promise and pleasure

Moving

2008-02-07T21:28:00.000-05:00

This blog has been moved here. Come visit my new home.

Jesus' Van

2008-02-07T16:24:00.000-05:00

Thanks to Barry Carpenter for passing this along to me. It's hilarious whether you are a Rob Bell friend or foe.

Biblical Masculinity

2008-02-07T10:30:00.000-05:00

Steve Shank interviewed CJ Mahaney at The Pursuit conference (a regional conference from Sovereign Grace Ministries) about biblical masculinity in 2007. The entire interview is helpful but I found Mahaney's advice to parents about teaching their young men about what it means to be a godly man especially helpful.

I think what I would say to a young man, is that there are categories he needs to familiarize himself with from Scripture. Two would be categories revealed particularly in Proverbs – the wise and the foolish. And I would want any young man (and this has broader application for all of us, but particularly for a young man) to familiarize himself with those two categories.

Those are the only two categories that exist. There are no other categories from God’s perspective. One either identifies with the wise or the foolish. Proverbs is a wealth of wisdom given by God as a gift from God to that age group in particular — to protect them from walking with fools, from being a fool, and from experiencing the consequences of being a fool.

Those who say that wisdom is the fruit of experience haven’t read Proverbs. There is wisdom there that will protect us from the experience of being a fool or emulating the example of a fool. So I would want to impress those categories and familiarize themselves with the numerous and detailed descriptions of the wise son, the wise man, the foolish son, the foolish man.

And I would want those categories to inform that young man and to protect him from sin and to provoke that young man to want to identify with the wise. I would want that young man to be protected from being numbered among the fools.

Proverbs describes a fool as someone who doesn’t acknowledge the relationship between character, conduct, and consequences. God says of that individual – you are a fool.

Often in Proverbs the father is informing the son, “in the end,” a little phrase that appears throughout Proverbs. He is trying to draw his son’s attention to the consequences of sin. Sin in its initial stages appears attractive and can even be pleasurable to some degree. The wise father is drawing the attention of the son to what takes place as a fruit of sin and in the end trying to help establish that relationship between character, conduct and consequence. And then protect the son so the son instead pursues wisdom.

I would also say to that young man, when Proverbs says “the companion of fools will suffer harm,” you will not prove to be an exception to that (Proverbs 13:20). A wise son, a wise man, hangs out with wise men and therefore becomes wise. Proverbs warns us (as an expression of God’s kindness), “the companion of fools will suffer harm.” Now that harm is not always immediately obvious to a fool because often that harm begins in the form of a conscience that goes from sensitive to seared. So that harm isn’t always evident in consequences that are obvious to all. But be assured, the companion of fools will suffer harm.

And I would say to all of us fathers that we must understand that this category of “companion” is broader than just the individuals our children hang out with. Television is a companion. The Internet is a companion. The iPod is a companion. These are all means of transferring foolishness to one’s heart and therefore we need to help equip our sons and daughters with these two categories to protect them from being numbered among the fools and experiencing the consequences of fools and to, instead, be numbered among those who are wise and to taste the sweet fruit of wisdom.

There are treasures to be savored here, not just for parents, but for us all as we pursue godliness. We need to walk among the wise as wise men, not as a fool among the companions of fools. And we need righteous discernment to help us know the difference.

Top 10 Least Christian-Friendly Countries

2008-02-06T12:50:00.000-05:00

1. North Korea
2. Saudi Arabia
3. Iran
4. Maldives
5. Bhutan
6. Yemen
7. Afghanistan
8. Laos
9. Uzbekistan
10. China

You can see the full report here.

Now These Guys Have Got Skills!

2008-02-06T10:43:00.001-05:00

http://view.break.com/447067 - Watch more free videos

How to Give Godly Criticism

2008-02-05T14:17:00.000-05:00

Mark Dever offers five helpful tips for giving constructive, godly criticism. These are especially challenging for those, like me, who evaluate and critique everything and everyone.

Proverbs 26:27 says "A lying tongue hates those it hurts, and a flattering mouth works ruin." I think that Christians, and especially pastors, should have words which reflect hearts of wisdom and love toward those we speak to. And it's in reference to those obligations and opportunities we have (and out of my own mistakes in doing this well!) that I offer the five points of criticism. Here are several ideas on HOW criticism is best offered:

1. Directly, not indirectly. If you're anything like me, you might have a temptation to imply something, to presume something, to do anything to avoid a direct confrontation. Be very careful, however, before adopting this pattern, especially in criticism. If you're not careful, you'll have people regularly looking at your words and asking themselves what you "really mean."

2. Seriously, not humorously. Again, I might want to give some piece of advice through a humorous aside, but I probably am giving criticism this way because of my own fear of man. I want them to like me, and so I don't want to directly confront them. I want to be able to dismiss my own words if their cost proves higher to me than I had estimated. And humor can appear to be a useful vehicle for this. I can disown the words I've spoken, explaining them merely as humor if they're not received well. I should know better. I should know that if something is worth correcting, I should show respect to the other person by taking it seriously. I should never joke about something I'm really concerned about in someone else, without first having spoken seriously to them about it.

3. As if it's important, not casually. Similar to the previous point, but distinct, is the idea that the other person deserves me to give a certain level of importance to the issue, or I probably shouldn't be offering them correction at all. Eleazar Savage has a wise section (pp. 487-490) in the book of books (Polity) on minor offenses that we as Christians should simply bear with in each other. Don't use up the other person's emotional energy on criticizing them if the matter isn't really very significant.

4. Privately, not publicly. A remark around other people could have negative effects on other people's opinion of the one you are offering criticism to. You probably won't have the opportunity to follow up with all of them about the nature and reasons of your criticism. Your friend will probably only struggle more with fear of man issues, having those confused with the merits of the criticism you have offered. Now your friend may well be left open to the Evil One tempting him to be distracted by what this or that person will think of him. You honor your friend better by offering the criticism in private.

5. Out of love for them, not to express your feeling or frustration. It's interesting how my "honesty" can sometimes be inspired by my own frustration. Good criticism should not be "my frustration"-driven, but "your need" driven. If I ever offer a friend criticism it should be in the time and manner that will best serve them, not that is most convenient and emotionally satisfying for me. One way we show that love is by sincerly encouraging them (not flattering them) in areas where God's grace is clear in our friend's life. The more they can believe that we mean this for their good, that we love them, and see real good in them, the less open they are to pridefully dismissing our criticism.

Hungry Haitians Eat Mud

2008-01-30T09:19:00.000-05:00

This morning my daughters had Fruit Loops and oatmeal for breakfast. This afternoon we will eat lunch together as a family as a part of our weekly Wednesday routine. This evening after bible study we will probably go out to dinner with our friends Barry and Lauren. At the end of the day we will enjoy three satisfying meals, and in some cases, we won't even finish what is on our plates because we are "full".

Todayt Charlene, 16, and her 1-month old son will eat cookies made from dried yellow dirt in Haiti's central plateau.

When my mother does not cook anything, I have to eat them three times a day," Charlene said. Her baby, named Woodson, lay still across her lap, looking even thinner than the slim 6 pounds 3 ounces he weighed at birth.

Though she likes their buttery, salty taste, Charlene said the cookies also give her stomach pains. "When I nurse, the baby sometimes seems colicky too," she said.

Food prices around the world have spiked because of higher oil prices, needed for fertilizer, irrigation and transportation. Prices for basic ingredients such as corn and wheat are also up sharply, and the increasing global demand for biofuels is pressuring food markets as well.

The problem is particularly dire in the Caribbean, where island nations depend on imports and food prices are up 40 percent in places.

This story brings tears to my eyes as Randall Goodgames "Share The Well" echoes in my ears. I'm half a world away, wondering what I can do about hunger in Haiti, AIDS in Africa, or human sex trade in the Far East. The words of the prophet Micah reverberate in my gut this morning, "He has shown you, O man, what is good and what the Lord requires of you. But do to justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God."

Father, I may not be able to show mercy to Charlene in Haiti today, but surely there is someone. Open my eyes, that I may see the world as you see it today.

Rick Love Responds to Piper's Criticism of A Common Word

2008-01-28T10:43:00.001-05:00

Rick Love, International Director of Frontiers who lent his signature to the document A Common Word Between You and I has responds to Piper. It is worth reading.

A couple of points with noting. Love states the document does not "promote or renounce evangelism" but is merely a response to the invitation to dialogue. While this seems fair enough I do wonder if the Muslim clerics would find the acceptance of the invitation as disingenuous if/when they become aware that the intent of this dialogue may not be the acceptance they seek, but rather an opportunity to expose the illegitimacy of Islam as a viable road to salvation and that Muslims must no longer worship God in ignorance, but through Jesus Christ.

Love also says:

I believe that Muslims worship the true God. But I also believe that their view of God falls short of His perfections and beauty as described in the Bible. Thus, I try to model my approach to Muslims after the apostle Paul who said to the Athenians: “What you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you" (Acts 17:23).

While I understand Love's point, he seems to be reaching. I do not understand how you can divorce "the true God" from the concept of the Trinity as revealed in Scriptures. How can Muslims worship the true God, which by Love's definition is only God the Father, while excluding the necessity of also worshiping Jesus and the Holy Spirit? I would certainly affirm that Muslims have a high view of God, but the God that they worship as Allah is not the same as Yahweh who says let us create man in our image. The Trinitarian concept of God must have a seat at the table when dialoguing about whether or not Muslims and Christians truly worship the same God.

"Pinch" Those What?

2008-01-27T22:50:00.000-05:00

About a year ago I heard this audio and laughed hysterically for days. My sister-in-law found the video footage and I couldn't resist posting it. Disclaimer: the video is of a "blooper" from a bible study. It's not inappropriate (in my estimation), but some more conservative folk might not laugh as hard or loud as I did. Consider yourself warned.

Obama on the Gospel

2008-01-27T22:12:00.000-05:00

In a recent interview with Christianity Today Barak Obama makes some comments relevant to how evangelicals should understand his faith and influence on some criticual issues to evangelical Christians. When reading his comments about abortion you would do well to also read Denny Burk's response to what Obama has said.

Here are Obama's comments about gospel.

"I am a devout Christian. I believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I believe that that faith gives me a path to be cleansed of sin and have eternal life. But most importantly, I believe in the example that Jesus set by feeding the hungry and healing the sick and always prioritizing the least of these over the powerful."

What I find most interesting (but not necessarily surprising) is that Obama places a higher priority on the social implications of the gospel than he does the gospel itself. He elevates how the gospel is supposed to be worked out in our lives above the gospel itself. While I certainly do not expect Obama or any other presidential candidate to be a theologian (though we all are to some degree), there is nothing more important than the gospel itself, not even the implications of the gospel to culture. Perhaps it is this understanding that is at the root of how the gospel has failed to shape Obama's political positions on moral issues such as abortion that should be, but clearly are not, informed by the gospel.

Responding to "A Common Word Between Us and You"

2008-01-24T11:51:00.000-05:00

On October 13, 2007, 138 Muslim scholars and clerics sent an open letter to leaders of Christian churches, everywhere. The letter highlights what Muslim clerics say they beleive Christians and Muslims have in common: a Scriptural mandate to love God and love people. In response to this gesture of peace from the Muslim world, 300 Christian leaders signed their name to a letter drafted by scholars at Yale Divinity SChool's Center for Faith and Culture in support of a Christian response to A Common Word Between Us and You. Some of the leaders who signed their name to this letter are Joseph Cumming (Yale Divinity School), Leith Anderson (President, National Association of Evangelicals), Bill Hybels (Pastor, Willow Creek Community Church, Chicago, Illinois), Tony Jones (National Coordinator, Emergent Village), Brian McLaren, Richard Muow (President, Fuller Theological Seminary), Robert Schuller (Founder, Crystal Cathedral), John Stott (All Souls Church, London), and Rick Warren (Pastor, Saddleback Church, California).

John Piper already has an excellent response to this letter. After reading both documents for myself (which you can see here and here) I have a couple of observations, primarily because some well-respected men in evangelical circles have affirmed in writing that they believe that Christians and Muslims can achieve peace by loving God and loving our neighbor as our Scriptures command because they believe that this explicit tenet in both the Bible and Qu'ran are sufficient common ground for peace between Christianity and Islam.

The Christian response says:

"If we can achieve religious(emphasis mine) peace between these two religious communities, peace in the world will clearly be easier to maintain."

A significant problem presents itself immediately:
How is religious peace possible between Muslims and Christians as long as their are significant differences in how each of us view the person of Jesus Christ? The Muslim letter states, "The basis for this peace and understanding already exists. It is part of the very foundational principles of both faiths: love of the One God, and the love of the neighbor. These principles are found over and over again in the sacred texts of Islam and Christianity."

But what about Ephesians 2:13-16? "But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might creae in himself one new man in place of the two, so making pecae, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing hostility."

The second issue is that the sacred texts of Islam also betrays that there can be any real peace between believer and unbeliever. Citing the Qu'ran 9:29: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book (Christian or Jew), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
There is another concerning aspect of this ecumenical olive branch extended between Muslim and Christian leaders. In what way does this document injure the biblical call to evangelize people from all nations, tribes and tongues, including Muslims? The document implies that, from a spiritual perspective, Muslims seeking to live in cultural and social peace with Christians, are okay spiritually. This letter makes dangerous assumptions, such as: Allah and Yahweh are the same (in our understanding of their character); the love of God for man and Himself can be divorced from the person of Jesus Christ, which is implied from the Christian side by this statement: "Our love of GOd springs from and is nourished by God's love for us". Sure it is, but not apart from Jesus Christ (1John 4:8-9.

Will any Muslim who may agree with the spirit of this letter in hopes of achieving worldwide peace (is this really possible apart from Jesus) not take offense at the Christian who signs this document and then proselytizes them? My concern is that this document harms the evangelistic impulse that should drive us to share the gospel with Muslims because it implies that they have no need for a Savior.

I certainly affirm the need for open dialogue between Muslims and Christians. Less open hostility and deliberate efforts to find common ground as a part of the human race is an admirable goal. I also believe that it is imperative that we live to do good to all men, both friends and enemies. As followers of Jesus we should show respect for Muslims and their religious convictions, never becoming belligerent or hateful in our response, always willing to respond with gentleness (as we should all people, regardless of their religious persuasion). However, the greatest good for mankind is found in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and we cannot sincerely seek the good of others and divorce the importance of Jesus from the equation. There can be no peace, not lasting peace, apart from the establishment of God's Kingdom through the reign of the Son of God Jesus Christ. There can be no "religious" peace between Muslims and Christians until there is agreement that there is only one prophet, Jesus.

Erwin on the Declining Membership in the American Church

2008-01-23T16:16:00.000-05:00

Erwin McManus is pastor of Mosaic Church in Los Angeles, Californian and author of books such as The Barbarian Way and The Unstoppable Force. He is also an insightful cultural observer. In a recent interview McManus was asked this question:

"Why do you think so many churches in America are facing declining membership?"

