Di autou

2012-01-30T11:37:00.002-05:00

Press On!

"Not that I have already obtained this or have already reached the goal; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. Beloved, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but this one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the heavenly call of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:12-14, NRSV).

There is no doubt in my mind that my life as a Christian is based upon the concept of a race or journey. I read the above passage as a runner. I know that there is only way to run a race in order to win. You have to run straight ahead, focused upon the race at hand. You can't look behind you or you will fall. If you look around from side to side, you can get distracted and lose form as well. You have to focus on hitting that tape at the finish line squarely. This is what it means to utilize proper form in order to maximize your running ability. Oh yeah, never forget to relax and to breathe, breathe, breathe. Relax your hands and focus your mind on the race at hand. Now you can focus on your running form. Who knew track would be so useful?

The only proper way to have proper running form is to constantly seek to improve the way in which you run the race. You have to want it - to press on as Paul puts it. This can best be done by consciously attempting to develop your relationship with Jesus Christ. By striving to do this, by striving to live the life of holiness that we are called to live, I believe that I will be able to live a more productive and excellent life. While there is a great deal of personal risk present in such an endeavor, you must believe that the potential risks are far outweighed by the potential rewards.
For so many people the hardest step to take in the field of personal development is the first one. It is almost standard operating procedure for people to assume that they are stuck with their situation in life. The old adage from Popeye, ..I am what I am.. seems to be the rallying cry for all too many. I believe that there are many different reasons for this but that the main culprit is fear. Fear of commitment. Fear of failure. Fear of change.

Fear keeps many from growing because they are afraid that if they were to change, their current positions in life would no longer prove to be of worth to them. In other words, so many have sold themselves short. They never cleared the bar because frankly, they never attempted to jump in the first place. Teddy Roosevelt lamented this condition when he said, "It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed."
It is with this thought in mind that I have sought to develop and increase my devotion to my savior, Jesus Christ. I desire to pursue him because he pursued me first. Through this process, which by the way will carry me through my entire life, I know that I will be able to stand along with Paul in saying, "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith" (II Timothy 4:7, NIV). While this may appear to be braggadocio on the surface, I must say that I am not able to say such things of my own volition. I will be able to confidently stand in the assurance that whatever was accomplished in the kingdom through me was done in concert with the Holy Spirit. My primary task is then to both surrender to his will and to strive to become all that I can be.
The ancient Greeks hit the nail on the head, so to speak, when they exalted the concept and pursuit of excellence in their lives. Through the pursuit of arête, or the Greek concept of excellence, I will find that I have for far too long settled for a cheap imitation of what my life could have been. Therefore, it would be most wise to say: "I am willing to say enough is enough. I have had enough of complacency and even mediocrity. I no longer wish to settle for the things in my life that have had led to a numbing of my heart and soul. From this day forward, I pledge to live a life that is devoted to the pursuit of excellence and improvement in my personal, professional and spiritual lives."
I believe that the most important relationship that I have in my life is the one that I am blessed to have with Jesus Christ. As this is the most important relationship in my life, I believe that it should serve as the barometer for all other relationships in my life. However I continue in my walk with Christ will go a long way in determining how I interact with my family, my church and my community.
I believe that the first priority in the life of a Christian should be to increase and cultivate the actual time spent in communion with their savior. This means that I will need to not only increase my time spent in prayer, but that I must also seek to make that time more productive. For me, this means that I need to guard my time more wisely. It is so easy to become side-tracked, today more than ever. With so many options available to me, I find myself pulled in competing directions. To that end, I must be able to set aside more time for the development of my prayer life.
Next, I believe that it is vital that I seek to increase my time spent in the Word and with other theological works. By doing so, I not only deepen my relationship with Christ, I also gain more knowledge which can then be passed on to others. While we demand a go, go mentality; even in the church, there can be no substitute for acquiring a willingness to put the brakes on and to slow down and spend quality time reflecting on the beauty and truth inherent in the Word.
Another way in which my personal relationship with Christ can be augmented is ironically, through relationships of accountability with other people. By understanding that I live my life before God and humanity, I become more concerned about my behavior and actions. I believe that this can best be done by finding, or even starting, a group of two to three other pastors who are willing to confidentially hold the other group members accountable for living a life of holiness and excellence in their homes and churches. Making myself subject to the inspection of others can but help me to live a life that is conductive to the production of excellence.
The final way in which I am seeking to improve my relationship with Jesus is in the area of life surrender. I want to totally give myself up as a "living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God"(Rom.12:1, NRSV). By continually seeking to live a life of holiness, I will be better equipped for ministry and will be closer in my walk with Christ. I do believe that through this process, entire sanctification will grow into continued grace and maturity which will culminate in glorification when I reach my Father who is in heaven. Until that time, I want to live a life that will match my talk. I believe that this will be accomplished best by implementing the strategies that have already been discussed in this section.
What are you going to improve your life? Are you going to be willing to surrender every fiber of your being to the one who gave you life in the first place? I've outlined a few personal strategies that I am working on in order to deepen my fellowship with Jesus. I'm not saying any of this in order to slap myself on the back or to ridicule you. If it sounds preachy, then thanks. I mean, hey, you go to the doctor to get treatment, right? Shouldn't one who calls himself pastor preach?
None of this talk of excellence has any relationship to making piles of money, etc. in the name of God. I am not advocating a "Your Best Life NOW" strategy. In Matt. 28:19, we are called by Christ to make disciples of all nations. This is an attempt to push for something deeper, something more committed than reciting a couple of lines of liturgy, singing a couple of hymns and nodding off during the sermon. Our life must include more encounters with Jesus Christ than just during Sunday morning worship time. Church is beautiful and should be attended. However, your soul, your walk with Christ should be attended to daily. After all, what kind of relationship is based on once-a-week contact?
Is your Bible dusty? Was the last time you were on your knees last week when you dropped that quarter? Folks, a life of excellence is a life that is given over to Jesus Christ. It is a life that is characterized by holiness. This means living a life of perfect love. This means being devoted to becoming - not just being - in love with Christ. To be sanctified, to be holy means to be set apart, to be different, to be "other". It is about not just giving your heart to Christ, but your ENTIRE life. It means being SET FREE from the sin nature.
Guess what? You DON'T HAVE TO SIN! Did you know that? A Christian's life shouldn't be characterized by sin. I John 3:9 tells us that when we are born of God, we are dead to sin. This means that our sin nature is eradicated. Now, this doesn't mean that you will be perfect. It means that you can be set free from the WILL TO sin. What a concept!! The Holy Spirit can enable you to do this, to live an excellent life, one that is free from the bondage of sin and addiction. Is there a catch? Sure!
You have to be willing to do ONE thing now. You see, the thing is, you are going to do it anyway. It's just a matter of when and under what circumstance you are going to do it. Phil. 2:10 tells us that "at the name of Jesus, every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth." We will all bend our knee before Christ. Will you do it willingly NOW or will you do it in resistance before him in judgment - when it's too late. In other words, who are you going to serve? Yourself or Christ? By the way, those are the ONLY two choices, folks. Acknowledge him now as your savior. Isaiah warns us to pursue the Lord while he is still close. In other words, if this moving you in any way to make a commitment to Jesus for the first time or to deepen your walk with him, then do it. ASK! Ask for the Holy Spirit to guide you. There are no set formulas for this. Open you heart before him and confess your need and desire for his lordship. Don't let pride and mediocrity get in the way of living a life of excellence today. So, run that race the right way - straight ahead, not looking back or to the side. Focus on hitting the tape and press on!

2012-01-24T11:27:00.002-05:00

Opening the eyes of my heart

My sister posted a great and powerful adage that we, as Christians, get to cling to. "When God closes one door, he always opens another..." This phrase may seem cliched but I think it is very true and very powerful. I responded in part by saying, "Give me eyes to see, O Lord!" But what does it mean to have eyes to see? I think that in order to truly be able to see, we must use more than our physical eyes. We need to be able to tune in with the eyes of our heart - that is our spirit. But how is this accomplished?
We can find that answer in Ephesians 1:17-19. Paul begins the passage by stating that there are three things that will open the "eyes of your heart". He then moves to elaborate upon these three things. I believe that Paul uses the phrase "open the eyes of your heart" in order to state that we need to focus on the big picture of life, both that lived here on earth and the one to come in eternity.
It is so easy to get bogged down with trivial matters. As C.S. Lewis stated, we live "like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because (we) cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea..." (The Weight of Glory) In other words, we settle for what we know, no matter how mundane because we forget or have no ability to comprehend just how grand of a scale our lives CAN be lived upon. The only true way that we can change is to, as Paul said, to have "the eyes of hearts" opened.
In v.18, Paul mentions "the hope to which he has called you". We are saved and bought at a high price. I need no longer fret about my eternal destination because Jesus paid the price of admission - all I must do is accept it and live it. I can only really live out my salvation when I focus less on myself and more on others. If I become self-focused, I become lost in pity and get removed from community. I have been given an incredible hope - the hope of eternity in heaven with Savior for all time!
Paul then mentions the "riches of his glorious inheritance." I am a child of the king! Paul also writes that we are joint-heirs with Jesus. This means that we are going to inherit more than we can possibly comprehend. I'm not talking about earthly riches, like gold or paper money. I am talking about eternity here. Infinity. Transcendence. We have the promise that, as saints, we get to partake in the splendor of the universe. If this seems like a mind-boggling concept - this is because IT IS! I'm not going to attempt to describe every bit because "no eye has seen and no ear has heard" what magnificence God has in store for us.
Finally, and this is where the pay-off is- we know that these two things will come to pass because we serve a God who possesses "immeasurable greatness" and power. Our God is so far beyond our puny imaginations. Think about this for a second. Our God, my God, is omniscient. He knows EVERYTHING. He is omnipresent. He's EVERYWHERE. He is omnipotent. He is all-powerful. There is nothing that God cannot know or overcome. He is so powerful that he possesses the ability to NOT strong-arm us into loving him. It is said that those who possess true power know it. They don't have to flaunt it. The power is innate and it radiates from every fiber of their being. When you are around someone like that, you too know they are powerful. Just imagine how much more power God possesses then.
He has allowed us to CHOOSE to accept him or reject him. He wants my true love. He wants me to come to him only if I want to. This is what blows my mind. My entire eternal destination is not decided by someone else. It is decided by me. Now, there are incredible consequences that come with my choice. I can choose to live like I have hope and a glorious inheritance ahead of me. I can choose to recognize that God is all-powerful and that he made the way to him through his son, Jesus Christ. All I have to do is accept this and then live for him. THIS is what will "open the eyes of my heart."
When I focus on the glorious hope and future that I have in Christ, my arrows, my pain, my struggles start to pale in comparison. My wants and desires begin to become more centered on what Jesus would want for me rather than what I think I want.
And yet, it is still so easy to try to find our doors to open. The problem is that in seeking our own doorways, we tend to choose our own "mud pies" because we know no different. Our eyes are then closed. If we reject God's paths in exchange for the temporal and ever-changing, we then live life grasping at straws. We then spend our lives searching for peace that never comes. We wind up living looking for the next big thing, yet when this comes, it is never enough.
It's like living with an itch that you just can't scratch. I know because I have lived that way. I chose to make my own "mud pies" because I never wanted anyone - ANYONE to tell ME how to live MY life. But you know what? Nothing fit. Nothing gave me peace. Nothing allowed me to look at myself in the mirror and actually LIKE what I saw. Sure, I had attended church for years. I knew my Bible. That wasn't the problem. I studied to be a pastor but I walked away from it when things got really tough. Why? Because the "eyes of my heart" were closed. I had the head knowledge and some raw gifts. The problem wasn't that. The problem was that I hadn't allowed God to become REAL in my life! That is a choice that must be made. You have to WANT it.
I believe this is what Paul is alluding to in this passage. He is offering a brief glimpse into the realm of possibilities. We don't have to live in the squalor of our own lives. I no longer have to live a selfish and incomplete life. Jesus has offered so much more. One choice. Just one choice can change everything. If we will but "open the eyes of our hearts", we gain HOPE, INHERITANCE and the knowledge that the omnipotent creator of all things is ultimately our Lover, Lord and King. In this way, our eyes are able to finally see those other doors that may bring our greatest hopes and needs. What a wonderful promise!

2012-01-23T10:04:00.002-05:00

Unifying the Body of Christ

I read an interesting blog entry earlier this morning about worship styles and the potential division that they can cause. There is a growing trend in churches to offer both a traditional worship service - consisting typically of hymn-based music and traditional liturgies - and a contemporary service - consisting typically of praise choruses and more "updated" liturgies. In addition to this trend, some churches are also choosing to have one service that utilizes what is called a "blended" style of worship - consisting typically of both a traditional hymn and a praise chorus and blended worship styles.
There is a great deal of controversy swirling around all three of these styles. Advocates for holding two services believe that in having both styles, they will be more attractive to both younger and older people. The thought is that the traditional service will attract older people and that the contemporary service will bring in the younger generations. Others adhere to a blended style because they believe that everyone could be attracted to this service.
I have listened to many arguments on both sides and have attended churches that offer all three kinds of worship services. Interestingly, these arguments tend to grow quite passionate. Advocates for two services tend to believe that two services can serve more people but those who differ on the subject, as does Tony Campolo, believe that two services tend to grow two separate congregations with two separate allegiances. He states his argument, along with scriptural justification below:

In Matthew 13:52, we read that Jesus said, “The kingdom of Heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure chest things new and things old.”"
"Any worship service that is all the new stuff is not the kingdom of God. Any worship service that is all the old stuff is not the kingdom of God. There needs to be balance between the two if it’s to be representative of the kingdom that Jesus wills for us to enjoy. Some churches have tried to settle this conflict by having two different services—one which uses contemporary worship music and one where the music is traditional. The problem with this is that it tends to create two separate congregations with two different perspectives on the faith." (Tony Campolo)

Those are some heavy words. On the other side of the subject, advocates for the separate worship services state that by blending worship styles, you tend to come up with a service in which no one is entirely pleased and you are left with a worship time that can feel lukewarm or non-committal to either one or both of the worship styles presented.
This controversy has been something that has troubled me for years. On the one hand, I really empathize with what Tony Campolo says. His main concern with holding two different services is a valid one. Do you want division and different allegiances within the same body of believers? Isn't unity in all things what we are called to have as Christians? Despite these concerns, I wonder if a blended approach to worship is really what is best.
I believe that there are a few ways to move to overcome the potential division that comes from having multiple styles of worship. First, I believe that all services need to be unified from the pulpit. That is all services receive the same teaching, rather in person, by Skype or some other medium that ensures that all services; regardless of venue or time are linked by the same message, theology and teaching. This approach seems to be utilized well in larger churches, as an example, like College Wesleyan Church in Marion, IN. Second, there must be offered times of combined services, whether in one style or another. Such a thing will encourage church unity. Third, the church needs to have other services: small groups, Sunday morning classes and Wednesday night offerings that offer multiple occasions to come together as a unified body.
Blended services may be a good alternative in the right situation. I think that churches that have worship services of 200 or fewer in morning attendance might be best served with a blended approach rather than a split approach. The easy and quick answer to this is that the are no easy and quick answers in regards to what is the best mode of worship. I believe that patience, prayer and vision are required in order to truly know what type of worship service will serve your church best.
The bottom line is that Tony Campolo, as always, is provocative and challenging. That is one of the many things that I love about him. He is a type of modern prophet in that he never allows his audience to feel comfortable or complacent. I think that he raises a very real question: are we more loyal to our own service or to the overall body of our church? Even more so, are we more loyal to the sign on the door or the reason why the door is there in the first place? We can never forget, despite differences in preferences, the church exists to be the one, the unified Bride of Christ. All else that divides her and that places schism in the mix is to be avoided and overcome through prayer and supplication to the Holy Spirit.
What do you think of the argument? Have you had positive or negative experiences with one style or another? I am anxious to hear what you think about this issue because it is a very real one and has led to too much division in the body already. Thanks for your input!

2012-01-20T12:03:00.002-05:00

Hate Religion, Love Jesus: Observations on the video

This video - which I have posted a link to on my facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002741355058&ref=tn_tnmn - hit me right between the eyes and contains some powerful stuff. It does contain provocative language, as you can tell from the title, but it makes such a valid point: church membership doesn't bring eternal life with it. If there are no actions, no evidenced faith in your life, how can you really consider yourself to be a Christian? Like I said, that is some very provocative and confrontational stuff. Is it off-putting? Possibly. But is it effective? Judging from the 1.5 million hits on youtube, I would say so.
A couple of observations: first - it is doubtful that Jesus is aiming for you to vote Republican. I love that statement because to me, politics and the church do NOT mix. I have seen nothing but division come from it. I think that pastors, in particular, need to spend more time in watching over their flock than stumping for politicians. Check out the Biblical record: Jesus not only avoids any political entanglements, he also, save for his "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" comment really has no focus upon politics at all. My point is that politics exist within a different sphere than does our commitment and walk with Christ. I am not suggesting that one should drop out of the political discussion, I am merely saying that we need to keep that element out of our churches and Christian discussions.
Second - and even more confrontationally speaking, the line about our true identity was powerful. Do we live a life outside of the church and outside of Sunday that brings glory and honor to Jesus? Is it clear to others, by the way that you live and love, that you belong to Christ? It's not enough to call ourselves Christian on facebook and then live like that the Christian declaration is utilized for nothing more than a line that fills out a personal profile. In the video, such an action is likened to one buying a Lakers jersey and then saying that you play for them. Ouch... I found that one to be powerful and particularly convicting. It looks like there is some remodeling due here. I have bitterness to let go of and repenting to do.
Finally then, remember: no one is saved through ritual alone. No one is saved through attendance alone. Remember, God wants our hearts, our lives much more than he wants our sacrifices (Hosea 6:6 & Matthew 12:7). In other words - church is great but religion saves no one. Also, it is clearly stated that the author loves the church but that our focus must be on Christ alone. Your salvation doesn't come from a building, an organization or from any other man than the man Jesus alone. The focus of the video here is clear: if someone was observing you throughout the week, would they know that you are a Christian? I don't know about you, but I've got some major work to do.

2012-01-18T10:27:00.003-05:00

The Toughest Love

We hear adages like this all of the time: "Love those that love you. Hate those that hate you - after all, if they don't respect you, why should you respect them. Do you want them to walk all over you? You need to get out there and get yours." There is no question that we live in a me first society. True story: several years ago on I-270, the wrap-around route that surrounds Columbus, OH, I was cut off by a passing car, as one of only three cars in close proximity no less, that bore the license plate tag "ME FIRST". I guess they weren't kidding. Wow.
But when I look at myself for a moment, I have to wonder, am I any better? Let's see. As a driver, I notice that I have an interesting habit of creating names for every driver that either moves too slowly, cuts me off or fails to signal. Amos T. Chet. Claude. Jake. I could go on and on. It's easy to say that I grew up hearing that, but what is it that I am doing? I get mad when drivers treat me in a way that is against what I feel I deserve. Are these feelings the same as hate? Oh, pretty much.
Going one step further: when a country goes against our country, either through a military, "terrorist" or economic action, what is our first response? We, through our leadership, usually try to impose our will upon them - in the interest of "national security", of course. I heard one presidential candidate last night state that we are not tough enough on certain countries and that we need to move quickly and decisively against them in order to show our strength. This was actually the quote that got me to think about this post.
As a Christian nation and as a Christian myself, am I to exert my will on others? Am I to love my loved ones and to hate those who have hurt me or picked on me through the years and to carry grudges against them for hurts even decades old? Am I supposed to despise all other drivers on the road because they dare get in my way? Hmmm.
Luke 6:27-36 lays it all on the line. Read what Jesus has to say on this subject for a moment: "But I say to you that listen, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you" (vv.27-28). Wait a minute - what did he say? Is that not the exact opposite of what we might hear from day to day? Love my enemies? Huh?
There's more. "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those that love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you?... But love your enemies, do good, and lend expecting nothing in return" (vv.32-33, 35).
That's radical stuff. Is it even possible in today's world? Can we truly love our enemies? Can we do good to all? Can we repay evil with good? I believe that we can. Think about it. What kind of world would we be living in then?
What if we started to treat others well and if we did things for others without feeling the need for reciprocation or even acknowledgment? What if we caught that door for another? What if we allowed that pedestrian to cross, that car to get out in traffic in front of us or better yet, even, what if we simply stopped carrying hurt and grudges to others and simply forgave that other person for hurts and began to treat them in a truly loving manner?
What if, as Christians, we actually prayed for the people and nations who despise us, who despise our country and all that America is supposed to stand for? What if, instead of cutting off aid to countries who disagreed with us, we continued to send humanitarian aid and food to the people who need it the most?
Would we be weak doormats? Passive, timid wimps? I don't think so. If we truly incorporated the teachings of Jesus in this arena, I believe we would actually be tough. In fact, think about this, we would demonstrating the toughest kind of love: potentially unreturned love. It's easy to love our friends, our family and those who treat us well. Almost everybody does that. It's not that tough. Try loving someone who is mean or difficult to your face. Try returning good for evil. Then see how tough love can be. "Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful" (v.36).
Never forget those words. Never forget the true toughness that Jesus demonstrated on the cross. He forgave those who did that to him. He stands to forgive our sins and our evil. Now, is that weakness? We are called and capable of doing the same thing, even today. I know that I have some work to do, by the grace of God. It will be difficult, but why else do I think it is called "tough love"? Have a great and blessed one and thanks for reading.
Feel free to comment, to pass this on.

2012-01-17T10:43:00.003-05:00

Using What You've Got

Who doesn't want to be the biggest, baddest or brightest? I'm #1, baby! Watch any sporting event and what you will see at some point during the game is that somebody is going to look at the camera and stick up that index finger and demonstrate to the world that even though their team is 5-11 or getting beat by three scores - they are indeed the best! Something is wrong though, isn't there? Can it be true that everybody is #1? Probably not. But what are the options? Are fans of the most lowly team supposed to hold up all of their fingers and show that they are #27? Again, probably not. We most definitely live in a "just win, baby" culture. But what happens when we don't win?
I think it can also be said that we live in a very beauty-obsessed world. Everywhere you look in the media, every commercial, it seems, is full of beautiful people. Apparently, only perfect people go to the grocery store or out to eat or to pretty much anywhere. Take one trip to any of those places and look around. You will see differently, won't you? Unless a woman is flawless, she isn't considered to be all that she can be.
What seems to develop as a result of both scenarios is that you have too many people who simple give up. They stop rooting for a team when they are anything less than the best. We see people gain negative self-images when what they see in the mirror doesn't quite compare with what they see on TV. Are we to simply quit or hide if we aren't the best?
Matthew 25:14-30 details the Parable of the Talents. In it, a master is heading out on a long journey. Before he goes, he leaves money with his slaves. He gives out the money according to the abilities of the slaves. One gets five, one two and another gets one. Notice something here. Not everyone gets the same amount of money. That might seem unfair - oh, we love to immediately jump to that statement, don't we? If things don't go my way, how quickly do I say, "that's not fair". I am quick to go there, but remember, what in life really is fair?
At any rate, the story continues. After the master leaves, the slaves get to work. The one who received five talents went out and made five more. The one who received two went out and made two more. Here's the interesting part: the one who received one went and dug a hole and put his talent in there. We are told that after a "long time" the master returned. Upon his return, he desires to settle up accounts. He then begins to call in the slaves.
The slave who was given five talents comes in first. He quickly states to the master that not only did he have the original five talents to give back, but he also had five more to give. What an overachiever, huh? There's your brightest and best. In response, the master gives this reply, "Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful in a few things. I will put you in charge of many more, enter into the joy of your master." (v.21)
Next, the slave who was given two talents enters. Just as quickly as the first, this servant proclaims to his master that not only did he have those earlier two talents to give back but that he also had two more! Pretty fine stuff there! The master, in somewhat surprising fashion, says the very same thing to this slave, a mid-line but solid worker, that he did to the first slave.
Finally, the slave who was given the one talent enters. This slave begins by offering some flowery language. You can almost picture this exchange in your mind's eye. Perhaps the slave stands up and begins to put on a display. He straightens his posture. He clears his throat quickly and puts on the most serious demeanor that he can. "Master, I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter seed; so I was afraid, and I went and hid you talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours." (vv. 24-25)
This seems like a very fair statement. The slave knew he didn't have much to lose. He didn't have a ton to begin with. The last thing that he wanted to do was to return with nothing. At least, it might appear that this is the case. What the master says in reply to this servant is most telling. He says, "you wicked and lazy slave! You knew, did you, that I reap where I did not sow, and gather where I did not scatter? The you ought to have invested my money with the bakers, and on my return I would have received what was my own with interest... as for this worthless slave, throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth" (v. 26 &30).
Whoa! Wait a minute, what is going on here! The slave thinks they are just being frugal or that since they don't add up to the best that they should just hold on to what they have, at the very least. Yet, it is the master who shows that this is an unacceptable position. The slave was never expected to BE the best. He was expected to do something, anything with what he was given. And there you have it: the moral of the parable. Regardless of what or how much you are given by God, you are expected to use it as well as you can. To do nothing with your talent, to think you have nothing to offer or even worse, to know you at least have something to offer and to hold on to that talent is simply a recipe for disaster.
In this parable, the master never expects the slave who received one talent to be the biggest, the brightest, #1. The master simply expected that servant to use what they were given. I think that this is an important lesson to learn in life. I know that I have, for far too long, maybe even recently, been much closer in action to that third slave than I ever should be.
How about you? Are you using whatever you have been given for the coming glory of your master? Remember, the point here is not that we are required to be the biggest and brightest. We are to use whatever it is that we have been given. To not to do so is simply an affront to our master. The next question then is this. What are you going to do about it? Are you going to use whatever talent or talents that you have been given for the glory of your master, God? Or are you going to live in fear, stating how unfair it is that you aren't the best and simply hide what it is that you have? You can't do that, I can't do that and expect our master to accept that answer. Use what you've got, even today for the glory of God.

2010-09-14T09:51:00.005-05:00

Thanking the Lord for the tough times?!

"I will give thanks to the Lord with my whole heart; I will tell of all of your wonderful deeds. I will be glad and exult in you; I will sing praise to your name, O Most High" Ps. 9:1-2, NRSV.

Is it really possible or even wise to thank the Lord for the tough times? Are we to praise him even in the midst of the most trying of circumstances? By any human measure, what kind of logic is that?
Before I continue, I wish to thank and to praise the name of Jesus for his continued manifest strength, endurance and blessings. I wish to thank him for providing us with opportunities to have our faith strengthened and reassured. He has been merciful and he has demonstrated his love for us abundantly.
This week has been so full of challenges, blessings and opportunities to experience the love and grace of The Lord and family. It would have been so much easier to wallow in misery and in the self-pity and agony that comes with a sudden family crisis. Yet, it is only truly during the toughest of times in which our faith is most radically constructed. We have been and are going through such a time of struggle with Mom's health. However, we have also been privy to the mighty workings of the Holy Spirit throughout our lives. Not only has he exhibited mercy and comfort during the tough times; he has also provided us with the unique opportunity to have our faith deepened.
I am not trivializing the situation or the pain that has been wrought. I am, however, stating that in the midst of the seemingly darkest times that the Lord has burst through with the brightest of lights. We have been given new opportunities and fresh perspective on life, on family and on priorities. How can you fail to praise his name in the light of such an event?
You see, it is very easy to praise his name when things are going well. It is very easy to praise his name in the midst of health and prosperity. However, it is not really during those times in which our faith is brought to the forefront. Though it may seem paradoxical, it is really during the tough times, the hardest times in which our faith is truly put to the test. It is during those times in which one's faith is either conformed or denied.
Is it easy to trust in the Lord during tough times? No. There is, in fact, very little that is actually easy during tough times. That is part of what makes them tough. However, if one is truly reliant upon the Lord, truly serious about their commitment to him and truly wish to live by the adage, "not my will but yours, Father", then one must be willing to accept his guidance. He will get you through those tough times. Simply let him do it. This is not a sign of weakness. It is a sign of strength and confidence. When you are confident enough in the lordship of Jesus Christ, you can release yourself into a time of tremendous faith building. By stepping back and allowing the Lord to be in control, to acquiesce to his leading during the tough times, one can gain tremendous perspective. He has brought you thus far in life. He has stated that he will NEVER leave you and will NEVER forsake you. Therefore, you can rest assured that he will bring you through the toughest of times right now.
What a comfort and even what a joy and privilege it is to serve the living God!
I have experienced these very things this past week and I believe with all of my heart that they are true. I am so thankful for the ways in which the Lord has continually made himself known, present and caring. That is why I want and must praise his name - even in the midst of the tough times! I am also quite confident that if he has done this in my life and in the lives of my family that he will do the same for you. All you have to do is to let him.

2010-09-02T09:23:00.003-05:00

It's been a long, long time!

I thought that it would be easy to maintain a blog while getting that M. Div. I guess I was wrong! At any rate, I do plan on being more active in writing and getting back into the swing of writing and working on sermon ideas, theological issues and all of the other fun stuff that I have written about in the past. Before I go any further, I would like to say that I am so grateful to God for all that he has done in the past few years. I feel even more assured in my calling, more confident in the salvation that was given to me and more vibrant and alive than ever.
These previous posts are from the "IWU era" - when I was working on my MML in Marion.
Many changes have occurred in my life since my last post, most significantly, that I am no longer an M.Div student but rather an M.Div holder - from Asbury Theological Seminary! Praise the Lord for that! Second, I am seeking a full-time ministerial appointment - more on that later. Third, I am the father of almost two teenagers - Kellie is an "old" 12 while Zach is 14. Fourth, Christie is hard at work on her BA from IWU. Soon enough, there will be 2 degree holders from IWU in the house!
So, with that, I'd like to kick off a new season of blogging!

2007-09-08T12:55:00.002-05:00

Hello and Shalom to all!

(this was posted this past May, but I wanted to include it here!)

Hello to all!
I'm back, alive and well. What a trip! What a journey! I apologize for not writing sooner, but I've been recouping and been out of town on business this week. I want to let you all know that Israel is everything anyone has ever told you and more. I would highly recommend to every Christian who can to go at some point in their life - but only with an experienced tour guide and driver. It's such a land of beauty and spiritual power, but if you don't know where you are going, you'll only find trouble. I had many thoughts during my time over there and I'll work to share them in the days to come. By the way, my new profile pic was taken on top of Mt. Arbel in Galilee, as were these fine shots.

Back to the profile pic: directly behind me is a 400 meter drop, which is only accentuated by the surrounding land, as the Sea is below "sea level". The Sea of Galilee is to the right of the picture. The city of Tiberias is out of view, but was almost directly below. The small town of Magdala is directly behind me. That was the home town of Mary Magdelene. Below my left hand, sort of in the haze is the Mount of Beautitudes - so named because this is the site of many of Jesus' sermons, fully recorded in Matthew 5-7.

It is also directly near the site of the feeding of the five thousand - the only miracle of Christ recorded in all 4 Gospels.
There's no possible way that I can convey all of the visceral aspects of the place, but let me tell you that I was blessed with the presence of the Holy Spirit in a powerful way at the Church of Beatitudes.

I wasn't expecting it, but he came and moved me to tears and sobs that were so beautiful, so cathartic, so healing, that I must praise the Lord right here and now!

A quick word
Very quickly I'd like to bring one point across in one word: devotion. This word, this action, devotion, was readily apparent in the land of Israel. As Americans, quite frankly, we have possessed a sense of entitlement in regards to our spiritual life. We abound in grace. While it is true that we are saved by grace and not by works, works need to be evident in our lives, as they demonstrate in a tangible way, our love for Jesus Christ. Once again, we aren't saved by works, but as the brother of our Lord wrote, "So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead" (James 2:17, NRSV). Devotion is the recognition and admiration of the life and works of Jesus Christ here on Earth, set into motion in order to give us eternal life for all who would believe (John 6:47). In short, this means that we need to change our perspective from "what can I get away with and still be Christian?" and begin to say "as a Christian, what must I do to express my love for him?" This is a paradigm shift of immense proportions. We then no longer get concerned with the "thou shalt nots" and become wrapped up in the "thou shalts". Do you see that? I think that we tend, myself included, to skate by too often on the merits of grace. We might attend a few church services, we might even tithe and teach a class here and there. But really, what is the measure of our devotion? Have we really invested ourselves in our relationship with Christ?
I saw people in Israel who wept, who knelt before and on and who draped themselves over the places of Christ's birth, his passion and his resurrection. While the motives for doing so may be varied, one thing became apparent. Am I as devoted to Christ? Am I truly thankful, in a transformational way, for Immanuel - God with us? It's a question that doesn't have a quick answer.While other religions have a works based salvation plan, Christianity is distinct in that we are saved by grace and belief. Yet, we can still earn lessons from others. Should our devotion to the one true God and Lord of all be less than that of a person who does not? What have you done in your life to truly make Jesus your Lord, the object of your greatest love and devotion? He has given you his life so that you may live. He is the bread of life that has given life to the world. (John 6:33) Eat of it, be filled, be devoted!
Devotion may be in the form of switching off the tv and taking time in prayer and study in the Word - not just one verse, but true contemplation and meditation on his precious words. I can tell you from experience that since I have been able to see the places of the Bible, my reading and understanding of them has changed forever. I also can tell you that this feeling is possible without having to go to on a trip. By spending time with the Word, by cherishing it, by ingesting it, you too can experience. This in turn should lead to a vibrant prayer life that puts you in tune with your Lord and God - thereby increasing that ever important word in your life: devotion. Won't you do that today?Thanks so much to all who have prayed for my journey and my family while I was away. Know that I prayed for you all as well. What a privilege and honor to lift up one another in prayer before the Lord! Have a blessed day!

2007-09-08T12:54:00.001-05:00

Completing the ENTIRE Person

Foreword
I'd like to let everyone know that I have been out of town extensively this past week, hence only one post. I'm shooting to begin a new series on prayer but it is more than likely going to be interrupted for some time. I'll be in Israel from the 9th to the 18th, so my access to the internet will be limited, at best. I'd really, really appreciate your prayers for that time, as it will be difficult for everyone, yet still an experience of a lifetime!

Introduction
Just as I did with an interesting theological topic, I also like to address general topics of interest from time to time. The concept of complete health is one that is not only of interest but one that hits me between the eyes right now. I believe that a person is physical, mental, spiritual and emotional. Pastors usually do their work in the realm of the spiritual and emotional. If you are a blessed communicator, the mental aspects of a person are also addressed. However, it is rare that a pastor ever addresses the physical components that help to complete the entire person. Yet without that, we never fully minister to all of the needs that a person may have. So, in the that spirit...

"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?" (I Cor. 6:19, NIV)
Last week I begrudgingly agreed to get some blood work done. When the results came back, I found out that I had high cholesterol and really high triglycerides. I wasn't too thrilled, to say the least. I used to run track and was very active until a few years ago. I'm 37, 6'3" and about 215, so I figured that all was well, as far as cholesterol went. What I've not really mentioned is that for years, I would eat pretty much whatever, whenever. I did have my gallbladder removed a few years back, which has caused me to change my diet somewhat, but I guess that wasn't quite enough.I recently gave up pork and most red meat in order to deal with some typical post-op digestive issues, but this recent news has been quite sobering. I'm quite thankful that I have found out the news at my age instead of in 10-15 years. Heart disease is no joke and something that needs to be discussed on a regular basis, whether on Sunday or Wednesday night or at a time of convenience for the church. Why?The aforementioned scripture makes it very clear that our bodies are of great importance. The church is great at addressing issues of sin, but then we all shuffle off to the buffet line without giving it a second thought.

Diet changes?
I really believe that we need to become more conscious about addressing not only what goes into our hearts and minds, but into our bodies as well. The number one killer amongst human beings is heart disease. And what is the typical initial symptom of heart attack? It is typically death. That's right! In many cases, heart problems are diagnosed post-mortem. In other words, when it's too late. I believe that something can be done to reverse years of damage that we have caused, but it's not easy. It requires willpower and accountability. Frankly, this sounds familiar to areas of our lives that we already, as Christians, strive to surrender to the Lord. Should our diets be any different?If we are truly thankful for our gift of life, I believe that we need to be willing to care for bodies. Daily, regular exercise needs to begin. I'm not talking about becoming marathon runners. I'm talking about doing something: walking, lifting, stretching.. something. Granted, a doctor should be consulted if haven't exercised for many years prior to activity, but for most getting out and moving will be a great start.Next, our diets need to change. Fatty foods, while tasty, will cause problems sooner rather than later. I was shocked when I went through some food labels recently. Do I really need to get 200% of the recommended daily intake of sodium in one sandwich? I'm not saying that everyone needs to become a vegan, but the fact remains that most people have between 5-7 POUNDS of undigested meat literally rotting away in their intestines on any given day. mmmmmm - sound good?I've recently decided to kick nearly all meat to curb. This is a HARD step for a guy like me to make, but a necessary one. I've found that with Boca and GardenBurger, there are many viable and actually GOOD tasting options out there. NOW, it's not always the most cost-effective way to shop. However, most of us take better care of our vehicles and houses than we do our own bodies. Meanwhile, the church sits by and never addresses any such concerns. Sure, we may take stands against smoking, drinking and other vices, but if you want 3 quarter-pounders, knock yourself out. Really, it is time for us to be willing to address all the things that violate our personal temples. This starts at the dinner table, folks. We can have good food while still paying attention to the awful amounts of cholesterol and fat that many foods contain. More fish, more chicken - less breading on them, too, by the way.

