicles in our parking lot, there was only one I saw that didn't have the windows all broken and smashed in. Here's a few pictures of my car.....if you're interested in buying it, just leave me a note here... :)

I think McCain might be a Young Fundamentalist....

2008-04-29T11:50:00.001-05:00

I’m sure that somebody has already seen and noted what I’m about to say, but since I’m spending less and less time online these days, I haven’t seen it. Part of this is tongue-in-cheek, but the main point is valid, I think. Enjoy.

I’m beginning to think that Young Fundamentalists everywhere ought to be unanimously rising to our feet in support of Senator John McCain. He is, after all, cut out of the same piece of cloth as most of us…Don't let the necktie and hair style fool you folks....John McCain might just be a Young Fundamentalist! Consider the following key principles about McCain:

Associations. McCain isn’t afraid to associate with people whom those in his particular circles have long shunned. I offer as proof the McCain-Kennedy bill and the McCain-Feingold act. Or how about his association with other "RINO's" (Republican In Name Only) in his infamous "Gang of Twelve"? I mean, there is some discussion brewing that he has considered placing Joe (or is it Joseph?) Lieberman on his ticket as a running mate in November!

Criticisms. McCain is quick to criticize those in his circles, but not so quick to criticize the other side. He has often displayed how quickly he will criticize those who would criticize his more liberal counterparts even if the criticism is justified. What more proof do we need to offer than his recent criticism of the North Carolina GOP? How about last January when he jumped all over Vice-President Dick Cheney for his "terrible mishandling" if the war? Or his statement that Donald "Rumsfeld will go down in history, along with McNamara, as one of the worst secretaries of defense in history"? McCain almost seems eager to defend Obama (having done so on several fronts including Obama's associations and friendship with Jeremiah Wright) yet quickly jumps to conclusions about his own party, often assuming the worst.

Heritage. McCain claims to be cut out of the same mold as a bunch of history’s great “dead guys”. You know, the guys that both sides like to claim as their own….

Personality. McCain is considered a “maverick”. This is a moniker he proudly displays as a badge of honor. With no regard as to the reasons behind some the stances of the party with which he is currently affiliated, McCain is quick to point out all the flaws and foibles from an “insiders” perspective.

The more I observe McCain, the more I’m reminded of myself, I guess. Quick to criticize the group I’m affiliated with, even though I don’t intend to end my affiliation anytime soon; quick to defend and even endorse those who have never been, nor ever will be part of my group because they take the "more practical stances" on some “hot-button” issues; quick to claim my affiliation with a whole bunch of dead guys from my particular “group” while careful not to align myself too closely with a lot of the live ones; proud to wear the badge of an intellectual, practical, relevant, compassionate proponent of truth while careful to let people know that I’m somewhat of a “maverick”…a “non-conformist” when it comes to matters that I deem as “non-essential”.

When I see this behavior displayed in politics, it makes me a little sick. As I watch McCain I begin thinking, “why don’t you just call yourself an ‘independent’ rather than a ‘republican’”? The man’s quickness to jump on his own while giving a free pass to those who are his enemies on the political front (even though they might share some common views) is a tad revolting. Yet every day, I see this same behavior in myself.

Watching politics the last several weeks has been a tad entertaining, but it has also caused me to reevaluate some things spiritually. Asking questions, calling for change, and criticizing some of the lunacy that exists within Fundamentalism are all good things. However, one has to be careful. There is a tendency towards arrogance, bitterness, and a critical spirit that can ultimately put more of a bite to your criticism than you ever set aside to have. McCain has made a career out of doing this sort of thing, and now the criticism and finger-pointing at his own come so naturally that it’s almost comical. So many YF’s seem to be headed towards the same fate, I think. I'm afraid that many of us have become something akin to "Fundamentalist In Name Only".

A brief "commercial break".....

2008-04-11T22:16:00.002-05:00

Josh Gelatt over at Ephemeros offers a great "commercial" for Calvinism....his catch phrase: "Calvinism: It's nutritious and delicious". You'll have to read the whole thing to understand!

An apology - my final comment on Joe Zichterman

2008-04-10T20:22:00.004-05:00

For personal reasons I've chosen to remove my blog articles regarding the Joe Zichterman controversy, as well as all the subsequent comments, from my blog archives. I regret much of my verbiage as well as the offense I may have caused to any who read them. Please don't misinterpret this as a show of support for Joe's actions and current alliances...it's not. While I feel that Joe is in error and has chosen a foolish path, that does not give me license to publicly disparage him. Joe is a brother in Christ.

While the recently removed articles were written last summer, I've received two separate emails about them this week - one in support of them and one asking me to remove them. My decision to remove them was made only after I re-read them. I regret the posts and truly wish that nobody had seen them.

A couple of my favorite websites.....