My primary assessment would be because American Christians tend to be incredibly self-indulgent. So they see the church as a place that is there for them to meet their needs and to express faith in a way that is meaningful for them. There is almost no genuine compassion or urgency about serving and reaching people who don’t know Christ.

I think the bottom line is our own spiritual narcissism. There are methods and you can talk about style, structure and music, but in the end it really comes down to your heart and what you care about.

Disclaimer: the use of this quote isn't an endorsement (as McManus can be a controversial figure among more conservative evangelicals), but I do think his insight about what is out of balance in the modern Western church is right. I would add to McManus' thoughts that an individual's role in the church is not only about serving and reaching people who don't know Christ, but also about serving and encouraging those who do.

Private Abortions

2008-01-22T13:36:00.000-05:00

The abortion rate in the US has fallen to its lowest rate since 1974, the first full year after the US Supreme Court legalized abortion as a viable and humane way to murder the unborn and legitimize the rights of women to do whatever they want with their bodies as long as the act has their consent. Interestingly, at the same time, there has been a significant increase in the amount of abortions caused by the abortion pill RU-486. The number of abortions induced by RU-486 has steadily risen by 22% and now accounts for almost 14% of the total abortion caused each year. At the last statistical analysis almost 1 out of every 5 pregnancies ended in abortion.

The rise in popularity of RU-486 since its approval by the FDA is largely due to the fact that women can now avoid both the invasive surgical procedure, as well as the potential for confrontation by zealous pro-life advocates who picket abortion clinics.

RU-486 compliments the strategy of abortion rights advocates because it is yet another way to try to establish the morality and normalcy of abortion. In speaking about the impact of RU-486 Beth Jordan, medical director of the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, said, "The impact and promise is huge. It's going a long way toward normalizing abortion." One of the primary reasons it is serving to "normalize" abortion is that it turns the decision to have an abortion, what is typically a medical procedure, ripe with doctor's visits and waiting room agony, two uncomfortable barriers to the abortion process, into a benign decision that can be made and executed in the privacy of one's own home.

Judi Gilbert, 41, a nurse in Philadelphia, opted for mifepristone in 2005 when she had her second abortion. She had a 3-year-old son and was about to start a new job.

"It was something I could do at home and be with my husband," Gilbert said of taking the pill. "It was a decision we made together alone, and we were able to take care of it this way alone. It was just a much more private affair."

She added: "I wouldn't say it was easy -- it's never easy to terminate a pregnancy. But in the grand scheme of things, it was much more pleasant than a surgical procedure."

This is an appalling sterilization of the atrocities of abortion. While having to go to a doctor for consultation followed by a medical procedure doesn't guarantee that a woman may choose against having an abortion, it at least created an uncomfortable space for the opportunity. Now women can simply drown their child with a capsule and a glass of water.

When Fear Is An Obstacle To Intergenerational Fellowship

2008-01-21T22:22:00.001-05:00

God blessed me with a gracious providential gift today when David and I were visited by Mike Garrett and Dr. Gerald Bray as they returned from an ordination service in Johnson City, TN. Dr. Bray was one of my professors in seminary. He is an Anglican with a brilliant theological mind and charming personality. As we talked we got on the subject of intergenerational fellowship. As an almost 60-year old single male I found his observations about this subject fascinating. One reason for this is that I think we generally assume that the primary obstacle to meaningful intergenerational fellowship is that younger people do not desire or pursue purposeful mentoring relationships with older adults. However, Dr. Bray challenged me to consider that perhaps older men and women are just as fearful of this kind of interaction as younger generations.

One barrier between older and younger generations, Bray observed, is that his generation is the first generation that has been confronted with the reality that younger generations are smarter than his generation. What he meant by this is that my generation (and even those younger than myself) are both - to a large degree - more educated (on average) and more technology-driven and literate than his generation. He believes this has promoted a great deal of anxiety in his generation leaving many older adults left to wonder whether or not they have anything significant to contribute to the life experience of younger generations. While it is certainly true that those who have walked with Jesus for generations do indeed have something to offer, they may not necessarily feel that this is the case.

While I'm not completely certain of what effect if any Dr. Bray's observation has on the lack of quality intergenerational fellowship in many Christian churches, the reality is that the kind of spiritual mentoring relationships described in the book of Titus between older and younger generations are virtually non-existant in many churches. If nothing else, his observation is at the very least something for us to consider as a possible obstacle to meaningful intergenerational relationships.

"Why Go Back To the Founders..."

2008-01-18T16:11:00.000-05:00

Timmy Brister has an excellent response to Frank Page's comments that I posted about yesterday. Brister shows his respect for Frank Page while at the same time pointing out that the resurgence of reformed thinking in the SBC isn't necessarily something to be feared.

Apparently, what Dr. Page does not understand, what the Arbuckle Baptist Association does not understand, what the itinerant evangelists do not understand, is that the movement taking place today is nothing less than a sweeping work of God’s Spirit to revive a passion for the gospel that compels us to believe it passionately, preach it fully, share it faithfully, and defend it lovingly. Young Calvinists in the SBC are not expecting you to agree with Calvinism or be a “five-point Calvinist.” We are not even asking you to go back and appreciate your Baptist history and what God did through the Founders of the SBC. But what we (if I can speak for the younger generation) are asking is to cease misrepresenting the truth and attempting to rewrite history.

You can check out the entire response above.

Getting It RIGHT About Calvinism

2008-01-17T15:14:00.000-05:00

The rhetoric, combatism, and venonmous dialogue about Calvinism and its resurgence among younger Southern Baptists is wearisome. However, though only 10% of Southern Baptist pastors claims to be 5-point Calvinists, there remains growing concern among Southern Baptist leaders (Frank Page Paige Patterson, etc) about the resurgence of Calvinism and its impact on the local SBC congregation. I'm convinced that open dialogue, biblical discussion, and kind-hearted, open-minded conversations would go a long way toward bringing both sides of the debate together.

However building bridges of understanding and cooperation among Jesus-lovers on both sides of the debate will only happen when everyone starts speaking the same language. In other words, understanding will only come when we actually understand and can articulate what each side believes about the issues of election and human responsibility without resorting to caricatures and exaggerated statements about the theological positions of the opposing sides. I also find it increasingly troubling that the conversation about the doctrines of grace continue to be very man-centered. The concern seems to be among many in SBC that we uphold the integrity of human autonomy without giving enough thought to the God-centered nature of salvation.

I found two examples of this in an article in Christianity Today this week.

Example #1: In speaking about the SBC historically...

Long considered more Arminian in orientation—emphasizing an individual's need to respond to the gospel rather than God's election in salvation—the nation's largest Protestant denomination is grappling with doctrines of grace and election amid a seminary-led revival.

While it is true that modern Southern Baptists have not emphasised God's election in salvation, I doubt that even the most sympathetically Arminian Southern Baptist would seek to dismiss God's electing purposes in salvation. If your reject the doctrine of election then you have put yourself outside of a biblical understanding of salvation. They would simply speak of it differently than a Calvnist. They would say that God has elected men and women to salvation based on his foreknowledge of all the future choices of humanity.

But even more troubling is the implication of the above sentence regarding the Calvinists view of human responsibility. Did you catch it? The statement is written suggesting that Calvinists would not emphasize an individual's needs to respond to the gospel. Anyone who would state that an individual's need to respond to the gospel is secondary to God's call of election has misunderstood the intent and tenants of Calvinism. It is clear in Romans 10 that faith comes through hearing, hearing through the word of Christ, and that all who call upon the name of Jesus upon hearing the gospel will be saved. Even the elect must willing respond to the message of Jesus through faith and repentance. No one will be saved without hearing and responding to the gospel. The proclamation of the gospel is the means of God's salvation.

Example #2:From the lips of SBC President Frank Page...

While acknowledging that both sides seek to uphold biblical truth, Page worries that extremists could undermine the SBC's emphasis on outreach. He isn't impressed by arguments that most convention founders embraced Reformed ideas. "The totality of history shows the vast majority of Baptists have not been [Calvinists], so why go back to the founders?" Page said. "I think we need to go back to the Bible."

A biblical Calvinist would shout a hearty "AMEN!" to Page's words, if he means that both sides on this debate should return, not to our traditions, but to Scripture in seeking clarity about how and why any man or woman turns to Jesus Christ in repentance and faith or why we should be motivated to evangelize the nations. But I'm afraid that Page's quote betrays his motive in his statement. He charges Calvinist with running too far to our SBC roots in appealing to the fact that the earliest Southern Baptists were historically Calvinists, while ignoring the fact that for the past 150+ years SOuthern Baptists have NOT been 5-point Calvinists historically. His statement that "we need to go back to the Bible" seems to imply that more recent history is right or more biblical on this issue.

What I find interesting is that most theologians are careful to take this approach with many other theological issues. When confronted with potential heresies, we often look to what the earliest church fathers said about the issue, not what our contemporaries say about it.

If Frank Page means that both Calvinistic and less Calvinistic Southern Baptists should look at what Scriptures says over and above what history and tradition tells us about the doctrines of grace, then I couldn't agree more. But I don't think it is fair to anyone to suggest that simply because Southern Baptists have been less Calvinistic over the past 150+ years that this means that Southern Baptists have been right.

Tim Keller: A Test For Biblical Involvement In The Local Church

2008-01-17T10:08:00.000-05:00

Have you ever wondered what it means to be involved in the local church? Thinking biblically, does attending church weekly, even going the extra-mile by going to Sunday school, constitute true biblical involvement? Furthermore, is passive involvement in church life where we mostly sit, receive information, sing songs, and then leave to embrace the demanding rat-race of life what the Bible has in mind when we are instructed to meet together regularly for the sake of our spiritual health (Hebrews 10:24-25)?

Tim Keller provides us a helpful test to gauge whether or not the depth of our involvement in our local church meets biblical criteria and standards. Keller is the Pastor of Redeemer Church in New York City. I have deep respect for Keller, the way he leads his church, and his gospel-centeredness in his ministry. I recently listened to a sermon by Keller titled “How the Cross Unites Us” from Ephesians 2:11-22. With this simple outline ( A) The Necessity of the Church; B) The Intensity of the Church; C) The Causality of the Church) Keller gives us reason to pause and evaluate what it means to be deeply committed and involved in the local life of the church. The Apostle Paul uses very deliberate metaphors in speaking about the change in our status that takes place through faith in Jesus Christ. The people of God are united in Jesus, the dividing walls of hostility are torn down, and we are called to be fellow citizens, family, and building blocks for the Temple of God as God dwells in us collectively, not simply individually.

For the sake of brevity I encourage you to listen to the linked sermon, but let allow me to highlight the two tests that Keller gives to gauge whether or not we are really involved in the church as we should be, because according to Keller, and I believe he is right, simply attending church regularly isn't enough.

Test #1: Personal Accountability

Keller tells the story about life before he got married. One day after he got married he went to work and after work he decided to stop by the store and pick up something. He arrived home about 30 minutes later than usual and walked in the door and his wife said, “Where were you?” Keller said he suddenly realized, “Oh, I didn’t tell her.” I never had to tell anybody when he was 30 minutes later than usual before. Suddenly he was accountable. Suddenly he realized he had lost control of his life! He wasn’t sure if he liked that, but it was too late then. He was married.

This is what we don’t like. Unless we find our ability to make decisions unilaterally hampered, unless we find that you are no longer an independent person who can kind of make his own decisions, unless that independence starts to go away, you are not involved enough in the church. Hebrews 3:13 tells us to exhort each other daily. How many people in this church know your besetting sins either because you have told them or you spend so much time with them that they can see them? And then, you’ve given them a green light to talk to you about them. You’ve given them a hunting license to come after you. You’ve given the permission to talk to you about them constantly. Are you personally accountable within this body of believers? Are you willing to go to this kind of accountability, you aren’t really invested in this household, you aren’t really the kind of building block that the gospel demands.

Test #2. Corporate spirituality. “As we are built up together, we are a temple of God…” God doesn’t indwell the individual building block, but rather, he indwells the temple. It is together we are inhabited by the Spirit of God. Corporate spirituality means that we are talking to each other about God. We are praying together. We are letting each other see what our relationship with God is really like. We are letting people see our heart toward God.

This is too intimate for most of us. We don’t like to talk at this level. In The Four Loves by CS Lewis he talks about his circle of friends, and some of these friends were pretty famous (Jack, Ronald (JRR Tolkien), and Charles). Charles died and when Charles died, as awful as this is, in some sense, at least I’ll have more of Ronald. He’ll spend more time with Ronald because there is no rival. But what Jack realized (to his shock) is that in losing Charles he did not have more of Ronald but less of him, for in losing Charles he lost the part of Ronald that only Charles could bring out. When Jack realized this he began to think, “If this is true of human beings, if no one human being can bring out all of another person, but it takes a whole circle of human beings (community) to extract the real you, how much more is this true of Jesus Christ?”

“In each of my friends there is something that only some other friend can fully bring out. By myself I am not large enough to call the whole man into activity. I need other lights than my own to show all my friend’s facets. Now that Charles is dead I shall never again see Ronald’s reaction to a specifically Charles joke. Far from having more of Ronald to myself, I now find that Charles is gone I have less of Ronald. In this friendship exhibits a glorious nearness experience to heaven itself, where the great multitude of the blessed, which no man can number, increases the fruition that each has of God. For every soul, seeing him in her own way doubtless communicates that unique vision to all the rest. This is why the seraphim in Isaiah’s vision are crying ‘Holy, holy, holy’ to one another. The more we share the heavenly bread between us, the more we shall have.”

The only way to know God intimately is to know a lot of other Christians intimately. The more Christians you are deeply involved with, the more you have opened your heart to, the more of God you will see.

A Snapshot of the Emerging Church

2008-01-16T09:42:00.001-05:00

PBS takes an objective look at the emerging church.

Oswald Chambers on Hearing God's Voice

2008-01-16T09:01:00.000-05:00

My friend Crystal Bouknight sent this to me because it pertains to the discussion taking place in yesterday's post "Service to the Saints and Beyond". Pay particular attention to what Chambers says keeps us from hearing the voice of God. Where I think this is applicable to the discussion is in the fact that God may be speaking to us and challenging us to serve in particular areas through the means of people, particularly pastors, seeing gifts and abilities in us that we may not see ourselves.

"I heard the voice of the Lord saying, Whom shall I send?" Isaiah 6:8
When we speak of the call of God, we are apt to forget the most important feature, viz., the nature of the One Who calls. There is the call of the sea, the call of the mountains, the call of the great ice barriers, but these calls are only heard by the few. The call is the expression of the nature from which it comes, and we can only record the call if the same nature is in us. The call of God is the expression of God's nature, not of our nature. There are strands of the call of God providentially at work for us which we recognize and no one else does. It is the threading of God's voice to us in some particular matter, and it is no use consulting anyone else about it. We have to keep that profound relationship between our souls and God.