Conclusion
So why would a pastor address these issues? Because for one thing, if they don't, they might wind up in no shape to pastor. If they say nothing, there might not be too many people left in the congregation. I believe that we have a responsibility, as pastors, to address all of the needs of the congregation that we can. Only as complete and healthy people can we fully enjoy this blessed gift of life that God has granted us. Seek to have a healthy and vibrant walk with Jesus Christ. Get your blood checked. Make appropriate dietary changes. Exercise. Pray. Read your Bible. Witness to and love others with the love of Christ. It ALL works together! Have a blessed day - and really, start taking care of your bodies as well as your spirits!

2007-09-08T12:52:00.001-05:00

Peter and Judas: Part Three: Perspectives

Introduction
I want to thank everyone who has made a comment throughout the life of this series. This subject is both intriguing and difficult. The intrigue lies within trying to ascertain the ways in which Peter and Judas dealt with their respective failures. The difficulty lies within our attempts to empathize with Judas without forgetting about his repentance and to keep from glossing over Peter's glaring inadequacies. At no time has this series attempted to make statements about the eternal destinations of either Judas or Peter. This is in line with the Biblical mandate of Matthew 7:1-2. This statement about avoiding judgments refers to our penchant for determining the outcome of the lives of others, which clearly the work of God alone.In wrapping this topic up, I want to look at what I believe to be the final and ultimate difference between Peter and Judas. The difference can be summed up in one word: perspective.

The crisis of introversion revisited
Why is perspective important in this case? It seems that the perspective of each of these men is what drove them towards their ultimate positions, one of shame and one of honor. One man seemed to have spent three years in the presence of Christ yet remained completely focused on self, literally consumed with an internal perspective. The other man was, at least eventually, able to change their perspective to one that was conducive to helping, leading and inspiring first the remaining apostles and then much of the early Christian movement.This crisis of introversion, as spoken about in an earlier post, is what kept Judas isolated from the fellowship of his brethren. It kept him focused on his needs and desires. He illustrates this by being labeled a thief in John 12:6. Judas was so focused on self that he failed to see the enormity of Mary's act of love and lack of concern for financial security in exchange for devotion to Jesus. Morris points out the significance of this passage. "This is the one place in the four Gospels wherein Judas is shown to be of bad character prior to the betrayal... and if this is the character of the man, we may well feel that he was dissatisfied with the way the mission of Jesus was turning out" (Morris, 1995, p.513, 514). In other words, Judas cared more for self, more for money and more for personal gain than he ever did others. This would explain how Judas was both able to be possessed by Satan directly and how he was able to betray Christ. Furthermore, it would seem to illustrate how he was unable to get over his own guilt, hence his ultimate act of suicide as a type of conflict resolution.

The eventual outward perspective of Peter
Peter, the prophesied rock of the church, acted in a way that was completely contrary to his eventual status as one of the pillars of the early church. He proved himself to still be impulsive and emotional, hence his ability to deny Jesus. Yet, we still must deal with he fact that Peter ultimately behaves in a way that is quite different from Judas. Like Judas, Peter is confronted with the finality of the earthly ministry of Jesus. Similarly, Peter is wracked with guilt after his failure, as was Judas. Two things seem to separate Peter from Judas. One is the fact that Peter isn't directly possessed by Satan. This speaks of the character and internal spiritual state of the man. Despite his massive foibles, Peter still, at least on some level has a heart that loves and longs to serve Christ, if not imperfectly. Second is this idea of perspective.While Matthew tells us that Judas is alone when he confronts the priests, John 20-21 shows that Peter was constantly in the company of others. The difference that shows between Peter and Judas cannot be overstated. One would only have to look to our own day and age, at Blacksburg, Virginia to show what happens when one person is consumed and overrun by an internally focused psyche. Peter is never mentioned as being alone or isolated. This is key! Peter stayed surrounded by others. Perhaps this was due to the man himself or perhaps it is due to divine intervention. While the cause of Peter's social interaction may not be correctly ascertained from scripture, the impact of that action may be.Peter is able to be present on the day of resurrection. He is able to witness the bodily resurrected Christ not once or twice but three times because he stayed with the brethren. This leads to his ultimate restoration and fairly exalted status as leader of the apostolic group. None of this would have been possible if Peter had remained wallowed in self-pity and isolation. By keeping a perspective of outward motivation, Peter is able to stumble along the path towards restoration rather than destruction.

Conclusion
While we may never know the impetus for Peter's remaining within community, what we can take away from the comparison between Peter and Judas is this idea of perspective. Judas was consumed and destroyed by maintaining an introverted life. Peter is eventually able to be restored by Jesus largely because he stayed available and in community.We, too, need to stay connected with a body of believers, both locally, through a church if at all physically possible and globally, through evangelism and interaction with others. I cannot discount the fact that Judas fulfilled prophecy, but I believe that his choices opened the door for these actions to occur.
I've tried to be fair to both, not too light on Peter and not too heavy on Judas, in order to illustrate that both real men illustrated truths for our enrichment and growth today.

Application for us
Please, don't stay isolated from your Christian brethren and from the world at large. Don't allow yourself to be consumed by self. Even Christians can fall prey to the crisis of introversion. It is something that I constantly battle. I have both succeeded and failed with this issue. Yet through it all, it is a focus upon the Lord Jesus Christ that is responsible for lifting me up and out of my crisis of introversion. So today, please don't just walk away with having just read this post. If all that you have read our words, then I haven't been clear enough. Only by living a life guided by the Holy Spirit, directed in love for others and devotion to Jesus Christ will you be able to stretch out past an inward focus. And only by focusing outside of oneself will restoration, just like that given to Peter and just like the one that each and every one of us needs in the form of forgiveness from Jesus Christ, become readily available to you. It's all a matter of perspective. What will yours be today?

2007-09-08T12:51:00.001-05:00

Peter and Judas: Part Two

Introduction
In the first part of this soon-to-be series, we took a look at some comparisons between Judas - insert boo here - and Peter - insert cheer here. It seems that the overwhelming view of these two men is characterized in exactly the same way as how I just presented them. Judas is hated and Peter beloved. Yet, I believe that the case for both men is not as cut and dry as we try to make it, with us having the benefit of hindsight. If we were to zoom back to their time, would we be so sure of the outcome?

One possible KEY difference
John 13:27 reads, "After he (Judas) received the piece of bread, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, "Do quickly what you are going to do" (NRSV). Similarly, "Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was one of the twelve" (Luke 22:3, NRSV). Luke 22:31 states, "Simon, Simon (Peter), listen! Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your own faith may not fail; and you (Peter), when once you have turned back, strengthen your brothers" (NRSV). These accounts point out one similarity and one difference between Judas and Peter. All of the disciples were tempted, Peter included, in a spiritual way to abandon Jesus in crunch time. However, Satan only seems to be able to tempt Peter. John and Luke both tell us that Satan actually entered into Judas. What a difference!
First of all, what must Judas's spiritual condition have been like in order to have been able to have been possessed? Second, what must Peter's have been like if he wasn't possessed? This might be the very answer to the overriding question about Judas. While demonic possession is mentioned extensively in the gospels, save for John, in no other case is it stated that Satan entered into someone directly. By the way, as a side note, I've often wondered how someone, particularly a Christian, could think that Satan doesn't exist. He seems to be very real in the gospels!
It would almost be fair to say that Judas wasn't fully under his control during the betrayal. We're not told when or if Satan left Judas, either. Possibly, just speculation here, but perhaps Judas acted under his own power in Matthew 27, when it is stated that Judas repents and seeks to take back the silver to the priests.

Back to Matthew 27:3-4 for a moment
In this text, as mentioned above and in part one, Judas is spoken about as being repentant for his actions. He feels, rightfully, culpability for his role in the betrayal of Jesus and seeks at least some form of restitution for his actions. It should be noted that perhaps Judas was acting in response to Deuteronomy 27:25, which called for a curse to put upon anyone who betrayed innocent blood for money. This is certainly a possibility as Judas specifically mentions that he betrayed innocent blood. So once again, we must notice here that Judas possesses at least a modicum of repentance - at least as much as Peter, perhaps even more.

Getting it
Another issue that has been raised throughout the interactions based on part one is the idea that somehow Peter understood the gravity of his situation more so than Judas did. Honestly, I can't really find much scriptural basis for this. I do tend to agree that in the long run Peter came to understand more than Judas did. Yet, in the immediate days of both Christ's death and resurrection, this doesn't seem to be completely accurate.We know from the text in Matthew 27:5 that Judas went and hanged himself after being unable to cope with his guilt. Later in Acts 1:18-20, Peter himself explains that scripture had to be fulfilled in regards to Judas. We may then ascertain that while Judas didn't get the concept of Jesus as a suffering messiah, he also is acting under direct satanic possession, yet all the while under God's provincial knowledge, hence the fulfillment of prophecy.
But before we slap Peter on the back, we need to do a Lee Corso (college football guru) - "Not so fast, my friend". Peter was obviously slow in some areas of acceptance of Christ. While he is applauded by Christ for acknowledging him as Lord, he is in the next moment HARSHLY rebuked - the get behind me, Satan quote of Matthew 16:23. Additionally, it must be noted that the account of Peter's threefold restoration in John 21 is the THIRD time that Jesus appears to Peter after the resurrection. Three times! John 20:19 and 26 account for the first two times. Additionally, it is recorded that Thomas - the doubting Thomas - is in fact restored BEFORE Peter. The man who said he'd only believe if he touched Jesus is restored prior to Peter. Is this to imply that unbelief is less of a sin than denial?In any way that you look at it, Peter just doesn't seem to grasp the situation. He never ACTIVELY seeks forgiveness and restoration. It sort of comes to him. Looking at the threefold restoration, some debate has arisen about the language that is used during the exchange.
It may be postulated that Jesus in both the first and second instances of "Do you love me?" is using a higher form of love, in the Greek text, than is Peter. Only in the third statement are both words for love the same. Does this imply that Peter didn't quite get it? Furthermore, does this show that Christ was willing to work with Peter, so to speak? I seem to have more questions than answers on this.

Conclusion
What I want to point out in this second part is that although we are quick to dismiss Judas as hellbound and clueless, the Bible itself paints a slightly different picture. Likewise, while we love to see that Peter is forgiven and restored, we tend to miss out on the fact that he was fairly slow in accepting that Jesus had to and needed to suffer as the atoning sacrifice for our sins. We may WISH to see Peter as one who was forgiven, like us, so we readily identify with him; foibles and all. Yet, why are we so quick to distance ourselves from Judas? Is it because he couldn't absorb his guilt and merely was repentant and not truly desiring of forgiveness? Or is it because, as Lora Mae and others commented, it's hard - and even painful to identify with Judas in any way? I'll continue this next post, but I'd really love to hear your take on these issues. Thanks for reading and bringing up valuable points and comments! Have a blessed day!

2007-08-30T13:57:00.001-05:00

Peter and Judas: Part One

Disclaimer
Every once in a while, I like to delve into areas of theological interest. I'll do this from time to time because hopefully there are some issues that are worth investigating within the grand scheme of the topic. I really want to open these types of posts to interaction, as they are largely issues rather than doctrine or straight up teaching topics. So, with that disclaimer stated, let's hit it!

Peter and Judas
This is a topic that came up on Sunday and I believe that it merits further discussion. Stanley Jones stated that the wonder isn't that Judas hanged himself but that Peter didn't. Wow! You know, I had never really given much thought to that, but this is a weighty subject. First, I want to let know that I still stand by Matthew 7:1-2, in that I am not going to judge the eternal destination of Judas. That's not my goal here or even something I have any business weighing in on, so I won't. In a comparison between Judas, one who is despised and vilified and Peter, one who is praised and admired, some comparisons can be made. One betrayed Christ and the other one denied him. Really, Peter's denial isn't as far removed from Judas's betrayal as we'd like to think. John 18:25-27 gives more detail about Peter's denial than the other gospel accounts do. I believe this is because the writer of the gospel was more than likely there. I've spoken a bit about this and the credit goes to Ben Witherington (2006) on the topic of the writer, but I agree with his thinking that the writer was the beloved disciple, Lazarus. This would account for the more exacting detail of the denial. All of that to say this. When Peter is confronted by a relative of Malchus, the servant who was de-earred by Peter in the garden and healed by Jesus, Peter folded for the third time. After this third denial, we don't hear anything about Peter until John 21, when he is restored by Jesus.
Interestingly, in Matthew's account Peter denies knowing Christ so vehemently that he swears and curses, possibly towards himself and possibly towards Jesus. Matthew builds on this and adds that Peter recognizes that he had fulfilled Jesus's words and goes out to cry bitterly.I think that Matthew puts an interesting wrinkle into this comparison in chapter 27. Judas is depicted as also being full of remorse for his actions, as he goes to the priests and changes his mind - the NRSV renders it as "repents" - and throws the 30 pieces of silver down and leaves the temple. By the way, on another rabbit trail, 30 pieces of silver was the common price of a slave. Yes, Judas betrayed Christ for the same amount of money that a slave was sold for. However, he was inadvertently fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah 11:13.So, we are left with the picture that both Judas and Peter are filled with remorse and regret for their actions. Yet, they seem to take divergent paths towards restoration. Judas hangs himself and Peter languishes for a time and then goes about his regular life, which was prior to his becoming a disciple the life of a fisherman. Not to dismiss that, but let's go back to this issue of repentance.

Repentance for both Judas and Peter?
We all know that Peter repents and is restored by Jesus to truly become "Cephas" - rock - as Jesus said. This followed prophesy. Judas seems to have followed as well, as Jesus said in Matthew 26:24 that it would have been better that the betrayer would have never been born. By the way, it is largely through those words that we get our view of Judas's eternal state.Still why is the repentant state of Judas different from that of Peter? It would seem that there ISN'T any difference. "When it is all put together, I think it is extremely difficult to deny the Matthean Judas genuine repentance. His change of heart cannot be judged as less authentic than that of Peter in 26:75" (Nolland, 2005, p.1153). This would seem to state that repentance in and of itself isn't necessarily enough to grant us salvation.

Salvation issues
I believe that the ultimate difference between Judas and Peter is not in their earlier betrayals or even in their states of repentance. They aren't separated by impulsiveness. Peter was characterized by rash action before his brain kicked in. Judas seems to possess a similar disposition. It has been postulated that Judas betrayed Christ not to have him killed but to force his hand into becoming the messiah that Judas most likely visualized. So, then what's different? It seems that Peter was starting to get over his impulsiveness but Judas never did. Perhaps, even, Peter possessed the ability to forgive himself and Judas didn't. Whatever the exact reason was, we know that Judas pronounced himself judge, jury and executioner by hanging himself. Any further work from that initial state of repentance was negated in that action. Peter was able to experience both restoration through Jesus and empowerment through the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Could Judas have experienced the same or was his fate sealed? That seems to be the million dollar question, as it were.I'm going to continue this discussion later.

Question
So, if I may, what do you think about this topic? Does Judas represent the inherent desire to control our own destinies? I wonder, could Judas have even changed after his betrayal. Maybe the question isn't could have rather it may be a what if question...

2007-08-30T13:55:00.001-05:00

The Crisis of Introversion

Introduction
Let's face it, we are a nation that is captivated by introspection. We spend billions of dollars on self-help aids, on psychiatry, on self-esteem building activities and the like. We couple this with the pursuit of material gain: the desire to have the biggest house, the best car and the finest clothes that money can buy. Our Christian bookstores are filled to the brim with self-help books - Lord help you if you might want to buy a commentary or Bible study aid! Our televisions are glutted with home improvement shows and fashion tips are easily attainable.While each of these pursuits, in and of themselves are not an issue, when added together, they tend to make a potent recipe for narcissism, the overwhelming and consuming pursuit of self. This is a problem that must change, especially if the church is going to progress towards being the spotless bride of Christ and effective tool for ministering to the world in the name of Jesus Christ.

The Crisis of Introversion
As mentioned above, we have become a nation that is hooked on self-examination and self-promotion. This post is not a diatribe against the material excesses of America, although it should be noted that we are the most affluent nation that the world has ever seen. We are rich and our churches are as well. Unfortunately, when a church becomes too rich, it has a tendency to become fat and lazy. It quickly becomes detached from the true needs of society and quickly shifts into "country club" mentality. I am a firm believer that a pastor has a sacred duty to comfort the afflicted and to afflict the comfortable. What does that mean? It means that a pastor needs to challenge and to exhort their congregations towards a headlong pursuit of Christ Jesus. It means that a pastor needs to promote discipleship and an atmosphere of genuine Christian community and service. There's the key word!! Service!
Let me make this clear. While it is of great importance to have a positive self-image and to cultivate a positive perspective on life, it must not be pursued at the expense of Christian service. We are called, as Christians, to become disciples of Jesus Christ, to live in community with others and to reach out to those who need a loving and helping hand. It's hard to extend that hand when both of them are clutching a mirror!
I was, for all intents and purposes, a very vain guy. My family could attest to the fact that I used to spend a great amount of time in front of the mirror, "checking to make sure that everything is in place" in the words of Phil Collins. The issue here isn't whether or not you care about your personal appearance, you should give some thought to it, but you don't need to be so consumed by it. This leads to an introverted thought process, in which all revolves around self. In doing so, we become guilty of creating a crisis of introversion. We become wrapped up in our own needs and desires.

How this crisis damages the church
"Well, I stopped attending that church because it just didn't fulfill my spiritual needs." "That church wasn't spiritually deep enough for me." "Those people are mere spiritual babes." "That church only fed us milk. I need meat, so I'm leaving." "Churches today are so full of hypocrites and those who aren't spiritual enough, so I'm not going back."Do any of these phrases sound familiar? Have you ever uttered any of them? all of them? I have at one time or another. All of these phrases have one thing in common. All of them reflect this crisis of introversion. If there is any truth to the latest book by George Barna, Revolutions, then the church is being crippled by introversion. My main critique of this book is that respects and even elevates the need for a Christian to leave the church when it no longer caters to their needs. Folks, this a problem!
While there are circumstances that unfortunately do merit a change in churches, they are not myriad in existence. Short of deep immoral behavior in the pulpit and a teaching of clearly unbiblical teaching and theology, our reasons for leaving a church are few. I want to make this clear in as loving a tone as I can muster. A church is not a spiritual Burger King! You can't always "have it your way." The church is full of people who are various stages in their Christian walk. There are those who can absolutely bury me in wisdom and Biblical knowledge. Similarly, there are those who haven't even cracked their Bibles since becoming involved in the church. Yet, they are all to have a place in the church!
One of the hallmarks of a truly mature Christian is the realization that you have so much more to learn and so many areas that need attention in your walk. This means that no one has arrived yet and no one is so spiritually mature that they can't benefit from the community of the Lord. AND - if you are really are mature spiritually, then you should be actively involved in helping others reach a higher state of maturity. That's right, the church isn't a buffet line! It's a community that is predicated upon love and service with the express desire to make disciples and to spread the message that there is indeed a God who loves everyone beyond their wildest imaginations!When our focus is on us, we lose that edge. We lose that focus on the world's needs when our eyes become myopic. We then become a church and a nation that is materially wealthy but Biblically poor. We become able to recite song lyrics and movie dialogue but can't recite a Bible verse longer than "Jesus wept". When this occurs, the church is bound to suffer and to be damaged.

Is change possible?
I truly believe that change can occur, though! How? By becoming committed to focusing upon the needs of others within our own household, our neighborhoods, our churches, our communities, our nations and our world, we stand to truly be the church of the Bible. When our focus turns to the needs of others, then AND ONLY THEN, do we truly love as Christ commands us to. See, the focus needs to be on love. Love, by nature, can't exist alone. It needs interaction with another. Love, as expressed throughout I Corinthians 13, is never self-serving. It gets over hurt feelings and desires to build up rather than tear down. Jesus stated that all of the commandments could be whittled down to two principles. If we love God with every fiber of our being and if we love our neighbor as ourselves, then we've got it. Love not only covers a multitude of sins, but it is the reason that Jesus came to us in the first place. John 3:16 isn't just good poster material!

Conclusion
I'm not about to say that the church is beyond repair. Yes, work needs to be done. Yes, changes must occur. But no, the church isn't beyond hope. That said, the only way that this generation will be able to have any part in this repair is if we begin to get past our desires to placate self and strive to build up others. By focusing on others, our own issues begin to smooth out. Suddenly, those problems begin to get more focused. Our hurts begin to heal. When our focus is upon restoring the fallen, we get to see mercy and grace acted out. This in turn not only changes us, it changes the church. When the church is changed, the world will begin to change. when that happens, watch out!

2007-08-23T12:12:00.000-05:00

Judge Not: Pt. 5: Restoration
"Dear brothers and sisters, if another Christian is overcome by some sin, you who are godly should gently and humbly help that person back onto the right path. And be careful not to fall into the same temptation yourself" (Galatians 6:1, NLT).

Introduction
We've looked at various aspects and real-life scenarios of judging, whether it be labeled discernment or out and out legalism. This series began as an exegetical look at Matthew 7:1-2, the "judge not unless you want to be judged" verses that are bruised and battered within and without the church. In this post, I want to examine what needs to happen after rightful judgment has been made - talking about discernment of activities here, not of a person's eternal destination, in the life of someone in the church.

The landscape
To me, there is nothing more tragic, sad and disappointing than hearing about how someone was hurt in a church to the point of leaving altogether. This has become an all too common occurrence and one that I believe can and must be avoided. While the person who was hurt does possess a degree of culpability in this scenario, stories and personal experiences have led me to believe that in many cases, one could hardly be blamed for leaving.
Paul instructions to the Galatians, which by the way was likely his first church letter, speak of how a Christian should be restored to fellowship. Now, there are some notes of interest that should be expounded upon briefly. First, it should be noted that this verse pertains only to those who are already Christians. Second, Paul is stating that it is entirely possible for a Christian to sin. Might he also be implying that one could lose their salvation as well? While not implicitly stated, the thought must be considered. Third, Paul is quite specific in stating that other Christians need to rally around their fallen brother or sister. And here is the rub...
Too often, this third note never occurs. Too often, this person is rejected, thrown to wolves, shot down by the very ones who are TOLD by the very book they claim to love! This point can't be missed! Our judgments that are geared towards other Christians are never, never, never intended to be ostracizing in nature. It is our duty as Christians to bring back those who have left, either from sin and shame or from being wounded by the church.
Paul places the emphasis on restoration in this passage for a reason. We must remember that the church is set up as a community first and foremost. A community, by its very nature is intended to build and to be built upon. We can't very well be building when we are tearing down, can we? It's pretty simple, or is it? Perhaps not, because then maybe, we'd see it more often.
Christians are called to surround the hurt, the fallen and the bruised in gentleness and humility. Paul's saying that we are not to hold the sin or hurt over the damaged person. In other words, other Christians in this case aren't to revel in the fallen, they are to remember that by the same measure that they give mercy, so shall they receive it. Maybe these words aren't so simple. I admit that I haven't always been as gentle and as merciful as I should have been. It becomes very easy at times to exalt our own perceived spiritual superiority over another's "weak faith". Yet, to do so flies completely in the face of scripture - not just this verse in Galatians, either.
Once again, I do understand that this post has some preachy elements in it, but what do you expect, haha... Also, I know that there is a bit of irony in noting that some judgment is required before restoration can begin. Remember, this though, the emphasis is upon restoring and rebuilding the kingdom and not upon the act of judging another here.

2007-08-22T10:16:00.001-05:00

Judge Not: Pt. 4: Actions might be louder than words

Introduction
In this series, we've dealt with Matthew 7:1-2 head on. The phrase "judge not and you will not be judged" refers not to a blanket statement made by Jesus to not judge. It is a statement that, through the interpretation of the original Greek, means that we are to not judge the ETERNAL DESTINATION of another person. While later verses also indicate that statements of judgment may be made within specific parameters, here Jesus refers to the ultimate form of judgment, made all too often even today, unfortunately.
In part three, we examined one way in which judgments may be made, through the lens of current events. In part four, this trend continues to focus upon social and racial equality, which was demonstrated by Jesus himself on many occasions, not the least of which was his direct and loving confrontation with the Samaritan woman at the well, as recorded in John 4.

Jackie Robinson Day
April 15th 2007, marked the 60th anniversary of the first regular season game played by Jackie Robinson in Major League Baseball. So what, some may say. Sure, this had to do with baseball, but it goes beyond that. At the time, the military was still segregated. When Jackie and other African-Americans served our nation during World War II, mere years before this game, they had to serve in separate units from their Caucasian counterparts and comrades.
These same men, when they returned home from service, still found that they couldn't stay in many of the same hotels, eat in the same sections of restaurants or even see a movie in the same theater as Caucasians. These practices weren't simply limited to the South Jim Crow states. They were also, shamefully, practiced in sections in the North, as well.
By setting foot on a professional baseball field, Jackie Robinson was taking one of the first of the civil rights movement, which was still about 15 years away. It's been recorded that at this time, Jackie was harassed on and off the field, even receiving death threats. Imagine that! He received death threats for having the "audacity" for wanting to play baseball! Yet, as bad that sounds, at least Jackie was granted the right to do so. He had no such option in the NBA or NFL. Baseball, likely Jackie's worst sport, was the only major sport to give him a chance at all.
It's been recorded that some of Jackie's "teammates" didn't want him to play on the Dodgers. One of the more vocal opposers was named Dixie Walker. Apparently though, it was made clear by Branch Rickey, the man responsible for signing Jackie, that anyone opposed to Jackie playing would be traded. In a related show of solidarity with Jackie, one day when playing in Cincinnati, the fans and others were being particularly cruel. In order to help dissuade the crowd from their actions, local hero and future Hall of Famer Pee Wee Reese went up to Jackie and put his arm around his shoulders, as if to show to the crowd that Jackie was a man and Dodger, just like the the rest of the team was, no more, no less. Reese was judging the behavior of the crowd as being incorrect, but he chose to respond to that same incorrect behavior in a loving manner. Reese's actions were clearly louder than any words might have been!

Application for the Christian
It is this action by Reese that I would like to apply to the Christian life. Few of us will have the opportunity to make a stand like Jackie did. He shouldered some the most difficult and frankly despicable treatment another human being could suffer. When the opportunity arose to show support and to voice a type of judgment against such behavior, Reese's actions spoke even louder than words.
This is the type of attitude that we as Christians are to display. Perhaps not through picket signs and protests, although situations may warrant it, but through our words and loving displeasure, we may make it clear that the Bible sends a different kind of message to the world. Racism can't be allowed to exist. Sexism is incorrect. However, we are not to employ the same methods as some in the world have employed in order to get these points across.
Judgments are needed at times, but not through a pursuit of an "any means necessary" type of approach. Our stance must be like Dr. Martin Luther King or even Mahatma Gandhi's approach of peaceful resistance. Remember, we are called to not only love or friends and fellow Christians, but to love our enemies as well. It's hard to love when you are throwing rocks! It is important for our Christian witness to be seasoned with love, for we must remember whose name we carry. If our actions, even in righteous judgment, are contrary to those of Christ, we defeat ourselves outright.

Conclusion
I'd like for us to remember that there are occasions that warrant our involvement. Judgment needs to given when we are faced with clear attacks on Biblical principles. However, even when our action is mandated, what we do must always be in accordance with the very Word that we are defending. After all, how effective would Reese have been if he had chosen to go up into the stands to verbally and physically confront those who assaulted Jackie? If we are told that a gentle answer turns away wrath, we need to remember that. There is a way to get your point across while maintaining your witness for Christ, I assure you.
Our judgments need to be seasoned with love. They need to have the purpose of not tearing down the person who has displayed the wrong behavior, but they need to have the purpose of removing the malignancy from that same person. In other words, we want to remove the cancer and leave the patient intact.

2007-08-22T10:11:00.000-05:00

Judge Not: Pt. 3: Where's the furor?

Overview
In what is quickly becoming a series of posts elaborating on one of the most brazenly abused scriptures in the Bible, Matthew 7:1-2, otherwise known as "judge not, lest you be judged, we are going to take a look at another aspect of application.
In part one, we investigated the proper exegetical meaning of the scripture, that Jesus is making a proclamation against judging one another eternally, not against judging actions that are immoral or unbiblical.
In part two, we took a look at some practical implications of how a judgmental spirit may overtake, overrun and keep a church from fulfilling its purpose on earth.
Part three will deal with another application. The question has been asked if there are times and places for judging. The answer to that is dependent upon the purpose and motives for doing so. What follows will be a building of a case for a time in which loving judgments should be made.

The Imus predicament
This past spring, much deliberation occurred over statements made by Don Imus in regards to his statement about the Rutgers women's basketball team. In one fell stroke, Imus managed to offend both the female and African-American communities. The comments have cost Imus his lucrative job, at least on CBS and MSNBC. A quick attempt to hush the matter by the respective companies initially led to a two week suspension for Imus. That proverbial slap on the wrist was eventually replaced by the firing of Imus, mostly in response to the furor of both offended communities.
This situation calls for a bit of an editorial comment on my part. First, I support the decision to fire Imus. In this day and age - frankly in any day and age, that type of misogynistic and racially charged language has no place on the airwaves. Second, I stand in full support of the comments that were made by the Rutgers coach, in which she stated that the time has come in which NO ONE should be making those types of comments: neither white, nor black, nor male nor female. In other words, no one should be saying such things, whether it be on the airwaves or in song.
Third, I also stand in support of the investigation and spotlight being turned upon the hip-hop community. As one of the most popular forms of musical expression, accountability for apparent misogny must be in place. With all respect for Snoop Dogg as a man, I think that his argument, along with that of Russell Simmons, about rap artist simply writing about what they see rings incredibly hollow. Women are not female dogs and they aren't mere objects for quenching men's desires. They are men's partners and equals. Across the board, statements against women must stop. This isn't an opportunity to swipe at the hip-hop community, it's an opportunity to speak out in judgment, motivated by my love for women and the protection of our children.
Fourth, I wonder if it might be possible that a bit of hypersensitivity didn't come into play in this Imus/Rutgers situation. Really, should the Rutgers team have cared about what some dj said about them? How do the statements of a played-out, well past his prime shock jock have to impact a fine athletic accomplishment? Just a thought...

Application for the Christian
Now, while I have stated that I contend that Imus was out of line and that his firing is justified, I wonder if the type of moral indignation that was displayed by both the African-American community leaders and women's rights activists shouldn't be carried into another arena. It seems that pundits for nearly every interest group is given a forum on a national level in order to, rightfully, voice their displeasure about unfavorable and possibly degrading race and sex based statements.
My only concern about this process, is this. Where's the furor within the Christian community in regards to statements that have been made by, for example, Bill Maher on his show about the deluded and weak need for some to rely upon religion? His statements aren't far removed from a Marxian opinion of religion being the opiate of the masses. Yet, does anyone speak out or is anyone even given the opportunity to speak out on a national stage?
Further, while Rosie was catching flak her statements of belief in a national conspiracy in regards to 9/11, who was standing up in righteous indignation about her recent comments in which she compared fundamentalist Christian to fundamentalist terrorists? Who was calling for her firing? I believe with all of my heart that Christians need to take note of the climate of sensitivity that is being displayed in this country and see if some of that might be able to be used to defend and refine thoughts about Christianity today? Or would we have yet another case of tolerance for all things, except the cross of Christ?

A time for "judging"
What I'm saying is that there are times to stand up and to "not let your good be spoken evil of". There are times to stand up in defense of the most precious gift ever given to humanity. In a similar fashion, there are times to judge statements made by individuals. I believe that I have demonstrated at least two occasions in which protest and judgment is apropos. What I would warn against, however, would be the use of that righteous indignation in statements against the person, Rosie O'Donnell. That doesn't mean that I stand in support of her public lifestyle choices. It means that any potential public forum that a Christian advocate might receive needs to and must be directed towards the hateful comments against Christianity rather than at the person who made them.
In other words, the examples of the aforementioned pundits must be followed. No credible comments were made against the person of Don Imus. It was the statements of the man that were measured and found wanting. I believe that Christians, when making discerning and Holy Spirit-led statements need to direct their furor at statements. Might there still be backlash against the brave stand? Sure, but at least the ammunition that is given to those making the statements against religion or Christianity will be diminished.

Closing Comments
So while there are times in which judgment may be Biblically given - and this particular post is only examining one time and one direction in which judgments may be vocalized - they should only be given when guided by love, correction and of utmost importance, the Holy Spirit. Love is still the rule and the guidelines of love that are given in I Corinthians 13 must be followed. Be patient, kind and never rude. Judgment can't be directed by selfish motives and can't be given in order to continue legalistic practices.

2007-08-16T14:37:00.001-05:00

Judge Not:: Pt. 2 : The Closed Door Syndrome

Introduction
In part one, we deconstructed the popular social misuse of Matthew 7:1-2. To quickly summarize, the use of "judge not, lest you be judged" is being used today as a means of deflecting any potential judgment being meted out by those who dare make a stand. Yet, the actual words of Jesus were conveying a command against making an eternal judgment against another, not one based on behaviors or actions - when done in a loving and constructive way.
In part two, we'll begin to examine an all too familiar practical application of the dangers of passing judgment upon others too quickly or from a position of supposed moral authority. Practical and common occurrences will be examined. In a similar way, a type of judgmental attitude may be perceived. Please know that this comes from a prayerful and loving place. I love the church and believe in my heart that the church is still and always will be the bride of Christ. I'm just trying to straighten out the train on her dress here, that's all...
Just to address the issue up front: once again, I'm not saying that Christians shouldn't take stands against behaviors that are clearly against Biblical principles. I am saying that discretion needs to be used when doing so. In fact, that discretion needs to come from prayer and supplication to the movings of the Holy Spirit PRIOR to making judgment statements about behaviors. Why? Let's a take a look...

A quick overview of the church
There seems to be two viewpoints on the mission of the church. One view is to hold that the church is a haven for saints. This means that the church exists primarily to build up and edify those who are already Christians. The second view is that the church is a hospital for sinners. This means that a church stays in welcome mode and exists primarily as an entry-level church. I would argue that a third view of the church needs to exist. I believe that a careful mix of both views needs to be incorporated into the church. I believe that a church should seek to build disciples of Jesus Christ. At the same time, and here's where some difficulty lies, the church should seek to welcome in "whosoever will". In other words, the doors to a church need to remain open. How does this tie into judging? Why, thanks for asking!

The First Church of the Closed Doors
In too many churches, and in some I have attended, there is a spirit that could be called either unintentionally or even intentionally disinviting. This means that a church "feels cold". There might be few greeters. There might be little interaction amongst all people in the church, with little cliques being formed here and there. If you haven't seen this, then think about junior high. Imagine that again and you're on the right track. These churches tend to be unwelcoming to "outsiders". Even worse, there may be people who wonder, "What are THEY doing here?"
This question might not be asked out loud, but it becomes apparent to the person who came in. A visitor may actually be a rare commodity in such a church. When one brave soul does venture in, they are gawked out like some carnival side-show freak. They are asked to stand up before the church and give their name, rank and serial number. The only thing missing here is either a spotlight or a large scarlet "V" being placed on their chest. There might be various reasons for this practice, but the message comes through loud and clear: we are us, you are they.
Let's face it, it's already difficult enough for non-Christians to come into a church. The music, although precious to us who grew up in a church or who are well-versed in 18th century music, seems dated. The practices of the church, though known to members and long-timers, can make others feel out of place and on it goes. My point here is that it is HARD for "outsiders" to walk into any church, even for the most confident, normal, well-adjusted person.
Now, let's raise the stakes a little. What if a divorced, mother of three were to come into the church, a little bit late and a little bit noisily? What if a person of another race were to come into a church of one predominant race? What if someone with smoke or alcohol smells came in? A known ex-con? A known and practicing homosexual? What happens then? Are they greeted warmly or must they run the gauntlet of stares and hushed quiet as they slip into the back of the church, unannounced and uninvited?
This is a scene that plays out all too often. And then, many churches who do this will be the same ones who wonder why their churches are dying or are so "inbred" that the a visitor register might be covered in dust and cobwebs. Or in an even worse scenario: they might not even care or wonder why no one new has come in. That church has become a "members only" country club of spirituality. The doors of that church have almost literally rusted closed.

