"Why do we always seem to appoint leaders and put them on pedestals?" It would be comforting to think that this problem happens only in the political realm, national denominations, or religious organizations, but it is within our midst; it permeates all the way down to the local church and the way we interact as brothers and sisters of Christ in our churches.
Principles For A King
In dealing with this topic, I have examined the story of Israel and her king. It begins in Deuteronomy.
Deuteronomy 17:14-20
14 When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, "Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us," 15 be sure to appoint over you the king the Lord your God chooses. He must be from among your own brothers. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not a brother Israelite. 16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold. 18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the priests, who are Levites. 19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees 20 and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.
Just because the law contains what to do when his people have a king does not mean that God desired for his people to have a king. There are many laws that deal with what to do when wrong actions are committed, so I do not think we can conclude that God desired for Israel to have an earthly king just because he made some stipulations for the actions of a king.
God knew the human tendency for people to have a king over them, so he made some regulations that His people and the king were to follow when they would stray from His kingship.
1. Be sure to appoint the king God chooses for you.
2. Make sure the king is one of your brothers.
3. The king was to not acquire a large military might. That is what the horses represented.
4. He must not take many wives.
5. He must not accumulate wealth.
6. He was supposed to make his own copy of the law, read it all the days of his life, and follow carefully all the laws and the decrees.
7. He is to revere the Lord.
8. He is not to consider himself better than others. The laws that apply to others should also apply to him.
As with most of the commandments of God, this one ends with a blessing. If the king would do this, then he and his descendants would reign a long time over the kingdom of Israel.
This is Part 1. Part 2 (Ignoring the Principles is posted here.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Principles for a King
"Why do we always seem to appoint leaders and put them on pedestals?" It would be comforting to think that this problem happens only in the political realm, national denominations, or religious organizations, but it is within our midst; it permeates all the way down to the local church and the way we interact as brothers and sisters of Christ in our churches.
Principles For A King
In dealing with this topic, I have examined the story of Israel and her king. It begins in Deuteronomy.
Deuteronomy 17:14-20
14 When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, "Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us," 15 be sure to appoint over you the king the Lord your God chooses. He must be from among your own brothers. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not a brother Israelite. 16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold. 18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the priests, who are Levites. 19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees 20 and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.
Just because the law contains what to do when his people have a king does not mean that God desired for his people to have a king. There are many laws that deal with what to do when wrong actions are committed, so I do not think we can conclude that God desired for Israel to have an earthly king just because he made some stipulations for the actions of a king.
God knew the human tendency for people to have a king over them, so he made some regulations that His people and the king were to follow when they would stray from His kingship.
1. Be sure to appoint the king God chooses for you.
2. Make sure the king is one of your brothers.
3. The king was to not acquire a large military might. That is what the horses represented.
4. He must not take many wives.
5. He must not accumulate wealth.
6. He was supposed to make his own copy of the law, read it all the days of his life, and follow carefully all the laws and the decrees.
7. He is to revere the Lord.
8. He is not to consider himself better than others. The laws that apply to others should also apply to him.
As with most of the commandments of God, this one ends with a blessing. If the king would do this, then he and his descendants would reign a long time over the kingdom of Israel.
This is Part 1. Part 2 will be posted next week.
Principles For A King
In dealing with this topic, I have examined the story of Israel and her king. It begins in Deuteronomy.
Deuteronomy 17:14-20
14 When you enter the land the Lord your God is giving you and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, "Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us," 15 be sure to appoint over you the king the Lord your God chooses. He must be from among your own brothers. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not a brother Israelite. 16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold. 18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the priests, who are Levites. 19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees 20 and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.
Just because the law contains what to do when his people have a king does not mean that God desired for his people to have a king. There are many laws that deal with what to do when wrong actions are committed, so I do not think we can conclude that God desired for Israel to have an earthly king just because he made some stipulations for the actions of a king.
God knew the human tendency for people to have a king over them, so he made some regulations that His people and the king were to follow when they would stray from His kingship.
1. Be sure to appoint the king God chooses for you.
2. Make sure the king is one of your brothers.
3. The king was to not acquire a large military might. That is what the horses represented.
4. He must not take many wives.
5. He must not accumulate wealth.
6. He was supposed to make his own copy of the law, read it all the days of his life, and follow carefully all the laws and the decrees.