The call of God is not the echo of my nature; my affinities and personal temperament are not considered. As long as I consider my personal temperament and think about what I am fitted for, I shall never hear the call of God. But when I am brought into relationship with God, I am in the condition Isaiah was in. Isaiah's soul was so attuned to God by the tremendous crisis he had gone through that he recorded the call of God to his amazed soul. The majority of us have no ear for anything but ourselves, we cannot hear a thing God says. To be brought into the zone of the call of God is to be profoundly altered.

Service to the Saints and Beyond

2008-01-15T11:12:00.000-05:00

I've been pondering the issue of service, particularly within the body of Christ, for some weeks now. The reason for this is because of the on-going frustration in ministry of struggling to find people willing to serve strategic ministries within the local church. I've got some thoughts and what I hope is a biblical response to how things should be, but before I verbalize them I want to get some feedback from the 3 people that read this blog regularly. So here is your chance to respond to the question below. Let me hear you.

What role, if any, should a person's interest play in their willingness to invest in a particular ministry? For example, a camp is planned for 3rd-5th graders. A recreation director is needed. You don't particularly enjoy 4th grade boys. However, a ministry leader thinks you are a capable, gifted leader and would be a great fit in this area. What role should your lack of interest in this area play in your willingness to serve?

What role, if any, should a person's spiritual gifts play in their willingness to serve in a particular ministry? How many people even know what those gifts are?

How many of you discovered areas of giftedness, not because you discerned these gifts or capabilities on your own, but because others saw their potential in you?

I'd appreciate any feedback the three of you faithful readers are willing to offer (and if there happen to be more of you, please chime in).

Obama's Connection to Farrakhan

2008-01-15T11:01:00.000-05:00

Denny Burk found this interesting article about Barack Obama's religous beliefs, with seems to be fair game considering the heightened interest in GOP candidates Huckabee and Romney's religious roots.

A significant amount of media coverage has focused on the religious beliefs of the Republican candidates for President (especially Romney’s and Huckabee’s). But Richard Cohen turns the spotlight on Democrat Barack Obama’s church in a column in the Washington Post. Here’s the heart of it:

“Barack Obama is a member of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama’s spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright’s daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said “truly epitomized greatness.” That man is Louis Farrakhan.

“Maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan “epitomized greatness.” For most Americans, though, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler — “They helped him get the Third Reich on the road.” His history is a rancid stew of lies. . .

“The rap on Obama is that he is a fog of a man. We know little about him, and, for all my admiration of him, I wonder about his mettle. The New York Times recently reported on Obama’s penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting “present” when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, “present” will not do.“

Ouch!

Why Are Discerning People So Mean?

2008-01-15T10:54:00.000-05:00

Tim Challies has just finished publishing a book about discernment. It's getting rave reviews and I hope to read it. Challies is currently on a blog-tour answering questions about his book. Recently Justin Taylor asked him this question, "As the World’s Most Famous Canadian Reformed Blogger, you seek to practice discernment as you critically engage culture and review books. Having now extensively studied the concept of biblical discernment, I wonder what implications you think this has for “discernment blogging”? In part, I’m thinking of “watchdog” blogs and bloggers that have “discernment” as their primary focus. Speaking generally, what are they doing right, and where do they need correction?"

Here is Challies' insightful response:

One of the questions I was forced to ask as I wrote a book on discernment was this one: “Why are so many discerning people so mean?” If you go looking on the Internet for discernment ministries or discernment blogs, you’ll quickly realize this is exactly the case. There are many people out there who, to borrow a phrase from one of my favorite bloggers, “give discernment a bad name.” Many, and perhaps most, of the people who emphasize discernment do so in a way that seems entirely lacking in grace. You’ll find all kinds of web sites that list all of Christianity’s authors with a list of their supposed flaws and foibles. You’ll find blogs that catalog lists of the offenses of every major Christian author or ministry. And all this is done under the banner of discernment. For the sake of my own sanctification and to ensure that I do not succumb to listening to all manner of gossip and speaking evil of others, I have long since had to cease visiting many of these sites. I suggest that others do the same.

I think there are several reasons that people who emphasize discernment can become so mean. But perhaps the primary one is this: the Bible makes it clear that as Christians we are to focus on the things that are good and lovely and pure and true. When we disobey God in this way and focus constantly on what is evil, it seems clear that we open ourselves to a kind of spiritual oppression. Constantly dealing with matters that are evil will inevitably damage us. As I was studying discernment I continually came across a metaphor which said that people who are being trained to identify counterfeit currency are taught not by being shown stacks of counterfeit money, but by being trained in the defining characteristics of real money. I visited the Bank of Canada (the body in Canada that is responsible for our currency) and found that this is exactly true. When people know what to look for—when they know the marks of genuine money—they rarely have any trouble distinguishing between true and false. And the same is true when it comes to spiritual matters. Rather than constantly looking for examples of a lack of discernment, we should focus on things that will build faith rather than threaten to extinguish it.

So while I appreciate that there are many bloggers and webmasters and others out there who are interested in guarding the church and who value being able to see in the black and white terms so necessary for biblical discernment, I believe we have not properly done our task of discernment until we have spoken the truth in love. Love may be tough, at times, but it must still be present. I think many of these blogs and ministries would do better to model discernment
than to continually show only the end result of their own attempts at discernment.

Would You Go To Church If You Knew You Might Die?

2008-01-14T22:37:00.000-05:00

Since the US-led invasion in 2003 the number of Iraqi Christians has decreased from 1.2 million to approximately 600,000, with many Christians fleeing to bordering countries in search of safety. The US occupation of Iraq has led to increased persecution of the already small minority of Christians in Iraq. This past New Year's Eve seven churches were bombed in a coordinated attack.

But not every Iraqi Christian is fleeing their homeland.

“We have decided to continue to go to church, let them bomb us, we’ve had enough,” said “Daniel” (name withheld for security reason) to AINA. “It’s our country too. If they want to wipe us out, they’ll be able to do it anyway. I will die proud,” he said in defiance of increasing Christian persecution.

I wonder if I value the fellowship of the saints so highly that I would willingly endanger my mortal flesh, as well as the safety of my family, in an effort to seek and savor the grace of Christian community we know as the church? Is this Iraqi Christian crazy, or does he see within the community Jesus purchased with his blood a treasure of greater value than the certainty of a comfortable, safe existence free from danger and uncertainty?

Appears More and More Likely that Evangelicals Have Found Their Man

2008-01-14T17:17:00.000-05:00

Huckabee no longer polarizing the evangelical voting base

McCain Surging, Dobson Speaks Out

2008-01-14T17:11:00.000-05:00

I don't wait with eager anticipation for James Dobson to guide my political and religious convictions, but he is a conservative evangelical and carries a lot of influence. John McCain's campaign is picking up significant steam, while Romney's is in political crisis and Huckabee has seemed to cool. Dobson is staunchly against a MCCain Republican nomination.

Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances," said James Dobson

See You Real Soon

2008-01-14T16:37:00.000-05:00

We made it back from Disney. We had a fantastic time. I remember reading a blog a couple of months ago from a site I frequent and the author talked about how much he loved Disney. I can see why. What a marvelous place for the imagination of both young and old to be energized! The people at Disney were courteous and seemed genuinely eager to serve. The parks were immaculate and ripe with creative ideas and other-worldly encounters. And while a trip to Disney isn't cheap, they go out of their way to make everything convenient, so that, in the end, you get maximum enjoyment out of the trip. I have a few stories I plan to write about, but for now, I'm back and it's good to be home.

Disney

2008-01-07T10:57:00.000-05:00

I'll be leaving today with my family for vacation at Disney World hoping to see an expression similar to this on my daughter's face when she meets Cinderella at the Magic Kingdom. Needless to say, I won't be making any posts this week but hope to have some fantastic pictures to share when I get back. I thank GOd for providing us the resources and opportunity to share this experience with our girls, my parents, my sister and her family, and my in-laws.

Posting will resume on Monday Jan 14. Until then I leave you a few posts below for your thought and meditation.

Mark Dever on Penal Substitution

2008-01-07T10:53:00.000-05:00

What if you're a ruler, known as a good guy, but you don't take action against those people who aren't good guys? What does it mean to say, "I oppose murder," but then refuse to punish murderers? What does it mean to bear responsibility to punish? ...

Christians believe that all such authority is rooted in God himself. ... He alone is able, ultimately and fully, to fulfill this responsibility. But in limited ways it is shared with parents and pastors, with judges and public officials, with bosses, with anyone entrusted with authority.

So what happens when you or I do something bad? Well, if we're children, our parents may punish us for it. If we're adults, well then maybe someone else, maybe the punishment could come from our workplace, or from the sheriff's office.

Of course, this is where our atheist friends may sink into their grim confidence that there is no one to right wrongs or reward rights. Whereas Christians hear echoes of the truth and the expectations that all naturally have of life, the atheist says that they are nothing more than reflections of our own groundless hopes and desires. ... Right and wrong are constructed by a social construct, they would say. They're simply relationships of power, that's how they're talked about today. Moral and immoral are customs that may or may not be enforced. The cash value of atheism on this point is that we can sin and get away with it.

But according to the Bible what is our situation? What is God's responsibility in the face of wrongdoing? Well, it must be great, given who God is. He is more powerful, more knowledgeable, more right than any one authority. He is more able, He is more certain of who and what merits punishment and more certain of what punishment it merits. ...

At the center of the discussion of right and wrong, of punishment and rewards for us stands the cross of Christ, and all that flows from that, our understanding of reconciliation, of atonement, of forgiveness, of restoration.

Christ's accomplishment on the cross is celebrated in a great profusion of images in the New Testament. There, He redeemed those in bondage, He reconciled those alienated, He propitiated God's wrath, He satisfied His justice, there Christ defeated Satan and broke the power of death.

And yet one image among this joyous proliferation is under attack today. ... It's the idea of penal substitution — that is, the idea that the penalty that we deserve God gave to someone else, another who did not deserve it, but who took it voluntarily, for us.

Now this very idea which is at the heart of the Christian message, is one that has been long denounced by non-Christians. For centuries, Christians have defended their message against those that have attacked it at this very point. About a century or two ago, however, these same objections started being raised by liberal Christians. ...

These objections of the idea of Christ making atonement for us as a substitute must be answered. ...

Today there are questions about the whole idea of the retributive justice. In the first place, all punishment should be restorative, people say. It's distasteful for some to have God involved in anything that would be some kind of gross spiritual economics of substitution, one person taking another person's penalty, freeing the first person from their own just deserves. ...

Faustus Socinus, one of the founders of modern-day Unitarianism, in 1578 put forward the objection that the doctrine of Christ being substituted for us, to receive our penalty, would put God in violation of the teaching that we are to forgive those who have wronged us. A kind of divine hypocrisy would ensue.

The Bible, however, disagrees with that. In fact, Paul in the epistle to the Romans stated specifically that God has a right to, and in fact should, and in fact does, act differently than we do in this matter. ... Romans Chapter 12, Verse 19 specifically, where he tells us not to take revenge. ... He tells us not to take revenge, specifically, because he says God will take revenge. So, because God will ensure that justice will be done, we as individuals do not need to take revenge. And then he goes on in Chapter 13 to say that the function of retribution is shared, in small part, with the government, though it's denied to the individual. The individual Christian is called to forgive. ...

Is such substitution alien to the Bible? No. Covenantal substitution was already deep in the story of the Bible. ... This idea of penal substitution is not alien, artificial, foisted-upon-the-Bible concept, but is woven deeply into the narrative of Israel and the whole Bible.

Mini-Me on Regeneration

2008-01-07T10:44:00.001-05:00

You ask why I call Mark Driscoll Mini-Me? Have you seen him? You tell me.

Here is Driscoll on regeneration. Be encouraged by the glorious work of Jesus in the lives of redeemed sinners.

Do Evangelicals Have A Future?

2008-01-07T10:34:00.000-05:00

Christianity Today has an interesting article that asks a pertinent question for our times: "Do Evangelicals Have a Future?". Here is an excerpt from the article:

Consumerism and relativism stand out as dominant cultural trends that seriously threaten the future of evangelical theology. When evangelicals over-contextualize their message in response, they strip the gospel of its transformative power. "To begin with, in our competition to be culturally 'more relevant than thou,' we have often forgotten that 'what you win them with is what you win them to," Jeffrey says. No few problems with discipleship can be traced back to this problem. The Baylor University professor goes on to observe, "Perhaps it is not too much to say that our 'old, old story' has been too frequently overshadowed by the glitzy show-biz media we have tended to use to proclaim it."

Murdered Christian Turks Case Re-Opened

2008-01-04T09:46:00.000-05:00

You may recall the brutal torture and murder of three Christian Turks last year by a handful of Muslim extremists pretending to be sympathetic and open to Christianity. The case was apparently mishandled by the prosecution and the murderers received lesser charges. However, the case has been revisited by the government. This is an important case for Christians in Turkey because it will reveal whether or not Christians are receiving the same liberties and rights as Muslims in the Islamic-led state.

You can read the article in its entirety here.

John Piper on the Prosperity Gospel

2008-01-03T11:25:00.001-05:00

This is an excerpt from John Piper's sermon at University Christian Fellowship in Birmingham, Alabama in 2005.

Get Off My Bus, Joshua

2008-01-01T13:56:00.000-05:00

In Joshua 24:15 Joshua says, "If serving the LORD seems desirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."

Christine Lutz of Texas was reading the Bible out loud to her children on the way to church will riding public transporation and was asked to stop by the bus driver. She refused and was promptly escorted off the bus. The city says the same action would have been taken if she had been reading Moby Dick or reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. I think it is doubtful that had Mrs. Lutz been reading to her children the latest pop culture gossip that she would have been asked to stop reading or lose her seat on the bus. Or if Mrs. Lutz had been reading the Koran to her children I doubt this bus driver would have said a word to her. This is yet another example of how the liberties our Constitution is intended to protect are being violated when the exercise of such liberties in is the name of Jesus. Our government works hard to protect the liberties and free expressions of all kinds of religions, views, opinions except Christianity.

You can read the entire article here.

Christmas Day and My Favorite Memory

2007-12-26T08:07:00.000-05:00

Everyone woke up a little blurry-eyed. Thankfully there wasn't the normal frantic pace of a typical Christmas morning. Once everyone was stirring we sat down and had a delicious breakfast, complete with balloons to signify from the onset that the day was set aside for someone special. Of course Emeline was already geared up to open presents, but I have to admit that she was less insistent that we open them than she could have been.

After breakfast we gathered in the den and began reading the nativity story from the Jesus-Storybook bible, which if you have children, is a must for your library. We then proceeded to read though on story about the life of Jesus. Emeline picked out the parable about the treasure hidden in a field. What an appropriate selection for Christmas morning. We then continued our reading into the events of the crucifixion, Jesus' subsequent death, and then his glorious resurrection. Emeline then sang us a song (an original) about how God made the whole world, everyone should praise him, and Jesus died on the cross so that we can praise God. It was sweet.