The First Church of the Open Doors
If you weren't born into the church, how did you enter in? How were you welcomed? Did it take many churches to find a good fit? These are questions that pastors and parishioners alike need to be asking themselves. We have to remember that as the church, WE are the representatives of Jesus Christ here on Earth. As children of the king, we carry the family name, so to speak. Therefore, we need to carry ourselves in that manner. With the privileges of sainthood come great responsibilities.
Jesus tells that whatever we do to the least of these, we do to him. This means that we as a church have got to become not only more welcoming INSIDE the church, but OUTSIDE of it as well. We need to walk across the street and talk with others, people that others might walk past.
If we don't, if we sit back and pass judgment on a godless world WITHOUT even lifting a finger to spread the Word lovingly, why should we expect the world to act any differently? Shouldn't we as a church, a body that has not an answer to the world's problems but THE answer in Jesus Christ, act like it?
Jesus communed with tax collectors. He ministered to and was accused of being a drunkard, a demoniac, of being insane, of being anything other than what we would think of as being a Christian. And yet, who accused him and judged his actions in such a way? Was it those who were healed? What is the woman caught in adultery or Mary Magdalene who accused him? It wasn't the Samaritan woman at the well who failed to bring people to him. She didn't put off evangelizing because she was hungry. It was the disciples, the very people who should have known better in the first place who did that. Read John 4 for more details. The Pharisees, the religious leaders of the day were the ones who were throwing the rocks of judgment at Christ. WOW!
See, Jesus mirrored for us what the church should look like. He welcomed in ANYONE and EVERYONE who wanted to be in. He reached out to those who were outcasts and social pariahs. Those who had blown their last chance were given another chance in him. Jesus welcomed in everyone and I'm confident that he'd do it today. Yet, this is only half of the story. While Jesus welcomed people in, like the overzealous Peter and the tax collector Matthew, yet he was never content with letting them stay in the condition that they were in when they walked through the door, so to speak.
This means in practical and clear language that we need to spend less time in judging and criticizing today's society. The critic's chair is the easiest one to occupy. It's safe and must have big cushions or something. What we need to do, and what I need to do, is to reach out INTO the world and at least try to reach out in LOVE and in the name of Jesus. I'd make this challenge to you. Are there any people on your friends list here on myspace or at work or in your neighborhood who do NOT profess to be Christians? If not, perhaps, you've become so insulated FROM the world that you have lost contact WITH the world. This isn't meant to be a slam. It's an admonition. It's an admonition that is directed towards myself as well. I need to be brave and to do a better job of reaching out to the very ones who need the ultimate life preserver that is Jesus Christ.
By judging the world instead of loving it, we miss out on the purpose of our lives here on Earth. If we were intended to live out our days solely in the presence of our brothers and sisters, might we all be transported directly to heaven upon salvation?

Salt and light
If we are to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world, isn't it so that we can spread the Word of God? It's tough to love and to reach out to others when both of our hands are clinched around a sword. While we have a moral imperative to make stands, should we do it at the EXPENSE of ministering? What I'm saying here is that in too many cases people have been wounded and injured forever by judgmental Christians. Have these people then really be able to make an informed and responsible decision to either accept or reject Christ? The turn or burn mentality tends to place us in a position of superiority rather than in the position of sinners saved by grace. I'm not saying that we shouldn't speak of both the reality and consequences of hell. We should, but it should be tempered with the reality and beauty of heaven.

Is your faith based on do's or don't's?
People are looking for and needing love. People want to see a person who is authentic in their faith and who genuinely wants to present a gift, not one who wants to judge or to force someone to take a bath before they can be cleaned. What I mean is people want to see lives that are characterized by do's. Do love. Do witness. Do read your Bible, pray and become an involved part of your local church. Few people today are looking for a list of don't when they walk through a door. By focusing on the do's of Christianity, the don'ts become fairly evident. I urge you to strive to love before you judge, to minister and to help before you speak out and to become a part of the solution rather than a part of the problem. Christians are called to be known by our love, not by our judgments. Is your faith based on a list of do's or dont's?

2007-08-16T14:27:00.001-05:00

"Judge Not... the most abused scripture today"

This post is based upon a comment that I left earlier today on a fine blog. I feel like the topic needs further exploration...

"Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get" (Matthew 7:1-2, NRSV).

It seems that "judge not, lest you be judged" is flung around ad nausem by anyone who has the desire or impetus to do so. These verses have suffered from abuse beyond compare, textually speaking. Usually, these verses are employed as a weapon. For the record, if there is one universal "bad policy" for scripture, it is the use of scripture as a weapon. The ironic thing about this particular scripture, and what makes me upset, is that it is generally employed by those who rarely, if ever, crack open a Bible.
It seems that the scripture is thrown most commonly at a Christian or another person who is seeking to take a moral stand against a particular activity or practice. Those who seek to defend their own practices or those of people they know then load their tired bow and fling this arrow. While I apologize for the irritated tone that I have at the moment, I want you to know that I am doing so for edifying purposes.

A quick exegetical background
As I believe I have stated in other entries, the key to sound and orthodox Biblical interpretation - exegesis - is taking into account the context of the verse in question. Verses don't exist in outer space. In fact, when the Bible was originally penned, chapter and verse wasn't used. Just using the New Testament as an example, these books were written in Koine Greek. This common language didn't employ either punctuation, paragraph breaks, etc., so a particular book looked like a sheet of letters. Chapter and verse is a construct of the Middle Ages. The reason for including this trivial information is to illustrate that the Bible was written to be ingested in thoughts rather than verse by verse. This means that in order for us to get an accurate picture of what a verse truly means, we must employ contextual studies.

Judge not - in focus!
Back to Matthew 7:1-2. What Jesus is talking about in this oft-quoted and even more oft-abused passage is that we are to sure that our own affairs are in order with the Father. In other words, the context of the verse in question is set with an eternal perspective in mind. The ultimate form of judgment, the final judgment before God that will take place for all, is what is being addressed here.
It should be noted that a prohibition against making statements against sin is not being made in Matt. 7:1-2.
In the Greek, the word for judgment in these verses - and throughout the book of Matthew is "used overwhelmingly for the eschatological judgment of God" (Nolland, 2005, p.318). This means that Jesus is making a prohibition not against calling sin what it is - remember, always coated in love - but rather against our judging about the eternal destination of another. That is the sole and exclusive territory of God.
By pronouncing that type of judgment on another, I am putting myself in the position of God. For the sake of argument, doing such a thing is really in violation of the First Commandment. Nothing is to be in the place of God, save God alone. This is why it is considered by many that to "damn" someone else through the use of language is sinful and plain wrong.

Again, this time with feeling...
To emphasize: Matthew 7:1-2 is speaking against the placement of self in the position of God himself, as eternal judge. To have a stand against something and to speak in a critical yet ALWAYS loving fashion is NOT being spoken against by Jesus.
We are implored as Christians to stand for what is holy and good, righteous and just. However, we are also called to always bear in mind that we are to be loving when we do so. I'm not referring to verbal abuse or putting on an air of moral superiority in the name of love. The ultimate definition of love is given to us through both the words and life of Jesus - who said that greater love has no one than the one who gives his life for another. Love itself is also to manifest itself as written in I Corinthians 13. "Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous or boastful or proud or rude. Love does not demand its own way" (I Cor. 13:4-5a).

Wrapping it up
So, the next time you feel led to either employ Matt. 7:1-2 or when you feel led to make a decision about another person's eternal destination, remember the context of the aforementioned verses. Let God handle the final judgment. Be sure that your heart and life are in order and that Jesus Christ is the Lord of your life. Check to make sure that love is your motivation. Always know that you catch more bees with honey than with vinegar. In other words, let's all, you, me and everyone follow the greatest commandments: to love God with all that we are and to love our neighbors - which is everyone - as we love ourselves.

2007-08-16T14:25:00.000-05:00

Do I live in Saturday?

Friday is the day that Jesus was crucified and died. It's called "Good Friday". Sunday is the day that Jesus rose from the dead. It's called "Easter". Saturday is that...., it's called.... Oh yeah, Saturday has no special name, no special services, no anything. It seems, at best, to be a space filler between Friday and Sunday, with only debatable activity occurring on both earth and in the spiritual realm. (One of my former professors has just posted a bit on Saturday - http://kenschenck.blogspot.com). So, the question is raised, of what importance is Saturday? Furthermore, with Saturday appearing to be a filler between two bookends, do I find myself living in that time?

Second place syndrome
I believe that most of us know what it's like to be the runner-up. We tried, came so close, but not close enough. I ran track long ago. It seemed on many occasions that my best race was just good enough to finish second. I won as well, but for some reasons, those second places are more vivid in my memory. I played very competitive softball for many years. I have several trophies from that time to this very day. Yet, out of all of the trophies, some of which are bigger than my kids, only one is for a first place title. That one is also the smallest one. Actually, come to think of it, I believe it was broken this past year by one of my cats. So there you have it, no first place trophies to show for it. Oh well, I think I hurt my hamstring during that tourney anyway...
There are so many interesting titles for that second place finisher, too. Runner-up. Second fiddle. First loser. Wonderful titles... Who remembers the second place person in any band? Messina? Oates? Garfunkel? Ridgeley? Stewart? Everybody wants to be the lead singer, sit first chair in the band, be the next "American Idol" and on and on...
Second place or being in-between is so unglamorous. Who remembers the time between World Wars I & II? You had the Roaring 20's and then the Great Depression. The times were and still are interpreted by the bookends of the world wars. The in-between seem unglamorous and are readily forgotten.
Yet, in reality, despite perceptions, are the in-between times any less important, any less vital to developing the overall story? Is the backstretch any less important in running a complete race than is the start or the final meters before the finish line?
In my own life is Saturday, where I find myself right now, that self-described limbo - see my post on the ordinary being extraordinary if you would like further insight - any less important than the Friday - my past and the Sunday, my expectant future?

Saturday, in proper perspective
I would argue that without Saturday, Friday and Sunday exist without context. If I may leave my own story behind for a moment, I'd like to examine the perspective of Jesus' disciples. On Saturday, it seems clear that the disciples would have been in deep hiding. Their master, the one that they had devoted the last three years of their lives to, had been killed. On one hand, it must have seemed like they had put all of their bets on the wrong horse, so to speak. We are told on more than one occasion that the disciples didn't understand what Jesus was talking about at the time until after he was resurrected. But I jump ahead... Back to the disciples on Saturday. What a woeful time! They must have been cowering in fear. No doubt Peter was a mess, having just betrayed Jesus three times. One of their own number, Judas Iscariot, was gone. We're told that the disciples, save for the "beloved disciple", who was present at the cross with Mary and the other women, etc., all scattered and deserted Jesus. It's clear that the other members of Jesus' own family had deserted him, as his burial was attending and cared for by non-family members, a true contradiction of what those times mandated. Family members were to provide for burial, but that cross brought public shame, shame that wasn't to be messed with by a family that didn't understand Jesus to begin with. Have I painted a bleak enough picture? Saturday was really a dark, lonely and despairing day.

The promise of Saturday
Yet, as bad as Saturday was (and is), without it, Friday was just a day of suffering. Sunday wouldn't have happened, as it would still be a day off in the future. James 1:2-4 contain some truly enigmatic and strange words for those who are currently in Saturday. I wonder if, in hindsight, the perspective of James, the brother of Christ, that was colored greatly by that very Saturday, led him to write these words - when taken in proper perspective: "My brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of any kind, consider it nothing but joy, because you know that the testing of your faith produces endurance; and let endurance have its full effect, so that you may be mature and complete, lacking in nothing" (NRSV).
Be joyful in trials? Enjoy Saturday? That seems impossible. And yet, that is exactly what we are to do. Why? Because without trials and testings, our faith is weak. Anyone can believe and follow Christ when life is easy and good. We pray for blessings, not trials, right? We pray for deliverance FROM trials, not TO them, right?
Back to the disciples... They were in the midst of a dark and almost undeliverable, at least from their perspective then, time. Saturday seemed to go on forever. Yet, it was that very time of despair and testing that made Sunday so remarkable. We're told that some of the disciples, when told of Jesus' resurrection on Sunday morning, actually ran to the tomb. They had been so shaken by Friday, so beaten down by Saturday, that Sunday was a jolt and shock to their system! When deliverance came, it nearly overwhelmed them! In fact, for at least one of the disciples, Thomas, his despair became so deep that Sunday morning wasn't enough for him. He was stuck on Saturday! This makes me wonder, then, am I?

Learning from Saturday
It's easy, with our present-day perspective, to gloss over Saturday. I no of no great books that have been written on the topic. I doubt one would become a best-seller, anyway. No evangelist uses Saturday for revival messages. The focus is almost always on Friday and Sunday. Why? Because it's easier and more dynamic to use those days. Yet, where are most people living their lives? I would argue that most are living their lives on Saturday, myself included.
However, we will do a gross injustice to ourselves and to the life that God has granted us if we become, like Thomas, lost in Saturday. We will become full of doubt and lacking in perspective if we become lost in Saturday. We benefit the knowledge that Sunday occurred then. The disciples didn't know until it happened. Perhaps, those of us who are currently living in Saturday would benefit from remembering that Saturday is but for a time and in the words of E.K. Bailey, "Friday is here, but Sunday is on the way!" The same may be said of Saturday. Saturday is here. I am living in Saturday. Saturday is all around me and I feel like no relief is in sight.
Even so, I must remember the blessed truth that Saturday exists to give Friday and Sunday context. Without Saturday, my faith is weak. Without trials, I receive no benefit, no joy from my faith. Therefore, in trust and faith, I must stand in the knowledge that Saturday is but for a season, but Saturday exists for a reason!

2007-08-16T14:23:00.000-05:00

Not me!

When I read the Gospel accounts of the Last Supper, as we call it, I usually find myself feeling just a bit superior. I like to think that had I been there, I would have been able to resist the urge to question my own loyalty to Jesus aloud by saying, "Surely not I, Lord" (Matt. 26:22, NRSV). I like to think that I would have felt more secure in my belief in Jesus than his own brothers and sisters did - Mark 3 and John 7:5 show that Jesus' family had issues with his authority - John goes so far as to say that his brothers didn't believe in him at this time. But by doing this, have I become just as guilty as those who deserted Jesus on that night? Am I really capable of betraying Jesus? Or have I already?
One of the more popular worship choruses in recent years contains the line, "I'll never fall away". This declarative statement of eternal fidelity seems to fly directly in the face of observable statistics that a majority of people who are currently in the life of the church will not be there in 2-3 years. What a statistic! Those that sing "I'll never fall away" are the same who will stop attending a church because either it's filled with those that they deem as "hypocrites" or because the pastor just doesn't feed their "advanced spirituality" or because there aren't enough "mature Christians", presumably like them.
Yet, before I get too judgmental of these people, I need to ask myself, have I done the same thing? The answer is frightening.
It's so easy to pronounce judgment upon Peter for his spectacular denial. All four Gospels give an account of it: Matt. 26:33-35; Mark 14:29-31; Luke 22:31-34 and John 13:36-38. Therefore, there must really be something that is to be learned from this. If we look closer at the account in John, we see that after Jesus tells Peter that he can't follow where he is going right now, Peter proclaims to Jesus that he will gladly lay his life down for him. A familiar sentiment! Yet, right after this bold pronouncement from Peter, Jesus tells him that he won't only betray his "lord", but that he will do it three times before the sun rises! This seems astounding! How could someone who was so bold and daring for Christ one minute betray him not once, not twice, but three times that very night?
Could it be that Peter still didn't get it, much like those who greeted Christ at the city gates with palm branches and cries of "hosanna" only a few days before (see previous post for discussion on Palm Sunday)? I think so. yet how could one who followed Jesus for three years, day and night, fail to see the point? I would say because Peter still had in his mind what the messiah should be like. Peter had a picture of a triumphant messiah, not one who should suffer. He more than likely thought that life with Jesus would continue on with privileges, blessings and positions of honor! Sound familiar?
It is this very mindset that resonates both within myself and much of contemporary Christian culture today. We are searching for blessings, blessings that are tied to material wealth and gain, our best life now and earthly incentives for serving Jesus now. Yet, it was this very mindset that Jesus was addressing within Peter when he proclaimed Peter's denial. I wonder if that is the same mindset that is found within the multitudes who will leave the church. Even more so, I wonder if some of that mindset is within me.
The question that lies at hand is not an easy one to ask. I would like to think that my faith and belief system is bulletproof. I'd like to think that I couldn't possibly turn away from Christ or miss the point of serving him. I'd like to be able to confidently shout, "Not me!" Yet can I?
When I spend more time on proclaiming the sins of the people than in helping them, I miss the point. This is so excellently told by C.S. Lewis in The Screwtape Letters. If I am spending more time pointing my finger in a self-righteous fashion without extending the rest of my hand, I've missed the point.
Further, if I am prone towards spending hour after hour in self-reflection without addressing the need for more prayer, for more study, for more witnessing, then I am missing the point. I keep coming back to this theme of missing the point because I believe that it is so vital to understand. While it is necessary to call sin what it is and while it is so important to examine ourselves regularly, neither can be a substitute for love, grace and mercy. For if we can't extend our hands to those who don't know Christ, why should they be compelled to come home? Should we think if we shine a light upon their sins that they will listen? Perhaps a few will, but so many more will be turned off. What if, instead of throwing a rock, we try to build a bridge?
If I become so wrapped up in myself, I tend to get tunnel vision. I tend to get caught up in my own piety. While it is important to live a life of personal holiness, it must not be lived in isolation. Holiness is only complete in community. A relationship with Jesus does no good when it is continually pointed inward. If I leave the church altogether because I'm not getting fed enough, was I really dining at all? Or was I, all the time, standing up and proclaiming, "Not me!"
Do you see why I said that the answer to the earlier is frightening? It's frightening because it is so obvious that I surely would have run that night, too. I'm not nearly perfected enough in my faith to have been immune to that which struck every other disciple. Oh, I can debate as much. I'm sure there even might be those of you who are reading this have had or are having the same thought that I did. "Alright, pastor, thanks for the words, but you don't know my faith. I'd never fall away." And yet, by proclaiming that, have you already? Not literally, maybe. But by placing so much emphasis on self, have you inadvertently done that?
See, if we are saved by grace and not our own merit, then we must be willing to admit that we have room for growth. If I shout, "Not me!" What am I really saying? Essentially, I am saying that I am a complete work. I am saying that I am strong enough on my own or through my faith to be immune to falling away. Is that true?
I am saved through the working of the Holy Spirit in my life alone. This is an advantage that the disciples didn't have until Pentecost. So, along with that and the benefit of 2000 years of history, I could maybe stand more confidently, but I'm not talking about today. I'm talking about me standing in the Upper Room that night. All things being equal, me standing there prior to Pentecost, hearing Jesus proclaim the upcoming betrayal, would I say "Not me" like the others or would I say nothing?
It's so easy to say "Not me!" because we both want to please Jesus and we also want to build up our own faith. Yet, by doing so, do we miss the point of the abandoning? Perhaps the disciples abandoned Christ, not because their faith in him was too weak but perhaps because it was misplaced. Perhaps, the disciples were too reliant on Jesus to take care of everything and not really able to walk on their own - within his strength to be sure, though.
In closing, I'm saying this. Perhaps, just perhaps, my faith is based upon all that which Christ can do, a wonderful thing to be sure; but if I'm not able to walk out the door of my church and go across the street to both befriend someone in need and to tell them about Christ, haven't I just missed the point? Haven't I just said, "Not me!" and then gone out and done just as the disciples did that night?

2007-08-16T14:22:00.000-05:00

The future in exchange for the present?

I'm finding myself at a funny place in life. Some call it a time of transition. Some call it an in-between time. I call it a pain. I'm not where I was, locked into classes and a program. That's done and the next program and degree, if there is to be a next is a few months away. Independent Greek lessons for me, haha! I'm not currently in a church, that's also a few months off. So, what I guess I'm saying is that everything that seems of interest is off on the horizon. Does that mean that I should whittle away my time now? Do I get into survival mode today in order to prepare for a future that entails the unknown for my family and I?
The future holds I don't know what, I don't really know where or how it's going to be paid for. In other words, there is more up in the air than there is on the ground, at least when viewed practically and logistically. Yet, why should I pine away for that future? Perhaps it is the expectation of that next challenge. Perhaps it is the acknowledgment of my penchant for loving new challenges and seeing who God's plan for my life jibes with my current surroundings. Whatever it may be, I am finding myself quite willing to exchange my present for my future. But is that right?
I believe that many Christians live their lives in that same mode of future-longing. They become so focused on the future promise of heaven that their present life becomes something that is loathsome. The phrase for this kind of thinking is "being so heavenly-minded that they are of no earthly good." Now, understand, I believe that there is nothing wrong with being captivated with the thought of our future glory in the eternal presence of our Lord and Savior, at least for those who have made the acknowledgment of Jesus Christ as the Lord of their lives.
The future
Have you ever noticed that in some circles, the future is so much more appealing to folks that their present sort of slides into a type of shadow dance with reality? I think this is dangerous and in fact is a squandering of the blessed life that we are granted daily from the Father. So, in a way, I guess I am answering my own question. i know in my heart that every day holds something blessed and important. Perhaps it is because of the lingering questions that my focus has been so far off lately. But whatever the reason for that is, I know that I need to focus on what is here right now.
We must know that first, Christ told us plainly that we should not be "worried" about the future because today has enough problems of its own for us. I believe he is telling us to focus upon the life that we have instead of the life we want or do not have as of yet. this doesn't mean we shouldn't plan ahead, it means that we shouldn't be so caught up in that which lies ahead that we spoil the precious and irreplaceable gift of today.
The rapture dilemma
On a related topic, I believe that at times, there is too much emphasis that is placed on eschatology, that is the study of the end times. We get so caught up in interpretations of prophecy that we tend to filter those prophecies only through present and the foreseeable future, at least as how it pertains to us here in America. Yet is that even the purpose of prophecy? Or is it there to continue the story of God's protection and love for his chosen people, the Israelites? Yeah, talking about our over-enamoration with a certain series of books, that in my opinion, might be better off left behind. Short of them bringing people into a current relationship with Jesus Christ - which is always of worth, and I think the overriding concept of the series, it must be recognized that the vast majority of it relies on both fictional events and certain and quite modern interpretations of Biblical passages that would have been viewed by the early church as absurd. Even the preoccupation upon a rapture helps to develop a type of bail-out mentality. I mean, the rapture is such a modern phenomenon - an 18th century Darbian interpretation. yet, if I were to google the word "rapture", I would find over 10 million instances of the word on the web. That's astounding!
Now, I'm not trying to step on any toes or to start needless debates. I believe that this issue is one of interpretation. I take Jesus at his word when he said that he would come again. I just don't personally believe that any texts conclusively prove the existence of both a rapture and a return. One event rather than two. But once again, to me, this is not an important battle. I talked about this last week under the post of "Choosing our battles."
The Point
My point is that we are given the responsibility of enjoying and maximizing our present lives. We are going to be accountable for what has and is currently being done, rather than what is to come. This means my eyes should be focused on what is around me, who is around me and how I can attempt to reach out today for the glory of Christ. I must TRUST - the key word here - that Christ will keep his word and that he is in perfect control of tomorrow. He will fulfill his word as he desires. I'm sure much surprise will come to us, as there was much the first time. My point is that all that I have any assurance of is right now. If my life is given over to Christ, my future is his. I live then in the blessed assurance that Jesus is mine, oh what a foretaste of glory divine! So then, my future must not become a preoccupation that overrides the beauty and even joy of the present. I can't exchange my present for the future. Although these days can't begin to compare to what lies ahead, they must not be forsaken. And yet, I press on to the high calling of Christ!
So, I leave you with the exhortation to live each day as if it were all that you have. That doesn't mean that you don't plan for the future. It means that you shouldn't walk through today with scorn. Don't give up the precious gift of life today. This is true whether or not today is great, blase or even bad. Today is ours to live out for the glory of Christ, so that others may hear and desire to also come to him. We live with the expectation of the future, but not with a preoccupation upon it. God is faithful and he will sort out what is to come. My job is to live today and to NOT exchange my present for my future.

2007-08-16T14:20:00.000-05:00

The most blessed man on Earth

Whether or not anyone would be willing to agree me, I would have to say that I am the most blessed man on the face of the Earth. Am I wealthy? No. Do I have an extensive financial portfolio? No. Do I have fancy cars? No. Am I a model? Definitely not. Do I even live in my own house? No. Yet, I still consider myself to be the most blessed man on Earth.
Now, you may be asking yourself, where is this guy going? Will he now list what he considers to be a blessing in either an attempt to convince me that he thinks he's blessed or even worse, in an attempt to actually convince himself? Actually, neither option is correct. I'm not going to give you a short list. Why? Because frankly, the Lord could take absolutely everything and everybody that I know and love away from me and I would still stand by my statement. Why? Because I know what can be called a secret...
How counter-cultural is that last statement? Unfortunately, quite. But see, my blessing lies in that which isn't directly seen, but by that which can be directly manifested in my life. This means that you might not be able physically see what or where my blessing lies, but you should be able to discern it from the type of life I strive to live.
"I know what it is to have little, and I know what it is to have plenty. In any and all circumstances I have learned the secret of being well-fed and of going hungry, of having plenty and of being in need" (Philippians 4:12, NRSV). What kind of verse is this? It's either a bit of pure enlightenment from the Holy Spirit or the basis of a baseless best-seller, thanks so much, Oprah.
First, the Greek that is being used here "to have little" is more along the lines of being humbled. Even more emphatically stated, Paul knew what it was like to humiliated. So, this statement made by Paul is more a statement of humility than of material want. How ironic is that? Those of us who live in America live in the most affluent and possibly materialistic country on earth. Due to this fact, our views of statements like Phil. 4:12 tend to lean towards the materialistic. That aside, regardless of culture, few people strive to be humbled. If there is any one thing that people seek to avoid, it is being humbled. Yet, in all honesty, one of the most cathartic and growth-inspiring events in our lives can be those that have caused us to be humbled or humiliated.
Second, Paul speaks of also knowing what it is like to have and have plenty. This seems to be the part of the verse that most people want to identify with. When we seek to be blessed, we usually pray not only for provision but for bounty. If only..., I'll be happy seems to be our mantra. Is this why our Christian bookstores are bursting at the seams with books that will show us how to be blessed, how to live our best life now or how to learn kingdom principles. As if these things are the true "secret" that Paul was speaking about in Phil. 4:12.
Taking this one step further, what exactly is this secret that Paul mentions here? Secret, here, really means to be initiated into mysteries. This is Paul's metaphor for understanding something that few either seek or get the opportunity to encounter. The most interesting part of this verse is that the "secret" of verse 12 isn't so secret.
Paul reveals the identity of the secret earlier in Philippians, in chapter 3. "More than that, I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord" (Phil. 3:8a, NRSV). This means that everything that Paul had done, as great as it was, wasn't enough. Everything that he had owned wasn't enough. All of that paled in comparison to the joy of knowing Jesus Christ. This is the secret to being blessed. In fact, it is the secret, period.
I believe that I am the most blessed man on the face of the earth because I have had the privilege of knowing Jesus Christ. Ironically, it is this wonderful relationship that has caused me to be at times humbled, humiliated but at other times lauded and given credit for things or statements that frankly, don't entirely belong to me. "Yet whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ" (Phil. 3:7, NRSV).
Pursuing the things of this earth can't bring true blessing. Trying to pursue happiness can't bring true blessing. Not even having the love of a faithful spouse or healthy children can bring true blessing. While all of these things are wonderful and make life more enjoyable, all of them fall short of providing that one true answer to the ultimate question of "what's this life for?"
So then, the secret of life, the source of all blessings is knowing Jesus Christ as the Lord of my life. It's as simple and as difficult as that. It's free and it's costly all at the same time. It requires no activation fee, yet it will cost you everything that you formerly held as dear. yet, if you were to try to reject it, you would ultimately find yourself drowning in a sea of sorrows.
Being the most blessed man on earth isn't about reciting a mantra or some manifestation of self-actualization or even the power of positive thinking. It is about finding the indescribable joy of knowing that Jesus is Lord. He has changed priorities, taken away stresses and given me my raison d'etre. This is the true nature of blessing. It's not material wealth or accumulation thereof. It's not in prestige or power. The true nature of blessing is found in losing yourself in the one true source. The rest of my life, that "pursuit of happiness" falls short in comparison. My life isn't the be all, end all. It's only here for a short time anyway. My true source of blessing isn't found in me, anyway. I surely am not happy being consumed by self and I am not truly blessed by focusing on "me, first".
If you find yourself living a life of "if only" or if you have been attempting to find yourself in the identity of another, I urge you to make a change. I'm not saying that having a great marriage isn't a worthy goal. I am saying that it's not enough. I'm not saying that raising healthy and happy kids isn't worthy, it's just simply not enough. The true SECRET to being the most BLESSED PERSON ON EARTH lies in knowing JESUS CHRIST as the LORD of your LIFE. I urge you to make that your top priority today.

2007-08-16T14:15:00.000-05:00

Choosing our battles

I think it is so important for us as Christians to be able to discern where our battles and where our true issues lie. Let me make it clear that first and foremost, I understand that the battle belongs to the Lord and that our enemies are not of flesh and blood but of powers and principalities. I'm not talking about warfare and I frankly don't advocate it, but that's another post for another day...

Absolutes versus relative truths
There's an absolute distinction that must be made between that which is an absolute of the faith and that which is relative. The lines between the two can become fuzzy and blurry at times and in different countries, denominations and people. That is why it is so vital that we let love rule the day. In fact, if you have your Bibles with you, please turn to I Corinthians 13. "If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing... love never ends..." (I Cor. 13:1-2, 8a, NRSV). In other words, I can understand all about absolutes and relativism, but if I choose to use these distinctions in order to throw rocks or to get in pointless arguments in which no one is saved or edified, then I am a useless and irritating noise to the the world. You know how there are two approaches to witnessing? There's the love 'em approach and there's the fire and brimstone approach. Guess which one Jesus used?
Trick question... both. Jesus showed love in all that he did, but there were times to be tender and times to speak clearly about the alternative to accepting him, which is summed up in one word, hell. Remember, Jesus spoke more about hell than anyone else in the New Testament. Never get it twisted. Jesus wasn't all about pats on the back and "it'll be alright" talks. YET, he always loved. I apologize for the long introduction, but I want it to made abundantly clear that this post and this blog and page are offered in love to one and all.
To the point now... absolutes are those things which are held in the strictest and purest regard. For instance, an absolute - a non-negotiable of the Christian faith is that Jesus is Lord and there are no other names under heaven, not Allah, not Buddha, not Vishnu, not David Koresh, by which we are saved. (Acts 4:12) In other words, syncretism doesn't work. I can't claim salvation in Christ and Buddha together. Doesn't work. Jesus said that he is THE truth and THE life and that NO ONE gets to the Father except through him. (John 14:6) Do you see what I'm driving at here? There are certain things that,a s Christians, we MUST stand for. These are absolutes. Jesus is the author and finisher of our faith. God is the creator and sustainer of all life.
Now, to something a bit off of absolutes. I believe in the exclusivity of the Trinity. In other words, I believe that God exists in three distinct and equal parts, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. 3 in 1. Now, there are those who disagree. Oneness Pentecostalism, some non-denoms from what we would call "Christian" churches and Jehovah's Witnesses, who I would consider a cult rather than as a Christian church. More on that perhaps at another time.
Dining and Differences
Yet, despite those differences and my views, I can still commune with those who feel differently on the Trinity. I believe that they are in theological error. I can even demonstrate 13 proof texts that show the 3 distinct offices of the Trinity. There are many other references that could be made that support the Trinity. Yet, despite these disagreements, at the end of the day, we are still brothers and sisters in the Lord. Now, would it be of benefit to argue the point about the Trinity mercilessly? To denounce them as heretical? You decide.
By the way, a theological term for an absolute is dogma. These are theological statements that are indivisible from Christianity. I can't really believe that Jesus wasn't raised from the dead in order to ascend to heaven and to be the all-encompassing atoning sacrifice for the sins of all who would receive him and still actually be a Christian, can I? I would say no. An absolute, dogmatic statement has just then been made. Jesus is Lord. dogma. No debate necessary, if you are a Christian.
Now, there are other issues that would fall under the term "relative". The real issue here is defining scripturally what these must be. It has taken so much time to develop Christian doctrine and seven ecumenical councils in order to hammer out the basic tenets, or dogma of Christianity. Yet, we find ourselves today as a church spending so much time in that which is relative. Now, before I move on, please understand this as well. I'm not going to say that you should take a stand on issues. I'm only saying that we should recognize them as such before we get so worked up that we border on "losing our religion".
The Issues
Issues are thins which may be culturally driven, time sensitive or even denominationally specific. Four hot button issues come instantly to my mind. Homosexuality, abortion, war and drinking. Now, once again, I am not saying that we as Christians shouldn't make stands. We should, but not by all means. Any stand taken should be motivated by love and be in the best interests of the world as a whole. Remember, Jesus didn't come solely for the American! At no point is that statement made in the Bible, yet we so easily co-opt that frame of mind into what we know as Christianity.
Without wishing to incite an online riot or to be overly confrontational, I would say flat out, that I believe that from the Biblical mandate for sex to be contained to marriage solely that I personally believe that homosexuality is wrong. That said, would I welcome a practicing homosexual into my church? I would welcome them in, but I would not wish them to continue in that sin any more than I would want someone who is beating their wife or who is trying skip through life on the merits of grace. Do you see what I am saying? Remember, Jesus was accused of being a drunk, possessed by demons, being a glutton and all manner of horrible and completely inaccurate things. He hung out with "sinners". He spoke with women and held them in high regard - a socially unthinkable thing in that day. He even witnessed to a Samaritan - to the Jew a half-breed, woman - there are Talmudic statements that make it clear that women are inferior to men. He did this in love! But who attacked him for this? The very people who should have had his back, namely the religious establishment. The very ones who should have known better were the very ones who wished for Jesus to be crucified because he didn't meet THEIR expectations. Sound familiar? I'm afraid to say that statement describes too many Christians today and the way I tried to practice my faith for too many years.
See, even though Jesus hung out with the unsavories and the sinners, he was never content to let them stay the same. A real encounter with Jesus takes you where you are then and should move you to another place all together. Look at Matthew, Zaccheus, the woman at the well, Paul, Peter and so many others. They were at the start of the story tax collectors, adultresses, murderous persecutors and cowards with uncontrollable tempers. Yet, at the end of the story these people were different. Zaccheus gave away money and repaid those he swindled with interest. The woman at the well went into town and brought others back to listen to Jesus - evangelism! Paul and Peter became pillars of the church - remember, both of them had name changes: Saul/Paul and Simon/Cephas or Peter as we know him. What does that mean? It means that we should do no less than Christ here. Let issues be issues and allow the Holy Spirit to convict and to change as he desires.
I could sit here and rant and rave about the ills of alcohol. For me, it may even be wrong. Yet, if I were to have this discussion with a man from South Africa (I have..), the cultural relevance wouldn't be there. Does that excuse me to live as he did? Probably not. Yet, I could have chosen to get all hung up on the issue and ruined a perfect opportunity to share Jesus. Once again, I'm not condoning sin or going light on it. I'm wanting to be governed by love, that perfect love that only comes from Jesus. That's why I say, we should and must learn to choose our battles as both a church and as Christians. I'm not saying that we should smoke because we are trying to fit in with our neighbors. But, I am saying that if your neighbor does, regardless of your personal convictions and stance on the issue, you still should both love them and invite them to church. That lonely divorcee, that drug abuser, that person who society would deem as repugnant or as second-class should be the very people we at least TRY to reach out to. What is past is prologue. We are all sinners saved by grace and it would do us good to remember that. That's not a free pass but it's a door. Choose your battles through prayer, study and community. Let's spend more time reaching out with the love of Christ and being willing to overlook the speck in our brothers eye, so that we may extend mercy. Jesus told us that by the measure that we extend mercy will be the measure by which mercy is extended to us.
What could be accomplished if we were willing to be preoccupied with restoring the hurt to the church, to reaching out to those who have never even heard of Christ? To putting our arms around those who wouldn't get any attention otherwise? I promise you, if we were stand on the absolutes of our faith and let issues be just that, there truly would be a different world around us. But this all starts with you. and me. Let Jesus be Lord.