7. He is to revere the Lord.
8. He is not to consider himself better than others. The laws that apply to others should also apply to him.
As with most of the commandments of God, this one ends with a blessing. If the king would do this, then he and his descendants would reign a long time over the kingdom of Israel.
This is Part 1. Part 2 will be posted next week.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Loving Together is Essential
Dwight L. Moody once shared the following illustration:
The life of love must begin among us, the church. The church should be like a well of love. When we gather together, love should be exhibited toward one another so much that love just builds up and springs forth into those around us once we leave the gathering. A polluted well produces polluted water while a clean well produces water that nourishes. And a dry well produces no nourishment at all. When we gather, we need share love for one another.
If love is not among this body of believers, then we are not even close to being the people God intended for us to be. We might even still have love for those outside of the church, but that love, if there is no love in the church, is just manipulation. It is a deceptive love that is not sincere. It does spring forth from our core but is contrived for purposes of converting others to a Christianity that is altered from what it should be.
Almost every Christian will say that we are to love the people within the church. However, loving one another in the church takes work. It takes time. It takes our whole being. We cannot just check in and out on a Sunday morning if we are going to meet each other's needs.
“Show me a church where there is love, and I will show you a church that is a power in the community. In Chicago a few years ago a little boy attended a Sunday school I know of. When his parents moved to another part of the city the little fellow still attended the same Sunday school, although it meant a long, tiresome walk each way. A friend asked him why he went so far, and told him that there were plenty of others just as good nearer his home.
"They may be as good for others, but not for me," was his reply.
"Why not?" she asked.
"Because they love a fellow over there," he replied.
If only we could make the world believe that we loved them there would be fewer empty churches, and a smaller proportion of our population who never darken a church door. Let love replace duty in our church relations, and the world will soon be evangelized.”
The life of love must begin among us, the church. The church should be like a well of love. When we gather together, love should be exhibited toward one another so much that love just builds up and springs forth into those around us once we leave the gathering. A polluted well produces polluted water while a clean well produces water that nourishes. And a dry well produces no nourishment at all. When we gather, we need share love for one another.
If love is not among this body of believers, then we are not even close to being the people God intended for us to be. We might even still have love for those outside of the church, but that love, if there is no love in the church, is just manipulation. It is a deceptive love that is not sincere. It does spring forth from our core but is contrived for purposes of converting others to a Christianity that is altered from what it should be.
Almost every Christian will say that we are to love the people within the church. However, loving one another in the church takes work. It takes time. It takes our whole being. We cannot just check in and out on a Sunday morning if we are going to meet each other's needs.
Friday, July 27, 2007
pray for our missionaries
If you do not have high speed Internet, or three minutes to watch the video, let me explain. It is a photo montage of the mission work this group of Korean Christians had done in Afghanistan previously. Right now they are being held hostage by the Taliban, and one of them has been killed.
Please, pray for their safe return. But more than that, please, pray for the impact of their witness.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
New Orleans - Part 1
As stated in a previous post, I spent a week in New Orleans doing some work to help restore the still hurricane devastated area. We went with Crossroads Missions which is a great organization to do a mission trip with. While down there, our group did a few things including siding a house, putting on the porch banisters, and even going throughout the neighborhood to cut lawns, trim weeds, and interact with the residents. The motto for Crossroads Missions work in New Orleans is “Renew, Rebuild, Restore.” At the end of the week I felt like we had some part to play in all of those things.
The foreman of the project, Rusty, really drove home the point of what we were doing down there. We spent most of our time in Central City, just outside of the main downtown stuff. And to be honest, it was not hit all that badly – maybe 3 feet of water. Conversely, the 9th Ward was hit the worst. Most homes were destroyed and remain unlivable. That in itself is tragic. However, the 9th Ward was also home to a strong criminal element. They have not returned either. Instead, they have migrated into other areas that had much lower crime rate. And the result was to be expected – crime in these one time safer areas has increased. Central City was one of these areas. The first house that Crossroads attempted to build came with much uneasiness in regard to safety. Also, with the overgrowth of vegetation combined with the large numbers of abandoned houses gave criminals plenty of places to flee and hide out. But, as the police have seen what they are doing, they have increased patrols along the roads that they were working. In a given day, I would see a police car drive by maybe 25 times. The neighborhood is beginning to feel safe once again.
And so with each lot that gets cleared of 10-foot tall weeds, each dilapidated home that gets torn down, and each home that gets built, we were doing more than just helping out one family. We were restoring a community. We were helping eliminate the evil that was running rampant.