Everyone got multiple meaningful and needed gifts (my second favorite might be the pass to the Masters Par 3 in April!; you'll understand my first later), but there is no need to spend much time here because it wasn't the focus of the day.

We sat down for a marvelous dinner and after dinner we had a marbled red velvet birthday cake made in honor of the incarnation of the Son of God. Emeline led us in Happy Birthday. She began the song by changing keys mid-stream. I couldn't help but laugh through most of the song.

What will surely be my most lasting memory from this Christmas followed. Emeline went to get her storybook bible and brought it to the table to read everyone a story out of the bible. She began "reading" at the Garden of Gethsemane, which she calls the "Olive Garden" ("Jesus' favorite place, you know"). She explained how the disciples were tired and went to sleep on Jesus. She then talked about Jesus praying and telling the Father that He didn't want to die. She then descriptively explained the events of Jesus' crucifixion, his agony on the cross, and even his words, "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

She then went on to talk about Jesus' disciples laying him in the tomb where the three women came to wash his body. She said it was "Mary, Madeline (because she didn't get that Mary Magdalene was one person and can't say Magdalene), and because we didn't know the name of the third woman in the picture (who we later discovered was likely a woman named "Joanna"), Emeline named her "Aladia" (her imaginary friend). She detailed the encounter with the angel where the women scramed in fright. She spoke of Jesus' meeting Mary outside the tomb when she mistook him for the gardener. She closed by talking about Mary running to tell Jesus' disciples that he was alive.

Emeline did all this from memory. She can't read, but with book open she shared in detail accounts from each page of her storybook bible. Not only was is quite sweet, but I was amazed at how much of the gospel she has already processed at such a young age. I thank God for making His gospel come alive in her heart and pray eagerly that she will come to embrace it as her only hope for salvation. The seeds have been planted and are beginning to bear fruit. This was my favorite gift this Christmas. Thank you, Jesus, for letting me see your work in my child on the day we celebrate you coming to earth as an infant, wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in weakness and fragility in a manger.

Christmas in North Korea

2007-12-24T10:20:00.000-05:00

There have been many discussions at our church about how to celebrate Jesus this Christmas in a way that puts him on center-stage in our Christmas celebrations. For most of us, however we choose to do this, we will be able to do so gathered around many family and friends, where we can openly celebrate and rejoice in the gift of the incarnation as we eagerly await the final consumation of our salvation through Jesus' return.

However, not all Christians around the world have been given the grace of open fellowship with other believers. There are believed to be tens of thousands of Christian disciples in North Korea. Unfortunately it is illegal for them to openly practice their faith. This sad reality may cause you wonder: how will Christians in North Korea celebrate this Christmas.

An article titled "Lonely Christmas for Christians in North Korea" paints both a bleak, yet surprisingly hopeful view of the length that many North Korean Christians will go to this Christmas to worship their Savior and Lord Jesus Christ. Here is an excerpt:

Simon, whose full name cannot be given for security reasons, explains that believers in North Korea can usually only gather two at a time on a given Sunday. A Christian would sit on a park bench and another Christian would come sit next to him. If no one is around, they may be able to share a Bible verse they know by heart and briefly give a reflection. They also share prayer topics with each other, said Simon.

“Then they leave one another and go and look for Christians in some other part of their town. This continues throughout Sunday,” he said.

A cell group usually has less than 20 Christians who meet and encourage one another this way or meet one-on-one in people’s homes.

In this way, Christmas will also be celebrated.

A Better Prayer Life

2007-12-20T16:56:00.000-05:00

Joe Thorn has a good post about cultivating a better prayer life/. Here is an excerpt:

When it comes to struggling with prayer I often hear things like:

“I don’t know what to say.”
“I run out of things to pray about.”
“My prayers amount to little more than a laundry list of requests.”
“I feel like my prayers just bounce off the ceiling.”
“My praying feels artificial.”

There are a number of things I recommend to people who are learning, or re-learning, to pray. The simplest is the ACTS acronym. Most of you know what it is, but just in case - it is the model of prayer that encourages us to begin with Adoration (praise), and then continue with Confession of our sin, moving on to Thanksgiving for all God is and has done for us, and concludes with Supplication (specific requests for self and others). I like this model, and it typically structures my prayer time even when I am not thinking about it. There are some great books I encourage people to read and use as well. Reading and praying through the Valley of Vision is a great aid to learning to pray more theologically. The Bible and the Closet by Thomas Watson and Samuel Lee was instrumental in altering my prayer life forever. Herman Witsius’ Sacred Dissertations on The Lord’s Prayer should be read by every pastor. But the best advice I can give someone who wants to deepen their prayer life, is typically the most unexpected. I am convinced that one of the best things to help your prayer life is systematic theology.

Calvinism, Prospective SBC Pastors and Search Committees

2007-12-20T11:04:00.000-05:00

This past month there was a conference called Building Bridges was birthed out of the research by Lifeway concerning the resurgence of Reformed theology within Southern Baptist life (though the term "reformed theology is somewhat of a misnomer for most Southern Baptist Calvinists since most are not "reformed" in exactly the sense that the term means). The purpose of the conference was basically to have an open discussion about what Calvinism is and isn't and move the SBC forward in a spirit of cooperation. Here is what the research revealed:

The research portrays what many have imagined to be true. While around 10 percent of rank-and-file Southern Baptist pastors would consider themselves to be five-point Calvinists, a sizeable portion (29 percent) of recent seminary graduates would identify themselves in that particular way. In fact, over 60 percent of graduates of one of our seminaries identify themselves as five-point Calvinists.

SBC leaders who do not consider themselves 5-point Calvinists such as Danny Akin and Paige Patterson are calling for more open dialogue and understanding among Southern Baptists over this issue, which is a good thing in light of some of the more hostile rhetoric towards Calvinists coming from Southern Baptist leaders such as the late Adrian Rogers and Ergun Caner (Liberty University).

One of the primary issues emerging from this resurgence in Calvinistic theology is that some prospective pastors have been less than forthcoming about their theological persuasions during the interview process with the pastor search committee. This has led to unneccessary conflict and even division in some local churches. Paige Patterson says that the solution is for prospective pastors to give full disclosure about their Calvinistic theology during the interview process. While this is good counsel, Tom Ascol points out that this is much easier said than done.

I add a hearty "amen" to his statements. But I also think it is necessary to inject a huge does or realism into the discussion at this point. Many of our Southern Baptist churches have not been very well taught on basic doctrinal issues. It would unkind and unproductive, therefore, for a pastoral candidate to employ theological jargon in a thoughtless way when interviewing with a search committee. Such language can be intimidating to some sincere believers and confusing to others. The goal is genuine understanding. Therefore both love and wisdom dictate speaking plainly and simply about one's doctrinal commitments when in the interview process.

Ascol then offers some helpful advice to prospective pastors whose doctrine has a Calvinistic flavor.

I encourage men to provide the search committee with a confession of faith that represents what the candidate believes. This can be a recognized confession or one that he himself has written. But it ought to be more thorough than brief. Don't try to hide your convictions. To do so is cowardly and dishonest and has no place in Gospel ministry. Try to explain your views in clear, concise language. If "Calvinism" as a term comes up, fine. Define it accurately and address it. If it doesn't come up, don't feel compelled to mention the word as some kind of test of honesty. Just be very clear about your biblical convictions.

However, the burden need not rest solely on the prospective pastor. Ascol wisely calls on search committees and churches to become more theologically aware and educated about the doctrines of grace. Sadly, too many churches and SBC lay persons "think" they know what Calvinism is, when in fact, they do not. My experience has been that many Southern Baptists equate biblical Calvinism with hyper-Calvinism. This had lead to widespread confusion and misunderstanding.

Calvinism, the doctrines of grace, Reformed Theology (insert your favorite description here _____________) is on the rise among young Southern Baptists. It is not an issue that we can, or even needs to be ignored. It is an opportunity for healthy dialogue (not debate). Furthermore, it is an opportunity for the followers of Jesus to search the Scriptures seeking God's wisdom and insight into how and why is it than anyone believes in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Time spent in God's Word is profitable so my encouragement to all lay theologians (and we all are exactly that on some level) is to spend twice as much time in God's Word as you do reading someone else's opinion on that matter. I believe you will find there is great gain in this worthy endeavor.

You can read Tom Ascol's whole post here.

So Long, Jack

2007-12-19T13:44:00.000-05:00

Britain's Office of National Statistics (wouldn't this be a fun place to work) is reporting that the name Mohammed is about to pass the name Jack as the most popular boy's name in the United Kingdom. While England has long been rampantly secular, it appears that the UK is now becoming increasingly Muslim.

Can Faith In The Public Sector Remain Exclusively Private?

2007-12-19T10:03:00.000-05:00

Many of the ideas this country has adopted and (wrongly) interpreted into the Constitution about church and State were shaped and introduced by the brilliant English philosopher John Locke. I discovered a post titled "The Privatization of Christianity on Behalf of America" that does a good job of giving us some insight into Locke's beliefs about the role of the church and the role of the State. Here are some quotes:

Giving a reason for establishing the right boundaries between the functions of the church and the state, Locke defends, “If this be not done, there can be no end put to the controversies that will be always arising between those that have, or at least pretend to have, on the one side a concernment for the interest of men’s souls, and on the other side, a care of the commonwealth.” Hence, it is assumed that the Church’s interests are primarily (if not exclusively) “men’s souls.” The care of the commonwealth is, thereby, placed in the hands of the state. The purpose of which is for “procuring, preserving, and advancing” civil interests, that is, according to Locke, “life, liberty, health, and indolency of body; and the possession of outward things, such as money, lands, houses, furniture, and the like….”

In Locke’s view, the “power of the civil government relates only to men’s civil interests, is confined to the care of the things of this world, and hath nothing to do with the world to come

Interestingly, as this blogger points out, these views sound strangly contemporary as we listen to Republican Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney in his recent speech about the role of his religious views (he is Mormon) and the Presidency.

“Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions,” he pledged. “Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin."

But here is the question: Is this really possible? Can any man who truly believes in his religion with conviction separate the private implications of those beliefs with the public implications?

I can't speak for Mormonism, Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, Islam or any other religious group outside of Christianity because I am Christian and do not embrace any other expression of faith as valid or biblical. But as a Christian I cannot see where Jesus makes any allowance for the privatization of faith for the sake of the greater good within society. I see exactly the opposite. Even a cursory reading of the ministry and message of Jesus will see that Jesus intends for his followers to live for the phyiscal and emotional interests of others, including going so far as commanding his followers to live lives of sacrificial service towards others in humility.

The reality is this: true faith - even faith that I might dismiss as erroneous - does influence our decisions. Romney may state that his church or faith will not influence his presidential decisions, and by this he may mean that he will not allow the Mormon church to strong-arm any political presidential decisions, but make no mistake, Romney's faith values, as well as the faith values of every presidential candidate, will influence the private and public decisions of our next president. If they do not it only reveals that their religious beliefs have been expressed more for political expediency and currency than as true personal convictions.

Abortion and Preemies

2007-12-19T09:57:00.000-05:00

TIME has revealed a study that links abortion to low birth rates and higher risk of premature birth. While the study was unable to conclusively determine if there is a higher risk from medically induced abortions rather than spontaneous abortions ("miscarriages"), there is sufficient evidence revealing that those who have had an abortion may increase the risk of an unhealthy future pregnancy.

Acts 29 Responds to the MBC

2007-12-13T09:33:00.000-05:00

Here is an excerpt from the response by Acts 29 to the motion set forth by the MBC yesterday.

Monday was a day when toddling church planters were left out in the icy cold. Justice was not served. On January 1, several church planters in Missouri will lose their promised funding, not because they were guilty of breaking a rule, but because they were associated with a small church planting network (only 9 churches in Missouri are affiliated with Acts 29 Network).

Acts 29 Network and the Southern Baptists share the same mission: to seek and to save the lost; to go into all of the world and share the gospel of Jesus and to baptize and teach the believers through the local church. For this reason, we love the SBC, have appreciated our partnerships throughout the country and are now mourning the loss of our fellowship with the MSBC. Since Acts 29 Network has never been contacted by the Missouri SBC to seek reconciliation, clarity and understanding, I am requesting justice and not retribution as an honorable response to an abstinence policy that we fully respect. I am asking you to consider reversing the vote to read, “We reaffirm the policy of the Missouri Southern Baptists to abstain from alcohol and will remove any funding from church planters who disavow this position. ”That way the baby church doesn’t get thrown out with the fermented bathwater.

You can read this thoughtful response in its entirety here

Piper on Acts 16:14

2007-12-12T15:25:00.000-05:00

Desiring God has posted an excellent meditation on Acts 16:14 by John Piper. Since the link on the site isn't working for this post I've copied it in its entirety. I hope you are encouraged.

A Meditation on Acts 16:14

December 12, 2007
By John Piper

Everywhere Paul preached some believed and some did not. How are we to understand why some of those who are “dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1, 5) believed and some did not?

The answer why some did not believe is that they “thrust it aside” (Acts 13:46) because the message of the gospel was “folly to them, and they [were] not able to understand” (1 Corinthians 2:14). The mind of the flesh “is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot” (Romans 8:7). Those who hear and reject the gospel “hate the light” and do not come to the light lest their deeds should be exposed (John 3:20). They remain “darkened in their understanding . . . because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart” (Ephesians 4:18). It is a guilty ignorance. The truth is available. But “by their unrighteousness they suppress the truth” (Romans 1:18).

But why then do some believe, since all are in this condition of rebellious hardness of heart, dead in our trespasses? The book of Acts gives the answer in at least three different ways. One is that they are appointed to believe. When Paul preached in Antioch of Pisidia, the Gentiles rejoiced and “as many as were appointed to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48).

Another way of answering why some believe is that God granted repentance. When the saints in Jerusalem heard that Gentiles were responding to the gospel and not just Jews, they said, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life” (Acts 11:18).

But the clearest answer in Acts to the question why a person believes the gospel is that God opens the heart. Lydia is the best example. Why did she believe? Acts 16:14 says, “The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” Notice four aspects of this conversion.

1) “. . . what was said by Paul.” First, someone must speak the gospel. God does not open the eyes of the heart to see nothing. He opens them to see the glory of Christ in the truth of the gospel (2 Corinthians 4:4-6). Therefore, we must speak the gospel. We don’t make the new birth happen when we do. But we fit into God’s way of doing it. The point of the new birth is to grant spiritual sight. The point of speaking the gospel is give something to see. New birth is for the glory of Christ. Therefore, God causes it to happen when Christ is lifted up.

2) “The Lord . . .” Second, the speaker of the gospel relies upon the Lord. Prayer is not mentioned here. But that is what we do when we realize that it is the Lord who is the decisive actor, not us. We have a significant role in speaking the gospel, but it is the Lord himself who does the decisive work.