2008-04-06T21:16:00.003-05:00

If you are anything like me....you are unbelievably charming, good looking, and you have a great sense of humor......! Additionally, you like to listen to quality preaching whenever you can. I recently got a great deal on an mp3 player and I'm making pretty good use of it, I think. My initial thoughts were to fill it with music and enjoy it on my 45 minute commute to work each morning, but I've found myself downloading and listening to sermons and books instead. A couple of websites that might interest you are:

SermonAudio.com - this is a terrific site that is chalk full of quality sermons from all sides of fundamentalism and conservative evangelicalism. I probably download and listen to 5 - 10 hours of sermons from here every week. You can search for sermons by passage, speaker, topic, or date. There are thousands of sermons there covering about everything.

Christianaudio.com is another favorite. They offer thousands of titles of books - but you have to pay to download them. However, each month they offer one book for free. It's the only time they will ever offer that book and they offer some great free titles every now and again. I've donwloaded David Brainard's diaries as well as Confessions of the Reformed Church (containing the Augsburg and Westminster Confessions amongst others). If you like audio books, this is a great site....if you like free audio books, it's an even better site! Well, at least once a month! Enjoy!

movin' and groovin'....

2008-04-02T17:35:00.000-05:00

We've been in the process of moving the last couple of weeks, so I haven't been around. There will be new articles coming soon....as for now, I'm just grateful to have internet access after a week off!

He is Risen!

2008-03-23T08:53:00.002-05:00

Note: This is a slightly modified post I put up last Easter......

He is risen!

Can you think of more wonderful words than these? The blood-soaked cross and the blood-stained ground beneath it both look magnificently different today than they did yesterday. For yesterday they reminded me of a dead man and the death wherewith he died. Today however, they serve as witness to what a living Savior endured out of total love for me and total devotion and obedience to the Father!

Alas, today I have a new emblem! There is an empty tomb! An angel sits atop the stone that once sealed its’ entrance and proclaims, "He is no longer here, for he is risen – just as he said"! His death gave me hope – his resurrection gives me life! His last words on that cross, “It is finished”, hinted at victory. His resurrection gave credence to his claim of being “the Resurrection and the Life”.

Yet, as beautiful and victorious as this empty tomb is, my eyes keep glancing back at that wretched cross. The prophet said that I would be healed by His stripes, but I never expected those stripes to cut so deep.

I cannot understand this amazing love. For centuries men have pondered the question…. “Why would One such as this suffer and die for one such as I?”

Why would He trade in His kingly crown for a crown of thorns?

Why would He give up His place in the Heaven of heavens shrouded in glory to be wrapped in this putrid flesh?

Why would He exchange angels worshipping at His feet for men pounding nails through them?

The angels sang His praises. Men mocked Him and spat upon Him.

In His former estate, the entire heavenly host gave to Him…worship and adoration. Here, the creatures of His creation took from Him….always wanting food, or a miracle, or health.... They took everything they could from Him…even His life.

Why art thou cast down, oh my soul? Do not mourn the crucifixion…hope thou in the Resurrection! Oh, what a glorious thought this is! My Lord has risen and He reigns in majesty! He sits clothed in glory, angels worshipping Him in His righteousness! And wonder of wonders, His very presence at the right hand of the Father perpetually satisfies the just judgment and punishment that my sin deserves!

My risen Lord and Savior hath clothed me in His righteousness! My soul leaps within me! Death hath no power! The cross is no longer a picture of horror, but one of beauty! HE IS ALIVE! HALLELUJAH! I will shout with joy today! As long as I have breath, let me not forget to praise thee, oh my Lord! And when I’ve breathed my last…oh, how I long to be in thy presence and at thy feet, and sing glory, glory, GLORY to your wonderful name!

____________________________________________________________________

When I Survey the Wondrous Cross
by
Isaac Watts

When I survey the wondrous cross
On which the Prince of glory died,
My richest gain I count but loss,
And pour contempt on all my pride.

Forbid it, Lord, that I should boast,
Save in the death of Christ my God!
All the vain things that charm me most,
I sacrifice them to His blood.

See from His head, His hands, His feet,
Sorrow and love flow mingled down!
Did e’er such love and sorrow meet,
Or thorns compose so rich a crown?

His dying crimson, like a robe,
Spreads o’er His body on the tree;
Then I am dead to all the globe,
And all the globe is dead to me.

Were the whole realm of nature mine,
That were a present far too small;
Love so amazing, so divine,
Demands my soul, my life, my all.

To Christ, who won for sinners grace
By bitter grief and anguish sore,
Be praise from all the ransomed race
Forever and forevermore.

Friends, Snobs, Jazz, BBQ, and a Free Steak: My Trip to Kansas City.

2008-03-16T14:19:00.000-05:00

I just returned from a business trip to Kansas City. The highlight of the trip was a long visit with on old friend on Wednesday night (my first night there). I'll talk about that a bit later on, but first a couple of other brief stories about the trip.

The Bass Pro Shop in Olathe is an extremely cool place. There's a fairly decent restaurant in there and the entire place is just fun to look at. I wasn't able to spend much time in there, but it was fun!