There is plenty of work left to be done, and there is plenty of reason to think that these little efforts aren’t making a difference. But they are.
And the same is true in our lives. All the little things that we do or don’t do in an effort to be holy as God is holy may not seem all that significant. But they are. They are small steps in bringing about a world that is once again good in God’s eyes.
The foreman of the project, Rusty, really drove home the point of what we were doing down there. We spent most of our time in Central City, just outside of the main downtown stuff. And to be honest, it was not hit all that badly – maybe 3 feet of water. Conversely, the 9th Ward was hit the worst. Most homes were destroyed and remain unlivable. That in itself is tragic. However, the 9th Ward was also home to a strong criminal element. They have not returned either. Instead, they have migrated into other areas that had much lower crime rate. And the result was to be expected – crime in these one time safer areas has increased. Central City was one of these areas. The first house that Crossroads attempted to build came with much uneasiness in regard to safety. Also, with the overgrowth of vegetation combined with the large numbers of abandoned houses gave criminals plenty of places to flee and hide out. But, as the police have seen what they are doing, they have increased patrols along the roads that they were working. In a given day, I would see a police car drive by maybe 25 times. The neighborhood is beginning to feel safe once again.
And so with each lot that gets cleared of 10-foot tall weeds, each dilapidated home that gets torn down, and each home that gets built, we were doing more than just helping out one family. We were restoring a community. We were helping eliminate the evil that was running rampant.
There is plenty of work left to be done, and there is plenty of reason to think that these little efforts aren’t making a difference. But they are.
And the same is true in our lives. All the little things that we do or don’t do in an effort to be holy as God is holy may not seem all that significant. But they are. They are small steps in bringing about a world that is once again good in God’s eyes.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Affirmitive Action
I have always felt that affirmative action is wrong. Growing up in the eighties and nineties taught me that any sort of preferential treatment given on the basis of skin color is wrong. Horrible even.
Also working against it was the feelings it was generating in the white community. Many within that community are unhappy about the stack being against them. Since it is hard to maintain anger at a system, those feelings get redirected toward minority employees any time one of them fails to be anything but a perfect employee. It's easy to see how this system polarizes races.
How could any fair-minded person possibly for this?
In the past, I have always read that last line with an exclamation point rather than a question mark. It was the lynch pin to any debate with the liberal wackos who had lost all their moral bearings as well as their grip on reality. Of course, I never actually discussed affirmative action with someone who was in favor of it, so getting my imagined nemesis to tap out was rather easy.
But lately I've been trying much harder to understand differing viewpoints.
So, how could a fair-minded person be in favor of a system that is openly discriminatory?
Well, in this country the majority race holds a disproportionate amount of wealth and power. Part of that wealth and power derives generationally and has benefited from practices like slavery and segregation. In this since, there is something fair about restoring balance.
This is hard for me to swallow. I'm not personally guilty of racial suppression. Those practices were outlawed before I was born. Also, when I was growing up, we were lower middle class in our better days. We were hardly the aristocratic fat cats living off 150 year old plantation wealth.
However, I can recognize that when my dad desperately needed to get a job in the late seventies without a college education, it was probably easier for him than it would have been for an average black man.
We lived in Algonac. It was a safe environment with above average schools. It was also a town where black people were made to feel unwelcome and unsafe. That's not my fault. I played no part in either choosing where I grew up or in making anyone feel unwelcome. However, I did benefit from conditions that would not have been available for many non-whites.
So whether or not it is fair to white people is debatable. I still think it is unfair, but far less worth the angst that I used to give it.
Now, I'm more concerned about the injustice affirmative action does to the minority races. Imagine getting a job for which you are qualified, but always being forced to wonder if you are there to simply fill a racial quota. Imagine trying to figure out if you were being promoted because of the quality of your work or some institutional sympathy over the color of your skin.
I do not think that it is helpful to people to keep reminding them that they are victims. This just makes people feel powerless, as if they have already lost. I also don't think it is helpful to a person to force everyone around them to treat them as victims. This just creates more polarization, which is practical segregation.
What we need from the majority race is sincere sympathy and repentance, not the kind produced by legislature.
What needs to come from minorities is forgiveness. For as long as they keep pointing fingers for their current predicament (no matter how valid those complaints are), we all suffer.
In the current practice there are no winners. What we need are religious leaders from both groups preaching and practicing grace.
These thoughts are still being formed. Your input is very welcome.