2007-03-17T15:18:00.001-05:00

Costly versus Cheap Grace: Part 3

In continuing with this series on costly versus cheap grace, I wanted to interact a bit with Hebrews 12:7-11. I'm currently reading and studying Hebrews, hence all of the references that are being made to this particular book. By the way, if you've never had the opportunity, take some time to examine this incredibly deep and spiritually motivating book. I see it as a partner of the book of James, which means that the concept of putting your faith into action is highly developed in these books.
This particular part of the ongoing series deals with the WAY UNPOPULAR topic of discipline. In the case of Hebrews 12:7-11, the focus is upon heavenly discipline. I say that this topic is wildly unpopular because it exacts a toll, a cost on the part of the one who is disciplined.
Does anybody truly enjoy discipline, more specifically discipline that is given from God? The Bible answers its own question in verse 11. "Now, discipline always seems painful rather than pleasant at the time..." (NRSV). So, don't worry, I'm not going to say that we should enjoy it when we are disciplined by God. However, we should mark it as a sign that we are truly God's children. Why? Verse 7 says, "Endure trials for the sake of discipline. God is treating you as children; for what child is there whom a parent does not discipline" (NRSV)?
You might be saying to yourself, "wait a minute, what is this guy talking about? I've always heard that if we are God's children, we will be blessed." Guess what? Discipline is a blessing. Let me explain. Today, particularly in the American church, we hear exactly the opposite. Some may tell you that if you are experiencing discipline, you are simply low on faith. If you have not, it is because you didn't exercise enough faith. With enough faith, we can even have our best life now. This sounds great, but frankly, the best life now, as described by that particular author, who shall remain nameless, isn't found anywhere in the Bible. The best life now, at least the Biblical best life isn't about the biggest house, the best spot in line or the seat of honor at the head table. Sure, we are told that the Father hears our prayers and delights in pleasing his children. Yet, do those scripture references imply material delights? More than likely not. Those scriptures are referring to the things that we really need. Love. Patience. Kindness. Gentleness. In short, the fruit of the spirit, as outlined in Galatians 5:22-23. Those are what build character, not million dollar mansions. Unpopular? Yes. Realistic and Biblical though? Yes, again.
The truth is, and this is a model from parenting, the more we pamper our children, the more we give into their whims, the more they expect and the more spoiled and soft they become. There's nothing wrong with getting gifts from time to time at all, but when we live to indulge our children, we succeed in leading our children down the path to unrealistic expectations of life. Furthermore, we only help to reinforce an undisciplined lifestyle. In short, by constantly catering to them, we create not mature human beings, but soft, spoiled brats. If that is true with us, why wouldn't it be true with God?
Remember, discipline is actually a blessing. It is truly a form of love that a parent gives to a child because they want to see that child grow up into a healthy and responsible adult. That's the goal of parenting. You have x amount of years to instill into a child what they will need for the future. This means doling out discipline as it is needed and as it is appropriate. God is the same way. Verse 10 tells that God disciplines us "for our good." How can this be? What if God were to grant every request, every prayer, every petition in exactly the way that we desired it at the time? Would we truly be happy? Would we truly understand life? Or would we come to view God as the Cosmic Claus? If we think that we can utter a prayer and possess enough faith to have the best house, the best car, the most beautiful spouse, what does that say about our character and of our view of life? Is this life about material gain or about spiritual gain?
I know this post will not pack folks into a sanctuary. I know it might even ruffle some feathers here. Yet, it is exactly what we NEED, you and I need, to hear. I must admit, I don't enjoy discipline. I'd love, or at least think I'd love, to have God answer my every prayer in my way. But guess what? As close as God is to you and as intimate as the relationship is, he still has the best interest of not only you but everyone else to consider at once. That means that sometimes, what we deem as best for us isn't what is best for others around us. This is one reason, I believe, why our prayers may not be answered as we wish. Furthermore, God's timing is the best timing. He knows what we need. We're told that he even knows what we need BEFORE we pray! With that thought in mind, should we really be too upset when we don't "get our way when we want it?" There may be good reasons why don't. We may actually even need what we are praying for, just not then. Therefore, if something doesn't happen for you when you think it should, don't get despondent. Don't get angry with God. Be willing to ask what God might have in store for instead of what you thought was in store for you. This paradigm shift will go a long way towards instilling a deep and lasting faith, costly as it may be!
Back to discipline. Discipline builds character. It also is an identifying mark of childhood in the kingdom. In fact, if we say we don't want or don't have discipline, we aren't even God's children! (verse 8). How about that? I'm not saying we need to sign up for discipline, but we should be willing to accept it. Discipline also implies a costly grace. To be indulged and given what we want all of the time and to have roses and sunshine all of the time implies a very cheap grace indeed. ANYONE could and would be a believer if that were the case. What would happen to that kind of belief and faith when the first storm came? That person would be just like the man in Matthew 7;26-27, who built his house upon the unsure foundation of sand. What happens to a sandcastle that is built on a beach? When a wave or series of waves comes upon that castle, it batters it until the eventually the sandcastle is reclaimed by the beach and is dissolved. The same thing happens to these who resist discipline.
By refusing discipline, you ask for your "spiritual house" to be built upon an unsure foundation. What's going to happen when the inevitable storm comes? Without discipline, without a tested faith that knows that God will see you through the storm, one way or another, what will be left?
How then should our attitudes be? We should know that when discipline comes into our life that, even though we don't like it, we are experiencing what it means to be God's child. If God allowed his only son to suffer and die, should we expect him to coddle us? yet if God had not given his son, where would we be? Although there is cost and even pain that is associated with discipline, it is that very discipline which will mold and even strengthen our faith, if only we'll possess the proper perspective.
I'm not saying you must go looking for discipline. I'm not talking about possessing a masochistic faith. I am talking about a realistic and a lasting faith. Know that discipline, that trials will come. But also know that we serve a Lord who has overcome all. Know that when we are disciplined, it is "in order that we may share his (God's) holiness" (verse 10, NRSV). It is then that costly holiness that will yield "the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it" (verse 11, NRSV).
So, if you are feeling like God has forsaken you, if you feel like God is out to shipwreck your faith, or if you have been tempted to ask if you even have enough faith, examine your life. Is discipline there? Are you currently experiencing it? If so, BE THANKFUL! Be thankful that God loves you enough to to do this. Once more, be assured that later on, you will be stronger, you will have greater faith and you will have the peaceful fruit of righteousness as your reward. But first, be willing to accept the costly discipline of God.
Thanks once again for all who have added this blog. I pray this will be a blessing to you and will in some way help to strengthen your faith. Feel free to pass it on, too!

2007-03-16T15:55:00.001-05:00

Even the "ordinary" is extraordinary

Hebrews 11 has long been known as the "Hall of Fame" of Christian faith. Throughout the course of the chapter Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and even Rahab, the prostitute from the story of the Israelite conquest of Jericho are given their own verses. Interestingly though, Samson, Samuel and even David are only named. Once more, a multitude of others are implied as having suffered cruelly for their faith. None of the major prophets are mentioned by name, although I believe Elijah is alluded to, as tradition holds that he was sawn in two (used in 11:37).
This chapter isn't meant to be all-inclusive and I believe that's great news for you and I. We must never forget all of those who have come before us. We literally stand on the shoulders of these giants of faith. We remember them, admire them and most importantly seek to emulate their faith. Hence their inclusion in the Word.
Yet, I've always wondered why a harlot received a verse but David only gets a mention. Could it be because even the socially outcast, even the downtrodden, even those who make poor decisions are able to be used by God IF ONLY they will step out in faith and listen to the call of God?
I think there are other lessons to learn here. For some reason, in our culture, we tend to seek that which is sensational and glamorous. This line of thought even permeates our views of personal testimonies. We tend to want to hear stories of both maximum degradation and massive redemption. We tend to want to hear of celebrity and high-profile conversions. Those type of stories are both captivating and inspiring. While I believe that they are both of merit and laudable, I believe that we can tend to overemphasize them at the cost of deemphasizing that which could best be deemed as ordinary.
For example, a person led a life that they knew was incomplete and in need of change. One day they decided to attend church and in the process of this were changed by a personal encounter with Jesus Christ. They then go on to live for 50 years, all the while faithfully attending church, living a life pleasing to the Lord. They die and then go on to their eternal reward. In contrast, you hear about a celebrity who lived a life of debauchery. They were drug users, womanizers and rabble rousers. This person then fell on hard personal times and when they were in the gutter, they cried out to God and were delivered from their own personal pits and now live an exciting and inspiring daily walk with Christ out loud. Now I ask you? Which life story is more exciting? Well, hands down, the celebrity story will be the one that people want to hear, the one that'll sell books and the one that'll pack out churches and theaters during speaking tours. Is this necessarily bad? Not really, but it can paint an unrealistic picture of conversion.
I don't think I'm out of line by saying that for every one spectacular story, there are hundreds of ones that could be described as mundane. Yet, should we think that for one second one story is more important in the eyes of the Lord than another? We are told that even angels rejoice at the conversion of one person who receives the Lord. Furthermore, precious is the death of his saints in the eyes of the Lord. At what point does it say that there are positions of prominence in the heavenly reception?
I have a picture currently up of Johnny Cash and Billy Graham. I have this picture up for both the comparison and contrast of their two lives and for the ways in which their lives became intertwined and examples of the redemptive power of Jesus Christ. I'm sure the reception was great for Johnny when he went home and I can't begin to imagine what it'll be like when Billy goes home. Yet, will it be anymore so when any other believer goes? Or is that even the point?
The same application may be made in the realm of personal testimonies. Because our testimony may be mundane, we are less apt to share it with others. We justify this inaction because we don't want to bore or we don't want to be thought of as drab. However, I believe that this inaction only serves to stifle the potential that lies inside of the lives and testimonies of us all. I have some news for those who think their stories are typical. A typical story is still atypical! The sad truth is that narrow is the path that leads to deliverance and wide is the path that goes to destruction. In other words, only a very few actually are called to make the leap of faith. That is not a point of rejoicing, because frankly, I believe that we should never be pleased when a person dies in their sins. However, we should rejoice and delight in the favor that we have been shown. We should be so happy that we long to share that joy with others. This should be through both our lives that exhibit that joy and our words which describe it.
Our typical story is still something that is so wonderful and special. It can still be used to glorify God and to bring others to Christ. As has been the theme lately, one can NEVER know the ways in which the Holy Spirit may be glorified or choose to work through the lives of those who allow it to happen.
Just remember one thing, the next time you are tempted to think that you are merely ordinary, you are wrong. You are extraordinary! Your testimony may not be "Movie of the Week" material, but it is no less consequential in nature. Even though you may never receive the recognition or notice in this life that you even may deserve, remember that "God is not unjust; he will not overlook your work and the love that you showed for his sake..." (Hebrews 6:10, NRSV). Therefore, never fail to seize the opportunity to let others know what God has done for you. In fact, you may very well be able to reach people that the more spectacular in testimony may alienate. Remember, there is no competition in both soul-winning (because the work of redemption is carried out by God) nor in strength of testimonies (each are saved through the blood of Christ alone!) Never, never, never underestimate the power of God (remember the post on miracles? Your own story is just as great of a miracle as the story of the blind man receiving his sight!)
On that note, I just want to take the time to welcome all of you who have added this blog. I am both thankful and humbled by that. Thank you for your comments and even more for your prayers. If you know of others who might enjoy this or be blessed by it, please by all means invite them. If you know of folks who don't know the Lord and might benefit from anything here, please invite them in. Anybody that wants to contribute, please do. This is a team effort! I pray that this blog is of use to you and may bless you in some small way. If you have been, please take a moment and drop a line to make that known. All comments are welcome! Have a blessed weekend and upcoming Sabbath day!!

2007-03-14T10:39:00.001-05:00

Miracles DO exist!

"Immediately the father of the child cried out, "I believe; help my unbelief" (Mark 9:24, NRSV).
In today's society, many of us tend grow extremely skeptical of claims of miraculous intervention. I must admit that I do the same. In my case, I'm not sure if I feel that way due to the sensational nature of some miracle claims or because some certain evangelists claim miracles will happen if you'll only give them money. I'm not so sure that my unbelief is based on something more, something more sinister and more potentially damaging spiritually.
The word solipsism is defined by Witherington as "making the mistake of generalizing from the part to the whole" (Witherington, 2006, p.5). In other words, because I believe that miracles can't happen, miracles don't happen. In my case this would mean that perhaps I have a narrow view of miracles because I don't believe in them. Just like the boogeyman, my denial of its existence negates its possibility. This is a truly dangerous position to take. What, because something hasn't happened to me, it can't happen for anyone else? Lord, forgive me for my unbelief.
Perhaps my position is due to my naturally analytical nature. I tend to emphasize knowledge over belief in my personal view of God and theology. But what does this mean? Am I better at reading and understanding theology than I am at believing it? I've learned much about sanctification, justification, and in detailed systematic theology. The concept of the Trinity, of the immanence of God, of the homoousios of Christ - his fully human and fully divine natures, the tenets of soteriology and understand about the existence of God through Scripture, reason, tradition and experience. However, this still isn't enough.
John 3 deals with the nocturnal visit between Jesus and a Pharisee by the name of Nicodemus. Most of us know the story because it includes John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life" (NRSV) or some variation of that wording. Yet within this encounter, Jesus outlines the need for being born again. Nicodemus, a very learned man didn't understand Jesus. "Jesus answered him, "Are you a teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand these things" (John 3:10, NRSV)?
I'm afraid that these words from Jesus hit me square between the eyes. Here I am a teacher, a preacher, a disciple of Christ and yet, I am so daft in many areas. This should not be. Lord, forgive me for my unbelief.
In some circles, my condition is called putting head over heart. I try to analyze and understand everything before I internalize it. While I believe that God gives us a brain and reasoning ability for the purpose of understanding, I must also realize that there things that frankly, can't be explained. How does a man rise up from the dead? I can't totally explain it. How does a man walk on water, and I'm not talking about frozen water, either? How does a biopsy come back negative after a positive was assessed as a foregone conclusion? How does a woman get pregnant after 12 years of "failures"? These things can't be explained. Yet, they have happened and will continue to happen in some cases.
I am not in any way saying we should dismiss reason and intellectual pursuit of the divine. However, we must be willing to admit that we just don't and can't figure God out completely. It's not like we aren't given fair warning, though. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the Lord" (Isaiah 55:8, NIV). In other words, God is infinite, omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. I am not. This reminds me of scene from the movie, Rudy. At a point of crisis, Rudy turns to prayer and to a priest for further guidance. The priest replies in this fashion: "Kid, I've learned two things in all my years as a priest. There is a God and I'm not him."
No matter how hard I try to fashion my God-box, he simply can't be contained there within. To say that he can be is as ludicrous as believing that if I look up at the sun and squint my eyes and then raise my hand towards the sun and pinch my fingers tight together over the sun that I have actually "crushed" the sun. Last I checked, that doesn't work, no matter what I may WANT to believe. The same goes for God. No matter what I may WANT to believe about him or about his work, I simply can't understand it all. I must accept some things on faith and through belief. Lord, forgive me for my unbelief.
Jesus tells the leper that he is cured through his belief. The blind man is given sight because of his belief. In a similar fashion, we are told in Mark 6 that Jesus couldn't perform many miracles in Nazareth because of their lack of belief. Even moreso, we are told that Jesus was amazed at their unbelief. I must say, that is the last thing that I would ever want Jesus to feel about me, yet there are times when I'm not so sure if that wouldn't be the case.
I've been blessed recently to see some things, to be around some people, to see some change in folks that I just didn't think possible. Like Luke Skywalker in The Empire Strikes Back, I reply to my master, "I don't believe it!" I shudder to think that he might say, "That is why you fail", ala Yoda. The point is, I stand at a crossroads of faith. I can either accept the fact that God can and will perform miracles at his discretion and within his perfect will, as he has already shown or I can bury my head in the sand and continue to live a "prove it to me" existence. Lord, forgive me for my unbelief.
I'm choosing to accept that miracles still do happen. They don't have to happen. I don't have to be cured every time I pray for it. I don't have to wake up with all my problems fixed. In fact, I don't have to see another miracle the rest of my days. Yet, still I choose to accept the fact that miracles do exist! How about you?

2007-03-11T21:02:00.001-05:00

Hebrews 6:7-8

"Ground that drinks up the rain falling on it repeatedly, and that produces a crop useful to those for whom it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it produces thorns and thistles, it is worthless and on the verge of being cursed; its end is to be burned over" (Hebrews 6:7-8, NRSV).
These verses hit me today during my devotional time and I believe that they have some strong implications for us today. While I'm sure that the interpretation of the text that I'm going to be applying may have some exegetical stretching applied to it, as in the verses themselves don't directly apply to the church - however, I do believe that the verses can be used to apply to the modern believer's experience in churches today. With that caveat aside, let's begin.
The first part of verse 7 seems to be alluding to a person, most likely a believer, who represented as ground receives rain on multiple occasions. That rain may take many different forms. The rain might be a poignant sermon or lesson. It may be the direct unction of the Holy Spirit. It may also be an exhortation or word of encouragement offered from another believer. The rain may even be all of the above from time to time. The point is that rain is nourishing and sustaining. In fact, without rain falling on the life of a believer, that life can wither and die. On the flipside, however, I don't believe that ground can be flooded out from exposure to too much of this kind of allegorical and spiritual rain.
What can be said though, is that ground must be exposed to rain. Not only exposed, but exposed repeatedly. How does this occur? In a number of ways. First, by spending quality individual time with the Lord, the rain of the Holy Spirit will fall. Second, quality corporate time is necessary. Yes, this means church time. This may an antiquated statement in some circles, but with all respect to Barna, church attendance is vital. Just because some are not attending doesn't mean that the current debunking of the church is right. We are called to gather together on a regular basis for support and edification. I'm not here to pontificate on the right denomination or church, but I would urge you to attend a church of your choice that both challenges and supports you spiritually.
Notice in the second part of verse 7 that the writer implies that some action will be taken by the ground itself, the believer. What comes next is not some theological tip of the hat to Pelagianism, a belief that we as humans are essentially capable of moving ourselves towards salvation. To state that we must act doesn't lessen the impact of God's grace on our lives. This is more in line with the costly grace that was spoken of by Bonhoeffer and mentioned in previous posts. The believer is called to produce a crop, and even more specific, a crop that is useful to us.
Verse 8 seems to indicate that this crop may be negative and damaging to the ground. But how? The writer of Hebrews seems to be saying that exposure to rain WILL produce a crop when acted upon in concert with the ground. Yet, that crop isn't always good. For instance, have you ever wondered how a person may attend church for years with no apparent signs of moving closer to the Lord? Or furthermore, how a person might attend church for years but act more like someone who has never darkened the doors?
I believe that the motives of the heart of a person and the desire for reception of that aforementioned rain plays a large role in governing the actions of a person. The Lord doesn't force a person to receive or act upon the rain that the rain that they receive in a positive way. In fact, he doesn't force any interaction or crop growth period. He exhorts, challenges and calls us to grow, but that ultimate choice, with all respect to my Calvinist brothers and sisters, for receptivity seems to lie within the person, or ground in this case, themselves.
It is interesting to note that mere reception of rain isn't enough to ensure a good and useful crop. In fact, exposure to this rain might in turn cause a person to be in worse shape than they were before hearing. Why? I believe this is due to the fact that exposure to the good things of God naturally causes some type of decision to be made. A person may choose to focus upon the glory of god and the beauty and sanctity, despite its imperfections, of the assembly that is called the church. Now another person who may be exposed to much of the same things might choose to become bitter because of their own pain or perception of hypocrisy in the church. In other words, and I may be stretching the exegesis of this passage here, these verses seem to be implying the ability of the ground to choose what kind of crop they will grow. Whether this choice is conscious or unconscious really is irrelevant. The point remains that we have some say as to what kind of crop may be produced.
While this freedom of expression exists, notice that the writer clearly demonstrates what the results of each ground will cause. If the crop is useful, there will be a blessing from God. If that crop is thorny, it is worthless and will be burned up. I don't think it takes much imagination and certainly no literary license to notice what is being stated here. The very crop that is produced from reception of the rain will very well impact the disposition of that person and the very eternal fate of the person themselves.
So what does all of this mean to you and me? I believe that these verses mean that we play a large role in our own lives and destinies. In other words, when people make a statement like, How can a loving God send someone to hell, we must be aware that frankly, he doesn't. That choice is made throughout our own lives. I apologize for that tangent but it is a point that I feel must be made.
In either case, we must be willing to not just become ground that receives rain, but ground that desires to produce a positive and blessed crop. I believe that this best accomplished through supplication of our own wills to the good and perfect will of the father. This isn't because we're too weak or not good or smart enough to handle life on our own. On the contrary, it takes a stronger person to admit that they don't have everything figured out and that someone else does. I urge you to today make that conscious choice to grow a good crop. Make sure that you put yourself in a position to receive that rain which grows a crop of blessing. Read the Bible daily. Pray daily for others and for yourself. Attend church at least once a week. Become a part of a small group, be it Sunday School, a home Bible study or something that encourages accountability. These things, as we have seen, don't guarantee a good crop. No one is saved because of them. However, I would argue that it is next to impossible to be saved without them.
As humans, we are created to be and live both individually and communally. You really can't ignore either aspect and live a healthy and growing life. Furthermore, you can't fully receive the rain that we have talked about without being exposed to other believers. With that thought in mind, I urge you to not give up on your church and to support it with your prayers, your finances and your attendance. This isn't a self-serving statement but one that has our best in mind. So seek that good and perfect rain, drink up, soak it up and be prepared to grow the crop that receives a blessing from God!

2007-03-07T17:24:00.000-05:00

The epidemic of historical revisionism

I've been wondering if I should offer any input in regards to this Jesus family tomb debacle. I decided that I won't try to shoot it down directly - here's a great link that does so WAY better than I ever could - http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/ - rather, I'd like to address this issue of historical revisionism.
Historical revisionism is using either newly found knowledge or opinion to review certain historical events or people in order to see them in a different way. This process may be both ambivalent or malevolent, depending usually on the motives of the revisionists. These motives range from genuine historical interest to aggrandization through sensationalism and book/movie sales a la DaVinci Code or this Jesus family tomb business.
As a former history teacher, I find it surprising that so many try to inject their own beliefs into history. Both secular and "sacred" sources are guilty of doing this. For instance, I taught for a couple of years at a Christian school that employed a curriculum, Abeka Books, which insisted that virtually all of the founding fathers were Christians, as we today would think of them. Honestly, I believe that is a ludicrous point of view and I would love to disavow of such notions, if I may. George Washington wouldn't even be allowed to be a member of the church that I now attend, as he was the largest distiller of rye whiskey in America. The minister of the church that Martha Washington attended during Washington's presidency remarked that he never once saw George attend. Now, I am not about to say that George wasn't a Christian. I believe he had a deep-seeded faith. However, to try to make him more than he might have been - an 18th century Mason, deist, possible Christian is historical revisionism. I'm mystified by similar efforts to regard Benjamin Franklin - a notorious ladies man and raucous party attendee by most accounts and Abraham Lincoln - a highly conflicted, depressed yet possible believer into evangelical poster boys. The effort to ameliorate these men ring both hollow and historically stunted. Isn't it enough to say that we believe that America was founded with the greatest amount of religious freedom a nation has ever known? Our own Bill of Rights indicates that the government will not be a respecter of any one religion. Why should we as Christians try to make any more out of that?
Of course on the other end of the argument are the Dan Browns, James Camerons (who really should stick to making unsinkable ships and human cyborgs come to life) and the more extreme devotees to religious divorce. I think their arguments tend to smack of both intellectual hubris and antipathy towards Christianity. Once again - better zip up, I think your agenda is showing!
All of this prologue was to introduce a work that I am reading by Ben Witherington - What Have They Done With Jesus. I guess the "they" would refer to revisionists who would have us believe that Jesus was someone other than the Jesus who is presented in the Bible.
"That's because when you consistently do historical work out of your own personal experience, whatever that experience may be, you are bound to skew the historical data some" (Witherington, 2006, p.5). This quote from Witherington seems to point out the subjective nature of historical research. In my experience, I think that Witherington could not be more correct. It is so easy to try to make people act like you do, to get statements or even worse, Bible verses to get to say what YOU want rather than what THEY intended to say. Now, no historian or pastor is ever guilty of that are they? I am sure that I have done exactly that on more than one occasion.
Why? I guess it's because it is both comforting and empowering to present a cogent sermon or argument that batters the opposition to tatters. It's the American ideal as well: bigger, better, faster, newer. It's an unfortunate symptom of a culture that is sucked into sensationalism and celebrity chasing as well. Escapism, anyone? What's wrong with living your life, YOUR life, the only one you have, the one that God in his infinite mercy has granted you?
As revisionism grows - to epidemic levels, hence the title, hehe, it is imperative that as much as possible we attempt to TRY to see things as they are, a difficult proposition, to be sure. Subjective beings view things subjectively. It's so easy to take a verse and use it to support your own point of view, denomination, theological tendency or needs. However, I urge you, I urge myself to take verses in context, in light of the rest of the chapter, book and vision of the Bible as well as orthodox interpretations. If you are viewing scripture in a unique way, guess what, you probably aren't a visionary, you're probably a heretic.
It is the need to reinterpret the Bible that has led to the popularity and proliferation of Left Behind. While I believe that LaHaye and Jenkins have nothing but the best in mind, I do believe that many have bought into that series as if it were Biblical dogma rather than both fiction and 18th century revisionism - from both Darby and Scofield. The rapture is a perfect illustration! Looking for Biblical evidence leaves one lacking of a clear and definitive stance on the issue.
Furthermore, only a revisionist would believe that we have exclusivity on believing that we live in the last days. Paul, Peter and the writer of Hebrews held this belief as did the early church fathers from Irenaeus to Lactantius. In fact, it might be safe to say that every generation has held that they were living in the last days. However, it would also be safe to say that only the past few have contended that a "bail-out" mechanism is in place. Now, to say anything different, such as that the rapture is both a misinterpretation and potentially dangerous doctrine - akin to Linus waiting for the Great Pumpkin to appear - that damages faith rather than strengthens it, can lead to unnecessary arguments, debates and schisms.
My point here is that a little revisionism can lead to a world of hurt. Whether in the church or in the world, revisionism as an occupation is a deadly one, if it is used to reinterpret personal agendas through history. History is just that - history. It was what it was. While we can use the passage of time to understand actions and events better, it is problematic to try to take those events out of their unique historical context. History can be cool and it can be ugly, too. Revisionists have both better understood the actions of the "pilgrims" and tried to explain away the Holocaust. Let the facts speak for themselves and let's try together to understand them!

2007-03-01T14:22:00.000-05:00

Costly versus Cheap grace: Part 2

The first entry in this series served as an introduction to the concept of cost in a relationship with Christ. This series is inspired by "The Cost of Discipleship" by Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Please remember that this post and entire series is given in love. However, if it sounds preachy in parts, remember my name...
I recently watched some of the interaction and banter about the supposed and downright fallacious Jesus family ossuary - here's a great link in regards to this complete and utter archaeological travesty - http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/ - anyway, what I latched onto was a man expressing that he was indeed a Christian but that he wasn't going to "bore us" with his "private beliefs". That statement fired me up. Since when is it acceptable for Christians to literally "hide it under a bushel" to steal a line from an apropos Sunday School song? If we, as confessing Christians are afraid to express our beliefs when given the opportunity, then I really believe that there must be some form of spiritual deficiency existing within that person.
Let me explain. America has long claimed to be a Christian nation. Yet, on program after another we continue to see a type of vilification towards active and vocal Christians, who are viewed as hateful bigots and exaltation of just about any other lifestyle or religion. If you want any type of confirmation of this, look no further than this year's Oscar program or many of the myriad talk show entries on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and the like. Tolerance towards all except Christ! The cross of Christ is foolishness to those who are perishing (I Cor. 1:18), never forget.

If we claim to be a Christian but then have nothing in our lives to evidence that change, then according to Bonhoeffer, cheap grace is on display. "But those who try to use (cheap grace) as a dispensation from following Christ are simply deceiving themselves" (Bonhoeffer, 1937, p.51). Christianity then becomes a term that is both socially acceptable and safe. This is the point at which many claim to be Christians. As in folks that attend church twice a year and think Jesus had some good ideas while trying to listen to "the man upstairs". At what point would Peter, Paul, Stephen and countless others have considered Christianity safe?
"(If) the Christian life comes to mean nothing more than living in the world and as the world, in being no different than the world...the upshot of it all is that my only duty as a Christian is to leave the world for an hour or so on a Sunday morning and go to church to be assured that my sins are all forgiven. I need no longer try to follow Christ, for cheap grace, the bitterest foe of discipleship, has freed me from that" (Bonhoeffer, 1937, p.51). Bonhoeffer was speaking about one who says that they are Christian. That person may go to church, may be considered a good person and may even help little old ladies across the street. However, none of those things are what Christianity is really about. Now understand, my intention isn't to sling rocks around, it is to differentiate between the cheap grace mentality and that of costly grace. I'm not saying that those who live with costly grace can't change with the intervention of the Holy Spirit, but what I am saying is that those who live under cheap grace may very well die and come before a God that they don't know. What a tragedy that would be, to live a life under the delusion that one was saved, but really either never understood or was never really told that so much more is required.
Cheap grace revels in a life lived as they want rather than as they might be called. Now, as I have stated before, I am not talking about living a life of legalism and rules. Church is wonderful and well-needed for both the spiritual health of the individual and community. Love is the essence of life and relationships. Missions, altruistic acts and giving of self and finances to church and charity are all hallmarks of the Christian life. I am not discounting these things in and of themselves.
I am talking about a life that is characterized by grace. Look, the fact of the matter is that even Christians are capable of sin. They might not HAVE to, but they still can. Costly grace enters into this equation when that same imperfect person longs to overcome that sin nature and live a life that is characterized by devotion to Christ. Cheap grace in this case would be akin to a thought of "I am imperfect. Therefore, I sin. We all do. Since I am "saved" it will all be worked out in heaven." While there is some truth in that statement, cheapness enters in when we experience complacency and even acceptance of sin in our lives.

Once again, being a Christian has less to do about steps, rituals and self and more to do about devotion, change and altruism. It has more to do with a desire for Christ and less to do with a desire for the things of this world. I'll address this concept more in the future, but suffice it to say that costly grace, transformative grace is what we are called to seek, promote and possess. We'll begin to take a look at what costly grace looks like in a changed life in later posts. In the meantime, try to find a copy of Bonhoeffer, but more importantly, take a look at faith in Hebrews 11 and the call to discipleship that Christ gives throughout the Gospel of John.

2007-02-24T20:38:00.001-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 10: Glorification

This is it! The final part, part 10, glorification, of the theology of holiness series. The explanation of glorification is given below but suffice it to say that glorification is the ultimate "happy ending" for the believer in Jesus Christ. It is the goal of all Christian disciples and that hope for which we all live, that being heaven and eternal life in the Father.
Glorification
Simply stated, glorification, or final salvation as it is sometimes called, “is the ultimate goal of the Christian life” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.218). Glorification, that time in which all is set straight in the life of a believer, is the logical conclusion of any ordo salutis. Therefore, it is altogether fitting that this ordo salutis and paper should end on glorification. “Glorification is the final and full realization of salvation for the faithful, the result of which is eternal life” (Sawyer, 2006, p.560). Glorification, then, is the final chapter that is written in the story of the believer. “This, the final stage in the process of salvation, is an inheritance guaranteed by the Holy Spirit”, as evidenced by such scriptures as Eph. 1:14, “the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession” (NIV).
“The term, “glory”, which translates a number of Biblical words… one of them is the Hebrew, “kabod”, which refers to a perceptible attribute… with respect to God, it does not point to one particular attribute, but to the greatness of his entire nature” (Erickson, 2006, p.1008). In the New Testament, the focus shifts to a more tangible attribute. The Greek word, “doxa”, conveys the meaning of brightness, splendor, magnificence and fame” (Erickson, 2006, p.1009). “Both the Old and New Testaments present this eschatological manifestation of God’s glory as the believer’s hope and goal” (Erickson, 2006, p.1009).
As wondrous a gift that this current life is, it cannot compare to that which is ahead for God’s own. “I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory about to be revealed to us” (Rom. 8:18, NRSV). We know that there are troubles and persecutions in this life, in fact, Christ promised us that “If they persecuted me, they will persecute you” (John 15:20, NRSV). Yet no matter how hard this life may be, we know that if we are in Christ, the glory that will be ours when we hear God say, “Well done… enter into the joy of your master” (Matt. 25:21, NRSV). Until that time, we live in the tension between this imperfect life here on Earth and the perfect and glorified life we will live in. More eloquently stated, “Our vision of the road from here to there, from creation to new creation, will vary not just according to what we conceive to be the final destination, but also according to the whole way we understand God and the world” (Wright, 2006, p.220).
Glorification is also called final sanctification. This is the moment in which sanctification comes to its glorious fruition. The definition of final sanctification is “the ultimate work of making us Christlike, which occurs in glorification, so that when we see Jesus face-to-face, we shall be like Him” (Drury, 2004, p.183). However, I am not sure if this definition is enough. The only contention that I have with glorification or salvation, for that matter, is that we always seem to use the future tense in regards to glorification and the present tense with salvation. Interestingly, Wesley regarded sanctification as “the prerequisite for final justification at the last judgment and for final salvation” (Lindstrom, 1980, p. 198). So, even in the doctrine of sanctification, its present and future connotations are noteworthy.
Could it be that we have it switched? Or could each concept be a bit of present and future? “The man, who through faith is justified and receives present salvation, achieves final salvation through continuing in faith” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.198). Wesley believed in a present and future salvation. In other words, we are saved here in this life through the atonement, justification and sanctification that we receive through faith. We are saved in the future at the judgment seat of Christ. I’ve already alluded to the future tense of glorification and heaven as our eternal destination if we are in Christ. It should be noted though that the concept of salvation actually “doesn’t come into being until the future judgment when we are found justified in Christ” (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
In a similar fashion, “the promise held out in the phrase “going to heaven” is more or less exactly “going to be with God in the place he’s been all along.” Thus “heaven” is not just a future reality, but a present one” (Wright, 2006, p.59). The beauty of the doctrine of glorification, besides being the consummation of our salvation is this. “The function of the future in biblical faith is to throw light upon the present” (Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.121). Additionally, “the concentration of final sanctification should not lead to forgetfulness of the magnificent gift already possessed in justification” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.200).
To me, viewing salvation and glorification in these new ways makes them all the more exciting and real. I do not claim to have this mystery of glorification all figured out. “The future glorification will also bring fullness of knowledge” (Erickson, 2006, p.1011). I claim the words of Paul in I Cor. 13:12, “For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known” (NRSV). Finally, in regards to glorification and how it relates to the power of Christ’s resurrection, I believe I can finally quote the following scripture in the proper Schenckian context: “Not that I have already obtained this or have already been made perfect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own” (Phil. 3:12, NRSV).