3) “. . . opened her heart . . .” Since the key problem in not believing the gospel is the hardness or the closedness of the heart, this is where the Lord does his decisive work. He “opens the heart” of Lydia. This means he takes out the heart of stone, and puts in the heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26); he says with sovereign authority, “Let there be light,” and “shines in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 4:6). So the darkness flies away and the light of truth reveals the irresistible beauty of Christ in the gospel.

4) “. . . to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” The effect of the Lord’s opening her heart is a true spiritual hearing of the gospel. “Pay attention to” is a weak translation of the Greek prosechein. It is stronger than that in this content. In this verse, it is a hearing with attachment. The work of the Lord does not just help her focus. It brings about faith. She was “granted repentance” (2 Timothy 2:25) and faith (Philippians 1:29).

Or, in the terms of John 6, she was given by the Father to the Son (v. 37), and was drawn by the Father to the Son (v. 44), and was granted by the Father to come to the Son (v. 65). She was “made alive” (Ephesians 2:5) and born again (John 3:3, 7).

Would you pray with me in these weighty and wonderful days at Bethlehem that God would do this for hundreds of people in our services? I have heard of three conversions in the last week. Mercy drops around us are falling, but for the showers we plead.

The Missouri Baptist Convention Executive Committee Should Repent

2007-12-12T10:26:00.000-05:00

Yesterday the Missouri Baptist Convention Executive Committee passed a motion establishing a "no partnership rule" with the Acts 29 Network (a church planting network established by Pastor Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill Church in Seattle). The motion reads as follows:

Effective Jan 1, The Acts 29 Network is an organization which the MBC Exec Bd. Staff will not be working with, supporting, or endorsing in any manner at anytime.

The motion was then amended with the following statement:

While recognizing the autonomous nature of all areas of MBC life beyond that of the Executive Board Staff, the MBC Executive Board directs the Church Planting Department and other ministry departments to not provide CP dollars toward those affiliated with the Acts 29 Network.

What does this mean? SBC church plants affiliated with the Acts 29 network in Missouri will not receive Cooperative Program dollars.

While there has yet to be an official documented public statement was to why this motion was passed, it would be logical to conclude that it comes as a result, at least in part, of the position of the Acts 29 Network and leadership (particularly Mark Driscoll) on alcohol (you can view their statement on alcohol here). The reason this is a logical assumption has to do with the recent history in the ongoing debate between the MBC and a church called The Journey, which leads a church-sponsored discussion called "Theology at the Bottleworks" at a local pub. The Journey Church is an Acts 29 Network church plant pastored by Darrin Patrick.

Why am I calling for the MBC Executive Committee to repent? The reason is that irregardless of your views of the social, casual consumption of alcohol in moderation for believers in the Lord Jesus (both libertarians and abstainers agree that drunkenness is a sin), the MBC Executive Committee has established boundaries for fellowship that exceed and violate the commands of Scripture. Romans 14 & 15 make it crystal clear that anyone who judges (condemns) another brother in these matters of Christian liberty has done so in violation of God's Word. No one has the right to declare unclean (in itself) what God has made clean in the Lrod Jesus (14:14).

There many compelling and biblical reasons to abstain from the consumption of alcohol within our culture. But the bottom line is that this is a matter of liberty and conscious between our God who judges and the individual believer. A person's view of alcohol should not be the litmus test for cooperation and unity in the gospel.

If you want to read more in response to this issue check out the following links:
Background on the issue
Tom Ascol
Scott Lamb

My Smart Daughter

2007-12-06T23:08:00.000-05:00

Tonight Emeline was screaming in the car. Cameron joined the chorus. I told Emeline to stop screaming. About 3 minutes later she screamed again (all in an effort to get Cameron to scream). I told her that she would get disciplined when we got home.

After 5 minutes of silence Emeline said, "Daddy."

"Yes, Emeline," I said.

"My bottom hurts."

"Why does your bottom hurt?" I asked.

"Because."

"Because why?"

"'Cause I'm sinning."

Just the anticipation of wrath brings a burning sensation to my daughters bum.

Ben Stein Takes On Darwin

2007-12-06T14:51:00.001-05:00

Prince Caspian Trailer

2007-12-05T10:32:00.000-05:00

You can find the new Prince Caspian trailer here

What Would Jesus Buy

2007-12-05T10:25:00.000-05:00

Modern Parables

2007-12-03T16:03:00.000-05:00

We are an image-driven, visually-stimulated world. Much of how we communicate today is dictated by the medium of technology. Compass Cinema has cast a new vision for the telling of some of Scriptures most famous parables. They look interesting, though the trailers do not give any indication of how faithful the telling of these parables as they flash on our high-definition flat screen televisions will be to Scripture. Here is hoping that they are a faithful rendition of the meaning of the parables. Check out a couple of trailers belows.

Evangelical Virgins Tasting Forbidden Fruit

2007-11-30T11:31:00.000-05:00

Paul's instruction in 1Thessalonians 4:3-8 seized my attention the other day. Paul writes:

"For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God; that no one transgress or wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we told you beforehand and solemnly warned you. For God has not called us to impurity, but in holiness. Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but GOd, who gives his Holy Spirit to you."

Young evangelicals are faced with a significant challenge in our sexually charged culture. Maintaining sexually purity of mind and body in today's world is like trying to scale the heights of Mount Everest. It takes discipline, courage, singlemindedness and determination. The footholds leading to safety are often difficult to navigate. One reason for this is that sexual imagery and conversation are pervasive in our world. An random moment of channel surfing can quickly (and rather innocently) turn into a Beyonce peep-show (who boasts to where the name of Jesus while often wearing little else).

What I found even more compelling and frightening about Paul's instruction is that not only are to fight for personal purity, but we are to fight for the purity of others. When we give into impurity, it may initially reveal itself privately through mental fantasies, internet chat rooms, sexually-charged movies, and perhaps (sadly)even pornography, but eventually these means of sexual exploration will energize a restlessness that desires to express itself toward the opposite sex (which it naturally should). Here is the warning in Paul's instruction: Your purity is important; but equally important is that you do not lead others into sexual deviance or impurity.

I came across an interesting article about a book called Forbidden Fruit written by Mark Regnerus which reveals that evangelical teens are actually more likely to be sexually active than mainline Protestants and Catholics. However, to be fair, Regnerus' research reveals that one reason for this is that evangelical is a broad term, and that those evangelical teens that consider themselves serious about their faith are far less likely to become sexually active before marriage.

But for the sake of discussion and to provoke thought, check out some quotes from the article below revealed from Regnerus' book.

Teenagers who identify as "evangelical" or "born again" are highly likely to sound like the girl at the bar; 80 percent think sex should be saved for marriage. But thinking is not the same as doing. Evangelical teens are actually more likely to have lost their virginity than either mainline Protestants or Catholics. They tend to lose their virginity at a slightly younger age—16.3, compared with 16.7 for the other two faiths. And they are much more likely to have had three or more sexual partners by age 17: Regnerus reports that 13.7 percent of evangelicals have, compared with 8.9 percent for mainline Protestants.

Who are these evangelicals? They are clearly nominal believers.

How is that possible? What happened to all those happy, young Christian couples from the '90s swearing that True Love Waits? Partly, the problem lies in the definition of evangelical. Because of the explosion of megachurches, vast numbers of people who don't identify with mainstream denominations now call themselves evangelical. The demographic includes more teenagers of a lower socioeconomic class, who are more likely to have had sex at a younger age. It also includes African-American Protestant teenagers, who are vastly more likely to be sexually active.

But partly the problem lies in the temptation-rich life of an average American teenager. The fate of the True Love Waits movement, which began with the Southern Baptist Convention in the '90s, is a perfect example. Teenagers who signed the abstinence pledge belong to a subgroup of highly motivated virgins. But even they succumb. Follow-up surveys show that at best, pledges delayed premarital sex by 18 months—a success by statistical standards but a disaster for Southern Baptist pastors.

For evangelicals, sex is a "symbolic boundary" marking a good Christian from a bad one, but in reality, the kids are always "sneaking across enemy lines," Regnerus argues.

Do the "serious" Christians teens fare any better?

Among the mass of typically promiscuous teenagers in the book, one group stands out: the 16 percent of American teens who describe religion as "extremely important" in their lives. When these guys pledge, they mean it. One study found that the pledge works better if not everyone in school takes it. The ideal conditions are a group of pledgers who form a self-conscious minority that perceives itself as special, even embattled.

I recently spent a year among some evangelical teenagers who belong to this elite minority, and I can attest to the inhuman discipline they exert over their hormones. They can spend all evening sitting on the couch holding hands and nothing more. They can date for a year, be alone numerous times in a car or at the movies, and still stick to what's known in the Christian youth literature as "side hugs," to avoid excessive touching.

But Regnerus makes a very interesting observation about the resolve of these Christian teenagers, particularly the males. They may be less likely to give into sexual pressure, but they aren't getting any help from their Christian female counterparts:

Muslims have it easy compared to them [evangelicals]. At least in Saudi Arabia the women are all covered up, so there's nothing to be tempted by. But among this elite corps of evangelicals, the women are breezing around in what one girl I know called "shockingly slutty conservative outfits" while the men hold their tongues

You can check out the article in its entirety here.

Scary Words From Evangelicals

2007-11-30T11:08:00.000-05:00

“How then have we come to believe that at the cross this God of love suddenly decides to vent his anger and wrath on his own son? The fact is that the cross isn’t a form of cosmic child abuse — a vengeful father punishing his son for an offense he has not even committed. Understandably, both people inside and outside of the church have found this twisted version of events morally dubious and a huge barrier to faith." Steve Chalke

“What I think I can say is, and this is where I get into trouble, I’m not so sure that when this life is over that all possibilities for salvation are over.”
Tony Campolo

“It is possible for someone who does not know Jesus to be saved.”
Dallas Willard

“For too many people the name Jesus has become a symbol of exclusion, as if Jesus statement ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me’ actually means, ‘I am in the way of people seeking truth and life. I wont let anyone get to God unless he comes through me.’”
Brian McLaren

“Could you elaborate on your personal theory of atonement? If God wanted to forgive us, why didn’t he just forgive us? Why did torturing Jesus make things better?”
Question addressed to Brian McLaren on his website (answered below)

“This is such an important and difficult question. I’d recommend, for starters, you read “Recovering the Scandal of the Cross” (by Baker and Green). There will be a sequel to this book in the next year or so, and I’ve contributed a chapter to it. Short answer: I think the gospel is a many faceted diamond, and atonement is only one facet, and legal models of atonement (which predominate in western Christianity) are only one small portion of that one facet. Dallas Willard also addresses this issue in ‘The Divine Conspiracy.’ Atonement-centered understandings of the gospel, he says, create vampire Christians who want Jesus for his blood and little else. He calls us to move beyond a ‘gospel of sin management’ — to the gospel of the kingdom of God. So, rather than focusing on an alternative theory of atonement, I’d suggest we ponder the meaning and mission of the kingdom of God.”
Brian McLaren’s answer to the above question

Younger evangelicals disenchanted with the institution of the church and seeking refuge in the "conversation" of the emerging movement would do well to heed the words of Francis Shaeffer:

“If we do not make clear by word and by practice our position for truth and against false doctrine we are building a wall between the next generation and the gospel.”

I'm concerned that some biblically orthodox evangelicals are too easily dismissing the influence of the emergent conversation. While there may be some redeeming elements to the movement, the reality is that the leadership of this movement, as demonstrated above, is moving far from the center of what have been historic orthodox beliefs. We cannot ignore the influence that the emerging church is having on Western Christianity. Perhaps that quotations from above will heighten our awareness of the battle brewing for orthodoxy within the Church.

One Local Church / One Global Mission

2007-11-27T10:50:00.000-05:00

The holidays tend to "bog" down progress in the blog world, so I apologize for the lengthy absence.

As our church begins to think more intentionally and move more purposefully towards adopting and unreached people group, I think the elephant in the room is always, "What kind of difference can one local church make? Isn't this what is so great about the Cooperative Program, bringing our resources together to make a bigger kingdom splash on the global front?"

I find this article about Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, TN. To be sure, Bellevue isn't your typical local church. It has over 30,000 members. Nonetheless, it is an example of how one local congregation can make a difference in the lives of people on the other side of the world. Check out the whole article (as a side note, BBC gives 1/4 of its annual $22 million budget to missions)

The Warmth of Prayer

2007-11-13T11:16:00.000-05:00

This past Sunday was International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church. I came across this eery, yet fantastic true account of how one man's life was spared by the power of prayer.

Mark Driscoll: A Confession of Pride

2007-11-09T14:37:00.000-05:00

Justin Taylor posted this already but it is well worth the server space to post it here again. It is an excerpt from a sermon by Mark Driscoll on humility.

I believe that humility is the great omission and failure in my eleven years of preaching. I believe that this is my greatest oversight both in my example and in my instruction.

I therefore do not claim to be humble. I do not claim to have been humble. I am convicted of my pride, and I am a man who is by God’s grace pursuing humility.

So in many ways this is a sermon that I’m preaching at myself, this is a sermon you are welcomed to listen in on as I preach to myself.

But I truly believe that were there one thing I could do over in the history of Mars Hill it would be in my attitude and in my actions and in my words to not only emphasize sound doctrine, encourage in strength and commitment and conviction but, to add in addition to that, humility as a virtue.

And so I’ll start by asking your forgiveness and sincerely acknowledging that this has been a great failure.

And I believe that it is showing up in our church in the lives of men and women who have sound doctrine but not sound attitude. They may contend for good things but their motives are bad and their methods are bad and their tone is bad and their tactics are bad and their actions are bad because their attitudes are bad even though their objective is sometimes good. I see this in particular with the men. I see this with men young and old, men who have known Jesus for a long time and should know better, and men who are new to Jesus and are learning sometimes the hard way.

I will take some responsibility for this. Luke 6:40 says that when fully trained, disciples are like their teacher, and I am primary teaching pastor of this church and I can’t simply look at the pride in some of our people and say that I am in no way responsible or complicit.

I’m a guy who is pretty busted up over this personally and it really came to my attention last December just in time for Christmas. The critics really brought me a lot of kind gifts of opposition and hatred and animosity. Merry Christmas. And some of those most vocal and nasty critics were Christians – some of them prominent Christians. So I was getting ready to fire back (my usual tactics). They hit you, you hit them twice and then blog about your victory. Which I don’t have any verses for and don’t say it was a good idea. But it had been a pattern in my life until a man named C.J. Mahaney called.

I’d always considered humility to be cowardice and a compromise. In the name of humility you give up biblical conviction and passion and the willingness to contend for the faith (Jude 3) and to fight false teaching. What he was describing was orthodoxy in belief and humility in attitude and that those two together are really what God desires. And so it got me thinking and studying and praying through pride and humility and repenting and learning and growing. So I would start by saying that I thank my dear friend C.J. Mahaney for his ongoing friendship and the kindness he has extended to me and the things I’ve been able to learn through his instruction.

Furthermore, I apologize and repent publicly to you, the church for whom I am responsible, for much pride in the history of my ministry that some of you have poorly imitated and for that I am deeply sorry.