Also working against it was the feelings it was generating in the white community. Many within that community are unhappy about the stack being against them. Since it is hard to maintain anger at a system, those feelings get redirected toward minority employees any time one of them fails to be anything but a perfect employee. It's easy to see how this system polarizes races.
How could any fair-minded person possibly for this?
In the past, I have always read that last line with an exclamation point rather than a question mark. It was the lynch pin to any debate with the liberal wackos who had lost all their moral bearings as well as their grip on reality. Of course, I never actually discussed affirmative action with someone who was in favor of it, so getting my imagined nemesis to tap out was rather easy.
But lately I've been trying much harder to understand differing viewpoints.
So, how could a fair-minded person be in favor of a system that is openly discriminatory?
Well, in this country the majority race holds a disproportionate amount of wealth and power. Part of that wealth and power derives generationally and has benefited from practices like slavery and segregation. In this since, there is something fair about restoring balance.
This is hard for me to swallow. I'm not personally guilty of racial suppression. Those practices were outlawed before I was born. Also, when I was growing up, we were lower middle class in our better days. We were hardly the aristocratic fat cats living off 150 year old plantation wealth.
However, I can recognize that when my dad desperately needed to get a job in the late seventies without a college education, it was probably easier for him than it would have been for an average black man.
We lived in Algonac. It was a safe environment with above average schools. It was also a town where black people were made to feel unwelcome and unsafe. That's not my fault. I played no part in either choosing where I grew up or in making anyone feel unwelcome. However, I did benefit from conditions that would not have been available for many non-whites.
So whether or not it is fair to white people is debatable. I still think it is unfair, but far less worth the angst that I used to give it.
Now, I'm more concerned about the injustice affirmative action does to the minority races. Imagine getting a job for which you are qualified, but always being forced to wonder if you are there to simply fill a racial quota. Imagine trying to figure out if you were being promoted because of the quality of your work or some institutional sympathy over the color of your skin.
I do not think that it is helpful to people to keep reminding them that they are victims. This just makes people feel powerless, as if they have already lost. I also don't think it is helpful to a person to force everyone around them to treat them as victims. This just creates more polarization, which is practical segregation.
What we need from the majority race is sincere sympathy and repentance, not the kind produced by legislature.
What needs to come from minorities is forgiveness. For as long as they keep pointing fingers for their current predicament (no matter how valid those complaints are), we all suffer.
In the current practice there are no winners. What we need are religious leaders from both groups preaching and practicing grace.
These thoughts are still being formed. Your input is very welcome.
Restoration 2.0
I will give you a quick update. I have e-mailed six different pastors in Waterford so far. Pretty much all I have received back are replies from secretaries saying that the pastor is on vacation. Figures, that time of year.
Another response was addressed to Ms. Shannon Caroland. I always get a chuckle out of that. But I realized that the assumption that "Shannon" is a girl could be a hindrance to connecting with more conservative pastors. I might have to use the phone.
I'm working on a post that I hope to get up today about affirmative action. Until then, be the Restoration Movement.
Another response was addressed to Ms. Shannon Caroland. I always get a chuckle out of that. But I realized that the assumption that "Shannon" is a girl could be a hindrance to connecting with more conservative pastors. I might have to use the phone.
I'm working on a post that I hope to get up today about affirmative action. Until then, be the Restoration Movement.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Patience
I spent the weekend in Mississippi with 4 boys (nephews and son) between the age of almost 3 and almost 5. It was trying and difficult at times. So, I thought I would post a few quotes on the much needed virtue of patience.
"Patience is the greatest of all virtues." - Cato the Elder
"A handful of patience is worth more than a bushel of brains." - Dutch Proverb
"Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety, fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, decisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success." - Brian Adams
"Patience serves as a protection against wrongs as clothes do against cold. For if you put on more clothes as the cold increases, it will have no power to hurt you. So in like manner you must grow in patience when you meet with great wrongs, and they will then be powerless to vex your mind." - Leonardo da Vinci
"Patience is the greatest of all virtues." - Cato the Elder
"A handful of patience is worth more than a bushel of brains." - Dutch Proverb
"Learn the art of patience. Apply discipline to your thoughts when they become anxious over the outcome of a goal. Impatience breeds anxiety, fear, discouragement and failure. Patience creates confidence, decisiveness, and a rational outlook, which eventually leads to success." - Brian Adams
"Patience serves as a protection against wrongs as clothes do against cold. For if you put on more clothes as the cold increases, it will have no power to hurt you. So in like manner you must grow in patience when you meet with great wrongs, and they will then be powerless to vex your mind." - Leonardo da Vinci
Monday, July 23, 2007
How can I become a Christian?