I was shocked to find that some businesses are a bit snobby when it comes to their customers using cash! My company put me up in a fairly "ritzy" hotel. Any incidentals I incurred, I paid for out of my own pocket (internet access, room service, etc). These people honestly seemed put out that I used cash rather than plastic.....I didn't bother to waste my breath explaining that I haven't used plastic in five years and don't expect to ever use it again......it frustrates me that green money is somehow inconvenient these days.

I ate one meal that I probably shouldn't have due to cost. While my company was reimbursing me for my meals, I still felt a bit guilty about the price of this one. The restaurant was extremely nice and the food was priced very high. I ordered steak and lobster....it took so long for it to get there that they ended up giving me the meal for free! Normally, I would have said, "well, if I knew it was going to be free I would have ordered the steak and lobster tail"! Since I couldn't say that, I simply told the waitress that her tip just got a lot bigger than it was going to be! The food was fabulous.

As I said earlier, the hotel I was in was quite nice. There were 16 stories in the place and the higher you went, the nicer and larger the rooms and suites were (I was on the 3rd floor!). Thursday evening I got into an elevator with a guy and asked him what floor I needed to push for him. When he said he was on the 15th floor, I replied with a hearty, "Well, congratulations!"......he didn't get my joke.

I did get to enjoy a little jazz and BBQ while I was there. Kansas City is really a unique place with a neat culture. I enjoyed it!

Now, regarding my visit with an old friend... Tim and I worked together at the Wilds of the Rockies for two summers ('93 - '94). We "hung out" a bit, but I don't know that we were ever super close as friends. He was one of only a few guys who was there from the previous summer, so we had a good familiarity with one another and often went the same places on weekends. After that last summer, I'm not sure that I ever saw or spoke to Tim again until recently when our paths crossed on SharperIron and Facebook. When I found out that I was going to be in the KC area for a few days, I got in touch with Tim and asked if we could get together for a bit. So on Wednesday night (my first night in town), Tim and his wife had me over to their house for dinner.

The food was great, but the highlight of the evening was the conversation. For nearly 4 hours we talked about the goodness and grace of our Lord. While we did some "catching up", the bulk of our conversation was spent talking about lessons learned in our respective lives as we've strived to please God and get to know Him better. Honestly, it was one of the sweetest times of fellowship I've had in the last several years. I'd never met or spoken to Tim's wife until I walked into their home, but instantly I felt a kinship with her as if I'd known her forever. From the moment I walked into their house, I felt like I was family.....that sort of warmth and comfort only comes with Christian kinship I think. At any rate, the food was wonderful, the fellowship was superb and the ice cream hit the right spot!

As enjoyable as the trip was, it was certainly nice to get back home to my family. I got in a tad later than I expected, but everyone managed to stay awake and greet me (with the exception of our youngest child.....he was out cold!). As excited as my wife and kids were to see me, their enthusiasm paled in comparison to that of our dog, but his level of enthusiasm is just as high if I walk outside for 10 minutes and come back in!

I don't really enjoy taking trips without my family, but finding an old friend to fellowship with certainly makes it much more enjoyable!

Not a typical music post...

2008-03-03T17:28:00.003-06:00

I came across this today over at Sharper Iron. I've never read it before now, but it made me laugh.....enjoy!

An old farmer went to the city one weekend and attended the big city church. He came home and his wife asked him how it was.

"Well," said the farmer, "it was good. They did something different, however. They sang praise choruses instead of hymns."

"Praise choruses?" said his wife. "What are those?"

"Oh, they're OK. They are sort of like hymns, only different," said the farmer.

"Well, what's the difference?" asked his wife.

The farmer said, "Well, it's like this - If I were to say to you 'Martha, the cows are in the corn' - well, that would be a hymn. If on the other hand, I were to say to you:

'Martha, Martha, Martha,
Oh Martha, MARTHA, MARTHA,
the cows, the big cows,
the brown cows, the black cows,
the white cows, the black and white cows,
the COWS, COWS, COWS are in the corn,
are in the corn, are in the corn, are in the corn,
the CORN, CORN, CORN.'

Then, if I were to repeat the whole thing two or three times, well, that would be a praise chorus."

The next weekend, his nephew, a young, new Christian from the city came to visit and attended the local church of the small town. He went home and his mother asked him how it was.

"Well," said the young man, "it was good. They did something different however. They sang hymns instead of regular songs."

"Hymns?" asked his mother. "What are those?"

"Oh, they're OK. They are sort of like regular songs, only different," said the young man.

"Well, what's the difference?" asked his mother.

The young man said, "Well, it's like this - If I were to say to you 'Martha, the cows are in the corn' - well, that would be a regular song. If on the other hand, I were to say to you:

'Oh Martha, dear Martha, hear thou my cry
Inclinest thine ear to the words of my mouth
Turn thou thy whole wondrous ear by and by
To the righteous, inimitable, glorious truth.