And thirdly, to say that I’m not a humble man but as result of study I’m a man who is acknowledging his pride and pursuing humility by God’s grace.
-- Mark Driscoll, sermon on Philippians 2:1-11 (November 4, 2007), part 5 in The Rebel's Guide to Joy in Humility (3:16-8:40)

Electability Trumping Values

2007-11-07T10:00:00.000-05:00

The reports this morning that Pat Robertson will endorse Rudy Guiliani for the Republican nominatino for President is frustrating (to put it mildly). Here we see a clear-cut example of a conservative endorsing a candidate based on their perceived electability rather than their moral and social values. Rudy Guiliani may be a tough, no-nonsense politician who is fit to deal with issues related to our national security and terrorism, but he is no conservative. His promise to appoint strict constitutionalists in the mold of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to our judicial benches must be considered in light of Guiliani's infidelity in his own personal life. If he has been unable to remain faithful and honest to the promises made to those closes to him, why should we expect that he would honor promises made to the American public at-large once in office. I have a hard time understanding why evangelicals endorsing Guiliani are so easily dismissing his lack of integrity in his private life. Why is it so hard for Republicans to see that if the voting base would rally behind a conservative candidate such as Mike Huckabee or Ron Paul (whom I don't know enough about so that isn't an endorsement) or even Fred Thompson, that he would instantly become "electable". Our fear of a Clinton presidency is eroding the principles the Republican party has embraced because of our willingness to embrace a socially liberal, morally misguided candidate. Guiliani is polarizing the voting base in the Republican party and this will likely result in handing over the office to the very person Republicans are trying to keep it away from.

One a side note, Mike Huckabee's campaign faced a serious blow when Sam Brownback endorsed John McCain this morning.

Lies and Illusions that Destroy the Church

2007-11-06T13:46:00.000-05:00

While in the middle of doing some research and study in preparation for a talk at UTC this week I came across a really good article in Christianity Today about the kinds of spirituality that Eugene Petersen believes is destroying the church. I encourage anyone with any interest in church and culture to take the time to read the article. Here's a quote:

When you start tailoring the gospel to the culture, whether it's a youth culture, a generation culture or any other kind of culture, you have taken the guts out of the gospel. The gospel of Jesus Christ is not the kingdom of this world. It's a different kingdom...

I think relevance is a crock. I don't think people care a whole lot about what kind of music you have or how you shape the service. They want a place where God is taken seriously, where they're taken seriously, where there is no manipulation of their emotions or their consumer needs.

One of the reasons I think a church like Mars Hill in Seattle (pastored by Mark Driscoll) is thriving is because they are very serious about the gospel while not capitulating too much to culture. There is no question that there is a great deal of contextualization that is associated with Mars Hill Church, but it appears this is never at the expense of the gospel (2Cor 5:21). This is where many emerging / emergent and contemporary churches lose their way. They tailor the gospel to culture in unhealthy degrees and, in effect, neuter the gospel of its power.

Prince Caspian

2007-11-05T12:04:00.000-05:00

Here is a sneak peek of the next movie from C.S. Lewis' classic series The Chronicles of Narnia

What Compels Muslims To Turn To Jesus?

2007-10-30T16:12:00.000-05:00

This is an important question primarily for two reasons: (1) Islam is statistically the fastest growing religion in the world; (2) There is a surging Islamic-fascists presences in the world that seeks the destruction of Western culture, a culture which many Muslims believe is "Christian". It is this second reason that provokes fear in the hearts of many people in the world because we don't know how to appropriately respond to the acts of violence committed by radical Muslims against Westerners and Western interests all over the world. Furthermore, most of us don't even understand what motivates such extremism and hatred for Westerners, but particularly Americans. This raises an interesting problem for the church in America because the gospel is meant to be extended to all nations - including Islam-dominated nations - and including those Muslims who would take great pleasure in killing you. If the gospel is going to be brought to Muslims, what are the means that God is going to use to bring them to faith in Jesus (besides the obvious means of the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit)? An article in Christianity Today answers these questions. You can read the entire article here, but you'll find a summary of what has compelled Muslims to turn to Jesus, even in the face of persecution, below.

1. The lifestyle of Christians, including an ethic of love and the rejection of violence.
2. The power of God in answered prayers and healings.
3. Deliverance from demonic power.
4. Dissatisfaction with the type of Islam they had experienced as Muslims.
5. The gospel message, especially its emphasis on assurance and forgiveness.
6. The spiritual truth in the Bible.
7. Love expressed through the life and teachings of Jesus.

Culture Says: Hypocrisy = Judgmental

2007-10-23T13:50:00.000-05:00

David Kinnaman, president of the Barna Research Group, a Christian think-tank, recently published a book called Unchristian: What A New Generation Really Thinks About Christianity. The book, based on a survery of 867 participants, 440 who were not Christians, discovered that a significant majority viewed Christianity as anti-gay and hypocritical among other things. 87% felt Christianity was judgmental, 85% believed it was hypocritical, and 75% believed that Christians were too involved in politics.

In an article from a local newspaper at Lousiana State University in Baton Rouge, one student, Emily Territo (a sophomore biology major) said:

... she has an issue with the amount of judgment that seems to come with the faith.

"I do find that there are hypocrisies in the church," she said. "They say judge not, but then they judge you."

Here is what I find interesting about this quote. This student, and many others like her, equate hypocrisy with judging. In many cases I've found that non-Christians complaints about the hypocrisy in the church has very little to do with lack of purity in the church and everything to do with lack of acceptance of an individuals sinful lifestyle. Isn't this the primary complaint of the homosexual community in regards to conservative evangelical churches? I challenge you to find one example of where a church or Christian community has been labeled hypocritical by the homosexual community (or any individual or community of individuals who flaunt their depravity as a badge) because the church itself is impure or immoral. Generally the church's character is attacked on the basis of lack of acceptance by the deviant community, not lack of purity.

Let me be clear about this: this isn't to say that the church isn't hypocritical at times because of impurity and sinful indulgences. The visible and invisible church of Jesus is a church full of hypocrites precisely because it is a group of redeemed sinners. In this sense, all followers of Jesus are hypocrites because none of us are without sin and yet we are called to pursue holiness. But it is more theologically appropriate for us to realize that true followers of Jesus are saints who sometimes sin and shouldn't pursue a lifestyle of sin that would appropriately earn us the label hypocrites.

Getting back to Ms. Territo's complaint, her issue isn't with the fact that Christians preach holiness and then deliberately live as antagonists and enemies of the very message proclaimed (isn't this the true nature of hypocrisy?) Her complaint is that Christians speak against immorality and then place demands on people for acceptance into Christian fellowship (i.e., the church). I'd like to ask Ms. Territo, "How is this different than what Jesus demanded from people in the New Testament?" Mark tells us precisely this in his gospel:

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent and believe in the gospel." (Mark 1:14-15)

Under Ms. Territo's definition, Jesus then, is a hypocrite, because he is violating her understanding of what Jesus meant in Matthew 7 when he teaches us not to judge others. By calling people to repentance (change in lifestyle), Jesus is excluding all who say they desire to love and follow Jesus but aren't willing to lay aside their love for sin first.

Huckabee's Bid For The Christian Right

2007-10-23T07:36:00.001-05:00

This is a good article by Time Magazine about Mike Huckabee's bid for the Christian right. Yesterday Sandy posted that Huckabee's candidacy will be in serious financial dire straights soon even if he fares well in Iowa and she is right. Hopefully his campaign will gain some traction soon. One thing that Huckabee is undeniabely right about is the need for Republicans to vote according to their conscience and values, not according to whom they think can defeat Sen. Hillary Clinton.

"Don't ever let expediency or electability replace our principles," Huckabee urged the crowd.

Jonathan Alter (Newsweek) has also written a compelling article about why Huckabee might be the best choice for the Republicans.

For me it really comes down to this: As Christians, should we support the candidate that will best represent and fight for the cause of justice and morality in our country and culture, or should we support the candidate that we think can beat Clinton? The current political landscape and front-runners in the GOP reveal that most Republicans don't really believe we can have both in 2008.

Guiliani Capitalizing On Fear, Insecurity At The Expense Of Life

2007-10-22T10:27:00.001-05:00

Political and evangelical conservatives are faced with a difficult choice this fall. The candidate that most evangelicals find most attractive is stuck in the quagmire of a campaign that can't seem to gain any momentum or traction (Mike Huckabee), largely because he doesn't have the deep financial pockets of Rudy Guiliani or Mitt Romney. Evangelicals can't seem to get over over at least two issues with Romney: (1) He is Mormon. Mormonism is a cult. There no way of getting around it. However, does one have to be Christian to be a good leader? (2) Romney historically supported both gay marriage and abortion rights. He says he's changed. Can we believe him? Fred Thompson entered the race too late and doesn't appear to have anything of any substance to say. The GOP candidates have done an excellent job marginalizing Thompson and his candidacy. John McCain is a candidate that some conservatives think needs to be reevaluated. However, McCain isn't without his flaws, one of which is his lack of desire to actually see Roe vs. Wade overturned. While McCain is pro-life, he ultimately sees no benefit to striking down the abortion laws in this country, though he affirms that he would like to see a day when Roe vs. Wade is deemed "irrelevant". This leaves us with Rudy Guiliani, the current GOP front-runner, in spite of the fact that his views on gun control, abortion, and gay rights are antithetical to the strong evangelical voting base whose support Guiliani will need to get elected to the presidency. This fact has everything to do with Guiliani's appeal to conservatives at the Values Voter Summit in Washington recently.

What has become clear to me is that Guiliani is the GOP front-runner because he appears to be strong on the issues of national security and terrorism. I say that he appears to be because this is really nothing more than a mirage. There is no question that Guiliani led boldly and courageously in the aftermath of 9/11. However, he was the impetus behind very little as it related to national security and terrorism in the years that have followed these horrific events. Guiliani led the implementation of a host of security procedures and protocols in New York City. However, this is no indication of his ability to do the same thing when it comes to foreign policy and the delicate issues associated with terrorism, national security and the rights of both citizens and aliens in our counrty and abroad.

Now what we have are Republicans seriously considering tossing aside years of labor to establish the Republican party as the party of life and values in our country by throwing support behind a candidate that may or may not have the best chance to defeat Sen. Hillary Clinton in the national election. One of the few differences between Guiliani and Clinton is the fact that Guiliani states that he will appoint strict constitutionalists to our benches, most importantly, to the Supreme Court, even though in so doing he will violate his personal beliefs about issues related to gun control, abortion and gay rights. Are we really so naive that we should believe that Guiliani will really do this when he couldn't even remain faithful to not one, but two spouses? I believe it was FDR who stated that the personal morality of the President will influence his public policy. This is something we cannot ignore.

If Guiliani wins the Republican nomination we as Americans, but more specifically as conservatives, will be demonstrating that we love and value our own personal comfort and security more than we value the comfort and security of unborn children. Read that sentence again slowly because I believe it is an accurate indictment of what is happening politically within the Republican party. The only two issues that give Guiliani's campaign any traction are national security and terrorism, even while he openly defies and rejects the conservative position of evangelicals and conservatives and many other important social issues. Are we willing to compromise those things that have defined the Republican party for twenty plus years simply because it seems more likely that Guiliani can defeat Clinton? Do we love our comfort so much that we would compromise the right to life of our children to preserve it? Are we so fearful of what might happen that we are willing to sabotage the future of the unborn to secure a false sense of security when the reality is that no President or administration can guarantee our safety long-term? The truth is that if conservatives would mobilize behind another GOP candidate like Mike Huckabee, you may discover that he has just as much a chance of defeating Clinton, a candidate that 45% of Americans say that they will not support under any circumstances, as we think Guiliani does.

Why Wayne Grudem Thinks Evangelicals Should Support Mitt Romney

2007-10-18T21:12:00.000-05:00

Wayne Grudem, a staunchly conservative evangelical Christian whom I have deep respect and admiration for, believes that evangelicals should cast their support towards Mitt Romney. I must admit that I am troubled about who to support in the upcoming Republican primaries. I find Mike Huckabee to be the candidate I am most sympathetic towards, but he isn't electable (at least not yet). Realistically, only Rudy Guiliani, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Fred Thompson have a viable shot at the Republican nomination (unless evangelicals decide to support Ron Paul or Mike Huckabee in mass). I found Grudem's argument persuasive and thought-provoking, so much so that I intend to spend some more time researching Romney. Maybe Romney is the only front-running Republican candidate who shares the morality and values conservatives have fought to hard to make a bench-mark of the national Republical party, and perhaps he is be the only pro-life candidate who likely stands a chance against the Democratic nominee (likely Hillary Clinton).

Check out Grudem's argument here.

As persuasive as Grudem's argument may be, I'm not convinced entirely that he is right. I think that conservatives and evangelicals are drawn to Romney, not because he is the best candidate, but because he seems to be the most electable candidate not named Guiliani.

Planned Parenthood's Masquerade

2007-10-18T15:58:00.000-05:00

In doing some research about vaccinations and aborted fetal tissue I came across the following from Planned Parenthood in Amarillo, Texas.

A woman's choice to donate to medical research tissue that she has aborted begins and ends with her. Federal and state laws have been specifically written to ensure that her choice to donate tissue from her abortion to medical research is made in an informed and ethical manner. First, she is legally required to give her written consent to have an abortion. Only after she has consented to have an abortion can she provide the necessary written consent to donate the fetal tissue. She cannot be paid for the donation. She cannot know or designate the recipient (USCA, 1988; USCA, 1993).

Knowing she can donate her aborted fetus to potentially lifesaving medical research may help a woman turn an unintended pregnancy about which she may feel a sense of loss into a social good. The choice to donate fetal tissue often gives solace to women who may need to end their pregnancies (Anderson et al., 1994; Martin, 1993).

Why would women feel a sense of loss if they are doing nothing more than removing "tissue" from their uterus, in the same way that one might remove an unwanted or "unintended" mole? The semantics and linguistic hoops that pro-choice men and women have to jump through reveals the sinister, wicked motives behind abortion. We live in a culture where we advocate death as long as it preserves our own right to comfort, convenience and life.

Scripture teaches us that Satan disguises himself as an angel of life (2Cor 11:14). No where is this twisted perceptive of reality more clearly revealed than through the posturing of Planned Parenthood in their efforts to validate this genocide against the unborn by championing the potential lifesaving benefits of embryonic stem-cell research.

The picture above is what our baby (11 weeks today) looks like right now.

The Terminator Is A Coward

2007-10-18T13:55:00.001-05:00

Glenn Jones posted an article about legislation that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger just signed that outlaws terms perceived as negative to homosexuals, such as "mom" or "dad" and qualifying persons as "male" or "female" rather than allowing for the possibility of transgender. The bill will also permit students to use restrooms and locker rooms of the opposite sex if this is where they feel most comfortable.

I found this article frightening and only heightens my concerns about state-run education as we consider what to do with Emeline in the next two years in regards to her education. Public schools continue to endorse and propogate the sexualization of our children over and above their education. This is not acceptable and Christians must not remain silent on these issues in the public sector.