2007-02-22T17:34:00.000-05:00

Costly versus Cheap Grace: Part 1
I really attempt to be an avid reader. Many times though, I wind up buying a book and sticking it on my shelves for "later use". This is an inevitability for many pastors, or so I am told. I have many that I want to get to from Barth, Wright, Bauckham, and Witherington. However, I believe that they will now have to wait. This is because I have found a true treasure recently. I've wanted to get my hands on "The Cost of Discipleship" by Dietrich Bonhoeffer for some time. I was finally able to do that earlier this week and I believe that I will never be the same as a consequence.
There are many topics that Bonhoeffer addressed in his all too short lifetime. One that is resonating with me profoundly right now is the concept of cheap versus costly grace. I'm planning on addressing this issue in greater detail in a forthcoming series of posts but I do want to start now.
"Cheap grace is not the kind of forgiveness of sin which frees us from the toils of sin. Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves... That is what we mean by cheap grace , the grace which amounts to the justification of sin without the justification of the repentant sinner who departs from sin and from whom sin departs" (Bonhoeffer, 1937, p.44).
What Bonhoeffer is talking about, I believe, is living a type of "christian" existence that is "christian" in name only. Cheap grace is found when someone speaks of "accepting Christ as their personal savior" without making any apparent lifestyle changes. This is when someone accepts Christ but then goes right out and lives like nothing is different for them. Now this may last for days, weeks, months, years or the rest of their lives. Frankly, this type of life begs the question... is that person saved to begin with? Now that is not the point of this series. I am not trying to put myself in the place of God, as he alone is the one who judges our eternal destination. That said, I do believe that Christians in general and pastors in particular have a responsibility to call others to a life of discipleship, or sa Bonhoeffer put it, a life characterized by costly grace.
"Costly grace is the gospel which must be sought again and again, the gift which must be asked for, the door at which a (person) must knock" (Bonhoeffer, 1937, p.45).
Notice something? Cheap grace may be characterized as a life that is passive in relationship to Christ. This view believes that Christ did all of the work, thereby exonerating myself from having to work, to grow or to change. Costly grace, on the other hand, is active in nature. As Jesus said, "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened" (Matthew 7:7, NIV). The verbs that are used are active. Jesus didn't say "give thanks, don't speak, don't seek, don't grow, be complacent and let others do the hard work." We were told to pick our crosses daily in order to follow him, not to sit back and rest in what we deem to be salvation. This mindset MAY be enough to get one into heaven, but it is quite possible that, in the words of Pastor Steve DeNeff, one may get to heaven and see a God that one does not recognize.
Remember this, I am not advocating a life characterized by legalism. i am not suggesting a formula of one part Bible study, two parts prayer and one part church attendance. While each of those are worthy endeavors and vital for spiritual growth and survival, they aren't ends rather they are means to an end. That end is a discipled life of devotion to Christ Jesus.
Costly grace is designated as such because it literally costs both us and God. It costs us because we give up our lives. It cost God because he gave up his son for this to be possible, to paraphrase Bonhoeffer. In other words, our lives MUST be different than they were if we are to be true disciples of Christ. Spend time in prayer. Spend time in the Bible. Tell others about Christ in order that some might hear and come to him. Attend and invite others to church regularly.
Does this seem costly? It should. Grace may be freely given to us by Christ initially, but it can exact a high cost. That cost is our old lives. Yet, if we are willing to make that change, we will come to a time when that old life will be held in contempt in exchange for the life given to us in Christ, as Paul wrote in Philippians 3. That is the hope that we have when we come to a point when we are willing to exchange our old nature for a nature that is changed by the Holy Spirit, a life characterized by costly grace.

2007-02-19T16:50:00.001-05:00

Seeking and Understanding the Bible

"The truth of the matter is that the central affirmations of the Bible are not self-evident; the Word of God... is not immediately obvious... the truth of the Word must be sought precisely, in order to be understood in its deep simplicity" (Barth, 1963, p.35).

I've been reading Karl Barth for some time now at a very leisurely pace. It seems to me that Barth had an uncanny ability to state what should be obvious in such a way that makes a reader feel like they were let in on a secret. The quote above is a perfect example. It would seem that anyone who has at least a passing knowledge of the Bible would realize that it is not set up as an answer book nor does it come with an abstract or easily readable lists of the most important statements that the Bible makes.
Even though this is true, the Bible still has managed to change the lives of its readers for millenia, in ways that no other work can possibly claim. Why is this? Could it be that the Bible is able to bypass and circumvent conventional wisdom in order to give people what they need rather than what they want?
For the 21st century, Western reader, books tend to be declarative and clear in intention and purpose. The Bible tends to take a different path. The Bible is largely narrative in nature. Much truth is given in the form of story and application. This means that a reader must do as Barth states. A reader must be willing to SEARCH for answers. For what it is worth, I believe that the Bible is in the form that it is in because its form has served to reach the most people in the most areas in the most times most effectively. It would be presumptuous and wrong to believe that the Bible was intended solely for our American sensibilities.
Due to the need for a search in order to begin to understand the themes and offerings of the Bible, it must first be able to be understood. This was the whole reason that the New Testament was largely written in what is called "koine" Greek. This is common Greek. It was the Greek that was spoken by the people. Interestingly, most works that were written in that era were written in a more formal style of Greek. Remember, books were all but unavailable to the common person. Scrolls weren't super common, either. That may be one reason why formal language was used in writings.
By using a common and understandable language, it may be ascertained that the Bible has always meant to be understood. For what it is worth, I believe this principle applies to today. That is one reason why I strenuously object with those people who declare that the King James Version is the only true Bible. As it was written in 1611, the KJV employs a style of text, that although rich, is quite archaic and not easily understood almost 400 years later. More modern translations not only benefit from employing more modern and more easily understood language, they also benefit from the vital archaeological finds of such things as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which have helped to revolutionize Biblical understandings. This is one reason why when asked what version of the Bible I endorse, I will always say whatever version you will read. Remember, the Bible is meant to be understood!
The Bible must be sought after, much like a relationship with Jesus. Even though it is the work of the Holy Spirit that brings us to Christ, we must still be willing to search and to strengthen our walks with him. In other words, the life of a Christian is never meant to be passive. If we are to truly be disciples of Christ, we must continually be willing to search, to grow, to be challenged and to exhort others to do the same. This is something that ALL are intended to do, not just preachers and "supersaints".
As Barth says, the Bible is simple. Yet, ironically, it can be quite difficult. I believe that although I might know more about the Bible now than I did ten years ago, I still don't understand the Bible as well as I would like or maybe even should. It always seems that the most profound truths are the ones that seem on the surface to be most simple. The Bible is an extraordinary example of this. Men and women have devoted their entire lives to one aspect of the Bible and still have only scratched the surface of understanding in that area. What this means is the more you might come to "know" about the Bible, the more you might realize that you know less than you thought. The Bible is so deep in truth that one must search in order to find it.
I would urge you then to search, to dig and to contemplate what it is that you are looking for in the Bible. Are you looking for an answer book to everyone's questions about meanings? Are you trying to find ways to either justify or condemn certain behaviors? In other words, are you actually trying to use the Bible for something other than what it was intended for? The Bible is meant to draw us into a deeper relationship with Christ. By making the reader dig for truth, by making the reader spend time in its words, the Bible "forces" the reader into a closer walk with God, if only the reader intends to do this.
Seek truth, not answers. Let the Holy Spirit speak to you through the Bible. By focusing on what the Bible wants rather than what you or I want, you will find a much more rewarding experience and life in Christ then we could ever have dreamt possible!

2007-02-15T13:11:00.001-05:00

Part 9 of this "ordo salutis" on the Theology of Holiness is justification. This important piece of the salvation "puzzle" is explained below. It should once again be noted that this theology is totally indebted to Dr. Ken Schenck. We are justified through faith in Jesus Christ!!

Justification
“Justification is the declaration of God that one, however sinful, who trusts in Christ’s atoning work is treated or accounted as righteous, insofar as in Christ one has entered into an upright relation with God” (Barth as cited in Oden, 1994, p.108). While the doctrine of justification has become associated mainly with Lutheran theology, its pursuit from a Wesleyan perspective is of great importance. “Justification’s nature is pardon, its condition is faith, its ground is the righteousness of God, and its fruits and evidences are good works” (Wesley as cited in Oden, 1994, p.109). Any ordo salutis would be lacking if justification were not included. In my personal ordo salutis, justification would come directly after repentance, which would lead to justification, regeneration and initial sanctification. Justification, then, stands as the foundation for which the rest of my ordo salutis may be built. “Justification is the liberation from the guilt of sin and the recovery of God’s favor” (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
As mentioned, the doctrine of justification is most commonly associated with the teachings of Martin Luther. Luther contended that we received justification by faith alone. In keeping with the concept of justification being a free gift from God, it is also considered that a person is justified by faith alone, rather than by committing any good works. “Justification is that divine act whereby one stands in right relation with God, an act of God’s free grace through which the sinner is absolved from guilt and accepted as righteous on account of the Son’s atoning work” (Luther as cited in Oden, 1994, p.108-9). It should be noted that just as Wesley was extremely interested in the doctrine, so was Calvin. “No evangelical teaching is more crucial” (Calvin as cited in Oden, 1994, p.108). However, it should be noted that for Calvin, sanctification held roughly the same esteem in his mind. He attempted to take “care to give the two doctrines (justification and sanctification) equal weight” (Lane as cited in Vanhoozer, 2005, p.418).
Interestingly, according to Lutheran theology, sanctification is “not something added to justification. It is simply the art of getting used to justification” (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.13). Therefore, according to the Lutherans, everything that we need for living a Christian life is received at justification. There is no need for a second act of grace then. Furthermore, growth in the life of the Christian is not viewed in the same light as it is in Wesleyan theology. “If justification by faith alone rejects all ordinary schemes of progress and renders us simultaneously just and sinners, we have to look at growth and progress in quite a different light” (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.27).
As an argument for a lower view of justification, it should be noted that the “NRSV has “justification” as a term only six times in the NT, “justify” only five times in the OT” (Gowan, 2003, p.262). This argument bases “justification” on the Greek word, “dikaiosis”, as found in Rom. 4:25, “who was handed over to death for our trespasses and was raised for our justification” (NRSV). However, it would seem that the aforementioned six and five occurrences, respectively, take a limiting view of the word as a noun only. This is pointed out by the fact that there are “more than 500 occurrences in the OT and 225 in the NT where terms from these two roots (Hebrew “tsadaqah” and Greek “dikaioma”) are used” (Gowan, 2003, p.263). “Tsadaq”, in Hebrew, “was used to connote a conformity to a norm, or to declare righteous or to justify” (Erickson, 2006, p.968). These linguistic statistics are used to point out that justification is indeed an integral part of the salvation process.
Justification cannot be mentioned without an investigation of the legal ramifications of the word. This is also known as “forensic righteousness”. It is a doctrine that contends that “justify (dikaioo) doesn’t mean “make righteous” (Erickson, 2006, p.970), but is rather a type of legal “defense or vindication” (Erickson, 2006, p.970). From this perspective, the following definition is fitting. “God’s legal determination of the charges against a sinner as not guilty, made on the basis of the atonement of Christ and in light of man’s repentance and faith” (Drury, 2004, p.185). Likewise, “justification is God’s declarative act by which, on the basis of the sufficiency of Christ’s atoning death, he pronounces believers to have fulfilled all of the requirements of the law that pertain to them” (Erickson, 2006, p.969). From a legal standing, God’s pardon that is granted to us through Christ is a type of “executive clemency remitting the penalty, on the principle of the pardon” (Oden, 1994, p.114). N.T. Wright stated that, “we are justified in the present in order to bring God’s justice to the world” (2006, p.136).
Calvin taught that justification didn’t imply righteousness as much as it served to “declare or deem upright (the individual) so as to acquit from guilt and punitive liability” (Calvin as cited in Oden, 1994, p.109). This rendering of the “not guilty” verdict by God seems to indicate that justification is indeed, less about human activity and so much more about the actions of God. “Justification cannot therefore be based on any righteousness in man himself” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.59). Wesley also contended that “atonement was the legal basis of justification. Atonement was a single event in the past, justification its individual and present application” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.92).
I do agree that there is a sense of justice that flows through all that God does and justification is no exception. "Essentially, justification is a judicial act" (Wiley, 1946, p.279). This means that in order for us to be considered "not guilty", God's justice had to be quenched at some point, by a worthy sacrifice. "Much more surely then, now that we have been justified by his blood, will we be saved through him from the wrath of God" (Rom. 5:9, NRSV). This is why justification and Christ's atonement are two doctrines that are nearly inseparable for me. You can't really have one without the other. Further, both must be received in faith, yet accepted in a believer's life through works, which demonstrate the love and gratitude that a person has for God's gift of grace. However, it should be noted that "there is nothing in His justice which forbids the exercise of His mercy" (Tozer, 1961, p.88). We still receive a gift in justification that is as merciful as it is just.
Viewing justification from simply the viewpoint of God isn't complete for some. "Justification is bound up with three related factors: from God, his mercy and grace; from Christ, his satisfaction of God's justice by the ransom of his blood and his perfect fulfillment of the law; and from man: a true and living faith in the merits of Christ" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.64). Frankly, from viewing many scriptures, "(Rom. 2:5-11; II Cor. 5:10; cf. Rom. 14:7-12; I Cor. 3:12-15; 4:4-5; 5:5; 6:9; Gal. 5:19-21; 6:7-9)" it appears that "Paul teaches both justification by faith and judgment by works" (Lane as cited in Vanhoozer, 2005, p.418). James wrote, "Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith" (James 2:18, NRSV). Here, "James is not arguing that works must be added to faith. His point, rather, is that genuine biblical faith will inevitably be characterized by works" (Moo, 2000, p.120). In other words, there is at least an element of human interaction with justification. This interaction has more to do with gratitude and thanksgiving for the free gift of salvation than it does in meriting justification on our own.
Justification, then, is "what God does for us through His Son" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). "While only God as Judge can pronounce the sinner righteous, only God as Sovereign can pardon or forgive. Thus, viewed negatively, justification is the forgiveness of sins; when viewed positively, it is the acceptance of the believer as righteous" (Wiley, 1946, p.279). So then, there is a certain duality that exists in justification. We are both forgiven and declared righteous. Justification serves to restore our favor with God. God works within the new believer to declare them "not guilty" of sins through the atoning work of Christ. "Justification is another word for pardon. It is the forgiveness of all our sins" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.86). This has been called a "relative change" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.84) by Wesley. "Justification only implies the forgiveness of sins and the acceptance incident to it" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.84). Wesley contended that the actual change in us occurs at sanctification. "Justification is not the work of God by which we are actually made just and righteous.

2007-02-11T10:38:00.001-05:00

Missing the Point

Do you ever feel like maybe you've just missed the entire point of being a Christian? Or even worse, do you ever feel like you have it all figured out? As a preacher and teacher, I usually feel obligated to either provide an answer to a question or a response to an argument. This is almost a default setting for me. A teacher never wants to feel like they don't have an answer. Yet, by continuously giving answers, have I, have we as a church missed the question entirely?
By arguing over exegetical meanings, have people been brought to Christ? By debating over social issues and matters of sin, have people been enticed to search for Christ? Has an anti-alcohol stand or pro-alcohol stand brought anyone into deeper relationships with God? While issues as such may have some importance, I believe that they are off-target. People will not come knocking on the door of our churches and houses if we suddenly decide to be a "moderate drinking" church now. If we are hip and cool, will people come? It is highly doubtful. People need Jesus. They need authenticity. they don't need our answers to social issues. In fact, by putting so much time into issues such as that, we tend to make ourselves look and act so INTROVERTED, that we miss the point of our lives on Earth.
We aren't placed here to try to figure out everything for everybody. The point of church isn't to provide answers for every question. Frankly, the point of the Bible isn't that, either. It is NOT designed to be an answer book. We are designed as humans to speak, to love and to bring others into a desire for a relationship with Jesus. That's the point, I believe. I don't have that all figured out and I don't believe that there is a magic, 4-step plan or process that will provide all of those answers. That's not the point.
The point is more about a willingness to listen, to love and to speak about the inexpressible joy of following Christ. It is about going out and loving others with no ulterior motives. It's NOT to try to convert others. Remember, the Holy Spirit does the work of salvation. Our job is to love, our job is to bring others back to Christ. Our job isn't to answer every question. For every question, there are a thousand answers, with each one of the answers possessing some semblance of truth. Take a look at one Bible verse and you will find several interpretations that are as off-base or as on-target as you desire. What then are we called to do? We are called to point people to Christ. We are called to invite, to love and be with people that otherwise wouldn't hear or otherwise wouldn't care. This is the essence of Christ's earthly life, our earthly life and the Great Commission. To do less is to miss the point entirely.
Jesus doesn't call us to have every answer to every skeptical question. He doesn't call us to address every issue. He calls us to love, to spend with others and to listen. I know that in my life, I have missed the point so often. On that note, It's time to get to Sunday School and to begin to practice what I preach. More later. Have a blessed Sunday and may the love of Christ overwhelm you today!!

2007-02-10T09:49:00.001-05:00

Theology of Holiness: 8: Law

The subjects of law and holiness may seem unrelated at first. However, as we find repeatedly throughout Romans, the concept of the law, judgment, atonement, grace, deliverance and salvation are intricately woven together. While we as Christians may not be bound under the Jewish law, we must know that "through the law comes the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20). In this way, the law serves to make us aware of what we must do and how we must act. We are saved through faith but we are made aware of our need for salvation through the law. Therefore, the law is worthy of study and examination in the context of a theology of holiness.

Law
"In the same way, my friends, you have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead in order that we might bear fruit for God" (Rom. 7:4, NRSV). The theological concept of the law serves a background for our covenant relationship with God. This means that the law is not a part of an ordo salutis but a part of the background that illustrates why salvation is necessary. Despite its value, the law is usually overlooked when discussing salvation (Vanhoozer, 2005). "So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good" (Rom. 7:12, NRSV). While this twice quoted section from Romans 7 refers to a hypothetical situation (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture), it does begin to point out the importance and continued standing of the law, even for the Christian. For me, the law is valuable in that it begins to establish the need for behavior that is becoming to God as well as establishing our utter need for Christ's atonement.
According to Wesley, "the law to which man is now subject is that of faith" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.147). This was due to the fact that Wesley contends that the Christian is free from Jewish ritual, Mosaic law and condemnation under the law, due to the absolution found in Christ (Lindstrom, 1980, p.78-80). Even so, the law is not only of value to humanity for all time, but it also stands as the forerunner to the Gospel. In fact, it could be said that "the Gospel is the law with a promise" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). The law is also just, as "it gives each man his due and exactly prescribes what is right with respect to the Creator" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.77).
"The word "law" is the standard translation of the Greek word, "nomos". This word occurs thirty-one times in the Gospels" (Moo as cited in Reid, 2004, p.675). In most cases "nomos refers to the Pentateuch" (Moo as cited in Reid, 2004, p.675). In Hebrew, the word "torah" was used. However, instead of having the meaning of "law", "torah would be better translated "instruction", and this torah compromises the whole of the Pentateuch" (Wenham as cited in Vanhoozer, 2005, p.442).
Further reinforcing this concept, it should be noted that "the torah was never intended to be a charter for individuals… it was given to a people; and at its heart it was about how that people would live together, under God and in harmony" (Wright, 2006, p.82). In this line of thinking of the law as instruction, it is of value to consider the four ways in which Paul uses the term, "the law" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Paul was referencing the Pentateuch when speaking of the law in Romans 3. In I Cor. 9, Paul meant "law" as in the Jewish legal code. Paul also uses "the law" to refer to the "just requirements of the law, as kept by some Gentiles. Finally, Paul could also mean "law" to refer to the rule of sin and death (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
Whenever the law is brought up, for most, the first thing that comes to mind are the Ten Commandments. The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue (ten words), are the basis of our understanding of God's law for human behavior. "Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came" (Gal. 3:24, NRSV). The Ten Commandments have been described as "the epitome of the Torah" (Williams, 2006, College Wesleyan Church lecture series). They serve to demonstrate to man that "God expects his followers to emulate his righteousness and justice" (Erickson, 2006, p.315). The Decalogue "reflect the core values of Israel's theology and moral outlook" (Wenham as cited in Vanhoozer, 2005, p.445), as given to them by God. Further, it is the Decalogue that illustrates "God's exclusive claim to (Israel)" (Gowan, 1994, p.180). While other parts of the Pentateuch help to build upon the concept of God's holiness, such as "You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy" (Lev. 19:2, NRSV), none do so with as much clarity as the Decalogue.
It was these ten words which helped to define the complete holiness of God and the wretched state of man. This concept is most clear in the first commandment. It is this commandment, that we should no other gods before him sets the stage for both the sovereignty and holiness of God. In fact, the concept of God's holiness being the justification for law is one that DeNeff is in agreement with. "Where there are low views of God, there is no law" (DeNeff, 2004, p.21). Further, "if we forfeit the doctrine of the holiness of God, there is a lower level of commitment among those who would be Christians" (DeNeff, 2004, p.22). In other words, the holiness of God that is brought to us through the Decalogue has such impact that people can be eternally changed through the conclusion that God is indeed a holy God.
"The righteousness of God also means that his actions are in accord with the law he himself has established" (Erickson, 2006, p.313). For as stated by Jesus in Matt. 5:19, "Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments… will be called the least in the kingdom of heaven" (NRSV). This sentiment is reiterated in James 2:10, "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it" (NRSV). Furthermore, it is the first commandment, which calls for us to have no other gods before God that sets the precedent of God's holiness before man. As this commandment is broken both in mind and deed, it is this very commandment that set the need for the atoning work of Christ.
So then, the law is of importance. Wesley regarded the law as holy, just as the Bible states. He believed that the law, "in the highest degree (is) pure, chaste, clean and holy" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.77). Three uses of the law have been pointed out by Schenck. "The law serves to convict of sin, to lead man to Christ and the law serves to keep the justified and regenerated man alive" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Further, sanctification itself can be viewed "as an expression of both law and love" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Yet even for all of its worth, no one will be saved by keeping the law. "For no human being will be justified in his sight by deeds prescribed by the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 2:20, NRSV).
Paul himself, although "blameless under the law" (Phil. 3:6, NRSV), still knew this wasn't enough. For as he stated, "Whatever gains I had, these I have come to regard as loss because of Christ" (Phil. 3:7, NRSV). This was so that he would not be found with a "righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ" (Phil. 3:9, NRSV). Paul desires the righteousness that only comes from Christ. For Paul the righteousness of Christ means that he would, "be done with "my own righteousness" which is "ek nomou" (from/predicated on law) and that he would then acquire a new righteousness from God "ek theou" (from/predicated on God)" (Fee, 1995, p.322). Still, while Paul had gained salvation in Christ, he "was still enough of a Jew psychologically to be uncomfortable with saying in every situation that the law was no longer valid" (Thielman as cited in Reid, 2004, p.690). It is in this vein that Wesley believed that "by faith the law shall be established in the heart and life of man" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.82).

2007-02-03T11:57:00.001-05:00

Theology of Holiness: 7b: Atonement

This is the second part of atonement. Once again, without the atoning work of Jesus Christ, salvation would be impossible. We, as humans, have no capacity for saving or delivering ourselves, no matter what kind of life we lead. The work of salvation is found ONLY in Jesus Christ. He ALONE is "the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through (him)" (John 14:6, NRSV). May Christ be glorified!

The atonement has also been viewed through the lens of ransom. “Just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:28, NRSV). “The theory with the greatest claim to having been the standard view in the early history of the church is probably the so-called ransom theory” (Erickson, 2006, p.810). It is this “approach to the doctrine of the atonement which seeks to maintain justice” (McGrath, 2005, p.328). “Christ’s gift of his life as a ransom suggests a transaction made in order to purchase freedom for slaves” (Bilezikian, 1993, p.145). The early church doctor, Irenaeus, espoused this view of the atonement. “The Lord therefore ransomed us by his own blood, and gave his life for our life, his flesh for our flesh; and he poured out the Spirit of the Father to bring about the union and fellowship of God and humanity” (Irenaeus as cited in McGrath, 2005, p.328).
Further, Anselm of Canterbury agreed with this interpretation. “And since the only possible way of correcting sin, for which no satisfaction has been made, is to punish it; not to punish it, is to leave it uncorrected. Furthermore, to leave sin unpunished would be tantamount to treating the sinful and sinless alike” (Anselm of Canterbury as cited in McGrath, 2005, p.340). The justice of God is emphasized here. There is a certain satisfaction that had to be met in order to right the wrongs, so to speak. “Satisfaction cannot be made unless there is someone who is able to pay to God for the sin of humanity” (Anselm of Canterbury as cited in McGrath, 2005, p.341).
Another key view of the atonement is the thought that Christ stood as a substitute for all of humanity. By all rights, humanity should have to pay for all of its sins. However, Christ intervened in order to save us. From a historical perspective, “Athanasius was probably the first to propound the theory that the death of Christ was the payment of a debt due to God” (Wiley, 1946, p.225). This concept of Christ’s substitution and payment for our debt is also espoused by DeNeff. “Christ bore our punishment. He paid the price for us. Consequently man has nothing to offer God but the merits of Christ” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.65).
A common phrasing of this view of atonement is: “Christ came to pay a debt he didn’t owe because we had a debt we couldn’t pay”. The concept of penal substitution deals with the fulfilling of God’s just requirements. “Jesus absorbed all the sins that had ever been committed” (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Atonement “is most frequently used in the sense of a substitute for penalty, a victim offered as a propitiation to God, and hence an expiation for sin” (Wiley, 1946, p.217). The term, propitiation, means to “appease the wrath of an offended person” (Wiley, 1946, p.223). “The vicarious sufferings of Christ are an atonement for sin as a conditional substitute for penalty, fulfilling, on the forgiveness of sin, the obligation of justice, and the office of penalty in moral government (Miley as cited in Wiley, 1946, p.218).
The legal ramifications of the atonement must not be forgotten. As a just God, he requires a just payment for the many sins that humanity has committed in their rebellion against him. “Orthodox satisfaction would seem to be the dominant conception in the view of atonement” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.61) that is presented by Wesley. Just exactly what that payment is and how it is conceived is open for conjecture. What cannot be debated is the fact that Christ’s atonement, when viewed through whatever lens necessary, was able to pay this just requirement in full. “As a result of this adjustment the consequences of neither God’s justice nor his mercy have been fully exerted. Without mercy his justice would have sentenced us to the everlasting captivity of the devil; His mercy, on the other hand, would have freed us without the payment of a just ransom” (Lindstrom, 1980, p.63). This is the crux of the gospel, as presented in John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him, shall not perish but have everlasting life” (KJV).

2007-01-28T20:41:00.005-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 7a: Atonement

The 7th section of this theology of holiness will be on atonement. In other words, do we as humans need it? If so, what does that mean? Who can provide it? How is it provided? These are some the questions that will be examined. Take care, God bless and enjoy!
Atonement
Rather than being a part of an ordo salutis per se, the atonement of Jesus Christ is what makes the salvation of humanity possible. It is mentioned during the course of this ordo salutis, I believe, because Wesley himself believed that "Christ's work of atonement was the sole ground of human justification" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.59). For without the atoning power of Jesus' sacrifice, no one could be delivered from the sin nature that we are all born with. "The sequence of salvation proceeds from the benevolence of God the Father toward humanity, through the atoning death of the Son in offering redemption, toward the grace of the Spirit in applying and enabling redemption" (Oden, 1994, p.25). Defined, "the atonement is the act of God in Christ that breaks down all the barriers our rebellion and sin have erected between the Father and ourselves" (Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.67).
"The term "theory of atonement" has become commonplace in English-language theology as a term for "a way of understanding the work of Christ" (McGrath, 2005, p.410). The atonement was of great importance to Wesley yet he "never took up the atonement for special consideration in any of his treatises or tracts. Nor is it the main theme in any of his sermons" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.55). Wesley did, however state that it was "the distinguishing point between deism and Christianity" (Wesley as cited by Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Furthermore, Wesley stated, "Indeed, nothing in the Christian system is of greater consequence than the doctrine of Atonement" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.55).
"The English word "atonement" derives from the prepositional phrase "at one". Its original meaning was something like "reconciliation" (Gowan, 2003, p.21). "The Hebrew term "kipper" and "kippurim" commonly translated "atone" was used primarily in the context of the sacrificial cultus of the tabernacle" (Gowan, 2003, p.21). The Greek "hilaskomai would not have awakened for the Greek reader the connotations of covering that seem to have been associated with "kipper"… but it did shift the basic metaphor for what was happening in sacrificial cultus" (Gowan, 2003, p.23).
An aspect of the atonement that has great meaning is blood. Blood signifies a sacrifice. "For this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matt. 26:28) were the words of Christ during the Last Supper, the night before his ultimate sacrifice at Calvary. "Blood plays a particularly important role in atonement… the most common single context for atonement language (for Jews) is in reference to sin offerings (e.g., Lev. 4-6)" (Gowan, 2003, p.23). The important thing to realize about the shedding of blood was that it came "not just as reconciliation, but as an offering" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). "…who have been chosen and destined by God the Father and sanctified by the Spirit to be obedient to Jesus Christ and to be sprinkled with his blood" (I Pet. 1:2, NRSV).
The concept that God himself would come to offer himself for the sins of his creation in order that this creation could be with him is a concept that is completely unique to Christianity. It is also an aspect of Christianity that has been debated and developed since its' very inception. In fact, this concept is unconscionable to every other religion. "The worth of Christ's flesh is to be reckoned, not just according to the nature of flesh but according to the person who assumed it, in that it was the flesh of God, from whom it gained an infinite worth" (Thomas Aquinas as cited in McGrath, 2005, p.421). The Bible does not appear to give only one perspective on the issue of atonement. Yet, this should never be misconstrued for contradiction. "Various presentations should be interpreted as convergent and complementary, not opposed" (Blocher as cited in Vanhoozer, 2005, p.75). The atoning work of Christ can be viewed through the lens of sacrifice, ransom and substitute amongst other views.
Drury defines atonement as "the provision through the blood of Christ which saves us and sanctifies us. Both the forgiveness of sins and the cleansing from sin come only through the atonement" (Drury, 2004, p.181). I stand in complete agreement with this statement. There is no possibility for sanctification, let alone salvation without the sacrifice of Jesus. The language of sacrifice is apropos as this concept is found in Rom. 3:25, "whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith" (NRSV). Again, the concept appears in I Cor. 5:7, "For our paschal lamb, Christ, has been sacrificed" (NRSV). Wesley stated, "The sacrifice of Christ, once made, is that perfect redemption, propitiation and satisfaction… and there is no other satisfaction for sin" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.60). "Paul's use of the Greek term "hilasterion" points to a sacrificial interpretation of Christ's death" (McGrath, 2005, p.411). "The biblical words expiation and propitiation are also closely related to the concept of atonement. They all refer to the fact that, in the moral order, satisfaction has to be rendered for wrongdoing… for Christians, the all-sufficient, once-for-all sacrifice was offered when Christ died on the cross for the sins of the world" (Bilezikian, 1993, p.144). It is through the cross that we are saved. This is because on the cross "Christ is understood to be the covenant representative of humanity. Through faith, believers come to stand within the covenant between God and humanity" (McGrath, 2005, p.421).

2007-01-28T20:41:00.003-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 6c: Sanctification

This is the last section on sanctification. Remember, in the other two sections, what sanctification is and why it is important was examined. This final section examines a bit of how sanctification may come about within a human being. The question has been whether it is a relatively short or long process. Can we make it come about when we choose or is all of that up to God himself? Sanctification, while largely a Wesleyan distinctive, has been discussed from a range of denominational foundations from Lutheran to Baptist. As I am from the Wesleyan tradition, that is the perspective that receives the most consideration. This means that I would consider sanctification to be possible in this life. In other words, we can live free from the weight and need to sin, in this lifetime. What a thought!!

There is dispute as to how entire sanctification is brought about. There are three camps with three different views. They are divided as proponents of: the shorter way, the middle way and the long way. The shorter way, as it is called, finds its roots in the teachings of Phoebe Palmer during the nineteenth century. It was her belief that God would not command us to be something we could not be. She also believed that God was willing to perform this action at her request. "It was thus she became assured it was her privilege to know when she has consecrated all to God, and also to know that the sacrifice was accepted" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). For her, "the shorter way… is one of total responsiveness to God's grace" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Additionally, "entire sanctification is a simple synergism in which the work of consecration and faith by a Christian is met immediately with deliverance from the inner propensity to sin by the Holy Spirit" (http://cbounds.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_cbounds_archive.html) . The advocates of this position are numerous within the Wesleyan denomination today, as they have been since Palmer's time.
Probably the most popular proponent of the shorter way in the Wesleyan Church today is Keith Drury. For Drury, entire sanctification is "a crisis event for believers which occurs instantaneously when a believer makes an entire consecration, reaching out in faith to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit" (Drury, 2004, p.182). After the work of entire consecration is completed by the person, God will instantaneously grant entire sanctification to the person, if the person receives this gift in faith. "There are two parts to sanctification: God's part and ours. God alone works in us to sanctify us. But he does so with our cooperation" (Drury, 2004, p.104). In dealing with the issue of why a person has not received entire sanctification, Drury writes: "Why don't you have it? Is it because God is withholding it? No. It is because you have not totally and completely given yourself over to God, in complete consecration. This is your part" (Drury, 2004, p.108).
For me, the shorter way of coming to entire sanctification is akin to a "name it, claim it" type of mentality. "So it is that you can say, "Fill me now" and God's sanctifying work will be done" (Drury, 2004, p.179). This line of thinking about sanctification was also espoused by Wilbur Dayton. His feeling toward receiving sanctification as quickly as possible was made clear: "Why wait? Ask and receive" (Dayton as cited in Wilson, 2000, p.190). As DeNeff says, "this is holiness at the drive-through window" (DeNeff, 2004, p.90). "The agonies of self-examination and self-denial… are suddenly compressed into a few minutes around the altar" (DeNeff, 2004, p.90). The shorter way seems to make God our servant rather than the other way around. To view him as simply waiting for us to consecrate in faith, is to me, to cheapen the grace and work of the Holy Spirit, who alone convicts the person of their sin. "If Wesley was right, we cannot choose the day of our sanctification any more than we can choose the day of our natural death" (DeNeff, 2004, p.129). I cannot agree with Drury's sentiment that if we have not, we ask not. It is God's pleasure to work on his own schedule. While I appreciate the passion and zeal for entire sanctification that Drury presents, I do not share his approach.
The second way, the middle way, is the approach to entire sanctification that I find myself in agreement with. As stated by DeNeff, "sanctification is possible in this life, but it does not necessarily happen just because we consecrate ourselves. It is not only more of commitment that leads to a crisis of entire sanctification, but less of sin and selfishness as well. It can happen, but it usually takes longer than we think" (2004, p.127). "Christians actively seek entire sanctification, availing themselves of the various means of grace, waiting for God's grace capable of creating faith to appropriate it. Thus, a person cannot be entirely sanctified at any given moment, but only in those times and places in which God's grace is being made available that can create such faith." (http://cbounds.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_cbounds_archive.html). It is through discipline, duty and daily examination that entire sanctification comes. In other words, "she cannot be entirely sanctified merely because one day she decides she should" (DeNeff, 2004, p.131).
The third way, the longer way, is the approach to entire sanctification that views it as "something that very few will attain in this life and only at the end of life" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). "The movement toward this state of perfection can only be brought about by growth in grace, knowledge, wisdom, experience, and the practice of spiritual disciplines. As such, entire sanctification is not really seen as a possibility for new converts, but only for those who have diligently followed Christ for many years" (http://cbounds.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_cbounds_archive.html). Because "holiness is qualitative rather than quantitative" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture), much time, effort and suffering must occur before entire sanctification can be attained. This was the road to entire sanctification that Wesley took in his most pessimistic writings (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). While I have sympathies along these lines, I cannot fully agree with this viewpoint.
Whether sanctification exists as an incomplete entity or as an entire one, I believe that it is attainable. Whether the road to sanctification is short, medium or long, I believe that it is attainable during my own lifetime. For Wesleyans, "sanctification is viewed as involving a deeper work of the Holy Spirit, or as a second work of grace, characterized as a crisis experience, that is both a goal and a possibility in this life" (Sawyer, 2006, p.575 & 354). For me, entire sanctification and freedom from willful sin in this lifetime is a possibility and I can enjoy it, to paraphrase Schenck. This life can be summed up as: "the intent of Wesley's doctrine of sanctification is that we are to live habitually from and in the sense of the divine presence" (Suchocki as cited in Maddox, 1998, p.54).

2007-01-28T20:41:00.001-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 6b: Sanctification

This post is a continuation of part 6 and will culminate with part C. Sanctification is a huge topic so I did split it up. Please don't overlook the topic because sanctification is all about walking the talk. I am indebted to the theology of John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist movement for much of this topic.