For the way of the animals who can explain
There in their heads is no shadow of sense
Hearkenest they in God's sun or His rain
Unless from the mild, tempting corn they are fenced.

Yea those cows in glad bovine, rebellious delight
Have broke free their shackles, their warm pens eschewed
Then goaded by minions of darkness and night
They all my mild Chilliwack sweet corn have chewed.

So look to the bright shining day by and by
Where all foul corruptions of earth are reborn
Where no vicious animals make my soul cry
And I no longer see those foul cows in the corn.'

Then if I were to do only verses one, three and four and do a key change on the last verse, well that would be a hymn!"

--Author Unknown

It's easier when you have all the answers!

2008-02-21T20:28:00.002-06:00

*****UPDATE: My friend Marty Colborn recently wrote an article on this subject that you might find interesting. I've known Marty for nearly 3 years and have come to appreciate his thoughts. He's one of the most genuine, godly men I've ever had the privilege of calling a friend. We come down on different sides of some issues, but in the end, we both love our Savior and we both want to serve Him. By the way, Marty and I attend the same church.....we even sing in a quartet together! You can find his article here. *****

I remember it like it was yesterday......I had it all figured out! I knew all the answers to the real important questions regarding life, Christianity, holiness, and sin. It was so simple and I couldn't believe that everybody else around me didn't see it - it was as clear as the nose on my cleanly shaven face!

The year was 1993 and I was a 20 year old bible college student. Everything made a lot of sense to me back then. I knew what a "real" Christian looked like, acted like, dressed like, etc...all others were counterfeit Christians. I knew what kind of music good Christians listened to, what Bible version they used, what kind of churches they attended, and what kind of haircuts they sported. I remember meeting a young man who's father pastored a different kind of church....you know, the kind that was full of "deceived, fake" Christians..... This young man seemed to love the Lord and he had a passion for the things of God. We were talking one night and he told me how the Lord was using his brother in the ministry his brother had. When I asked him what that ministry was, I was shocked to discover that his brother was the lead singer in a Christian Rock Band (one that is fairly well known these days). I was flabbergasted! Fortunately I was able to tell him with a great deal of confidence that his brother was probably not saved.....I explained how the term "christian rock" was an oxymoron - the two words ought not even be uttered in the same sentence. That's right - I had all the answers and that night I lost a friend because of it.

One of the first churches I worked in after college was a small non-denominational church in southern Kansas. The fact that they had the word "community" rather than "baptist" in their title really bugged me, but they preached from the KJV and had conservative music from a good old hymnal, so that was good enough for me. I left that church when I "discovered" that they were supporting an SBC ministry financially - after all, the SBC was filled with compromisers...not "true" Christians. Again, I damaged some good friendships and hurt some sweet servants of God with my damaging words....all because I had all the right answers.

I like for things to be "black and white". I've got an extremely analytical mind and "gray areas" used to bug the living daylights out of me. It was much easier to write people off as being counterfeit than it was to try to understand things from a truly biblical perspective. In my mind I couldn't rationalize how a Christian man could ever have long hair, or wear jewelry, or (gasp!) have a tattoo on his body! As a matter of fact, a man who would put a tattoo on his body had disqualified himself from any usefulness in ministry as far as I was concerned. Yep....I had all the answers...

I guess the Lord began to open my eyes a bit when I finally found a church to attend that felt the same way I did. The lack of love; the separating from the world to the point that we were perceived as haters; the constant denigration of any Christian or Christian group who listened to certain types of music, read certain bible versions, or dressed in a certain way.....you get the picture - anyone who was different. Those things began to make me realize that I might just be missing something.

It was a lot easier when I had all the answers.....but it was lonely. I mean lonely in the sense that I went out of my way to ostracize myself from other believers. I viewed things such as music, bible versions, and calvinism as separation issues. I used to get mad when I would hear about or read interviews with CCM musicians and they would talk about ministry or speak of their relationship with Christ. I didn't understand how Satan was using them, but I just knew he was. After all, those within CCM were likely unsaved.......

All the answers.

Well I'm glad I'm no longer deceived into thinking I have all the answers. I've come to realize that God doesn't fit all that well into a little box, no matter how well that box might seem to be constructed. I've made dear friends who seem to have incredible walks with the Lord, yet they just don't see eye to eye with me on everything....I've come to love them and accept them....even the ones who have all the answers! I've come to find that two of the most important characteristics that a Christian should display are humility and love....it was difficult to display those characteristics when I was so convinced of my own righteousness.....

I realize that I don't have all the answers. Sometimes that makes things difficult, but.....I think it's better!

A correction.....

2008-02-14T18:08:00.002-06:00

I am sometimes (OK....often) guilty of overstating something for effect. My last article was such an occasion, I think.... I have no intention of voting for Hillary or Obama (although I like Obama.....he strikes me as the most honest liberal that's ever run, even though he's left of nearly everybody in the US!).