School Board Approves Birth Control For Middle School

2007-10-18T11:46:00.001-05:00

Tragic. What else is there to say?

Joel Osteen on 60 Minutes

2007-10-15T09:41:00.000-05:00

Denny Burk's anaylsis of Joel Osteen and his message is dead on. Osteen is a likeable, obviously sincere person. This is what makes criticism of him so difficult. But I agree wholeheartedly with Michael Horton's statement in the 60 Minutes interview that Osteen's message is heretical. It is an anti-gospel message. These words carry weight and I do not utter them casually. Osteen's message is deceptive. While his motives may not be deliberately sinister, he leds as one who deceives and is himself deceived (2Tim 3:13). Several years ago I sat at the beside of a young man whom I love who had cancer. I asked him what had strengthened his faith during the dark days of cancer. He said it was Osteen's book Your Best Life Now. My heart broke when I heard those words. Why, you may ask? Because he found comfort in a message apart from the gospel, and there is no comfort, no salvation, no security apart from the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Once again, Burk gets is right:

I am writing this blog because I think Osteen is dangerous. The prosperity “gospel” that he preaches makes the Almighty into a cosmic slot machine; just believe hard enough and you’ll hit paydirt and have your “best life now.” Yet the Christian gospel explicitly teaches that if a person tries to have their best life now, they will forfeit eternity: “Whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake shall find it. For what will a man be profited, if he gains the whole world, and forfeits his soul?” (Matthew 16:25-26).

Listen to Joel Osteen at your own risk. He is peddling death. And he is affable enough to make you feel like it’s life. But do not be deceived. Nothing could be further from the truth.

You can read the whole post here.

Elders in Congregational Life

2007-10-15T09:18:00.000-05:00

There is no question that there is a biblical pattern for leadership established in 1Timothy and that pattern is meant to include both elders (overseers, pastors) and deacons. The question, however, is that most Southern Baptist churches do not function in this way. As a matter of fact, historically, the departure from the model established by the Apostle Paul began as early as the 2nd century.

Most serious Christians want to be bibilical - both personally and corporately - in their expressions of their faith. But one has to wonder: (1) why the church departed from elder-led congregations; and (2) how would a church that has deviated from the mandate for most of its existence successfully transition back to this biblical form of church government and what would it cost (not necessarily financially, but in terms of church unity, structure, service, etc)?

This post begins to ask some good questions, which is a necessary starting point for the discussion. What would an elder-led church look like practically? How would it function? How would the standard pastor-led or deacon-led church have to change to make this biblical transition? The questions asked on this blog aren't exhaustive, but they are a start. What questions might you have?

The Political Waters Are Stirring

2007-10-12T13:43:00.000-05:00

Recently I've read several compelling posts by evangelicals about why they would not support Rudy Guiliani if he wins the Republican nomination, even if it means conceding the Presidency to Hillary Clinton.

You can see them here, here, and here.

Paul Kengor, a presidential historian who recently authored God and Hillary: A Spiritual Life talks about why a Clinton presidency should be of grave concern to pro-lifers:

If you’re a pro-lifer, and if no issue is more important to you than the right of an unborn child to have life, then nothing could be more calamitous than a President Hillary Clinton. I don’t know of any politician who is more uncompromising and extreme on abortion rights than Hillary Clinton. I know this well and don’t state it with anger or hyperbole. Her extremism on abortion rights was the single most shocking, inexplicable find in my research on her faith and politics. I couldn’t understand it. No question. It is truly extraordinary. Nothing, no political issue, impassions her like abortion rights. For Mrs. Clinton, abortion-rights is sacred ground.

By the way, speaking of Catholics, Mother Teresa and Pope John Paul II saw this abortion extremism in Hillary, and both confronted her on it repeatedly, especially Mother Teresa, right up until the day she died. I have a chapter on this in the book. It’s a gripping story.

As the Republican and Democratic primaries near, evangelicals must get serious about how we are going to respond to the prospects of potentially two pro-choice candidates running for office. The time may well be upon us that we can no longer vote a ballot strictly according to political parties. Evangelicals need to mobilize behind an electable candidate who holds to our core values, even if that reduces us to one-issue voters (such as John Piper). I, for one, will never knowingly cast a vote for a pro-choice candidate, even if it means that I have to be governed by the socialist Hillary Clinton.

Love-Hate

2007-10-12T12:53:00.000-05:00

I'm in a love hate relationship with the Southern Baptist Convention. I'm a Baptist because I believe that on most issues Baptistic doctrine most accurately reflects Scripture. I'm a Southern Baptist by choice. Honestly. there are days I wonder if I've made the wrong one. Today is one of those days.

Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, led by Dr. Paige Patterson, while rightfully encouraging and stressing a complimentarian view of gender roles, is taking things too far. This fall the seminary launched a program that allows women (only) to earn credit towards a bachelor's degree by learning how to set tables, sew buttons and sustain lively dinner conversation. The program lead the author of an article in the LA Times to grossly overstate with broad, sweeping assumptions the biblical view of traditional biblical roles as a life where, "Men make decisions. Women make dinner."

Here is why I think SWBTS has gone too far, and it's not because I disagree with their theological conviction that women and men, while equal, were created to serve different roles and purposes as we practice dominion over the earth:

(1) Southwestern has assumed the responsibility of the local church and overextended its calling to equip called men and women of God with a theological education. While the heart behind this program may be sincere, it is not the responsibility of seminaries to mentor young women in this way; it is the responsibility of the church. In Titus 2:3-5, when Paul gives pastoral instruction to Titus, he clearly places the responsibility of mentoring as it relates to gender roles on older women within the local church. A seminary is not a church.

(2) While persecution and mockery are to be expected from our secular counterparts and the church should also be prepared for stinging, irresponsible, misrepresentative characterizations from culture, should we knowingly subject ourselves to such abuse? Peter tells us (1Pet 2:12)that we should live with such honorable conduct that when unbelievers speak of us as evil-doers (which is what feminists think the traditional roles of women are - evil), that they may see our good deeds and be persuaded to follow Jesus. How exactly is instituting a program where women receive seminary degrees for baking chocolate chip cookies and table settings going to accomplish this purpose? Doesn't advocating a degree in homemaking only reinforce the stereotypes that are associated with a traditional view of gender roles? Maybe I'm being too harsh in my critique of this program, but it seems to me that energy would be better spent living and loving Jesus in biblical community, pursuing causes of injustice and serving the poor, while at the same time loving our wives as Jesus loved the church (men) and submitting to your husband as the church submits to Jesus' leadership and authority (women), recognizing that this kind of relationship isn't about domination or keeping the wife quiet, barefoot and pregnant, but rather about a picture of the gospel so that the marriage becomes a platform for God's glory. Maybe this program is intended to accomplish this goal. I just don't see it. Isn't there a more winsome, compelling way to champion our equality but distinctiveness as men and women in our culture?

1 in 5 Pregnancies End in Abortion

2007-10-12T11:56:00.000-05:00

A study completed in 2003 reveals the disheartening news about abortion. Consider the following:

Globally (2003), there were 31 abortions for every 100 live births;
In Eastern Europe there were more abortions than live births (105 abortions for every 100 live births);
In Europe 32% of every pregnancies end in abortion;
48% of all abortions performed were unsafe to the mother (while obviously lethal to the child);
41.6 million abortions performed in 2003.

Redeeming Life in the Suburbs

2007-10-09T13:29:00.000-05:00

I thought this post by Chris Smith was interesting. He lists ten ways to live more intentionally in the suburbs as a way to develop more meaningful biblical community. Essentially it boils down to this: live near the people you go to church with, share everything, spend more time outside, and support local establishments even when it is inconvenient. What do you think about the list?

God-Glorifying Work

2007-10-09T13:26:00.000-05:00

Jerram Barrs has a good post about the value of secular work and how it can be used to glorify God.

John McCain

2007-10-01T22:21:00.000-05:00

Presidential hopeful John McCain is being lambasted by Muslim and Jewish groups for stating his belief that the United States was founded as a "Christian" nation and that his personal preference is that the person leading the United States share in his faith.

McCain clarified his remarks on Sunday night:

"What I do mean to say is the United States of America was founded on the values of Judeo-Christian values, which were translated by our founding fathers which is basically the rights of human dignity and human rights," he said.

"I believe that anyone can be president of the United States of any faith," McCain said, saying he was angry his remarks were misinterpreted but "there's nothing I can do about it."

Ibrahim Hooper, spokesperson for the Council on American-Islamic Relations took exception with McCain's comments because they seem to suggest that Islam is not a religion that values human dignity or the concept of human rights.

"Sorry, Islam and other faiths have their basis in human dignity," Hooper said.

However, one has to question if this is essentially true? Can Islam to be said to be a religion that values human dignity and human rights when Islamic-rule governments regularly torture, imprison and put to death converts from Islam? Or how about the treatment of women within Islamic culture?

As this relates to John McCain, who recently stated this week he is a practicing Baptist, isn't it sad that a Presidential candidate cannot publically state his personal preference that the leader of the United States share his religious beliefs and values? Does expressing his own personal views disqualify him from service? Must our political leaders be so publicly open minded that we have no idea of what they really value and treasure personally?

"...no longer looks like Jesus."

2007-10-01T15:16:00.000-05:00

A recent study suggests that negative attitudes among young non-believers continue to pervade the cultural climate of America. Even more interesting is the impact that the impressions and perceptions of non-believers is having on younger evangelicals in the Western church.

"Older generations more easily dismiss the criticism of those who are outsiders," Kinnaman said. "But we discovered that young leaders and young Christians are more aware of and concerned about the views of outsiders, because they are more likely to interact closely with such people. Their life is more deeply affected by the negative image of Christianity. For them, what Christianity looks like from an outsider’s perspective has greater relevance, because outsiders are more likely to be schoolmates, colleagues, and friends."

I believe this sensitivity among younger evangelicals is promising, but it also possess significant risks to the gospel. A desire to embrace the perceptions of outsiders for the sake of relevance and significance can sometimes lead to the neutering of the gospel and the dismissal of essential doctrines for the sake of unity, as we have seen in some streams of the Emerging Church. But one thing is certain: change is coming in the Western Church.

"While Christianity remains the typical experience and most common faith in America, a fundamental recalibration is occurring within the spiritual allegiance of America’s upcoming generations."

You can read a summary of the entire study here.

Uncovering the Psychology Behind the Fight for Gay Marriage

2007-09-30T21:40:00.000-05:00

Evan Wolfson is the founder of the gay marriage movement. He is a promiment civil rights attorney and advocate and founder/executive director of Freedom to Marry. This recent interview with Wolfson reveals not only what is at stake in the gay marriage movement, but how cleverly sinister those fighting for same-sex unions are in their arguments for equality. The interview is long but worth the time to read. Here are a couple of excerpts from the article.

According to Wolfson, he is an advocate for marriage, not simply gay marriage:

DS: You are one of the leaders, arguably the founder, of the modern gay marriage movement—

EW: —marriage. Not gay marriage. Marriage. We’re not fighting for gay marriage, or same-sex marriage, or any phrase like that. We are fighting for an end to exclusion from marriage. We are fighting for the freedom to marry, the same freedom, rules, responsibilities and respect as our non-gay brothers and sisters have. It’s not just a question of wording.

The question, however, is what should be the boundaries for marriage if they are not based on the defintion that marriage is meant to be defined by God, designated exclusively to be between a man and a woman. Where does the slippery slope lead? What is to prevent polygamy between loving, consenting adults? What is to prevent marriage to minors between loving, consenting partners? What is to keep someone from marrying an animal?

Marriage is a vocabulary, it’s a vehicle, an engine for a larger discussion that moves people’s understanding of who gay people are, why sex discrimination is wrong, why exclusion is wrong in America, that brings up discussion the separation of church and state, that brings up discussion of whether there should be limitations or roles based on sex, or whether w:men and women should be treated equally. Whether two women should be considered whole when they form a committed and loving relationship, as opposed to saying they are unwhole and unequal because they don’t have a man in their life.

This quote gives some real insight into where this debate is going. It is much bigger than marriage alone.

DS: Transgender people face specific issues in marriage since what constitutes a man or a woman is often legally defined. How does the marriage movement address this issue?

EW: Our understanding of how you define a man and a woman should absolutely be true to people’s lived experience and should not be laced with archaic gender roles and discriminatory attitudes about men and women or about people who are transgender. Second, we all have an interest in ending sex discrimination in marriage. How you come to be a same-sex couple, whether by transition as a transgender person, or simply by falling in love with a person of the same sex, really shouldn’t affect your ability to get a marriage license. It should not matter to the government because there is no good reason for the government to impose a different sex restriction on a couple who wants to marry. That’s true whether it be a couple that includes a person who is transgender or a couple who happened to get there by falling in love.

Notice that for Wolfson how we define what is "true" is based upon "people's lived experience", not on an objective standard. Again, if our subjective experience is the basis for defining our morality, who then defines what is ultimately morally right and wrong?

Read the article for yourself and feel free to post comments for discussion.

Sin and Grace

2007-09-30T10:49:00.001-05:00

I recently finished Dave Harvey's fantastic book When Sinners Say "I Do". While the book is clearly written to benefit married couples, there is no doubt that anyone could benefit from the wisdom of this book in everyday relationships. Why? I think Paul David Tripp says it best in the foreword of the book:

This book grasps the core drama of every married couple [and humanity]. This drama is no respecter of race, ethnic origin, location, or period of history. It is the one thing that explains the doom and hope of every human relationship. It is the theme that is on every page of this book in some way. What is this drama? It is the drama of sin and grace.

Questions for Kids

2007-09-30T09:50:00.001-05:00

Justin Taylor has posted a very helpful list of questions that Rick Gamache regularly asks his kids. This is a must read for fathers.

Mitt Romney

2007-09-28T16:30:00.000-05:00

Christianity Today interviews Mitt Romney.

How do you answer evangelicals who want their President to have faith but not your faith?

It depends on what they worry about. Do they want agreement on doctrine, and does that really effect how someone leads as President? Or does someone want a President who shares values and will preserve the values and culture of America? That will only happen if people band together where we share common values.

A Granddaddy's Thoughts

2007-09-26T14:36:00.000-05:00

I read John Piper's words, spoken at his granddaughter's funeral, with tears. But the tears came, not only through the sorrow I feel for the unspeakable pain and sense of loss that Abraham and Molly Piper (Felicity's parents) must feel right now in the overwhelming grief of losing a child, but also for the unfathomable joy and comfort that come through knowing Jesus, wondering how those who do not profess faith in Jesus cope with a loss such as this brought about by the curse of sin. I pray your faith is strengthened. Mine has been as the Piper's reveal to the world how to grieve and hope in a way that shifts our affections toward God. There is only one rock and anchor sufficient through the tempest of life's storms found only through a God-centered vision of this world and eternity revealed in Jesus.