The first exposure to sanctification that comes to the believer are "the actual changes in a person's thoughts, words, and deeds making that person more like Christ, which occur at or around conversion" (Drury, 2004, p.184). Sanctification "begins in man at the new birth" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.84) and "simultaneously with justification, sanctification begins" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p. 86). Wesley also stated that "sanctification in the proper sense is an instantaneous deliverance from all sin, and includes an instantaneous power then given always to cleave to God" (Wesley as cited in Wiley, 1946, p.312). In other words, there is an initial sanctification that comes to the converted and regenerated person. This is because the two aforementioned events are directed by the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is directing these changes, he will then continue to direct changes in the life of the new believer. Therefore, the new believer is able, "through initial sanctification to walk in the newness of life" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Scripturally, an initial call to sanctification may be found in John 17:17, "Sanctify them in truth; you word is truth" (NRSV), which were Christ's words during his High Priestly prayer for his people prior to his trial, persecution and crucifixion. Interestingly, "the word "sanctify" is not the same as "purify"; the disciples have already been declared clean… the prayer seeks the endowment of the disciples for their apostolic mission" (Marsh as cited in Morris, 1995, p.646).
While the position of initial sanctification is the subject of little debate, the nature of sanctification itself is. For Wesley, sanctification was about "the ethical regeneration" of the individual. This stance is reiterated by Steve DeNeff, who agrees that sanctification is more about the moral nature and obligation of a human being (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Sanctification has also been described as consisting of two components: "being set apart as sacred on God's side and living the way we should" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Therefore, sanctification can be seen "as an expression of both law and love" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Furthermore, the distinctive component of sanctification, for Schenck, is the aspect of "being plugged into God. Ethical behavior is of secondary importance" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
As the new life of the believer continues, a process of becoming more Christlike occurs. This is known as progressive sanctification. As explained by Drury, progressive sanctification envelops "the gradual changes in a person's thoughts, words and deeds making that person more like Christ as (they) grow toward the crisis of entire sanctification" (Drury, 2004, p.186). As is obvious from the name, progressive sanctification is more about being on a journey than having reached a destination. "It means simply the temporal aspect of the work of grace in the heart, as it takes place in successive stages. Each of these stages is marked by a gradual approach and an instantaneous consummation" (Wiley, 1946, p.317). Wesley explained progressive sanctification in the following way: "after a gradual development in sanctification the Christian life will attain fruition in (entire) sanctification" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.117). This has also been described as "growth in grace". (Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.92). The imperative for a growth in grace is stated in II Peter 3:18, "But grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (NRSV). "As one comes to know Christ better, the grace of God through the Holy Spirit leads one to bring his life more and more into accord with Christ's pattern of living" (Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.92).
Eventually, the life of process and growth in a believer will reach a state of critical mass. It is at that juncture that the person has a decision before them. They can choose to consecrate everything in their life to Christ or they can choose to hold areas of their life back for themselves. "Our sanctification depends on the complete surrender of our whole being" (DeNeff, 2004, p.134). What happens next is the subject of debate. The length of time that "elapses between regeneration and entire sanctification… this depends wholly upon the experience of the individual" (Wiley, 1946, p.315). There are those who believe that the only thing that stands in the way of a believer and entire sanctification is the desire of the believer to consecrate and receive. In an opposite fashion, there are those that contend that the act of complete consecration, of total surrender will not necessarily bring that person to the crisis of entire sanctification. Regardless of position, it is held by both camps that "entire sanctification, which is God's work, can't come without the previous gradual work of sanctification" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
What, then, is entire sanctification? Wesley described it as follows: "It is that habitual disposition of soul which, in the sacred writings, is termed holiness; and which directly implies the being cleansed from sin, from all filthiness of both flesh and spirit" (Wesley as cited in Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.93). Wesley "based his doctrine on entire sanctification almost entirely upon thirty texts in the Bible" (Brown, 1910, p.191). Further, Wesley described this work as "the loving of God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. This implies that no wrong temper, no contrary love remains in the soul, and that all the thoughts, words and actions are governed by pure love" (Wesley as cited in Wilson, 2000, p.47). Another synonym for entire sanctification would be "Christian maturity, as called for in Eph. 4:13 and II Cor. 13:9" (DeNeff, 2004, p.77). All of these actions point to the fact that entire sanctification, in my estimation, is about more than entire consecration. It is the freedom from willful, conscious sin and the root of the sin nature inherent in fallen man, as well as being that process which perfects the love.
Christian perfection, another name for entire sanctification, is deemed as having been achieved when a person possesses "a heart emptied of all sin and filled with pure love to God and man" (Wiley, 1946, p.331). Christian perfection is marked by "four characteristics: purity of intention, the imitation of Christ, love to God and love to neighbor" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). It should be noted that Christian perfection in no way tries to be presented as an absolute perfection. "It is not absolute. Absolute perfection belongs not to man, nor to angels, but to God alone" (Wesley as cited in Sawyer, 2006, p.354). Further, it is a "perfected and harmonious personality" that is consumed by a "perfect purity in intention and will" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). For Wesley, "the goal of the whole process of salvation is the entire sanctification of man" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.119). Whatever entire sanctification is, what it can never be seen as a quest for spiritual gifts. In fact, we are told to "seek not the gift but the giver" (Brown, 1910, p.130). Again, whatever entire sanctification is, we must know that "this life is really possible… and it means a good deal more than we think it does" (DeNeff, 2004, p.76-7).

2007-01-28T20:40:00.001-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 6a: Sanctification

The next three entries are going to deal with the subject of sanctification. This is a subject that doesn't get discussed very often. In short, to be sanctified means to be changed. It is literally the life evidence of salvation. Your life will no longer be characterized by sin and doing your own thing. It will be characterized by becoming more Christlike and less sinful. You can have freedom from willful sin in your life. The ways in which sanctification comes about is open for conjecture, hence the length of this discussion. Is one way more correct than the others? For me, yes, but that is a decision that you will have to make for yourself. Enjoy and thanks for reading!

Sanctification
If any of the concepts mentioned in this paper could be considered to be foundational, it would be the concept of sanctification. "The idea of holiness is virtually everywhere in the Bible and in Christian history" appearing "in one form or another, more than six hundred times" (Drury, 2004, p.33 & 40). "Sanctification has been called "the goal of salvation" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture), which would justify the claim of being a foundational concept. It also "applies to believers who have received the Holy Spirit, as in II Thess. 2:13 and it involves the cleansing of past sins, as in I Cor. 6:11" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). By the same token, if any concept in this paper could be considered to be controversial, it would be the concept of sanctification. From a theological perspective, sanctification is viewed through a variety of extremes. These extremes range from believing that sanctification is an instantaneous work of God upon conversion and the belief that sanctification can't exist in this life at all.
In a similar fashion, there are almost as many synonyms for sanctification as there are views. "Perfection of love, Christian perfection, Christian maturity, second working of the Holy Spirit, second blessing, second work of grace, full salvation and circumcision of the heart" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture) are the most popular synonyms. However, sanctification is "less about what we call it and how it happens but that it does" in the first place (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). As I could easily write an entire paper on the concept of sanctification alone, I am going to treat this section as an overview. In my personal ordo salutis, sanctification comes after regeneration and justification. I will elaborate upon my own personal view of sanctification as is warranted.
The doctrine of sanctification may be described as "liberation from the inherent power of the root of sin, as well the restoration of the imago dei" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). It is a freedom from conscious, willful sin. The word, sanctification, arrives to us from "the Latin, "sanctus" (holy) and "facere" (to make), as well as the Greek word, "hagiadzo" (to make holy)" (Wiley, 1946, p.320). While sanctification in its most complete sense is a Wesleyan distinctive, other Protestant denominations have tackled the subject. In fact, even the Catholic tradition has addressed the topic. Sanctification, as a development, may be viewed as starting "at conversion with initial sanctification, continuing gradually in progressive sanctification, leading to entire sanctification, progressing in continual sanctification until the believer dies" (Drury, 2004, p.186). This is a rough outline that demonstrates that sanctification is a "gradual development" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.116) rather than a static endeavor.
Before digging any deeper into what sanctification looks like, I would like to examine the various debates about the nature and existence of sanctification in this life. The Lutheran tradition contends that "sanctification is the business of making progress in cutting down on sin according to the scheme" (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.23). Further, sanctification is viewed not as a second act of grace, but as a continuation of the first. Therefore, Lutheran doctrine proposes that sanctification is "simply the art of getting used to justification. It is not something added to justification" (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.13). This would then put the Lutheran understanding of sanctification at odds with the Wesleyan understanding and mine, as well. That stated, Lutheran doctrine contends that "God is always the acting subject, even in sanctification" (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.15). "The distinction serves only to leave the old being in control of things under the guise of pious talk…we attempt to combine the unconditional grace of God with our notions of continuously existing and acting under the law" (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.15). For Lutherans, the emphasis of salvation doctrine is on justification by faith. However, this doesn't mean that Lutherans have no desire to overcome sin. Forde states that "sin is to be conquered and expelled" (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.27). However, sin is something that a human deals with as "simul justus et peccator, simultaneously just and sinner" (Forde as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.23). In another way of stating the Lutheran position, sanctification is viewed as a "momentary but unsustainable experience" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). This is in opposition to the Wesleyan doctrine, which may be summed up as being able to have "victory over sin in this life and being able to like it" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
The Reformed view of sanctification differs from the Wesleyan experience as well. The Reformed doctrine on sanctification states that "Jesus Christ himself is our sanctification or holiness; and it is through union with Christ that sanctification is accomplished in us" (Ferguson as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.48). In other words, sanctification is dependent upon union with Christ only. Yet, it has been stated that "the Christian life will be marked by human activity" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture), which are most strongly evidenced by the actions of consecration and faith (Drury, 2004). Christ's sanctification and humanity's need for it are combined by the "ministry of God's Spirit and the exercise of the believer's faith" (Ferguson as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.51). Further, the Reformed tradition holds that sanctification is "an impossible dream" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture) and "salvific gradualism" (Spittler as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.127) at least in this life. To believe that sanctification is an unachievable goal in this lifetime is to make light of scriptures such as I Peter 1:15, "Instead, as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct" (NRSV). Would we be given an impossible imperative from God? While our holiness is based in Christ, it more about being renewed in the image of Christ rather than basking in the glow of his holiness.
This freedom from sin is expressed as a "mystic interiority found by a few" (Spittler as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.127), in regards to the contemplative view. For the Pentecostals, sanctification, as an experience, is of great value. Yet, the Pentecostals "seek the baptism in the Holy Spirit" (Spittler as cited in Alexander, 1988, p.127) to a higher degree than they seek sanctification. The two views are united in their quest for experiencing a life of holiness rather than working towards one and relying upon the Holy Spirit to provide one, according to the will and timing of God. In other words, experiences are more valued than is the life of holiness itself. For me, that is an oxymoron. To seek the experience over the life is to have the wrong perspective on sanctification.
According to the Wesleyan perspective, "holiness is a process of becoming in reality what already is ours in Christ through the new birth" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). The emphasis here is on a process of becoming. "(Sanctification) is first a process, and later a crisis, and finally a process again" (DeNeff, 2004, p.90-1). This can best be described by using the terms initial sanctification, progressive sanctification, entire sanctification and continuing sanctification. "There is no perfection which does not admit of a continual increase" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.118), as "it is impossible for the Christian, even if fully sanctified, to stand still" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.118).

2007-01-28T20:39:00.004-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 5: Salvation

Frankly, everything else in this series hinges upon this one concept, salvation. I believe that salvation is both a process and a crisis. It is a process in that when you live for Christ, you should continue to grow and become more Christ-like. It is a crisis in that you come to a point when a decision MUST be made. Am I going to live for Christ or am I going to live for myself? It is a choice that all of us make, in one form or another. Have you made that decision? Once again, I use Thomas C. Oden's "Life in the Spirit" and a lot of other sources. I pray that this is clear and will help you all. Salvation is a wonderful gift from the God to humanity, made possible by the atoning sacrifice of his son, Jesus Christ and manifested in us through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Salvation
Salvation as a concept "has become widely used in Christian theology to express the provision of God for our human situation of need and sin" (Marshall as cited in Reid, 2004, p.998). Salvation is then connected to the "extravagant gift of God's grace" (Erickson, 2006, p.321). To Wesley, the word "salvation" wasn't about "deliverance from hell, or going to heaven; but a present deliverance from sin, a restoration of the soul to its primitive health… the renewal of our souls… in righteousness and true holiness" (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.100). Once again, an element of the ordo salutis is more about our conduct in this life rather than the determination of our eternal destination. This is an extraordinary finding for me, as I had always focused on the eternal aspects of this doctrine. As for my personal ordo salutis, I would place salvation as an overall concept rather than as an individual step.
"Salvation is seen as a process by which man passes through a series of successive stages, each stage representing a different and higher level" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.105). Salvation as a process and action would best be described as emanating from God. However, as also described with the previous aspects of the ordo salutis, there is a synergy that exists between the human and the divine. We are participants in this process. "God's choosing is based upon our choice, we cooperate with God" (Bounds, 2005, MIN541 lecture).
Salvation may also be defined as "what is needed to restore the broken relationship between God and the creature" (Erickson, 2006, p.903). God is the giver of the grace that is necessary for the human to accept their need for God in the first place. "We cannot call ourselves sane nor Christian if we foolishly believe we may accept Christ… whenever we want. We can't" (DeNeff, 2004, p.59). In other words, God extends the free gift of salvation at his discretion. This leads to a definition of salvation being "the act of God whereby He rescues the souls of repentant humans from the dire circumstances of punishment we are due because of our guilt and the pollution of our sin" (Thomas, 2000, p.181). "The salvation prepared for the world can only become subjectively appropriated when one repents, trusts in God's pardoning grace, and follows the narrow way" (Oden, 1994, p.81).
The English word, "salvation" is "derived from the Greek "soteria" and from the Latin "salvus", which meant safe (Oden, 1994). The accompanying verb, "sozo", means to save "as a continuous process with distinguishable components (Oden, 1994, p.85) and "to cause someone to experience divine salvation" (Marshall as cited in Reid, 2004, p.998). Yet, for all of the individualistic meanings given to salvation, the word "is best not employed in (that sense), for it includes the whole history of God's saving activity and the history of human reception of it" (Oden, 1994, p.81). This seems to be evidenced by the fact that the Hebrew word for salvation is "yeshuah", which was of course the Hebrew rendering of the name Joshua and later, Jesus. In both cases, "the word salvation evokes the rescue of persons caught in a hopeless situation" (Bilezikian, 1993, p.145). First, it was Joshua who led the Israelites into the Promised Land and then Jesus who gave deliverance for all who would accept it.
The discussion of patron and client relationships in ancient times is apropos in a discussion of salvation. This is due to the fact that we, as humans, stand in the position of client to that of the ultimate patron, God. As was expressed in lecture, "clients could never earn the patronage. Early Christians would have understood this" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). As the process worked, a patron was one who was "asked to provide money, grain, employment or land. A person who received such a benefit became a client to the patron, accepting the obligation to publicize the favor and his gratitude for it, thus contributing to the patron's reputation" (DeSilva, 2004, p.130). The obvious ties to Christianity from this passage demonstrate the level of debt that all Christians owe to the author of their salvation, Jesus Christ. An interesting component of the patron/client relationship was the mention that the client owed public gratitude to the patron. The one intention of life, then, is to live all the time to please and honor God in our lives, both privately and publicly.
"The salvation that comes by faith is a salvation from both the power and the guilt of sin" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.99). An essential component of our salvation is faith. Without faith, we cannot be saved. Therefore, we know by faith that we have been set free, saved, from a life that weighed us down both presently and eternally. Coupled with faith is a concept that is unique to Wesley. The "new birth (is) accompanied by assurance" (Lindstrom, 1980, p.115). The concept of assurance of salvation, accepted by faith takes a dual path. "Faith is the confidence that what we hope for will actually happen; it gives us assurance about things we cannot see" (Heb. 11:1, NLT). When the witness of our spirit is combined with the indirect witness of the Holy Spirit, they work together to "establish the assurance of salvation" (Wiley, 1946, p.295). This belief of assurance finds a basis in Romans 8:16, "It is that very Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God" (NRSV). "It is by two corroboratory witnesses that this confirmation is received: God's Spirit and our own spirit together bearing the same testimony (summartureo). Together they convince and assure" (Oden, 1994, p.204). I believe that these thoughts are the key thoughts in dealing with salvation. The implications of accepting the offer of grace through faith are so grand in scope that they exceed the limits of human imagination.
In regards to Paul, salvation is "primarily future oriented" (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). It is about future deliverance as much as it is about present deliverance. However, this is not Paul's exclusive view, as evidenced in Titus 2:11-13. "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all, training us to renounce impiety and worldly passions, and in the present age to live lives that are self-controlled, upright, and godly while we wait for the blessed hope" (NRSV). To reiterate, "God's design to save humanity includes all time, not just part of history. " In the Greek language (sozo) may depict an action as either punctiliar or durative, or it may make no specification whatsoever as to the kind of time involved" (Erickson, 2006, p.903). "The fulfillment of God's purpose in creation is awaiting a final consummation in the end of days" (Oden, 1994, p.85).

2007-01-28T20:39:00.003-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 4: Regeneration

Part 4 of our journey through an ordo salutis (order of salvation) takes us to regeneration. Regeneration is essentially the time at which our "old self" is changed into our "new selves". Of course, this isn't a complete change because salvation is a process, yet there should be noticable changes in a person who is regenerated. In this section I draw heavily from Thomas C. Oden's "life in the Spirit" and lectures from Dr. Kenneth Schenck, a scholar and theologian from whom I was able to take a life-altering class from.
While this piece may use theological terms, I assure you that it is understandable and is nothing to be intimidated by. Theology is for all. It is vital to understand what it is you feel when you accept Jesus Christ as your savior.

Regeneration
According to Dr. Ken Schenck, ..there is no Biblical word for (regeneration), but the components are there.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). This is reiterated by Dunning & Greathouse who wrote, ..Regeneration..is not a biblical term but one that theologians coined.. (Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.92). Yet, regeneration may be though of as ..a new birth, a resurrection, a new life, a new creature, a renewing of the mind, a dying to sin and living to righteousness, a translation from darkness to light.. (Hodge, 2003, p.3). The word in Greek that is most closely associated with regeneration is the word, ..palingenesia.., which ..is a compound of again, ..palin.. and birth, ..genete.. (Oden, 1994, p.156). Even so, Wesley deals with the concept of regeneration with a person as being the ..new birth.. (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.107). This ..new birth.. has also been termed ..new life.. (Oden, 1994, p.158), a ..new life that is understood as liberation from bondage.. (Oden, 1994, p.163).
To Wesley, the new birth was an objective and real change that was made within a person. A new birth would signify a ..re-beginning.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture) and a delivery from the power of sin (Lindstrom, 1980). ..New birth is followed by a life of reborn affections.. (Oden, 1994, p.175). Through the gift of the Holy Spirit and through faith demonstrated in repentance, ..the eyes of our soul (are) both opened and enlightened.. (Wesley as cited in Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). In a more Calvinistic understanding, ..regeneration is a secret act of God in which he imparts new spiritual life to us.. (Grudem, 2000, p.699). This means that for the Calvinist, ..regeneration is totally a work of God.. (Grudem, 2000, p.699). This understanding of regeneration seems to limit the involvement of humanity in the act, yet it must be noted that no human can muster regeneration themselves.
I believe that the concept of regeneration is an absolute essential of any ordo salutis. Regeneration signifies a change from one state, depravity, to another, being born again. In this way, regeneration is the effect of the cause, conversion. For this reason, in my personal ordo salutis, I would place regeneration directly after conversion.
While regeneration as a Biblical word is not present, the concept is present in several passages.
..The term regeneration as used in the Scriptures means literally ..to be again... It is, therefore, to be understood as a reproduction or a restoration. The term is generally applied to the moral change which is set forth in such scriptural expressions as: born again (John 3:3, 5, 7); born of God (John 1:13; I John 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18); born of the Spirit (John 3:5, 6); quickened (Eph. 2:1, 5); and, passed from death unto life (John 5:24; I John 3:14)... (Wiley, 1946, p.282)

Regeneration is also present, conceptually, in Titus 3:5, ..He saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.. (NRSV). This verse implies a new ..quality of life, imparted (by) holy.. (Dunning & Greathouse, 1989, p.92) behaviors. II Corinthians 5:17 is also in this line of thought, ..If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has past away; see everything has become new.. (NRSV). ..The new birth is a spiritual transaction between God and humans rather than a physical experience.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.156). While the term, birth, usually has physical connotations, the birth described here is much greater than that.
..Regeneration is the work of the Holy Spirit; and the Spirit is the Author of that new man.. (Ambrose as cited in Oden, 1994, p.164). Further, the renewal spoken of ..is a restoration of the moral image of God in which man was originally created (Wiley, 1946, p.283). This life is characterized by love, but a love that is not yet perfected (Lindstrom, 1980). Wesley believed that this new birth was ..a change wrought by God in the soul.. (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.108). Interestingly, Wesley also believed that, ..if the new life is to persist and grow, activity on God..s part must always be accompanied by activity on man..s part.. (Wesley as cited in Lindstrom, 1980, p.117).
The new birth, aka regeneration, has also been described as the beginning of the process by which holiness is attained (Wood as cited in Alexander, 1988). ..Regeneration is a complete work and therefore perfect in its kind.. (Wiley, 1946, p.287). ..Only through the character and quality of this life given in regeneration can man have a positive, vital acquaintance with God.. (Wiley, 1946, p.289). Further, ..new birth is the decisive work of God in the economy of salvation whereby spiritual life in Christ is imparted by the Holy Spirit.. (John Chrysostom as cited in Oden, 1994, p.156).
So then, regeneration is also about leaving behind a life that was directed inwardly in exchange for one that is now focused outwardly. It is about living a life defined by pursuits that are more in line with the pursuits of God rather than the pursuits of man. Once again, it should be understood that regeneration is an act of God..s grace. A human is unable to regenerate themselves, regardless of their intentions. For that reason, regeneration is a precious gift and the hallmark of a Christian life.

2007-01-28T20:39:00.001-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 3: Conversion

The third part or consideration of the life of holiness is conversion. This means that because of the grace - prevenient grace - that is received by man in faith from God alone, man is able to be changed forever. Conversion could be explained as being a crisis event where after a change or difference in the life of that person is shown to others in that person's actions and deeds.
This is a shorter section, as conversion is a product of repentance, which was discussed in part 2 of this theology presentation. For original sources, take a look at H. Orton Wiley's "Introduction to Christian Theology"; Gilbert Bilezikian's "Christianity 101" - which is fantastic for new believers or those who are curious about Christianity. Once again, Thomas C. Oden's "Life in the Spirit" is drawn on. As with the other sections, I do go on a bit of a word study. This is done to show what the word meant in its original context. If you haven't already, please read parts one and two in order to get the whole picture thus far.

Conversion
Conversion is viewed as an action of a human being, when viewed through the Wesleyan lens. ..Conversion is our willing response to the gospel call, in which we sincerely repent of our sins and place our trust in Christ for salvation.. (Grudem, 2000, p.709). ..Conversion was the basic message preached by Jesus from the outset of his ministry.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.158). In contrast, strict Calvinism views conversion solely as ..an act of God.. (Sawyer, 2006, p.323). Once again, for Calvinism, the onus for change is upon God exclusively. I do not agree with strict Calvinism on this front. Conversion ..is the term used to designate the process by which the soul turns from sin to salvation.. (Wiley, 1946, p.273) or as Oden states it ..a change from unfaith to faith (Oden, 1994, p.101). Furthermore, ..Arminianism holds that through grace, preveniently bestowed, man turns to God and is then regenerated.. (Wiley, 1946, p.274). Another fine definition of Christian conversion states that it is ..the combination of repentance and faith which leads someone to turn and follow Christ.. (Thomas, 2000, p.176).
In my own ordo salutis, I would place conversion after repentance, as it comes as a result of repentance. In fact, conversion is impossible without repentance first occurring. I would also place conversion after justification, as justification comes at repentance. Conversion is the manifestation of a life changed by repentance. ..Conversion compromises two elements, one negative and the other positive: repentance and faith.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.159). Succinctly stated, ..repentance and faith produce together the conversion that makes regeneration possible.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.160).
The English word, ..conversion.., ..come(s) from (the) Latin root word, ..convertere.., and from the Greek word, ..epistrepho.., which both mean ..to turn around or turn toward.. (Oden, 1994, p.80). This is mentioned due to the fact that the words ..conversion.. and ..salvation.. are linked inexorably in English yet actually possess different meanings in Latin (Orton, 1994). Due to its root word meaning, conversion actually has ties to the Hebrew definition of ..repentance.., that being ..shub... Both words involve a turning about of one..s actions. In English, the word conversion seems to denote a type of metamorphosis from one state of being to another or from one frame of mind to another. This seems to be a bit different from the classical understanding of the conversion concept.
According to DeNeff, ..the point of conversion..is for cleansing, and not merely forgiveness.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.104). This treatment of conversion points at what occurred to the prodigal son in Luke 15:21 when he said, ..Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.. (NRSV). The son had changed from a life of self-indulgence to one of recognition of his own sin and disgrace. The tax collector in Luke 18:13 stated, ..God, be merciful to me, a sinner.. (NRSV) (Oden, 1994). Possibly the greatest Biblical example of conversion is found in the change of the Pharisee and early church persecutor, Saul. Saul is blinded by the glory of Jesus while on the Damascus Road and is converted through his acceptance of God..s calling. Paul writes in Galatians 1:15-16, ..But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any human being.. (NRSV).
Faith is required if conversion is to occur. In fact, the faith that results in conversion could be termed a ..saving faith.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). It is by this faith that we receive ..the Spirit.. at conversion (Wood as cited by Alexander, 1988, p.101). Wesley himself wrote of his May 24, 1738 Aldersgate experience, ..I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust Christ, Christ alone, for salvation..and saved me from the law of sin and death.. (Wesley as cited by Sawyer, 2006, p.353). Conversion, then, this ..change of one..s personal relationship to God.. (Sawyer, 2006, p.551) is reliant upon the reception of grace in faith. It is the sincere belief that change is required, desired and attainable. Conversion is ..turning from sin to Christ.. (Grudem, 2000, p.709). Furthermore, conversion ..allows (Jesus) to get a hold on us and to infuse us with new life. The new life that begins with the new birth is forever; it is life eternal.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.160).

2007-01-28T20:38:00.000-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 2: Repentance

The second part of the theology of holiness that I am presenting is a tough one. It is difficult for all of us, myself included. Who wants to admit that they are a sinner? Who wants to admit that they have need for salvation in the first place? Yet, that is exactly where each and every one of us stands. We are told that if we think that we don't have sin, we make Christ out to be a liar. "If we claim we have not sinned, we make him (Jesus) out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives" (I John 1:10, NIV). Those are serious words and they are one of the reasons why repentance is such an important topic. Repentance lies at the core of the Christian life. The only way that we can be freed from a life of sin and bondage is to recognize that we first have a problem. Once again, please feel free to discuss any aspect of this. The main references I make are to H. Orton Wiley's "Introduction to Christian Theology", which has a Wesleyan-Arminian perspective; again, Thomas C. Oden's "Life in the Spirit" and Steve DeNeff's "Whatever Happened to Holiness".

Repentance
..Do you not realize that God..s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?.. (Rom. 2:4b, NRSV) The concept of repentance has been grossly underestimated by some. It has even been postulated that Paul didn..t find the concept of repentance important, as it is mentioned in his writings only three times (Gowan, 2003). However, for Luke, the key topic of his gospel and Acts is repentance (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). There are those who believe that repentance means saying sorry for previous sins. Additionally, many contend that repentance is simply a crisis event. I believe that this position is an incomplete understanding of repentance. Repentance is a multi-faceted entity.
Defined, repentance would include the following components: ..the Spirit (leading) the penitent to godly sorrow for sin, reform of behavior, reparation for harm done to others, revulsion against sin and confession of sin.. (Oden, 1994, p.83). Restated, ..repentance is a heartfelt sorrow for sin, a renouncing of it, and a sincere commitment to forsake it and walk in obedience to Christ.. (Grudem, 2000, p.713). For these reasons alone repentance holds a position of prominence in my own ordo salutis. Without true repentance, one is not able to receive salvation. Repentance must pass through the heart, soul and mind in order to be true and effective. (Grudem, 2000).
..The Hebrew word used to denote repentance is shub, which means literally ..to turn, turn around, return.. (Gowan, 2003, p.424). In other words, repentance is more about ..reversing one..s course.. or ..giving up one way of life for another.. (Gowan, 2003, p.424) than seeking forgiveness. ..In the New Testament, ..repentance.. (metanoia) is used to describe the changing of one..s mind.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.45). The word ..metanoia.. appears in the New Testament as a noun or verb fifty-five times (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture), which would make the concept of repentance an important one. For DeNeff then, ..true repentance is not the first step toward salvation. It is salvation. In true repentance, then, the seeker changes his mind, not only about God, but about himself and his sin.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.45).
..Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees.. (Matt.3:10, NRSV). The metaphor used by John the Baptist was to show that ..repentance is an act aimed at the root of sin.. (Oden, 1994, p.97). I stand in agreement with these sentiments. How have we changed our minds or lives if we merely express sorrow over being caught or found guilty? An admission of guilt is not nearly enough. While it is true that repentance ..removes guilt.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.50), seeking repentance as a type of ..eternal fire insurance.. really doesn..t qualify as true repentance. ..The goal of repentance is not heaven but holiness.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.104).
In order to be repentant, I believe that there must be a ..strepho.., to borrow from Acts 11:21, a turning, in a person..s life. What was once acceptable to a person, that being a life of sin, is no longer so. This would imply that repentance is truly a process. ..Repentance continues daily in the life of the faithful, sustained by Word and Sacrament.. (Oden, 1994, p.99). We are called to repent and ..to bring forth fruits meet for repentance.., at least on a conditional basis (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture) according to Wesley.
Interestingly, just as prevenient grace plays the role of catalyst in predestination, I believe that it also does the same in repentance. Also, just as grace is given to all, ..it is not irresistible.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). The ability to change one..s mind is inherently a statement of the capacity for free will. However, I believe that the propensity to do so is an expression of the prevenient grace of God, which causes one to look to change in the first place. It is this grace that allows that ..conviction of sin and guilt is awakened in him.. (Lindstrom, 1980, p.110). Because of this, Wesley placed ..repentance before justification and faith in his (ordo salutis).. (Lindstrom, 1980, p.110). So, in a manner of speaking, it is God who allows man to accept him through the actions of man, which cannot work without God..s own grace.
As vital as repentance is, it is even more vital to understand why one should need to repent. Repentance is necessary because of the inherent sin nature that is found in each person as the result of Adam..s fall. ..Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned.. (Rom. 5:12). Adam was ..the instrument through whom sin and death were unleashed in the world.. (Moo, 1996, p.321). In this way, sin is a power, a nature (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). Sin itself ..is conceived of as an offense against God.. (McGrath, 2005, p.420). The sin nature is called depravity by Keith Drury (Drury, 2004, p.182). It is described as ..the inbred sin we all inherit as children of Adam, the inner nature inclining us to disobedience, carnal nature.. (Drury, 2004, p.182). This ..innate sinful depravity of the heart.. was termed ..original sin.. by Jonathan Edwards (Edwards as cited by McGrath, 2001, p.438). For Wesley, original sin was ..the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from his original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil.. (Wesley as cited by Lindstrom, 1980, p.51). Original sin is our earthly inheritance from our earthly father, Adam. Original sin causes the natural state of our flesh to be subject to the power of sin, without the inherent power to change this course. Original sin exists but we don..t have to go to hell as a result of this fallen sin nature. It is our choice.
Romans 6:14 demonstrates that ..sin is again personified as a power.. (Moo, 1996, p.387). Because of the power of sin, when we remain in sin, we remain under the dominion or lordship of sin. ..Sin tend(s) to become habit.. (and) this habit tends to form a certain, definite sinful character.. (Brown, 1910, p.71). This is where repentance fits in. True repentance involves a change of life, in this case, ..a change of lordship.. (Moo, 1996, p.387). True repentance, then, is creating a new set of habits and ..changed behavior.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.49). True repentance is characterized by ..a lifestyle of faith, submission and holiness.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.51). ..Repentance involves such conviction of sin that it produces real desires and sincere resolutions of amendment.. (Wesley as cited by Lindstrom, 1980, p.114).
While repentance comes only as the result of God..s prevenient grace, it is this grace that can only be accepted by faith. ..Out of repentance and faith comes a life seeking to glorify God.. (Oden, 1994, p.99). This is why I agree with Wiley in stating that ..God is said to be the author of repentance, but he does not repent for us; he gives or grants repentance in the sense of making repentance possible.. (Wiley, 1946, p.266). There is a synergy that exists between the penitent person and God. ..God, by His Spirit, applies the truth to the sinner..s heart, unveils to his mind the number and aggravations of the sins he has committed, and the exposure to everlasting wrath which he has incurred.. (Wiley, 1946, p.266-7). So then, repentance exists as a concert between a merciful God who shows a sinful human of how that human has failed God and how God himself can deliver that human from the life characterized by sin. One step further, God also gives the necessary faith needed by that human to accept that the ..pardon (that they will receive) always remains a free gift.. (Oden, 1994, p.99).

2007-01-28T20:37:00.000-05:00

Theology of Holiness: Part 1: Predestination

I'd really like to thank everyone who takes a moment to read this blog. I pray that it has helped you, even if in some small way. I know that in my last entry, I had mentioned that I was going to go in a certain direction. I'll get back to that, but first, I would like to share some stuff I have been working on.
Perhaps, in order to flesh out the reasons for living a holy life - which is characterized by FAITH and LOVE, it would be of benefit to examine the components that go into holiness and the Christian life. This is going to be a ten-part piece in which each part will cover a different topic. The first will be on predestination. Before I get started, I would like to thank my instructor, Dr. Kenneth Schenck, for giving me the opportunity to ponder, examine and pray about these topics. If you ever want to read a REAL master, read his blog here: http://kenschenck.blogspot.com Another fine blog that should help much more than mine is from Dr. Chris Bounds - here: http://www.cbounds.blogspot.com If you go to either site, go hungry and go often!!
Let's get started! All sections will have plenty of citations, so that you can check out the originals. I'll tell you this up front, do yourself the favor of finding the original sources as often as possible. I use Steve DeNeff's "Whatever Happened to Holiness", Thomas C. Oden's "Life in the Spirit" and Harald Lindstrom's Wesley & Sanctification" texts repeatedly in this section. If you aren't sure where a source is from, I'll be more than happy to let you know. Seriously, if you have any questions, don't agree, etc., don't be afraid to leave a comment. I'd love to discuss, etc.

Predestination
..The theological purpose of the vocabulary of predestination is to claim that persons really do belong to God as a result of God..s initiative..as a result of the reconciling work of Jesus Christ.. (Gowan, 2003, p.106). In regards to the doctrine of predestination, I stand in agreement with John Wesley and the Arminian tradition that predestination is conditional. ..It is dependent upon personal choice..and this opportunity (for salvation) is based on the foundation of grace.. (Lindstrom, 1980, p.36-7). In other words, the individual has the ability to participate in this election, but they can only do so as compelled by the prevenient grace of God. This then places the responsibility for the acceptance of predestination upon the individual (Lindstrom, 1980). The key to my position is the recognition that we possess the ability to participate in our salvation by grace only, as opposed to the historical position of Pelagianism, ..which held that human beings are able to take the initiative in their own salvation.. (McGrath, 2005, p.25). So then, in an established ordo salutis, I would place predestination at the first position.
I differ strongly from the traditional Calvinist doctrine of predestination. Calvin taught that eternal life was foreordained for the elect, as well as eternal damnation for the rest (Wiley, 1946, p.257), which is also known as supralapsarianism (Erickson, 2006, p.931). This thought, interestingly, was a step removed from Augustine who believed that ..the means of grace (were) only available to the elect (McGrath, 2001, p.397) while stating nothing about the state of the rest of humanity. ..Election, according to Calvinism, is God..s choice of certain persons for his special favor.. (Erickson, 2006, p.929).
While other proof texts are used to justify Calvin..s doctrines, one of the key references is Romans 8:29, ..For those whom he foreknew he also predestined.... (NRSV). This seems to be a clear indication that God does both foreknow us and predestine us. However, the Greek does not support that entire claim. Due to the structure of the ..verb and its cognate noun.. (Moo, 1996, p.532), this verse ..mean(s) not ..know before.. in the sense of intellectual knowledge or cognition, but ..enter into relationship with before....Paul does not say that God knew anything about us but that he knew us.. (Moo, 1996, p.532). It has been postulated by Moo that while the verse would apply to God knowing of ..the human response of faith.. (Moo, 1996, p.532) in general ..before the foundation of the world.. (Eph. 1:4, NRSV), it a statement of general, rather than particular relationship. Further, the ..predestination.. spoken of in Romans 8:29 is that ..we might be conformed to the image of God..s son.. it is God..s purpose to imprint on all those who belong to Christ the image of the second Adam.. (Moo, 1996, p.534).
It is my contention that Romans 8:29 is less a statement of specific doctrinal application and more a statement of the general state of those who choose to accept God..s offer of salvation. This verse and the ..predestination language highlights God..s sovereignty and the honor of the elect.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). ..Paul is more focused on groups than individuals.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture). It should be noted that ..the idea that that one has to choose between (foreknowledge and free will) is a post-New Testament idea based on Greek logic (Keener, 1993, p.431).
I believe that limiting salvation to the elect serves to limit the scope and power of the atonement of Christ. Further, this view fails to take into account scriptures such as I Timothy 2:4 which states, ..who desires everyone to be saved.... (NRSV). The Greek, thelos, that is rendered as ..desires.. in the NRSV and ..wants.. in the NIV ..should be understood in the strongest sense as indicating God..s will.. (Towner, 2006, p.177) rather than as mere desire or hope. The word ..everyone.., pas in Greek, was meant to demonstrate that salvation was made open to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. In other words, it is God..s will that all should come to him, not merely the elect. This theme is reiterated in Titus 2:11 where Paul writes, ..For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all.. (NRSV). Once again, we are shown ..Paul..s emphasis on the universality of access to God..s grace throughout his letters.. (Towner, 2006, p.746). Yet, ..belonging to the chosen people (is) dependent on a free decision.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.151) made by an individual who is compelled to choose neither life nor death. In honoring this free will choice, ..it must be sadly noted that God abides by the decisions of humans who exclude themselves from belonging to the chosen people.. (Bilezikian, 1993, p.152).
According to Calvinism, humanity plays no role in determining their eternal destination. I believe that this doctrine removes responsibility from humanity and grace from God. If there is no responsibility, there is no need for grace in this matter. I stand in the words of Dr. Chris Bounds who states, ..God knows all that humans will do in the future because he ..foresees.. what we will freely do. (God) does not foreordain what we do.. (Bounds, 2005, MIN541 lecture). The fact that God foresees our future in no way limits our free will nor does this foresight indicate the predestination of the elect. ..The very first motion of good is from above, as well as the power which conducts it to the end.. (Wesley as cited in DeNeff, 2004, p.62). To further demonstrate the aspect of human interaction in predestination, I am in agreement with the words of Dr. Ken Schenck. ..I suspect we do the greatest justice to Paul..s teaching if we emphasize the end human choice as the evidence of God..s predestination. In other words, God..s calling and election is ultimately uncertain until we reach the end of the road.. (Schenck, 2006, MIN543 lecture).
Where the doctrine of predestination finds relevance with Wesley is in the arena of prevenient grace. Everyone has been willed to be saved; therefore, all have been given the condition to accept salvation, hence to be elected. Prevenient grace plays a strong role in my understanding of predestination. As mentioned earlier, I believe that God instills prevenient grace in all men. ..This prevenient grace is comprehensive, including all human desires after God..every movement of the soul toward God is initiated by grace, yet..there is a recognition that man is a free agent.. (Wiley, 1946, p.263). ..Prevening grace works within human knowing, feeling, and willing to move the self toward that saving faith that knows, feels, and wills in relation to God..s own personal coming.. (Oden, 1994, p.135).
God initiates the process of salvation and gives us the grace to respond to that call of our own free will and volition. As Steve DeNeff puts it, ..even after God has done this, we must still respond with an effort and a cooperation of our own.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.62). This is due to the fact that predestination ..has less to do with who goes to heaven, than with the character of those who are going.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.58). Therefore, ..Predestination implies that the destiny of our faith is holiness.. (DeNeff, 2004, p.58). These statements show that predestination is also a statement of behavior and character as much as it is a statement about eternal destination.