All that said......I also won't vote for McCain. McCain is conservative in name, but not in practice. I like his stance on the war and on abortion, but those two things alone are not enough to win me over. The fact that our current President gave him the resounding endorsement of being "a true conservative" certainly doesn't add much credence to his cause, in my opinion. I will vote this election, but I'm not sure for whom. It will likely be 3rd party or a write-in....but I may change my mind between now and then - time will tell.

So it seems that this go around, we are destined to get either the first female, black, or really, really old President.....either way, we will likely see more of the same - a political quagmire in D.C.!!!! I just love politics!

My political post

2008-02-07T10:07:00.000-06:00

I don't really talk about politics too often, because the subject frustrates me. Each Presidential election brings us news that is nothing more than "all politics, all the time", so the political discussion is now on my mind. Of course, this frustrates me all over again, so I'm going to use my little slice of the internet to discuss my frustration.....

For most of my adult life I've been a registered Republican. After all, we know that all good Christians (and especially fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals) simply have to support the GOP! This is the same GOP that has given us the President we've had for the past 8 years and is apparently going to throw all its muscle behind a marginal (at best) Republican like John McCain for the upcoming election. The same GOP that turns utterly spineless when at a crossroads with Democratic opposition in the Senate. Quite frankly the GOP has abandoned most of its conservative principles and is causing me to refer to myself as a man without a party.... It frustrates me that the "conservative base" in the GOP are perceived as such dullards that all it takes to get our vote is to attach the term "pro-life" to your name. Equally frustrating is the fact that we've earned that reputation! You have to look no further than how this primary season has shaken out for McCain....a man who is more of a Democrat than Leiberman ever was is getting the vote of conservatives for two reasons...he's pro-life and he takes a good stance on our current war situation.

The only viable conservative that even ran for the Republican nomination this year was Romney (who will have no choice but to drop out soon), yet conservatives by the truckload threw their support behind Huckabee and McCain (who are essentially the exact same on most issues). This upcoming election is likely to pit McCain against Obama......in that scenario I'd likely vote for McCain, but if Clinton wins the Democratic primary I might just vote for her this year. A McCain Presidency would look a lot like a Clinton Presidency with the exception that Clinton has the benefit of being married to a former President. I guess I'll have to see who their running mates are. If the ticket is Clinton / Obama, there's no way I'll vote for it. If McCain chooses someone like Lieberman or Huckabee, I feel the same way. I don't know, maybe this is the year that I don't vote....

By the way, after this primary season is over, I will no longer be registered as a Republican.

Humility

2008-01-24T08:56:00.000-06:00

In Philippians 2 we are reminded to be of the same mind as Jesus Christ. As the passage continues, we are reminded of the great humility displayed by Christ by, not only in His willingness to leave heaven and live for a short while as a man, but to have that life taken by the hands of His creation in the most brutal of methods. If we take pause, however, after that short phrase, “….let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus…”, we cannot help but to tremble at the thought.

I, for one, fail so often in this matter of humility that it’s depressing to even think about it. The idea of self-sacrifice and completely selfless living is often so foreign to me that I wonder if there’s anything other than selfishness coursing through me. Christ’s humility involved a measure of this selflessness and self-sacrifice that sinful man is unable to achieve, yet the Apostle cautions us to, “let this same mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus…”. Is it really possible? In this day and age I meet precious few people who are willing to put into practice some of the basic lessons that Christ taught us both in word and deed. Commands like, “love your enemy”, “turn the other cheek”, “bless those that curse you”, or even “love each other” – as in agape. I don’t mean to come across as if I display these things on a daily basis. I don’t even display proper love consistently to those whom I hold dearest in this world.

Sometimes the study of the Word will prompt one to ask oneself some difficult questions. Some questions I’ve faced recently during my study times have been:

How can I claim to be a follower of Christ when I consistently fall short in nearly everything He’s commanded?
How can I maintain a right relationship with my Lord when I bristle at the most petty of differences between myself and those whom I call my brothers and sisters in Christ?

I’ve been confronted with many more questions than these, but they are personal enough that I won’t share them here…

So why am I sharing this with you? Simply put, I’m beginning to grow tired of the mediocrity that typifies the lives of most Christians, but specifically, my own life. I sometimes wonder if I know the first thing about humility, sacrifice, and selflessness. I don’t know that I’ve ever been accused of “turning the other cheek” and of loving my enemies. Quite the contrary, as a matter of fact. In some venues I’ve garnered a reputation that says I’m not a good man to cross…..I don’t think that’s the type of reputation that God would have one of His children possess. It's certainly not the example left by our Savior as He was "led as a lamb to slaughter".

In a couple of weeks I’m beginning a study with our adult Sunday School class on some of these things. We’ll be taking a 4 or 5 week look at some examples of humility from the life of Christ and drawing some practical lessons from them. I’ll be posting some of my notes here following each class.

I hate seeing football season end...

2007-12-28T22:31:00.000-06:00

I don't generally talk about sports here, but with football season drawing to a close, my mind is going back to the year that was. All in all, I've enjoyed this season of football (both NFL and NCAA) more than any other I can think of off the top of my head (although the Packers last Super Bowl season was fairly memorable...). First off, let's look at the college game this year.