Hebrews 13:17 and the Western Mega-church

2007-09-25T10:19:00.000-05:00

I found an excellent post about the perspective that many non-Western Christian pastors and leaders have on the state of mega-church in the West. While we have a multitude of churches that boast memberships of over 20,000, and I serve in a convention that boasts of over 16 million, most of these churches, as well as our convention, can only account for approximately 1/3 of their membership on any given Sunday. If God's Word is true, countless pastors will be held accountable by God for the souls of their membership and have no idea where almost 2/3 of those people even are! Many non-Western Christian leaders weep over the fact that we don't know where our members are and at how little it costs to follow Jesus in America. I encourage you to read the post about unregenerate church membership in its entirety.

Culture Waging War On Our Children

2007-09-18T16:56:00.001-05:00

It only takes a surface reading of the daily headlines on Fox News or CNN to see that the curse of sin and the men who delight in it are waging war against our children in unprecedented ways. Consider the following:

Texas woman sets her three children on fire;
US Prosecutor arrested for seeking to have sex with girl, 5;
Fashion show blasted for using 13 year-old as their sexy model spotlight;
Kidnappers force teenagers to smoke marijuana and perform sex acts;
Celebrity faced with losing custody of two toddlers because of wild lifestyle;

These are just examples of how people within our culture are exploiting and causing physical, emotional and spiritual injury to children in order to satisfy the cravings of their corrupt desires. The stories I came across today stirred up emotions ranging from disgust to outright anger against these predators who use our children for their own gain or as bargaining chips in society. These are some of the more perverted examples of the curse of sin and the hatred we should have as believers for its effects on our world. May Jesus hasten to make all things new while protecting the physical, emotional and spiritual well-being of my children in this broken world.

Carson on Contextualization

2007-09-18T09:27:00.000-05:00

Justin Taylor posted this on his site already this morning, but it was such a helpful distinction that I wanted to post it here as well - just in case you don't typically read Taylor's site.

The following was in an email from D.A. Carson to Mark Driscoll, as cited in Driscoll's chapter ("The Church and the Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World") in the forthcoming book, The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World:
Paul refuses to circumcise Titus, even when it was demanded by many in the Jerusalem crowd, not because it didn’t matter to them, but because it mattered so much that if he acquiesced, he would have been giving the impression that faith in Jesus is not enough for salvation: one has to become a Jew first, before one can become a Christian. That would jeopardize the exclusive sufficiency of Jesus.

To create a contemporary analogy: If I’m called to preach the gospel among a lot of people who are cultural teetotallers, I’ll give up alcohol for the sake of the gospel. But if they start saying, “You cannot be a Christian and drink alcohol,” I’ll reply, “Pass the port” or “I’ll think I’ll have a glass of Beaujolais with my meal.” Paul is flexible and therefore prepared to circumcise Timothy when the exclusive sufficiency of Christ is not at stake and when a little cultural accommodation will advance the gospel; he is rigidly inflexible and therefore refuses to circumcise Titus when people are saying that Gentiles must be circumcised and become Jews to accept the Jewish Messiah.

Driscoll also offers a crucial distinction, again from the pen of Carson: "No truth which human beings may articulate can ever be articulated in a culture-transcending way—but that does not mean that the truth thus articulated does not transcend culture."

Vacation

2007-09-06T15:07:00.000-05:00

Lord willing, I'll be leaving for vacation in the next two days. This means I probably won't be able to post. If you think of me and my family, please pray for the following:

* Safe passage to Ft. Walton Beach, Florida. We will be driving late on Sat night into the the early morning. Pray that God would protect us. Pray that God would keep me alert and lucid as I drive;

* Pray for rest. Pray that we would not only rest physically but that we would rest in Christ during the week;

* Pray for intellectual stimulation. Too often vacation is a good time to "check out" spiritually. I'm taking along some books that I hope continue to shape my thoughts about the church, marriage, missions and preaching from the OT. Pray that I would not be lazy with my mind during the week;

* Pray for purity. The beach can be a wonderful place to relax, but it can be a place of torment visually for those who desire purity because they want to see God (Matt 5:8). Pray that we would be diligent to guard our eyes and hearts during the week;

* Pray for a special time of fellowship with my family. I love my three girls and want this week to be special and saturated with Daddy and husband time.

Thanks for praying.

Takin' a Cheeto Beatin'

2007-09-05T08:37:00.000-05:00

An Iowa man was charged with assault for throwing a bag of Cheetos at his father. The bag hit his face and caused his eye-glasses to cut the bridge of his nose. The son admitted to being on methamphetamines at the time.

Okay, seriously, I'm not excusing that this man was out of his mind on drugs at the time, but assault for hurling a bag of Cheetos. Under this criteria I'm guilty of assault when I launch balls of paper at students for talking.

Experience < Word

2007-08-31T09:18:00.000-05:00

If you aren't familiar with Justin Taylor's site you should acquaint yourself with it. There is always good stuff there. Today he posted a link to Rick Phillips who writes about the recent revelation of Mother Teresa's spiritual despair and emptiness as she ministered to the poor in Calcutta, India. The recent release Come Be My Light will only further solidify Teresa's saintly status among Roman Catholics, but raise many more questions about her in the minds of evangelicals.

Here is an excerpt of a lesson learned from the revelations of Mother Teresa's spiritual darkness: "...I would suggest that Mother Teresa's testimony should turn us away from the path of subjective spiritual experiences and urge us back to the life of faith in God's Word. Like her, we should long for the presence of Christ in our lives. But unlike the soon-to-be-sainted yet truly tragic Mother Teresa, let us seek Christ where He is found. Paul explained: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) or "Who will descend into the abyss?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? "The Word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim)" (Rom. 10:6-8). Paul tells us to seek Christ in the Word of God. For as our faith rests on God's Word and trusts in the promises of his gospel, we gain Christ and His light shines in our hearts."

"Worship must become...more life than event"

2007-08-29T12:56:00.001-05:00

Several years ago Sally Morgenthaler wrote a wildly popular book called Worship Evangelism. Many people within Western church culture grabbed hold of Morgenthaler's ideas and paradigm and ventured into the world of worship-driven ministry, all in the hopes of reaching the unreached through our worship. But years later, after seeing 15 years of rapid decline in church attendance in America, Morgenthaler is rethinking it all. This is an excellent article - especially if you've read Worship Evangelism, but even if you haven't, you should read it. It definately gives you something to think about.

Is Interracial Marriage Wrong?

2007-08-29T10:19:00.000-05:00

John Piper writes a very insightful and challenging article about interracial marriage and the necessity of the local church to take a biblical stand on this issue. Of course, the problem in many cases is that many churches believe they are taking a biblical stand in their belief that interracial marriage is prohibited in Scripture, and their ignorance and bigotry is an offense to the gospel.

I remember as a seventeen year-old that I had my first significant disagreement with a pastor I respected when he stated from the pulpit that interracial marriage is sinful. It broke my heart to hear him use God's Word to erect the very barriers that the gospel of Jesus tears down. I encourage you to read the article. I think you'll find it encouraging, and maybe it will help you see more clearly the transforming impact that gospel is intended to have on our views of race and marriage.

Baptism and Worship

2007-08-29T09:25:00.000-05:00

Bob Kauflin posts a helpful article about baptism and worship.

Taliban Releases Some South Korean Missionaries

2007-08-29T09:09:00.000-05:00

The Taliban has released 8 of the 19 South Korean missionaries it has held hostage while demanding the withdrawal of 200 South Korean troops from Afghanistan. They continue to hold 11 missionaries but has agreed to release them all. The Taliban previously killed 2 of the 5 men captured.

I am perplexed at the lack of media coverage this international incident has received in the United States. I guess we are too preoccupied with Michael Vick's horrific abuse of dog's or Lindsay Lohan's second stint in rehab in a matter of weeks to notice.

When a suspected terrorist goes on a hunger strike in Guantanamo Bay, it makes the headlines and the US military is castigated in the town hall known as sensational mass media. But when 23 Christian medical missionaries from one our allies are taken by force by the Taliban, it barely gets mentioned on the back page of our local papers. When Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and later sadly executed by Muslim extremists, we couldn't escape coverage of his plight. And yet, when the same thing happens to 23 Christians, hardly anyone notices (except for South Koreans).

And You Thought Pennies Were Worthless...

2007-08-28T09:00:00.000-05:00

Last week when I read an article about what it costs the US Mint to make a penny I was flabbergasted. Did you know that because of the rising cost of zinc in the world that it costs 2 cents to make every penny? That's right, 2 cents. And last time I checked a penny is only worth, you got it, 1 cent. Considering the US government mints about 8 billion pennies every year, taxpayers are paying about $160 million dollars annually to mint only $80 million dollars worth of pennies. This is yet more evidence that the inmates must be running the asylum on Capital Hill. Seriously, what other institution would allow such gross financial mismanagement without a serious restructuring in leadership. And to think, this is one of the mildest examples of poor leadership by our "saviors" on Capital Hill.

Being the Church in our Culture

2007-08-22T13:31:00.000-05:00

This is a long article (which I have only skimmed) but when I get a chance to read something by Tim Keller I do.

Harris Gets "Uncomfortable"

2007-08-21T12:52:00.000-05:00

Josh Harris (Pastor of Covenant Life Church and author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye and Stop Dating the Church shares his views about the importance of the local church as the truest picture and means of the gospel shaping the lives of Jesus' disciples, the damage done to the gospel when younger evangelicals grumble about the blemishes of the local church, and his personal struggles with personal evangelism.

Updates from South Peru

2007-08-17T21:37:00.000-05:00

One of the local missionaries through REAP is posting status reports on the relief efforts here

More From Peru

2007-08-17T15:43:00.000-05:00

"One man I came across was in mourning outside his home. He lives across the street from a cemetery and owns a flower stall. He typically sells flowers to those going into the cemetery to place at gravestones. But not on this day."

"The man wept on a coffin. His house had collapsed during the quake, and his mother was killed. There in the street, in front of what was left of his house, he held a wake for his mother. Two little candles were lit. He didn't have flowers, even for his own mother. He was devastated."

Mike Huckabee: The Next President?

2007-08-16T16:09:00.000-05:00

The more I read about Mike Huckabee (former Arkansas Governor) the more I like what I read. In a party desperately seeking a candidate that can connect with the general American public, particularly the conservative voting block, Huckabee might be exactly what the GOP is looking for, and he might be, in my estimation, the only guy with enough credibility and lack of baggage to effectively challenge Hillary Clinton (who seems poised to take the Democratic nomination). Check out what Michael Medved has to say about Huckabee.

Spiritual Conversations

2007-08-16T13:36:00.000-05:00

Today I came across a few posts by Gary Rohrmayer. You can check out his three posts about engaging in spiritual conversations here, here and here. But if you only have a few minutes here is a summary.

There are (at least) 4 ways to increase spiritual conversations in your life:
(1) Make it a priority. Essentially this means you need to plan for spiritual conversations. This may not mean that you need to write down an appointment in your Blackberry (or in some cases it may mean precisely that), but the intent is that you strategically plan your day with the intent of having spiritual conversations with people in your world. Rohrmayer suggests the 3X5 rule for church planters. If you are going to be serious about connecting with people you need to strive to make 5 new contacts a day (35 week) which will lead to 3 sit-down conversations weekly.

(2) Pray for opportunities. When is the last time you asked God to open new doors of opportunity to speak about Jesus?

(3) Get out into your community. A good thought (directed at church planters in the post but applicable to us all) is making an effort to tithe your time to community service and interaction. Coach a soccer team at the YMCA or Camp Jordan (not in a local church Upward league). Join the Rotary Club. Get involved at a local park. Do something that gives you opportunity to rub shoulders with people in your community.

(4) Establish routines and cultivate relationships. I know of one lady in our church who does this already. Grace Owens visits the same stores weekly. The employees know her name and she knows theirs. Get to know people in your community by visiting them routinely at places of business. Reggie McNeal loves to ask his servers when eating out, "I'm going to pray and thank God for my meal and I always pray for my server. Is there anything specific I can pray for you about?" I thought this was an excellent, tangible way to strike up spiritual dialogue.

I'm encouraged to be more deliberate in my conversations in the community, aren't you?

Death Toll Rising In Peru

2007-08-16T10:04:00.001-05:00

My heart for Peru is growing and I am praying and grieving about the earthquake that crippled this struggling nation yesterday.

Our Children Are Bored? Why?

2007-08-14T09:09:00.000-05:00

Jerram Barrs has written an interesting article explaining why he believes children, particularly adolescents, are so bored, and how to curtail the boredom.

Did I Really Say This?

2007-08-10T15:39:00.001-05:00

"As a dead pereson we achieve nothing. We are not alive until we are made alive in Jesus. Our identity is in Christ and any achievement we make is Christ's. If our achievemenets don't set us apart in Jesus' eyes, then neither do our failures."

The Consequences of Sexualization

2007-08-10T15:29:00.000-05:00

The American Psychological Association has posted a report stating that consequences to teenage girls brought about by the sexualization of girls is having potentially disastrous mental health effects, not to mention the potentially devastating physical and sexual consequences that follow.

Studies reveal that sexual exploitation and encouraging sexual expression in the media have been factors in teenage girls posting nude photos of themselves on the internet, allowing their boyfriends to take nude photos, and filming amatuer pornograhic videos. But the long-term effects of this sexualization are even more startling. The study reveals that sexualization (which happens all the time in the media) can lead to cognitive and emotional consequences (such as poor body image, feelings of shame and anxiety), mental and physical health issues (eating disorders and depression), and impaired sexual development (a healthy view of sex and sexuality).

“As a society, we need to replace all of these sexualized images with ones showing girls in positive settings—ones that show the uniqueness and competence of girls,” said Zurbriggen. “The goal should be to deliver messages to all adolescents—boys and girls—that lead to healthy sexual development.”

But this needed message can only come through a biblical, God-centered view of sex and sexuality. Culture needs to see strong Christian men and women with a healthy, biblical view of sex and sexuality, as well as a proper understanding of gender and gender roles within culture and the family.

Want To Have Sex? Find A Christian.

2007-08-06T15:49:00.000-05:00

Provocative title? Got your attention, didn't it?

Michael Gershon discusses the startling find that evangelical Protestant teens begin having sex (on the average) halfway through their 16th year, and this this is actually sooner than mainline Protestants (non-evangelical) and secular humanists.

Gene Veith suspects that one reason for a higher percentage of sexual activity among evangelical teens is that the Law alone (meaning apart from grace) promotes rebellion (this is a Scriptural assumption and Veith is probably correct to some degree). He even suggests that Christian teens should marry at a younger age if their sexual desires are out of control since this is what Scripture prescribes (1Cor 7:9).

I'm not sure that marrying younger is the solution, and I also don't think that the Law promoting rebellion is the only reason that evangelical teens are having sex sooner than other teenage segments of the population. Other factors would include: (1) relationship with their fathers; (2) spiritual leadership in the home; (3) body image; and (4) influence of media.

What do you think?