2006-10-30T15:55:00.000-05:00

The importance of holiness

"But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do." (I Peter 1:15, NIV)

Holiness is a virtually forgotten subject for many of us. It is associated with old, bun-wearing ladies or prudes who have no clue what the "real world" is. However, these associations are anything but correct. Did you know that the Bible makes about 600 references to holiness or towards living a life of holiness? This means that holiness is a very important subject.

Yet, the question remains. If holiness is so important, why don't we hear more about it? This is a major dilemma. In some cases, holiness is not preached from the pulpit because the pastor is afraid of either offending their congregations or they are afraid of being exposed as frauds. If holiness gets preached, they will be expected to live out their own words.

In the above verse, we are called to live a life of holiness. We are told to do so because God is first and foremost, a holy God. All of the rest of his attributes, God's love, mercy and justice flow from this primary attribute. What this means is that even though God does love us all, he is also holy. This means that he will not tolerate our sin. In other words, yes, a loving God WILL allow us to choose ourselves over him, hell over heaven. His holiness can never be forgotten.

The thing is, our "holiness", our "righteousness" before God won't cut it. We may profess to be good people, and by many of OUR standards, we are. But guess what? "Good" isn't good enough. Isaiah 64:6 tells us that our righteousness is nothing but "filthy rags" before a holy and just God. In other words, our standards and God's standards aren't the same. We don't get our good deeds measured against our bad deeds, no matter how much we want to believe that. ALL of our deeds, when taken by themselves, don't measure up.

So now what? Are we all doomed to hell? The answer, quite frankly, is yes. By ourselves, we can't cut it before a holy God. THIS IS WHY JESUS CHANGES EVERYTHING!

Through his perfect life, he was able to be the perfect covering for our inadequate righteousness. Through his sacrifice on the cross and resurrection from the dead, we are given the ability to step out of our own "filthy rag" righteousness and to take own the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ.

What's the catch? Well, we have to accept IN FAITH, that we have the need to be covered first of all. We BELIEVE that Jesus is the Lord of all and we BELIEVE IN FAITH that he will save us. This means that we confess that we are sinners who are doomed to hell before a holy God. It also means that we are confessing that we want Jesus Christ to cover us before God. In exchange for that, we agree to live a life that reflects our love for Jesus Christ.

That life of love is the essence of holiness. You see, holiness living is NOT what gets us into heaven. Remember, it's not about what we have done or will do!! It is all about the work of Jesus Christ. Because of this, we can't just sit back and relax. If we do, we are showing that we are UNGRATEFUL for the work that Jesus did. We are saying that he isn't really the LORD and SAVIOR of our lives. By continuing to live as we did BEFORE we invited Jesus into our lives, we are showing that we were really only trying to get out of going to hell. In other words, we are holding Jesus in contempt. We want to keep on doing our own thing while still holding on to heaven.

Do you see the dilemma? If we don't choose to live a life of holiness - what is called Christian maturity by some - we aren't really demonstrating the FAITH that is required of us. How does it make us feel when we really go out of our way for someone we love, when we buy a really expensive gift for them yet they don't ever use it? Wouldn't you feel like you really wasted your time and money? Is it fair to think that God is different? If God gave US the PERFECT gift in Jesus Christ, shouldn't we accept that gift and use it?

How do we "use" this gift? We do it by giving ourselves to the gift. We let him take control. We are called to "consecrate" or to surrender our lives to Jesus by asking for the Holy Spirit - the 3rd member of the Holy Trinity" to fill us with the strength that we need in order to show God that we love him and are thankful for his gift of Jesus Christ. This is a fair and reasonable thing to do. Romans 12:1 puts it like this: "I appeal to you therefore, brothers and sisters, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual (reasonable) worship." (NRSV)

We are then to live a life of holiness, which is empowered by God in order to show God that we are so thankful for him and we love him. In the next few blogs, at least, I will go into what this life of holiness is about, what sanctification is about and how we can begin to live a life that pleases the Lord. Once again, holiness is not a subject to take lightly or to dismiss as archaic or Victorian. The Bible calls us to live a life that is DIFFERENT - holy- from the rest of the world. If you are wondering what that means, do this.

First, ask yourself if you are a Christian. If that is true, then what kind of things are going on in your life that would show that to be true? Is your love for God about more than one hour a week on Sunday morning? Is your Bible dusty? Have you been in prayer for more than just a minute or two lately - and I don't mean prayer for your team to win a game or some silliness like that. If someone else was watching your life, would they be able to tell that you love Jesus with all of your heart? Would what the Bible commands and what you live stack up? If not, you have some work to do. Remember, all of us are still growing, myself included. Still, progress must be shown, as demonstrated in Galatians 5, the fruit of the spirit MUST be evident in the life of a Christian, or else we aren't living by the Spirit, but by the flesh. "The fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control." These are the HALLMARKS of a holy life. I'll go into more detail about these later.

One final word, I am not talking about living a works-based life in order to gain God's favor. God's favor is won when we ACCEPT Jesus as our Savior. Holiness is showing our love for God with all of our hearts, souls, strengths and minds - just as Jesus commanded. To settle for anything less is to hold Christ in contempt. Next time, I'll address this statement. Did you know that you can live a life that is FREE FROM SIN and LIKE IT?? Thanks, Dr. Schenck!

2006-10-04T19:27:00.000-05:00

The head, the heart and the body

Did you know that there is a difference between knowledge, belief and action? The head, the heart and the body were designed to work together in all areas of your life. Take the arguments for the existence of God for example. you may know them, if not, please take a look below. They are not my exclusive work nor compilation, as they were assembled, at least in this form, by Dr. Chris Bounds. There is also some explantion of what arguments rather than proofs are. Now - back to this concept of the head, heart and body.
Knowledge is a cerebral act. "I know there is a God." It implies that a body of information, facts, etc. have stayed in the brain and will reside there until they are needed in form or another - whether for a test, a question or personal contemplation. This is where most people find themselves in regards to most things that they have processed. For example, I know that there is a body of laws that exist that allow us to maintain a civil society.
The next step is taking that knowledge and synthesizing it through your being, your "heart" , in essence. This is what belief is. It is taking those facts and making them real to you in a special way. "I believe there is a God." Another way to look at it would be to take the first example and say,"There is a body of laws that allow us to run a civil society and I believe that they are the best laws, and they allow us to have the best society for me and for others." The thing is, this is not the end of the journey, although many people stop right here.
The final step on this journey is the logical conclusion, the action. In order to make anything go from your brain to your heart and then to your life is to ACT upon it. It is about taking the next step, the concrete expression of knowledge and belief. This is action. An expression of action, which puts belief into motion, is to then say "Ok, I know and believe that God is real. If he is real, then he is truly God. This means he is in charge - hence God. If he is then God, then I must be willing to accept the fact that he isn't just God in an abstract way, but in a real and tangible way. If he is God, I must then listen to him and then follow his commands." Or to finish the earlier analogy, "I know there are laws that allow for us to have a civil society, and I believe they are the best. I want the country to stay that way, so I will vote for politicians, lawmakers, etc. that will best help to maintain my beliefs."
While there are differences between knowledge, belief and actions, it is interesting to note that there is a necessary synergy that exists between the three of them. There is also a logical progression from one to the next. Knowledge, in and of itself, will only carry you so far. However, without it, belief is incomplete. Belief, by nature, is an emotional and faith-driven expression. It works in concert with knowledge but has little lasting impact without it. Actions require the engagement of both mind and heart in order to be effective and meaningful. That is what makes them so powerful. It is also why they are the logical conclusion of knowledge and belief. It is also why actions are required in order to fully express beliefs and knowledge. Actions are the final testing grounds of the head and the heart.
I would challenge you to think about what it is that you know and what you believe and to then act upon that in all areas of your life. Specifically, in the area of God, if you are convinced in your mind of his existence and know in your heart that you believe in him, what should you do about it? Action must follow up knowledge and belief in order to complete the process of complete engagement. You act upon your convictions and beliefs by implementing a new life strategy that recognizes this. In other words, in this arena, you would live as if you know and believe in God's existence. this means God is in charge of your life, and you believe that he is Lord of all. One step further, you believe what he says about himself in the Bible. You would also believe that Jesus is not only his soon, but is also God himself. If Jesus is God, you must accept and live with that fact. You then acknowledge Jesus as the Lord of your life and then live a life that reflects that knowledge and belief. By doing this, you then complete the cycle of the head, the heart and the body.

Arguments for the existence of God

It is an incredibly valuable and rewarding thing to question and examine what we all believe in. I really don't have the time today to develop this post as I would like, so have patience, please. First things first. I'll tell you this up front. If you are looking for empirical data, concrete proof, etc. for the existence of God, you are out of luck. The bottom line is it cannot be PROVEN that God exists. However, there are a great many things that we accept as fact that fit the same bill.
What can be done is that arguments for his existence can be made. These are found, briefly, in five categories:
1. Cosmological - the argument of causality. the world and and universe exists - therefore, there must be justifiable cause behind it. Motion exists, something started that motion. From physics, no effect exists without first having cause. Contigency is in place - an interdependence between systems, organisms, etc. - ultimately, dependence lies on something being continually greater than the other, leading beyond man and his reasoning capabilities. Finally, there are grades of perfection inherent in the universe that point in an upward direction from inanimate to animate and so forth.
2. Teleological - the argument of order and design. Clearly, order exists within the universe, also, design is present and observable in all systems.
3. Humanity - the arguments present in the existence of the mind, human nature and human culture. Another aspect - why do humans have the innate conception that there is something greater than they?
4. Morality, beauty and pragmatism - the moral sense of humanity - yes, the existence of the conscience in form or another. Why does beauty exist and how does it exist? Pragmatically, look at the positive effects that believeing in God has upon humanity.
5. Ontological - since we cannot empirically prove God exists, why would we have the idea of him if it wasn't placed there by him.

Once again, none of these are proofs, rather, they are arguments. Yet, when taken together, they present a hefty case for God's existence. The same type of thinking exists when dealing with things like Einstein's Theory of Relativity, etc.
The deal is, all of this boils down to one thing. Let me assure you, though, it isn't brainwashing. The whole issue of God's existence is contained in one word: faith! Faith is the hope of surety and the certainty of the unseen. I do have enough arguments for me to logically wrap my mind around the existence of God. I can't fully understand him or explain him, but I can logically conclude in his existence.
This is a solid starting point for examining arguments for the existence of God. If they do raise issues, good. If they give you problems, good. However, I would say that your struggles lie in one area - like I said earlier, they lie within FAITH. It is wonderful to examine what and why you believe as you do. If you are going to do that, though, I urge you to do it right. Come at the issues as objectively as humanly possible - a difficult proposition, to be sure. A few last questions for thought. If you are your own God, can you take credit for ANY of the arguments that I presented earlier? Would you have you as God? Do you possess any divine attributes?
I'm not trying to position myself as one who knows all, etc. However, I have gone through the same struggles that you are presenting - every one of them that I have read so far. So, please, take time to read this post, let me know if you have ANY questions, etc. You can keep those as private or as public as you like. I'm not going to try to MAKE you believe anything, as I really can't. It is a decision that YOU alone must make for YOURSELF, as you have the ultimate responsibility of belief. However, I am obligated to help you in any way I can.

2006-10-04T19:25:00.000-05:00

The race is ON!

There is no doubt in my mind that my life as a Christian and minister is based on the concept of a race or journey. The only proper way to navigate this course is to constantly seek to improve the way in which I run this race and journey of life. This can best be done by consciously attempting to develop my relationship with Jesus Christ. By striving to do this, by striving to live the life of holiness that we are called to live, I believe that I will be able to live a more productive and excellent life. While there is a great deal of personal risk present in such an endeavor, I must know that the potential risks are far outweighed by the potential rewards.
For so many people the hardest step to take in the field of personal development is the first one. It is almost standard operating procedure for people to assume that they are stuck with their situation in life. The old adage from Popeye, ..I am what I am.. seems to be the rallying cry for all too many. I believe that there are many different reasons for this but that the main culprit is fear. Fear keeps many from growing because they are afraid that if they were to change, their current positions in life would no longer prove to be of worth to them. In other words, so many have sold themselves short. They never cleared the bar because frankly, they never attempted to jump in the first place. Teddy Roosevelt lamented this condition when he said,.. It is hard to fail, but it is worse never to have tried to succeed...
It is with this thought in mind that I have sought to develop and increase my devotion to my savior, Jesus Christ. I desire to pursue him because he pursued me first. Through this process, which by the way will carry me through my entire life, I know that I will be able to stand along with Paul in saying, ..I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith... (II Timothy 4:7, NIV) While this may appear to be braggadocio on the surface, I must say that I am not able to say such things of my own volition. I will be able to confidently stand in the assurance that whatever was accomplished in the kingdom through me was done in concert with the Holy Spirit. My only tasks are to surrender to his will and to strive to become all that I can be.
The ancient Greeks hit the nail on the head, so to speak, when they exalted the concept and pursuit of excellence in their lives. Through the pursuit of arête, or the Greek concept of excellence, I will find that I have for far too long settled for a cheap imitation of what my life could have been. I am willing to say enough is enough. I have had enough of complacency and even mediocrity. I no longer wish to settle for the things in my life that have had led to a numbing of my heart and soul. From this day forward, I pledge to live a life that is devoted to the pursuit of excellence and improvement in my personal, professional and spiritual lives.
I believe that the most important relationship that I have in my life is the one that I am blessed to have with Jesus Christ. As this is the most important relationship in my life, I believe that it should serve as the barometer for all other relationships in my life. However I continue in my walk with Christ will go a long way in determining how I interact with my family, my church and my community.
I believe that the first priority in the life of a Christian should be to increase and cultivate the actual time spent in communion with their savior. This means that I will need to not only increase my time spent in prayer, but that I must also seek to make that time more productive. For me, this means that I need to guard my time more wisely. It is so easy to become side-tracked, today more than ever. With so many options available to me, I find myself pulled in competing directions. To that end, I must be able to set aside more time for the development of my prayer life.
Next, I believe that it is vital that I seek to increase my time spent in the Word and with other theological works. By doing so, I not only deepen my relationship with Christ, I also gain more knowledge which can then be passed on to others. There are many tools that exist for devotional periods. For instance, I would like to spend time with Charles Spurgeon's Morning and Evening. I believe that the devotional aspect of the Christian life is overlooked, at least in our Westernized society. While we demand a go, go mentality, even in the church, there can be no substitute for acquiring a willingness to put the brakes on and to slow down and spend quality time reflecting on the beauty and truth inherent in the Word.
Another way in which my personal relationship with Christ can be augmented is ironically, through relationships of accountability with other people. By understanding that I live my life before God and man, I become more concerned about my behavior and actions. I believe that this can best be done by finding, or even starting, a group of two to three other pastors who are willing to confidentially hold the other group members accountable for living a life of holiness and excellence in their homes and churches. Making myself subject to the inspection of others can but help me to live a life that is conductive to the production of excellence.
The final way in which I am seeking to improve my relationship with Jesus is in the area of life surrender. I want to totally give myself up as a ..living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God.... (Rom.12:1, NRSV). By continually seeking to live a life of holiness, I will be better equipped for ministry and will be closer in my walk with Christ. I do believe that through this process, entire sanctification will grow into continued grace and maturity which will culminate in glorification when I reach my Father who is in heaven. Until that time, I want to live a life that will match my talk. I believe that this will be accomplished best by implementing the strategies that have already been discussed in this section.
So, the ball is in the court of you, the reader, now. What are you going to improve your life? Are you going to be willing to surrender every fiber of your being to the one who gave you life in the first place? I've outlined a few personal strategies that I am working on in order to deepen my fellowship with Jesus. I'm not saying any of this in order to slap myself on the back or to ridicule you. If it sounds preachy, then thanks. I mean, hey, you go to the doctor to get treatment, right? Shouldn't one who calls himself pastor preach?
None of this talk of excellence has any relationship to making piles of money, etc. in the name of God. I am not advocating a "Your Best Life NOW" strategy. In Matt. 28:19, we are called by Christ to make disciples of all nations. This is an attempt to push for something deeper, something more committed than reciting a couple of lines of liturgy, singing a couple of hymns and nodding off during the sermon. Our life must include more encounters with Jesus Christ than just Sunday mornings. Church is beautiful and should be attended. However, your soul, your walk with Christ should be attended to. After all, what kind of relationship is based on once-a-week contact?
Is your Bible dusty? Was the last time you were on your knees last week when you dropped that quarter? Folks, a life of excellence is a life that is given over to Jesus Christ. It is a life that is characterized by holiness. This means living a life of perfect love. This means being devoted to becoming - not just being - in love with Christ. To be sanctified, to be holy means to be set apart, to be different, to be "other". It is about not just giving your heart to Christ, but your ENTIRE life. It means being SET FREE from the sin nature.
Guess what? You DON'T HAVE TO SIN! Did you know that? A Christian's life shouldn't be characterized by sin. I John 3:9 tells us that when we are born of God, we are dead to sin. This means that our sin nature is eradicated. Now, this doesn't mean that you will be perfect. It means that you can be set free from the WILL TO sin. What a concept!! The Holy Spirit can enable you to do this, to live an excellent life, one that is free from the bondage of sin and addiction. Is there a catch? Sure!
You have to be willing to do ONE thing now. You see, the thing is, you are going to do it anyway. It's just a matter of when and under what circumstance you are going to do it. Phil. 2:10 tells us that "at the name of Jesus, every knee should bend, in heaven and on earth and under the earth..." We will all bend our knee before Christ. Will you do it willingly NOW or will you do it in resistance before him in judgment - when it's too late. In other words, who are you going to serve? Yourself or Christ? By the way, those are the ONLY two choices, folks. Acknowledge him now as your savior. Isaiah warns us to pursue the Lord while he is still close. In other words, if this moving you in any way to make a commitment to Jesus for the first time or to deepen your walk with him, then do it. ASK! Ask for the Holy Spirit to guide you. There are no set formulas for this. Open you heart before him and confess your need and desire for his lordship. Don't let pride and mediocrity get in the way of living a life of excellence today. The race is ON!

2006-09-06T08:57:00.000-05:00

The Church is worth fighting for!!

Make no mistake, there are problems within the church today. However, that is no excuse for abandonment! The church is worth fighting for. I applaud efforts that are made to truly reach out to others in an attempt to communicate the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I think that the use of the internet for ministering is a wise use of this resource. I believe that it can greatly augment and supplement a person's relationship with Christ and other believers. That said, I do have some reservations about using the internet as a person's exclusive faith community.

I simply am unable to reconcile the Biblical accounts of Christian fellowship, church, and community with George Barna's book "Revolutions" and a move to divorce oneself from an actual, live, real time community of believers. You see, our faith is based NOT on self. We do not come to salvation in isolation. How can I say this? While commands in John 3 that we are to become born again, he never uses the phrase "personal savior". This is a recent and Western phenomenon. Our faith in Christ is to be interwoven with that of other believers. This cannot be accomplished in isolation. Even though I love and try to use internet communities and forums for evangelism, encouragement and education, this medium can never duplicate face-to-face contact with other believers.

Another issue that I have with Barna here is the implication that if the church fails to meet MY needs, that I have the right to leave it. I believe that this statement is a correct summary of Barna's beliefs. From a theological standpoint, "Barna sees the Church, the Body of Christ, exclusively as a mystical, spiritual community of "revolutionaries" without any direct relationship to the local church. The Church is a community that Christians spiritually join when they decide to follow Jesus, rather than one into which they are incorporated concretely through baptism and local church discipline." (Bounds & Drury & Smith, 2005) This fundamental shift in understanding the church explains why Barna believes in "revolution".

Understand, our place in the community of faith is not established exclusively by church membership. No one is saved by attending church. We are not going to reside in Methodist or Baptist and Presbyterian sections in heaven. However, this is NOT the point or intention of the church. The church is to be a community of IMPERFECT people who have gathered together to worship Christ our Risen Lord, to lift up prayer needs and concerns of the church, community and world, to push one another to a deeper faith in Jesus and to pursue holiness together.

With that definition in place, it becomes increasingly more difficult to have church in isolation. What exactly constitutes church? I agree that the church is not a building. Absolutely not. The church is not even a sacred space. The church then, is a gathering of people who wish to come together in MUTUAL submission to the authority of the Lord, the Bible and a pastor/leader. Our faith is based largely on this concept of submission. I submit my life to Christ. I submit my life to my brothers and sisters in the Lord. I strive to see others come to Christ and to disciple fellow believers. "Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ." (Eph. 5:21, NRSV) What a foreign concept to most of us!

To take an off-road here - this concept of discipleship must never be forgotten. We must never be willing to see people come to Christ and then watch them founder and wax and wane in their walks with Christ. We are called to sharpen one another, as iron sharpens iron. Discipleship is a lengthy process. It is about mutual growth, rather than merely individual growth. There is a relationship there, but it is not exclusive.

Furthermore, I believe that some of the complications here come from a skewed view of what the mission of the church is to be. Is it a haven for saints or is it a hospital for sinners? I would argue that it is to be both! I am a pastor. However, I must still never forget that I am also a sinner who is saved ONLY by the grace that is given to me by Jesus Christ. In turn then, I am a broken one who leads other broken ones. I know that hurts occur in the church. Many of us, myself included, have been wounded - deeply wounded, by someone who is in the church. Let's face it, the church is full of hypocrites. But this accusation is not enough. So is the rest of the world! That is the point. What sets the church apart from the world is that within church, the imperfect people are on a journey of faith. There is an effort that is being made to become something more. Sure, imperfect people make up the church. Paul writes in Philippians 3:12, "Not that I have already obtained this or have already reached the goal; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own." (NRSV)

The church, as the bride of Christ, then is precious. How many times is it stated that Christ is the head of the church? - Eph. 5:23 for one. Christ gave his life for the church - Eph. 5:25. Because of this, we are to love the church as Christ loves us. Does abandonment constitute love? When Martin Luther nailed the 95 Theses on the castle door at Wittenburg in 1517, did he do it with the intention of leaving the church altogether? No! Luther voiced his problems WITHIN the church and community of believers.

Do you have problems with the church? Voice them! It is not good enough to stand OUTSIDE of an organization and critique it. For example, do I have the ability to influence political change if I only stand outside of the political arena? No! I must vote and make my voice heard. I must work WITHIN the established framework. The same goes for the church. Barna is not calling for a revolution. What is calling for a legitimate divorce from the church. There is nothing revolutionary about that. You cannot hope to influence an organization for the BETTER of that organization by leaving. In leaving, the only one that you are serving is YOURSELF! That is contrary to the concept and design of the church.

Barna throws stones at the church, but never seeks to offer solutions to the problem. It has been said that the easiest chair to occupy is the critic's chair. Furthermore, it was Abraham Lincoln who stated," He has a right to criticize, who has a heart to help." In other words, if there is no intention of helping the church, then no criticism of the church is valid. Are there problems in the church? Yes. I am sorry, deeply sorry for the fact that so many people have been hurt within the church. But, I will say this. Who has the power to hurt you more than anyone else? Family! But, at the end of the day, after is said and done, what are they still? Family!

It is not good enough to simply take our ball away and go home when the game doesn't suit our needs. This isn't elementary school. Frankly, it isn't even good enough to leave the church when you have been hurt. While this is a response, it is not a healthy or mature response. I apologize for the length of this post, but I feel that it is my duty to respond. I say this only in love for my brothers and sisters in Christ, the church and for my Savior, Jesus Christ. The church IS worth fighting for!

2006-09-05T15:46:00.000-05:00

Perfect sex

Sex does NOT need to be a taboo subject. However, it also must not be a subject that is taken lightly or viewed as dirty. I definitely believe that sex is an incredible gift from God. Sex can give us completion and unity, in a physical sense. Due to its nature, sex then is a perfect expression of physical and even emotional and spiritual intimacy. Sex exhilarates, enlightens and encourages. Quite honestly, the feeling of an orgasm is one of the most ecstatic events in the emotional spectrum of life.
Yet, because sex is so powerful, it also has the potential for abuse. Serotonin and endorphins are released upon orgasm. These chemicals are released directly into the bloodstream and are responsible for that feeling of orgasmic bliss. From a biological point of view, it is quite possible to become addicted to this feeling. As a side note, it must be recognized that there is a difference between enjoying sex and being addicted to it. Restraining yourself to the perfect expression of sex allows you to overcome the addicting nature of sex and it also allows you to enjoy sex in the manner in which God intended it.
I bring these points up in order to show one reason why sex is so powerful. As I stated before, sex is beautiful and completely natural. However, and here is the rub, as wonderful as sex is, sex cannot be practiced without restraint. According to the Bible, sex is ONLY to be practiced between one man and one woman, who are united in marriage. Because of its power, sex must be respected, just as we respect the power of fire. Fire burns when played with irresponsibly. So does sex. This is why boundaries MUST be set. Because sex expresses physical intimacy, physical compatibility must be in existence. This is only found between a man and a woman. It's just straight up physics there, folks.
Even more importantly, sex expresses emotional and even spiritual intimacy. It is NOT the complete expression of either one of these areas, but it is a barometer. Sex is SO MUCH MORE than a physical act! I cannot emphasize this enough. Because of the emotional and spiritual components involved, sex must be expressed solely in a committed relationship. The committed relationship that is held in the Bible is marriage. A marriage is a covenant NOT just between a man and woman, it is a covenant before God as well. This means that, yes, God is and WANTS to be involved in your sex life. Because of this, sex has the aforementioned parameters for perfect expression.
As with the other gifts of God, man has a choice in how to receive these gifts. Sadly and unfortunately, so many choose to receive this precious gift in an order that please THEM ONLY. Remember, sex is to be enjoyed, but it is also meant to be enjoyed in its PERFECT EXPRESSION. When we choose our own expressions, we find ourselves working in "our flesh". This is also expressed in our sin nature. Galatians 5:19-21 expresses sins of the flesh. many of these sins are sins because they take the natural gifts of God and put them into the order of man. As I have stated, sex is wonderful in its perfect expression. However, when taken out of its perfect expression, it leads to adultery, fornication, impurity, self-indulgence and the like.
The church in America has for too long focused on what is negative in sexual matters. Sex needs to be recast in its perfect light. However, it must be acknowledged that when it is taken out of its perfect expression, sex does indeed lead to purely negative arenas. Sexual abuse, adultery, homosexuality and divorce are just a few of the sins and problems that come from taking sex out of context. These things can be avoided! When sex is left in its proper place, it becomes that completion that we as humans tend to seek. When we seek that completion too early - i.e.- prior to marriage, we suffer the consequences - perhaps an unplanned pregnancy, perhaps guilt. When we seek that completion outside of marriage,we likewise will suffer consequences, as have been previously mentioned. This is not intended to be an exhaustive discussion of sex, but an overview. I am not including the personal details of my sex life with my life, as I do believe that expression to be private, between my wife, God and me. By the way, I truly believe that if we took that stance, that sex is beautiful, we would be less likely to mar its beauty. If we believed that sex is sacred, I believe we would continue to maintain that sanctity. This is what must happen. I believe that this really must begin in the homes of Christian married couples everywhere. As we speak of the true nature of sex, I believe more people will of the positive nature of sex. This in turn can lead to more people desiring perfect expression over one-night stands - which only lead to loneliness, flippant attitudes and portrayals of sex and the demeaning of women as mere objects of sexual desire - and the demeaning of men as being little more than sex-crazed dogs. God intended sex to be so much more than that!!

2006-08-29T16:02:00.000-05:00

How the Bible came to be and why the King James Version isn't and shouldn't be the only version

There are many, many different versions of the Bible out there today. Sometimes, the choice for an appropriate text can be overwhelming. Some prefer the NIV, others the NRSV, while others would have you think that the King James Version is the only pure and Godly version in existence. This belief is more harmful than good. For many proponents of this position, the other versions of the Bible came out through a satanic plot to corrupt the church. They claim that the Alexandrian texts used by the NIV and others are corrupt. Actually the objection to the Alexandrian texts is a fallacy. The King James text, which originated in 1611, has limitations, due to the time it was written and by the method of translation that IT used. I am not saying this to proclaim that one text is better than the other, but I do want to point out that the line of thinking that Alexandrian texts were considered heretical is not true.
First, the KJV is without the knowledge of the Masoretic texts and the Dead Sea Scrolls, which when discovered in 1947 brought about incredible knowledge of early Jewish life and their beliefs. Second and most important, the image of one lonely monk painstakingly translating the Bible from its original Hebrew and Greek into Latin or even later, English is not an accurate view of translation.
See, we don't have the original autographs - the original documents, written by the original writers. We do have pieces of papyrus that date close to the originals, but even then, we are talking about @ 100-200 years of difference. Also, many - and I mean hundreds of pieces of scrolls and papyrus get laid out on tables and they are then pieced together by flow and writing style in order to match up content, etc. for accuracy. This is a lengthy process that requires the work of many, rather than one.
Second, the translation style that was used for the KJV is actually the weakest. Instead of examining the scrolls, etc. themselves, the "translators" all sat in one large room, while one person sat up front and read the scrolls aloud. In essence, this was a large dictation party. This was done for speed's sake. Remember, the KJV came at the bequest of King James. History shows us that he was not even what you would call a very decent man. YES, I do believe that God used in spite of himself. God does that throughout history. By the way, for what it is worth, it is believed that James was very likely a homosexual. Does that really matter? That is an issue between the man and God, but it should be noted.
The translating process for scrolls, papyrus that was used by the NIV involves much more time and the process that I first described. This is one reason why you might see phrases like "does not appear in the earliest Greek texts" in the notes in some Bibles. For example, Mark 16:9-17 - the ending that we have in Bibles simply was added later. John 7:53-8:1-11 - which is the story of the woman caught in adultery does not appear in most ancient texts. These portions, along with others simply weren't in the most reliable early texts. This clearly points to the portions being added by later writers. By the way, the one text that is used by KJV-only proponents, most vocally Chick Publications, point towards I John 5:7 to say that if your Bible doesn't read, "There are three that testify in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one", then it is "false". The vast majority of versions render this verse in v.7-8 as "There are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three agree". Once again, the most reliable early texts simply DON'T render what the KJV has in it. In fact, the KJV rendering, while being a concise Trinitarian statement, would be the ONLY verse in the Bible to be so clear in position. I am a firm believer in the Trinity, so I am not bashing that, only once again pointing out that there are inconsistencies in the KJV.
Frankly, it is NOTHING BUT A MIRACLE of the Holy Spirit that we have the Bible at all. Remember, it is NOT like the Bible was assembled in one piece and laid at the feet of every believer upon conversion. The Bible that we have today is the result of the efforts of thousands over countless hours of writing, mediation, study, debate and most importantly, PRAYER.
I really think that some of the issue with KJV-only folks is their view of how scripture was given to men. Some people believe that the writers were mere tools who wrote every word EXACTLY as God meant it to be. In other words, they were merely taking dictation. However, when you read the Bible, it is clear that the personalities of the writers comes out from time to time. I really believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but just as God chooses to speak to the hearts of men, he also has used men to write. This is called "dynamic inspiration". The Holy Spirit worked WITH the writers, using their literary skills, world views, etc. For instance, why do we have 4 Gospels? Why do those 4 Gospels actually have 4 different views of the same events? Why is it that some omit things others left in? It has to do with the writer and most importantly, the CONTEXT in which the book was written. Remember, the books were also assembled. It's not like Luke would have just sat down and wrote his gospel in sitting. It took time, etc. Remember, Luke wasn't even at the events that he describes in his gospel, yet Matthew was. Don't you think that would lead to some differences in accounts? This isn't to lessen either one, it is merely to say that we have to be careful as to how hard and dogmatic we cling to each word.
Each person has a unique personality and even writing style. This is reflected in the texts that we have today. Look at the different styles that are present. The Bible is collection of 66 smaller books that were written over hundreds of years and then only MUCH later, assembled into what we have today. It wasn't even until AD 367 that Athanasius wrote the first list of books of the New Testament, in the way in which we have it today. As a side note, it should be stated that the nature of Christ, his full divinity and full humanity wasn't nailed down until the Council of Nicea in AD 325. The full divinity of the Holy Spirit wasn't established, formally, until the Council of Constantinople in AD 381. Point being, our faith has been worked out through the course of time by so many. We take this for granted, but it should NEVER be.
I write this not to attack, but to inform. We must understand that while yes, the Bible is the Word of God; it has been given to and through fallible men. I am not saying that it is full of errors. I am saying that the Bible has plenary inspiration from the Holy Spirit. This means that the Bible is inerrant in INTENT. It is completely inspired in thought and intent from the Holy Spirit. Personal use of words and phrases was allowed for the purpose of expressing the divine in human words. I hope this is of use. There are many other reasons why there are different versions of the Bible, but I assure you that the NIV and others do not exist as some plot of Satan to corrupt the church and Christians everywhere. This has been a quick overview of the landscape of Biblical interpretation.