It seemed like there was a different number 1 or number 2 team every single week, which made for the most exciting and dynamic season there has ever been. Being a Kansas Jayhawks fan, I generally don't have much to cheer about until basketball season, but this year saw the very surprising KU squad get within 9 points of the number 1 ranking going into the last week of the regular season, and they get to play in a BCS Bowl in January. Nobody predicted it - not even close - but it was a lot of fun to watch in this most unusual year. Equally exciting was to see another Big XII team get a BCS Bowl. I'm certainly not a Mizzou fan, but I always enjoy seeing the Big XII on top.

As if the NCAA season wasn't exciting enough, this NFL season has been a great a deal of fun to watch as well. First of all, the Bears returned to their pathetic form and played well only three times this season (their recent loss to the Vikings was probably their best game of the year). While some Bears fans are talking trash about their sweep of the mighty Pack this year, it should be noted that the first game was an absolute gift (anybody who isn't a brain-damaged Bears fan will agree ;) ) and the second game was all about the Packers absolutely pathetic special teams play and Favre's horrendous 3rd quarter. Orton looked OK, but the dude had nothing to lose. Chicago still doesn't have a QB that's capable of winning more than 2 consecutive games, so expect the next two seasons to look a lot like this one for duh bears.

More impressive than the Bears return to form this season was the resurgence of the Pack as one of the premier teams in the league. They went to Dallas with four key starters watching from the sidelines and still managed to stay in the ballgame against a team that was touted as being head-and-shoulders above the rest of the NFC. Look for this young, talented team to be one of the top-tier teams in the NFL for the next 4 or 5 years.

Speaking of top-tier teams, the New England Patriots have been nothing short of amazing this season. Forget about "spygate"...these guys are absolutely incredible and seem to be about three steps of everybody else in the NFL. They will go down in history as one of the best single season teams ever and will break nearly every single-season team and individual record there is to break this season. If they manage to continue this impressive run and win the Super Bowl they will no doubt be ranked as the best single-season team in history knocking off both the '72 Dolphins and the '85 Bears claim to that title. I've never been a Pat's fan, and I'm still not, but watching them play this year has been a real treat.

The other great streak that's been fun to watch in the NFL this year was the hapless Miami Dolphins. I think their better than at least 3 other teams out there (Jets, Falcons, and Chiefs - although the Lions, Bears, Cards and Niners also come to mind), but they just couldn't win games this year. I was really hoping to see them go winless just for the opportunity to see both perfection and the exact opposite happen during the same season!

Now, all that being said, I'm going to make a bold prediction regarding the playoffs and Super Bowl. I think the Redskins will beat Dallas this week and make the playoffs as the hottest team playing in the NFC right now. They will win their first playoff game and then pull off an upset in Dallas (the Cowboys are getting a little worse each week it seems) to get into the NFC Championship game against Green Bay. If the weather is lousy, I think we'll see the Redskins in the Super Bowl against......Indianapolis. Yep, Indi. As much as I want to see New England finish off the perfect season (unless they play the Pack in the Super Bowl), I think that Indi is going to pull off the upset and repeat as Super Bowl champs over the winner of the Green Bay/Washington game.

Either that, or New England will stomp Dallas in the big game (how's that for waffling?).

By the way, another great memory from this year was the fact that my wife and I were able to go to our first NFL game this season. We went to Arrowhead Stadium in Kansas City and watched the Packers win one of their 13 games. It was a great time and the Chiefs fans we were sitting near were a lot of fun. The picture to the right was taken right after the Chiefs fans began to exit en masse and the one to the left was taken as the Pack began their last key defensive stand that resulted in a interception return for a TD.

Is Theology really all that important?

2007-12-26T23:09:00.000-06:00

I've been asked that very question more than once and in more than one way. A lot of Christians get a bit "put off" at the thought of studying theology or doctrine. Those two words, theology and doctrine, tend to be met with moans and groans when mentioned in any setting of Christians outside of academia. One of the best answers I've ever heard or read to the question, "why should I study theology?", was put forth by C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity. He said, "{If} you do not listen to Theology, that will not mean that you have no ideas about God. It will mean that you have a lot of wrong ones - bad, muddled, out-of-date ideas.

I was once asked to give a brief overview of systematic theology to an adult Sunday School class. That overview was to be followed by a 4-week study on the subject of Christology. I began the first class by asking the question, "what's the first thought that enters your mind when you hear the term systematic theology?" That question was met by audible groans, some laughter, and one man shouting out, "TROUBLE!" The responses caught me a bit off guard, but I guess I wasn't really all that surprised...people tend to view the study of theology as something that should be left to "professional theologians" - pastors, professors, and the piously argumentative intellectuals who like to hear themselves talk and are visibly shaken when a conversation takes to using too many monosyllabic words!

The fact is that all Christians are theologians...some are just bad ones. We should be constantly striving to learn all that we can about our Heavenly Father. Too many Christians allow their pastor or their church's doctrinal statement to tell them what they believe without ever having bothered to study for themselves. I think it's an understatement to say that this is tragic....why would a Christian operate under the notion that that sort of laziness and apathy is acceptable?

Obviously, study isn't the end all. Increasingly deeper study should lead one to correct doctrine and a correct view of God. A solid grasp on correct doctrine, coupled with a correct view of God, ought to lead one to a more holy way of living as he strives more and more to please God.

Too often I've seen blissfully ignorant Christians take some sort of ridiculous pride in their ignorance of even the most rudimentary portions of theology. I once heard a pastor proudly proclaim, "I ain't no theologian" (that's a word-for-word quote). The sad part was that this proclamation was made during his ordination (a sham if I've ever seen one). The purpose of the ordination was so that he could be sent out to pastor a church elsewhere. He went and within 2 years the church had all but vanished from the face of the earth. That pastor went back to his sending church with tales of how the people were against him the whole time and he was just glad to be back amongst "God's people". (By the way, even though this guy should have known that he was in no way prepared for the pastorate, I hold the pastor of the sending church even more responsible.....another reason I'm so thrilled to be away from the psychotic fringes of IFB-dom). While this is purely anecdotal, there are a million stories just like this one. While these same people can quote Matthew 22:37 by heart, very few of them have ever bothered to consider what the phrase "with all your mind" might encompass.

Is the study of theology really all that important? Absolutely! Let's strive to engage our hearts and minds in diligent study of the things of God. I began a new study on the Doctrine of Scripture this week and came across this great statement from R.C. Sproul, "The Word of God can be in the mind without being in the heart; but it cannot be in the heart without first being in the mind."

Finally back!

2007-12-24T11:38:00.000-06:00

We've been without internet access since my last post on 12/12. We've had cable the entire time, but we were waiting for the cable company to get out here to replace our fried modem - they finally showed up today and all seems right with the world once again!

No lights, no heat, but a lot of fun....

2007-12-12T17:52:00.001-06:00

It's been an interesting couple of days out here in the Midwest US. Ice began flying on Monday early evening and didn't stop until sometime Tuesday mid-morning, only to start up again on Tuesday night. We lost power at our house at about 5:00 Tuesday morning and decided to "hole up" for the day. We were grateful to have our power restored at about 3:30 Tuesday afternoon, but that only lasted for a couple of hours....

So, Tuesday night we moved a large mattress into our bedroom and put the kids down on it. We shut everything up and managed to stay pretty warm in the bedroom even though the temperature dropped below 20 degrees overnight. When we woke up this morning our room was still fairly comfortable, but the rest of the house had dropped down below 50 degrees and was steadily dropping. Listening to the radio we discovered that there was no power anywhere in town, so we went to the Red Cross shelter so we could get a warm cup of coffee and try to find out some information from the folks there. As soon as we got there the Red Cross representative asked us if we wanted to get cots reserved for the five of us since power wasn't expected to be restored for at least 2 days! We got the cots, came home and got bedding, and headed back to the shelter to ride the rest of this thing out.

We spent about 3 hours at the shelter mingling with the folks, eating lunch, and watching "Cars" when suddenly, the lights came on! The problem turned out to be a tad less major than the power company had assumed and they were able to get power restored to a large part of the city...as it turned out, our house was part of that section (although, not everyone in our neighborhood has power just yet).

So, we're back home where it's warm and cozy and I'm sitting here drinking coffee out of my favorite coffee cup. Rarely has a shower and shave felt as good as they did this evening! The kids are a tad disappointed that we didn't get to sleep on the cots at the shelter, but when they found out that school was canceled tomorrow (for the 3rd consecutive day), they kind of forgot about missing out on the adventure of sleeping on cots with a couple of hundred other people!

The entire town is a mess right now. Enough ice dropped that a lot of power lines and a few poles broke. There are trees down all over town and several of the trees in our backyard sustained some pretty major damage. Thankfully, we haven't heard about there being any injuries or deaths due to the storm. Some of the clean up began today, but we've all got a heck of a long week ahead of us. Tonight it's supposed to drop down to 18 degrees or so, but it doesn't like there going to be much moisture in the air, so we shouldn't have any problems overnight.

I'll try to post some pictures of the damage to our property later this week...

Criticism, love, and finding the right balance.

2007-11-28T16:34:00.000-06:00

I’m not a terribly arrogant individual. I’ve been accused of that from time to time, but that’s part of the price one pays for being so darned good looking … people just assume your arrogant. (Note: the last sentence was complete sarcasm….). For one to be involved in blogging, one has to be equipped with a certain level of confidence as well as a fairly “thick skin”. In blogging I tend to be fairly critical of the extremes within Fundamentalism as well as Evangelicalism. More often than not I find myself critiquing and criticizing the whole of Fundamentalism from an insider’s perspective. That’s earned me some well-deserved criticism which has caused me to take a look at what and why I do what I do here at A s For Me and My House … I’m not at all uncomfortable being lumped in with the ever increasing group of people who have grown more and more dissatisfied with what they see in this movement. However, I dislike being summarily written off as a “trouble-maker” or as a loud dissenter who is questioning just for the sake of questioning. I certainly do not want to put forth the notion that I’m merely looking for ways to justify my own fleshly desires. So I’m going to take a little time with this article to attempt to explain my heart a bit.