2006-08-29T16:01:00.001-05:00

3 models of theology

All Christians are called to be theologians. I am not talking about a monk who reads, writes and studies 20 hours a day, by candlelight. Although there is nothing really problematic with that lifestyle, if you are called to it, that is. It is just that few are. Most believe that theology is best left to academicians or ivory tower gurus who wear blazers and think really deep thoughts. Nothing could be further from the truth. A theologian, as defined by M. James Sawyer, is someone who knows about or speaks about God. Dr. Chris Bounds defines a theologian more along the lines of a practitioner. That is to say, a theologian is one who takes gospel truths and applies them to life in order to care for the souls of others. This really encompasses all Christians who wish to make a difference for Jesus Christ in society.
Since that makes every committed Christian a theologian, I think that it is important to outline what makes theology so beneficial and important. A quick note about the following work. It is not mine, exclusively. In fact, far from it. Herein lays one of the beauties of theology. You are not a complete original. You are standing on the shoulders of the giants who have come before you or alongside of those who are serving with you. If you believe that you are completely original, it would perhaps be best for you to research just a bit more where your theology is coming from. If you are interpreting scripture in a way that no one else in the past 2000 years has, chances are GREAT that you are not an original. You are more than likely a heretic. That is, you are wrong. The writer, in Ecclesiastes, laments that there is nothing new under the sun. With that in mind, here are the three useful models of theology. Another good word for model might be the word view or aim. These models have been organized into a table format in Sawyer's excellent book, The Survivor's Guide to Theology.
1. Theology as SAPIENTIA. This is Latin for "wisdom". By the way, theologians can use a lot of Latin. This is due to the fact that so many scholars for well over 1000 years have used the language. Therefore, some it has stuck around. Besides, it can sound really cool - but only if you know what the word means!
This viewpoint centers around the belief that theology, at its heart, should be wise enough to direct a person "toward a relationship with God based on personal trust", to quote Sawyer, once again. This means that all of the theological statements about God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, salvation, sin, etc. should direct a person towards actually wanting a relationship with God. It should be wise and engage the heart as well as the mind.
2. Theology as SCIENTIA. Once again - Latin - here it is used for "science". This is the classic definition of theology. The fathers of the church called theology "the queen of the sciences". This is because, by their estimation, everything else flowed out of theology. Isn't that interesting? Today, many scientists claim that faith has no part in science. Yet, the pioneers of scientific research clearly thought otherwise. By the way, practice organic chemistry and tell me that you don't need faith. Yes, everything is calculated and measured, but exact chemical reactions can differ when using organic compounds. One false move and POOF!!
3. Theology as ORTHOPRAXIS. Orthopraxis means "right action". This differs from the Greek word, orthodoxy, which means "right doctrine". Yes, theologians have also used Greek, as the New Testament of the Bible was written in Greek. Orthopraxy, put into practical terms, means that you practice what you preach. You can call yourself a Christian, but do you live it, according to the Bible? To me, this view makes so much sense. I can preach and study and learn about theology. But, if I am not willing to put into practice what I have studied, then I have really just wasted my time.
This is just a little overview of what theology, at its heart, is aiming for. It doesn't have to be scary. It doesn't have to be overly intellectual. It does require thought, study and most of all, prayer. I encourage everyone to begin to study theology. One problem that can occur is that many texts, provided that you find one, can be over the head of most people. This is why I would really encourage beginners to find the book, A Survivor's Guide to Theology. This can be found at most Christian bookstores and will not break your bank or back. Once you have moved from there, something like Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology" or Thomas C. Oden's 3 part systematic theology would be excellent for full immersion.
I do not consider myself to be an expert theologian. I am still learning and plan on doing so for the rest of my life. I am doing so in order to grow in wisdom in order to strengthen my walk with Jesus and in order to help educate others whenever possible. Don't be afraid of reading and study. Take a few pages at a time, if you are new to it. Pray to the Lord that you will receive "spiritual wisdom and understanding." If you do this, the Lord WILL open the "eyes of your heart" to the vast treasure that is a relationship with him!

2006-08-29T16:01:00.000-05:00

Some eschatological thoughts

I'm not a pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib, pre-millennial, post-millennial type of Christian. However, I do believe in the return of Christ to this Earth, just as he promised. Here is some of my eschatology - it's not my own, I'm not trying to claim that it is - nor am I trying to say that I have it all figured out. Let God do that. He is the one with answers. I know that I am to trust in him and know that he is control. I do my work, he does his. Jesus is Lord and that is good enough for me!!
I believe that 1. the 1000 year reign is a figurative sum of years. Just to think about this for a moment - so say you make it to that point. If Satan is released AGAIN after he is bound up, that would mean that theoretically, you could make it through everything and then be seduced by Satan and end up in hell. Also, if Christ is in control then, this would mean that he gives up at least some control. I have real problems with this. Rev. 20:1-3 is then talking about a time PRIOR to the final judgment. Read all of Rev. 20 in context and you see that in order for Satan to wage war, he has to have troops. These troops would be trib survivors? They are "as numerous as the sands of the sea?" When you do some quick math, and assuming even current figures- that could mean millions of troops? From where? If we are to read Revelation as a history book, that is chronologically speaking, remember that when Christ returns in Rev. 19, the antichrist's army is wiped out. The only way to fit then Rev. 20 in is to assume that while Christ is reigning on Earth, people still are married and having babies. These babies then grow up and eventually, through the course of time have many who reject Christ and join Satan's army? That just doesn't seem to make any sense.
2. the rapture still isn't mentioned in the Bible. That's a problem. I know that it is popular but it is a recent phenomenon, only gaining popularity in the 19th century due to the works of Darby and the advent of the Schofield Reference Bible. See, what the rapture doctrine really teaches is a "parachute" type of mentality. Let's get out of here - jump off this plane before it crashes and grab my chute!! Are we so anxious to be rid of this gift of life?
3. there are not 2 prophesied return events but 1. If there is a rapture where we are caught up in the clouds with Christ that is one return event. Then when he returns, we have two. Scripturally, that doesn't fit. 4. It is a major league problem to try to put a modern exegetical spin on Revelation. Revelation is apocalyptic literature. It must then be treated as such and read as such. This means that it is not a history book to be taken the nth degree literally, a la Left Behind. It tells the story of deliverance and God's victory. Yes, I do believe that Jesus will return, literally here on Earth. However, I'm not counting on it being in my lifetime. I do seek to live every day as if he might return, but my faith is not built upon that. Every generation - EVERY generation has felt that they were the final generation. Read some of Paul's writings, it is very clear that he believed that Christ's return was imminent back then. Yet, it wasn't Why? Because God is patient.
II Peter 3:9 says that "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." God is merciful in delaying his judgment - that is sure to come, so that many more will hear the Gospel and receive Jesus. My best advice is to stop looking for signs - remember, Jesus said that a wicked and adulterous generation looks for signs. Live as if Jesus may return at any moment BUT don't live like Jesus MUST return at any moment. Revelation is a synopsis of the entire Biblical story, it is a history book with portions that are obviously set in the future. It was not intended to be a history book or a guidebook. God has never given us exact dates - he transcends time! Remember, Jesus came to earth 400 years after the last OT book was written. We must be wary when we attempt to put the infinite into a finite time table that suits our purposes. I will never say that I have it all figured out. I will rely upon God to fill in the details of history as he sees fit. But one thing I do know is that we are really trying to make his plan fit into our charts and seminars and books if we try to make everything fit the human mindset.

2006-08-29T16:00:00.001-05:00

The promise of heaven

To me, I barely possess the vernacular to describe heaven. After all, "no eye has seen, no ear has heard..." but for the sake of the exercise, I'll try. The nature of heaven, to me, is a place beyond our boundaries of time and space. It is a place where there is no more pain, no more tears and no more remorse. It is a place of eternal praise and rest. It is then "joy unspeakable and full of glory."
We will find our place in the presence of God. I believe that is where we will finally realize - aha! that was what life was all about. Paul wrote that he only saw in part, that he hadn't attained perfection, and on and on with the metaphors of partial realizations that we gain here on Earth.
In heaven, that all comes to fruition. I believe it to be a place of everlasting joy. We finally get to meet Jesus - face to face! I say this from personal experience. In 1989, I had a heatstroke and actually died for a short period of time. During that span, long story short, I was transported into a place of blinding yet calming light. I remember feeling like I was no longer confined to my own body, that I had somehow transcended it. The next thing I was aware of was a presence in front of me. I still remember looking up and seeing a majestic robe. It was bright and the further I raised my head, the greater the radiance was. I couldn't even see above a certain point, but I knew, just knew in my being that I was in the presence of Christ. It was at that moment that I heard him say that it wasn't my time yet and then BOOM! I was back in my own body and in all of the pain and convulsions that I had been before.
All of that was to say that I not only believe in heaven but I have also been blessed enough to have experienced just a taste of what heaven was like. The ironic thing about that is that I would later live as though I hadn't. Just another proof that miracles do NOT inspire, in and of themselves, long term responses.
Anyway, back to the topic. When heaven is brought up in conversation, I usually go back into my mind to a time when I was 11. My grandmother had just passed away very unexpectedly. I remember talking with my dad, who was younger than I am now, about what heaven was like and what Grandma must now be seeing. I remember thrilling at the prospect that she was in the presence of Jesus. She was getting to meet David, Moses, Noah, Peter and all of the heroes of the Bible. I will never forget that night and the childlike innocence that I possessed at that moment.
I really believe that is what heaven is all about. It is when we truly become childlike again. I mean that to say that we are once again INNOCENT! If that were all heaven is, then it would still be worth everything. To be innocent and unknowing of evil, guilt and fear. I hate those three things so much. To be free of their bondage will be so heavenly.
When heaven is brought into conversation, to me, it is better than any Christmas memory that I had as a child. When comes up, it always seems to bring is with it joy and even a bit of wistfulness. I long to be there, but I must remember that my labor here is not finished yet. In my case, the Lord literally had something more for me to do for his kingdom. I don't want to forsake that.
I believe that my concept in heaven can ONLY enhance my intimacy with God. To think that he has prepared a place that so much greater than anything I can comprehend!
Because I have had a dynamic experience with heaven, I believe that has afforded me the chance to describe it to others in vivid detail- at least from a standpoint of feelings and perceptions. This in turn gives me the feeling of great intimacy with God. My experiences, as great as they were, though, are still not enough to rely upon. My reliance must come upon the Lord himself. If at times he seems distant, I must remember of the promises that he has made me through his Word and through the experiences that I have had. Heaven and the promise thereof allows for such peace and trust in God that I feel that I can empty my heart and soul to him. The promise of heaven is so great that I know that despite the pains that I encounter in life, the doubts that naturally creep in or the times when I want to give up can't overcome it. To know that God loves us so much that he has given us the chance to be in his presence FOREVER is mind-blowing!
Even what I can conceive of is so incredible that I am literally smiling as I write this. It is utterly so vital that we gain at least a perspective of what our lives are about. we are not just sleep-walking through this life. We are not the random arrangement of molecules, we have been given a purpose. As Christians, we are to live a life that is pleasing to the lord. This is for two reasons. One, yes, is to secure our future with God in heaven. But secondly, and just as important, is that we are to live a life that reflects the greater future of heaven so that OTHERS may see that. We want others to know that they too can have a place in heaven, if they will but turn their lives over to Jesus Christ! God gives us the choice to accept this eternal place of joy and happiness. How can we choose anything else?

2006-08-29T16:00:00.000-05:00

My Secret Identity

Paul begins Ephesians 1:18-23 by briefly stating that there are three things that will open the "eyes of your heart". He then moves to elaborate upon these three things. I believe that Paul uses the phrase "open the eyes of your heart" in order to state that we need to focus on the big picture of life, both that lived here on earth and the one to come in eternity.
We mortals, myself included, get so bogged down on trivial matters. As C.S. Lewis stated, we live "like an ignorant child who wants to go on making mud pies in a slum because (we) cannot imagine what is meant by the offer of a holiday at the sea..." (The Weight of Glory) In other words, we settle for what we know, no matter how mundane because we forget or have no ability to comprehend just how grand of a scale our lives CAN be lived upon. The only true way that we can change is to, as Paul said, to have "the eyes of hearts" opened.
First, Paul mentions "the hope to which he has called you". We are saved and bought at a high price. I need no longer fret about my eternal destination because Jesus paid the price of admission - all I must do is accept it and live it. I can only really live out my salvation when I focus less on myself and more on others. If I become self-focused, I become lost in pity and get removed from community. I have been given an incredible hope - the hope of eternity in heaven with Savior for all time!
Second, Paul mentions the "riches of his glorious inheritance." I am a child of the king! Paul also writes that we are joint-heirs with Jesus. This means that we are going to inherit more than we can possibly comprehend. I'm not talking about earthly riches, like gold or paper money. I am talking about eternity here. Infinity. Transcendence. We have the promise that, as saints, we get to partake in the splendor of the universe. If this seems like a mind-boggling concept - this is because IT IS! I'm not going to attempt to describe every bit because "no eye has seen and no ear has heard" what magnificence God has in store for us.
Third, and this is where the pay-off is- we know that these two things will come to pass because we serve a God who possesses "immeasurable greatness" and power. Our God is so far beyond our puny imaginations. Think about this for a second. Our God, my God, is omniscient. He knows EVERYTHING. He is omnipresent. He's EVERYWHERE. He is omnipotent. He is all-powerful. There is nothing that God cannot know or overcome. He is so powerful that he possesses the ability to NOT strong-arm us into loving him. It is said that those who possess true power know it. They don't have to flaunt it. The power is innate. When you are around someone like that, you too know they are powerful. Just imagine how much more power God possesses then.
He has allowed us to CHOOSE to accept him or reject him. He wants my true love. He wants me to come to him only if I want to. This is what blows my mind. My entire eternal destination is not decided by someone else. It is decided by me. Now, there are incredible consequences that come with my choice. I can choose to live like I have hope and a glorious inheritance ahead of me. I can choose to recognize that God is all-powerful and that he made the way to him through his son, Jesus Christ. All I have to do is accept this and then live for him. THIS is what will "open the eyes of my heart." When I focus on the glorious hope and future that I have in Christ, my arrows, my pain, my struggles start to pale in comparison. My wants and desires begin to become more centered on what Jesus would want for me rather than what I think I want.
Yet, with all of that said, as incredible as this prospect is, so many want to choose another way. They want to choose what seems to be their own path. They choose their own "mud pies" because they know no different. Their eyes are closed. They reject their God in exchange for the temporal and ever-changing. They live life grasping at straws, searching for peace that never comes. they live looking for next big high, the next big thrill, yet when this comes, it is never enough. Just one more binge. Just one more hot night and I know that I will be content... Yet that never happens. It's like living with an itch that you just can't scratch. I know because I have lived that way. I chose to make my own "mud pies" because I never wanted anyone - ANYONE to tell ME how to live MY life. But you know what? Nothing fit. Nothing gave me peace. Nothing allowed me to look at myself in the mirror and actually LIKE what I saw. sure, I had attended church for years. I knew my Bible. That wasn't the problem. I studied to be a pastor but I walked away from it when things got really tough. Why? Because the "eyes of my heart" were closed. I had the head knowledge and some raw gifts. The problem wasn't that. The problem was that I hadn't allowed God to become REAL! That is a choice that must be made. You have to WANT it.
I believe this is what Paul is alluding to in this passage. He is offering a brief glimpse into the realm of possibilities. We don't have to live in the squalor of our own lives. I no longer have to live a selfish and incomplete life. Jesus has offered so much more. One choice. Just one choice can change everything. If we will but "open the eyes of our hearts", we gain HOPE, INHERITANCE and the knowledge that the omnipotent creator of all things is ultimately our Lover, Lord and King. This will in turn give us an identity that will last for all of eternity. I will no longer have to view myself as a loser, as an underachiever or as a failure. My identity is built, then, on the firm foundation of Christ. I am truly then, a "new creature" in Christ.

2006-08-29T15:59:00.001-05:00

Intimacy issues?!

Intimacy is a rare commodity today. Too many times, we exchange intimacy for quick fixes of immediate gratification. We trade love for lust. We view our spouses as mere objects for our own pleasure rather than as partners for life. This isn't true intimacy, it is self-gratification. In the long run, this mindset isn't healthy for us or the other people in our lives. What is it that creates a sense of intimacy in a relationship?
I believe that the ability to disclose oneself is what begins to create a sense of intimacy in a person. You can't possibly hold others at an arm's length if you want to establish intimacy. Secondly, you can't force it. Intimacy can't be bought or rushed. It takes time to develop. It takes common experiences and "insider" moments. Third, you can't just wish for it. Intimacy isn't something that can be "poofed" into existence. It comes from hard work and commitment to a relationship. Fourth, intimacy is an issue of desire. You have to WANT to be intimate with another person, whether that relationship is platonic or otherwise. Relationships, once again, are hard work. Just like exercise, you tend to get out of relationships what you put into it. Of course, there are always exceptions to this. However, be in a long-term relationship, like a marriage and find out how much effort it requires for a healthy and intimate relationship with your spouse.
For me, most of those same principles apply. Take my marriage, for instance. When we were first married, my wife and I longed to spend every bit of our time together in one form of intimacy or another. As the years passed, we found ourselves spending less and less private time together. I really longed to get to know my wife better on a personal level - as more than a wife and lover. I wanted to know her as a woman and fellow human being. This required so much more effort! What I found was that she was less willing to open up sections of her heart due to previous pains and hurts. In turn, I also found that I had placed many walls around my own heart because I too had been burned too many times by others. So, I found that one big component of being intimate was self-exposure - you know what I mean...
I had to be willing to expose parts of my being, my soul to my wife if I wanted to grow closer to her. This was and still is scary. I have been married for thirteen years and it is still hard work and is still frightening at times. Why is that? Anytime you seek to move closer to another person, you have the chance of getting hurt - yes, even and maybe ESPECIALLY by your spouse. My wife gets to see me at my best and worse - and yet, she still loves me- wow!
Finally, intimacy with Christ requires much work as well. For me, it is a labor of love. It requires discipline and much faith. See, you can't physically see the Lord right now. This has required faith for my analytical side to process. However, through prayer, I have sensed his presence in powerful ways. It has been through a desire to want to know him better, to open my heart and being open to him completely - in ways that I can't even do with my wife. I talk to Jesus just like I write and talk with anyone else. I still hold him in the utmost regard, there is a sort of tension. I talk to him as if he is my best friend but I still realize that he is the sustainer of the universe - yet he still longs to love my heart! Sorry for the babbling here...
Intimacy to me is so special. It is what makes life worth living to me. Intimacy is a rare and difficult achievement. I say achievement because of the work and discipline that is involved in it. Yet, at times, it is the most natural and easy thing to do. We all want to be known and pursued, I am no different. I want those that I love to know me as well as they desire to do so. In a like manner, I want to know them as well as they will let me.

2006-08-29T15:59:00.000-05:00

A few words about the church

It is fine to be upset with the status quo within the church today. That's good! Be upset! However, you have to do something about it. Can you truly make any difference in an organization if you pull out of it? What good does it do to run from the church, which is called on more than one occasion, the bride of Christ? Remember one thing, NOWHERE in the Bible is the phrase "personal savior" ever used. God didn't so love Jeff, he so loved the world. This means that there is a whole lot more at stake then just me. We are saved IN COMMUNITY! There is a world that is literally dying to hear. This starts locally. It begins in your heart - BUT it doesn't END there.
The church is not intended to be a one-stop shop or a drive-thru for any one person. It is a collection, a body of believers. To live isolated from it is extraordinarily dangerous. Once more, it is irresponsible. We have been called to tell the world about Christ AND to make disciples. Disciples aren't made in isolation or overnight. They are made through time and through community. We are told in the word that iron sharpens iron. This symbolizes how one person strengthens another. How can a person be sharpened in continual solitude?
My main issue with this mindset is the same problem that I have with people who complain about the government but then don't vote. They have no right to complain because they aren't attempting to change the broken organization. The problems that exist in the church aren't going to fix themselves. They require caring, loving and honest people who are caring, loving and honest enough to get involved in their churches and denominations.
The Bible NEVER says that we are to leave the church. We are never called to live in isolation. We are never called to go to church or to pray or read the Bible in order to get what we can out of God. This is why George Barna’s book Revolutions is complete garbage! We are called to equip ourselves so that we might do 2 things. One, so that we can resist the devil and two, so that we can help equip others. Show me one time in the Word where the Holy Spirit works in complete isolation with just one or even two people. It doesn't work that way!
So, get angry! Get appalled at the apparent apathy and compromise that exists in the church today! Luther did! Wesley did! Calvin did and on and on. But one question here then - what would have happened if they had taken their ball and gone home? What if they had been so upset with the church but then simply did their own thing? If that thought is frightening to you - and it should be - then don't make that mistake. Take what you learn and GIVE it away. That is the true nature of the Kingdom of God!!

2006-08-29T15:58:00.001-05:00

Understanding God (a little) Better

I am not saying that I have God figured out. Far from it. In fact - very, very far from it. However, the Bible does give us indications as to how he works. Interestingly, not all of the scriptures view God as loving and tolerant of our every action. Quite honestly, if Ps. 13:1; 22:1 and 44:24 were all that I knew of God, I would have to seriously doubt his intentions. I would feel that I run the risk of abandonment when things fail. Would I feel like I am lost when I sin? But when I really think about it, how many times have I seriously questioned the Lord in this way, as if the creation knows better than the creator. The fact remains that we constantly question and wonder what the problem is when "bad" things happen. If we have failure, many of us run to see what we have done wrong.
The real problem is that we tend to forget that Jesus made us a promise. He promised us that in this world, we WOULD have troubles. We aren't promised anything more than trials and tribulations in this life. In many ways, it us almost more realistic to look for the good times as points when we were truly blessed rather than as the accepted norm of the redeemed.
I am not suggesting that this life is misery and worth dumping at the first chance. What I am saying is quite the contrary. God is constant, even when we do not see him. He is always there. He promises that he will never leave us nor forsake us. While it is easy to feel abandoned when bad things happen, we must keep the big picture in mind. God is good all of the time, even when I wonder if that is true.
For my money, I prefer to remember God through Psalm 23:1, as my shepherd. Psalm 46:10 assures me that he is God, so I can relax in him when things go "bad". Psalm 10:17 promises that God does indeed hear the cry of the afflicted. Jeremiah 29:11-13 tells me that God does indeed have a plan for my life. He doesn't seek to harm me but to test me so that I may become strong. Isaiah 41:10 tells me not to fear, God is in charge. Finally, can I forget the promise of John 3:16? God has sent the ultimate fix and ultimate expression of his love for me, when he sent his own son, Jesus, to make the way for me to live with him eternally. In turn, I can then express to others that they too need the saving touch that can only come from a personal and transformative relationship with Christ. This, then, is the ultimate purpose that God has for our lives - to live with and for him, to bring others into that same loving community and relationship with him!!

2006-08-29T15:58:00.000-05:00

You have to understand your enemy!!

We are constantly given choices in life. We have the ability to determine much of what we perceive. It has been said that life is but 10% of what happens to us and 90% of how we react to the events. In other words, much of what happens in our lives has little bearing upon it. What really matters is our perceptions of those events. This is where Satan has his most fertile areas for attack. If we constantly go through life with a "woe is me" mentality, if we are constantly pessimistic and a general drag to be around, how will we be able to positively impact the world for Christ?
If we choose to focus upon our problems and pains throughout our life, we will be less than effective in reaching out to others. We will afraid of being hurt again. We will choose to live in isolation and insulation. Nobody WANTS to be hurt, do they?
It's not like we are the first round of humans to be here on earth. Satan has had thousands of years to hone his "craft". Few of us are gullible enough to believe that he is somehow in charge of things. He isn't usually able to get people to openly renounce God. This is rarely his modus operandi.
He usually attacks much more subtly and indirectly. The most crushing attacks are the hardest ones to openly perceive. If we will not actively turn from God, perhaps we will passively do so. If we can have a doubt, a pessimistic mindset or victimized mentality, we will become weak to other attacks. This is how Satan usually moves. If a Christian can't be turned, they can be rendered uninfluential by focusing on their own pains and issues. If we can be moved to be self-directed and if we can be kept from genuine community and brotherly love, we are made easy targets.
Try watching any program on hunters on Animal Kingdom. Do the predators every go right into the middle of the herd in order to attack the most strong and healthy animals? No way. Predators look towards the outside of the herd. They look for the weak and slow. These animals make the best victims. We really aren't any different. If we stay on the fringe of the community by rarely going to church and rarely becoming involved, we stay weak. If we constantly focus on the negative and the painful, we remain weak.
Remember, Satan is called a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. He is a predator by nature. If we remain weak, we make an inviting target. However, if we are strong through continual prayer, love and faith that God will provide and care for us, even when it is tough, then we will be strong. If we stay plugged into our local church and other Christian support groups - such as online forums, etc. - then we stay strong. DO NOT TRY TO LIVE AS A CHRISTIAN ALONE!! Stay connected. Get involved! If we see that God has only our best in mind, we stay strong. If we examine our arrows and attempt to remove them, we remain strong.
In this way, we may do as James implores us. We will resist him. The battle is not our own. Christ is the defender of our faith. However, we are commanded to do our parts. By doing this, we are strong in the Lord and so much less of an inviting target to the enemy of our souls.

2006-08-29T15:57:00.001-05:00

Baggage claim!

The word, baggage, has such negative connotations for me. It seems to imply something that is extra or something that hangs on. It's like a growth or tumor, just one that might not be visible. Due to this fact, it is absolutely imperative that we are able to interpret whether or not that baggage is benign or malignant. Therefore, we must know not only the nature of our baggage but also whether or not we have any to begin with.
In my estimation, I clearly possess baggage. From a pro standpoint, it is good to know that I have it in order to examine its impact upon my life. For instance, if I were the product of an abusive household, that would have an impact on how I interacted with others. On the flip side, if I was the product of a nurturing and loving household, that would also have an impact on my interpersonal relationships. It is always good to understand how my upbringing may have influenced my life's baggage.
An additional pro of knowing one's baggage is that it keeps us grounded and humble. It is too easy for us to become self-righteous and condescending when we view ourselves as above the fray of humanity. If I realize that I have problems just like everybody else, then I am able to identify with the needs and concerns of others.
From a con standpoint, if I am always focused upon those bags in my corner, I can hinder my growth as a professional out of fear that my baggage will either become known or that they will devour me. Likewise, constant self-loathing lowers my confidence level. This then causes me to become introverted and unable to give myself freely to others.
There is no way that a pastor can be authentic if they are unaware of their own baggage. If you are oblivious to your own problems, how can you give yourself away freely? You are only able to give a perception of yourself. additionally, by being unaware of your own shortcomings, you have a tendency to portray yourself as superior or above others. How does allow you to be authentic and approachable to others?
I believe that we can find out what our baggage is through prayer, meditation, self-inspection and honest dialogue with others, preferably those who know us best. From time to time it is of benefit to gain the perspective of those who do not know us in order to find out how we are perceived at a glance by others. as we have seen in this workshop, there are also tools available for our consumption that will benefit our self-examination. In this instance, a tool like the Johari Window can be used in order to examine what dark and dank baggage may be lurking in the shadows or perhaps even mildewing in some lost corner of our minds, even unbeknownst to us.
It's never too late for spring cleaning - even in August!!

2006-08-29T15:57:00.000-05:00

Some ramblings from my exegetical study of James 4:1-10

There aren't too many things that make me feel better than having a final paper written and done. I'm telling you what! James 4:1-10 is an incredible passage. If you haven't ever read it, do so know. I'll wait for you....
There is so much power present there. For those that don't have their Bible handy, I'll tell you that, in short, James tells his people that they are fighting because they have been blindly following their own desires and passions. They have been playing games with God. They are trying to live exactly like they did before they were saved, only know they were trying to "Christianize" the very things that they had been delivered from.
James tells them trying to be friends with the world and friends with God won't work. To be a friend of the world is to be an enemy with God. By the way, a friend of the world is really another way of saying that a person is acting like they never were saved in the first place. James gets pretty rough with the people - he calls them adulteresses. This tough love continues but then in true pastoral fashion, he explains how they can get straight with God. He actually lists 10 things to do. The most important things for them and for us - for me to do are to submit to God, to draw close to God and to humble yourself before him. These things are easier said than done.
I know that I always had a problem with that submission issue. I'm a man. who wants to submit when you don't have to, I thought. I was really missing the point. Submission is NOT - repeat - NOT a sign of weakness. It's a sign that you are mature and secure in your faith. It's admitting that you know that you don't have everything all figured out in your life.
I know that I never started to REALLY LIVE until I submitted my life and career to God. It was at that point that I began to wake up. My faith had always been weak and much like a rollercoaster, I always up and down... yo-yo Christianity is a weak substitute for the real thing.
I was truly, as James writes, double-minded. I was trying to live with the best of both worlds. However, Jesus says that no one can serve two masters. You will leave one for the other. Invariably, if you try to take just a bit if God with the rest of your life, that little bit of God will become less and less. There is a reason for that. God won't share you. He doesn't have to. God is not going to FORCE you to do anything. He loves you enough to allow you to make up your mind. Why not? Think about this. What kind of love would you rather have from your significant other? Coerced or genuine voluntary love? The answer is a slam-dunk! God wants your heart, your life free and clear. That is why he sent his only Son to die for you and claim you.
One step further, Jesus wants your life totally. So many of us - myself included - have always lived our lives with the adage of "Can I still do ___ and still be a Christian?" Fill in the blank with what you want. I am telling you that question is backwards. As a Christian, our minds need to be set upon God, not us. If not, we are being double-minded and are enemies of God. This passage in James is directed to CHRISTIANS!
Our lives must be lived in another way. "How is doing ___ going to bring me closer to God?" That must be our primary line of thinking. I am not saying that we should gather up our belongings, give them up and go join a monastery. We are called to live in the world. That said, we can't forget the rest of the verse here. We are also called to not be OF the world. That is not popular to say. we want to do whatever we feel like doing and still believe that we have God's blessing. I will tell you this. Being a Christian is NOT easy. It is never promised that we will have an easy, healthy and wealthy existence here on earth.
Jesus tells that in this life, we WILL have troubles. If we are to share in his glory, we must also share in his SUFFERINGS. That is NOT popular stuff to say right now. But guess what? It is what the Bible says. we aren't promised the biggest and best things NOW. We are promised that Christ will never leave nor forsake us. God IS NOT our cosmic bell-hop.
Sorry, but when Jesus says that we have not because we ask not, he is NOT referring to that BMW535 that we have our eye on. He is referring to spiritual wisdom and authority. He is referring to that which is of the Father's will for your life. Our life can't be lived in the pursuit of material things. If they come in the course of your OBEDIENCE to the Lord, then great. But always remember one thing. It is NOT yours. We are bought at a price - a high price. The one who never knew sin took our sin upon himself and paid for it IN FULL. All that we must do to receive this gift is to receive it and live it.
This is the message of James 4:1-10. I urge you, draw close to God. He promises that if we do that, he WILL draw close to us. When that happens, get ready for the ride of your life!

2006-08-29T15:55:00.000-05:00

Dealing with the peaks and valleys of our lives

How easy is it to live life when all is well? When we are on top of the mountain, we feel invincible. We feel strong; we are happy and full of life. There is only one problem with that. We don't get to STAY on top. The majority of our lives are lived in the valleys below.
The mountain top represents our peak experiences in life. For me, as an example, that was last Sunday. However, as great as that time was, the effect eventually wore off as it always does. That is not to say that life is bad or anything like that. It means that there are always issues and even problems that "bring you back down to earth", so to speak. It's not to say that other people bring you down. Life has a way of doing that for you. Have enough problems coming at you at the same time and all of the sudden, you find yourself back down the slope.
We can't sustain life on the mountain top. To even attempt to do so is foolhardy. We would begin to search and crave highs and we would then miss out on the rest of life. Sure, we live most of our lives "in the valley". That's alright. It should make us enjoy those mountain top experiences all the more. They are few and far between. we should remember them and more importantly, remember how God has helped us in the valley and brought us up the mountain. By focusing on the positive rather than the negative, it becomes easier to survive the down times. By remembering that "this too shall pass" we can keep from going into emotional tailspins or depression, which can keep us from even trying to climb the mountains that could be right ahead of us.
How many of know exactly what God has in store for us? Without choosing to move forward, we will never know. We could choose to give up and to be down. By doing that, we deprive ourselves of what could have been an incredible and transformational experience.
What I'm saying is this. Life is full of troubles. It really is. Much of what happens in our lives comes as a result of choices that we have made. Additionally, much of our attitudes about life are formed by our reactions to events that have happened, rather than the actual events themselves.
Our lives are blessings. Each breath is a cherished gift that must be viewed that way. It's incredibly easy to take that gift for granted. We can get into the "woe is me" mode at the drop of a hat, if we want. How do we avoid this? By thanking the Lord for his goodness and provision. This helps to keep from being selfish and self-absorbed.
It is not a recipe for avoiding troubles. Those WILL happen, regardless of faith. Jesus tells us that in this life, there WILL be troubles. We will have problems. We are NOT guaranteed health, wealth and power in this life. There are absolutely NO Biblical grounds for that type of thinking. You CAN take individual scriptures and TWIST them out of context to say something like "Jesus will grant me whatever I ask as long as I ask for it in his name..." Yet, that is out of context and frankly shows that we are thinking of our Savior as Santa or a genie in a bottle who is waiting to do our bidding.
So sorry, I don't have any ways for you to AVOID problems, but I CAN tell you how to DEAL with them when they do appear. TRUST. Trust that you will come out the troubles a better and stronger person. No one can see the end of the storm when you are in the midst of it. That is why you TRUST. Trust the one who CAN see the other side of your storm. By doing that, by placing your faith in Jesus, your troubles begin to look surmountable. The valleys are less deep and more livable. The mountains begin to appear on the horizon and before you know it, you begin to climb up one. Then, get ready for the ride!

2006-08-29T15:52:00.000-05:00

Family RULES!!

Family RULES!! There are many things that we can change. We can change our hair length and color (let me tell you something about that - haha!). We can change our clothes, our eating and sleeping habits, etc. One thing we can't change is our family. We are born into one and that is the way that it is. Maybe that is why it is so easy to take them for granted. I have been terribly guilty of doing that.
Let me give you an example. For many years, really until last year, I took the Crawford Family Reunion for granted. It was a time we all got together, ate, talked and then went home. I loved everybody there but it was really almost about putting time in before I went and did what I wanted to do. It sounds bad but it is true.
Last year, that perspective began to change. I began to realize that my family is a valuable treasure given to me by God. I must not take for granted the times that we have to share together because who knows if I will ever get the chance to see them again. You miss so much through apathy.
This year, I was totally blown away... I was given the opportunity, privilege and honor of preaching the Sunday morning sermon. This has been the territory of my dear Uncle Roy, who has been a pastor for some 55 years. In other words, he knows what he is doing. I was approached about two months ago to take over - wow! For me, preaching in front of my family would be the litmus test of my calling and abilities. In other words, the thought of preaching in front of my family scared me, exhilarated me and overwhelmed me.
I am telling you, I really didn't sleep well for the two weeks before the big day. My other class work was completed early so I could focus on sermon preparation and much prayer. I wrote it, read it, delivered it and prayed over it to the point that I pretty much drove my wife nuts! (She is used to that type of behavior - thank you, God!!)
When the reunion came this past weekend, I felt somewhat nervous and apprehensive about the whole situation. Then something changed. Saturday evening we all got together as a family. We met at my old church and had a fabulous time. I had the chance to go into the big sanctuary, by myself, in order to preach to exactly no one. I should back up a second... Everytime that I visualize myself preaching, it has always been at this church. I don't know why, but that is how it has been. To actually get to do what I have dreamt about for years was a thrill that is every bit as exciting as anything else I have ever experienced! Needless to say, that time alone relaxed me and convinced me that God was going to help me through this.
Sunday morning came and as I was sitting in church, I noticed my voice was a bit hoarse. I don't know why but it was. I really couldn't sing anything. It was kind of funny. Anyway, I began to get nervous as the moment arrived. I was called to come forward to preach and there I was! In the spotlight, in front of most of the people that I had known all of my life. It was go time! That feeling of fear slammed against me. For one second, I thought about sitting right back down. Then, a wonderful thing happened. I felt the presence of the Holy Spirit in a way that I never have before. I felt the love and support of my family as never before. I began to not only WANT to preach but I felt that I HAD to preach. It was like a burning sensation.
As the sermon progressed, I began to really enjoy myself. I was able to make eye contact with my uncles, my parents, my cousins and Grandpa. I was moved to the point of tears at one point and almost lost my composure. But at that point, I felt the calm reassurance that my calling was sure and I was right where I needed to be. For one of the few times in my life, I knew EXACTLY that in that moment, I was at the BEST place and BEST time in the WORLD!! I was supposed to preach in order to bless them, but something really awesome happened. Instead of blessing them solely, I was blessed. I was ministered to in an unimaginable way!
Afterwards, the outpouring of love, affection, affirmation and support from each and every family member was overwhelming. They really showed me their hearts and love. It was a time I will never forget. The day is one of the best days of my entire life. The rest of my life will never be the same.
Take my advice; NEVER take your precious family for granted. If that makes me sound like a wimp or a geezer, so what! Family is an irreplaceable blessing that should never be looked at with disdain. Don't cheat yourself! Get in contact with some family today. Pray for them and show your love for them regularly! You won't be sorry that you did.