During the time I’ve been blogging, and really even before that when I was more involved in other venues on the internet, I’ve taken quite a bit of criticism for some of my opinions, questions, thoughts, and (at times) attitudes. Sometimes publicly and other times in email exchanges or personal conversations. Now I’m certainly not alone in this and I willingly admit that I’m a relatively “small fish” in the blogosphere by any standard; however, I want to offer up a small defense for why I choose to question, point out faults, and (at times) name names.

I want to say from the outset that I realize that I’m not always right. As a matter of fact I’ve been proven wrong on many occasions. My approach to whole Joe Zichterman issue is a good example of this. I called the man a false teacher several times and even constructed an utterly foolish “open letter” to him (which, thankfully, I only left up for a few hours before obliterating the post altogether). There are many other examples of where I’ve screwed up here, but I’m not here to talk about those. I only mention these “wrong steps” so that I can say that I understand that in my criticisms of “the movement” I may not be spot on all the time. Having said that, I do criticize openly and without remorse because I think it needs to be done.

Not too long ago I was called (in a private conversation) a “novice who has not earned the right to criticize Fundamentalism”. In so many words I was told that I should keep my mouth shut and turn the guns on the enemy (presumably, the Evangelicals). This took me back a few steps because I have a great deal of respect for the individual who spoke these words to me, but, after some careful thought and prayer on the matter, I think the individual in question is dead wrong. I’m glad to be part of a growing number of people within Fundamentalism who are no longer afraid to tip some sacred cows. I’ll discuss in a bit why I think I’m justified in my approach.

I should note that I understand my limitations. I’m a 35 year old Bible college drop-out who has never been in full-time ministry. I’ve never been a leader within Fundamentalism, nor have I rubbed elbows with very many of the “important folks” within the movement. While most of the "big names" I have gotten to know personally are still thriving within the movement, there are a handful of exceptions who have either left the movement or are now being cut off from large portions of the movement. The way some of them have been “cut off” has caused me an increasingly high level of frustration with the Bob Jones and Northland “orbs” of the movement, but that’s an entirely different discussion (no, that last comment has nothing to do with Zichterman).

With my limited qualifications, I understand the frustration that some might have with unknowns like myself attempting to “call Fundamentalism to the carpet”, but I think I’m justified in doing so. The fact is that I’m a Christian who has spent my lifetime in the movement and who has seen just enough lunacy to justify a response. Like it or not, much within the bulk of Fundamentalism has done a great deal of harm to the body of Christ and to the cause of the Kingdom – that should be addressed.

It wasn't until 6 or 7 years ago that I began to understand that the Body of Christ extended beyond the boundaries of Fundamentalism. I had this idea that anything outside of the movement was sub-par Christianity at best. I couldn't understand how anybody could think otherwise....I've gotten past that Pharisaical judgmentalism, but I still find that sort of thing to be a somewhat common factor within the fundy movement. I admire Fundamentalism's dedication to separation, but I think we've often gone too far and that our contribution to the Body has been to make it increasingly fragmented. A Christian has, I think, an obligation to call attention to this and to point out the errors to those within his sphere of influence (however small that may be).

If our goals - my goal - in criticism is purely to spew, spit, and get a reaction, then everyone is better served if we keep our mouths shut. However, if the goal of criticism is to foster a conversation, generate positive change, and to lovingly work together towards a common good, then we should encourage and welcome the criticism. I think the key to all this is held in looking at 1 Corinthians 13:4-8. If you haven't read them before, I've got a series of posts on that passage of Scripture here, here, and here - the last two in particular are worth a read.

Imagine if all our actions were governed by Paul's description of love in the passage mentioned above. I don't know that we could correct all the problems or even get on the same page on everything. But I do think that we would go a long ways in ending some of the infighting and "fragmentalism" that has become such a large part of the movement.....

I'm still here...

2007-11-13T01:08:00.001-06:00

I'm working more often than I'm not these days, so blogging has taken a back seat for a while. I've got more than half a dozen articles that are started, but I just haven't found the time to finish them up. Hopefully I'll be back to blogging sometime this month.

Some of the articles that will be forthcoming will be a series comparing the the basic tenets (thanks for the correction, Don :) ) of Calvinism and Arminianism; an article on the home; a discussion about "rules"; a discussion on worldliness; and a short article concerning discernment. All of these are in the works, and I hope to finish some of them up soon. In the meantime, be sure to check out some of the new blogs I've listed in my blogroll on the left side bar.