The other day I was driving in my car with the radio tuned to a Christian channel. At the end of the ministers message, he gave an invitation. It prompted me to hop on the internet and check to see what the minister was saying on the radio was prevalent in Christian circles. I googled for “How to become a Christian.” It brought me the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. What I found there was like what I heard on the radio – a zero personal sacrifice Christianity. Now, I am not talking about Jesus' sacrifice. The invitation is full of that; I am talking about the sacrifice we are to make in response to Jesus' sacrifice.
I could find nothing about surrendering our will to God's, selflessly loving our neighbor, and accepting the Lordship of Christ. It is almost like the evangelical Christianity around us is something different from the Christianity of the Bible. It appears to be a Christianity that removes all of the tough parts.
Jesus taught: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.” (Matthew 16:24b-25)
When we have fajitas at home, Lindsay cooks up onions, peppers, tomatoes, beans, and steak. We have sour cream, salsa, and cheese on the side. Lindsay, Eli, and I load up a soft flour tortilla shell with everything. Isaac on the other hand just puts beans, cheese, and sour cream in his – leaving out the steak and all of the vegetables. We have fajitas while Isaac has a cheese and bean quesadilla.
I wonder if we do the same thing with Christianity. We take out whatever parts are difficult and just relegate those areas to the “radical Christians”. We have a separate water-downed Christianity for the masses. That does not seem to be what Jesus intended. If we want to eat fajitas, we have to eat fajitas. The same is for Christianity. If we want to be Christians, then we have to be Christians. If we take away from what being a disciple is, then we are not really disciples just like Isaac was not really eating a fajita. Our Christianity, like fajitas, can completely change to a point where it might resemble Christianity but it is no longer Christian.
Jesus prepared a whole table full of the elements of what makes a Christian. We cannot just pick and choose what we like off of the table and expect that to make us “Christian”. Anything less than surrendering to the will of God and living a life of loving self-sacrifice toward others is not Christianity. That is what Jesus invited his disciples to.
I could find nothing about surrendering our will to God's, selflessly loving our neighbor, and accepting the Lordship of Christ. It is almost like the evangelical Christianity around us is something different from the Christianity of the Bible. It appears to be a Christianity that removes all of the tough parts.
Jesus taught: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.” (Matthew 16:24b-25)
When we have fajitas at home, Lindsay cooks up onions, peppers, tomatoes, beans, and steak. We have sour cream, salsa, and cheese on the side. Lindsay, Eli, and I load up a soft flour tortilla shell with everything. Isaac on the other hand just puts beans, cheese, and sour cream in his – leaving out the steak and all of the vegetables. We have fajitas while Isaac has a cheese and bean quesadilla.
I wonder if we do the same thing with Christianity. We take out whatever parts are difficult and just relegate those areas to the “radical Christians”. We have a separate water-downed Christianity for the masses. That does not seem to be what Jesus intended. If we want to eat fajitas, we have to eat fajitas. The same is for Christianity. If we want to be Christians, then we have to be Christians. If we take away from what being a disciple is, then we are not really disciples just like Isaac was not really eating a fajita. Our Christianity, like fajitas, can completely change to a point where it might resemble Christianity but it is no longer Christian.
Jesus prepared a whole table full of the elements of what makes a Christian. We cannot just pick and choose what we like off of the table and expect that to make us “Christian”. Anything less than surrendering to the will of God and living a life of loving self-sacrifice toward others is not Christianity. That is what Jesus invited his disciples to.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Community is Costly
Here is an illustration that I am going to use in my sermon next Sunday. It comes from Dissident Discipleship
.
Long ago in a distant land, a prince dreamed of creating more than a geographical or political kingdom. He dreamed of establishing a community in which all persons were committed to each other in loyalty and equality, where every person sought the welfare of the neighbor even at a cost to the self. So the prince called a great meeting of all the heads of clans, all the wise and trusted people of the land, and dared to tell his dream. Each chieftain and his clan were invited to join in the foundation of a new society. As part of the community's inauguration, each was requested to search his cellar for the best wine produced from his ancestral vines. These treasured bottles would be uncorked, poured into a great communal vat, and blended, as the true community it represented, into a common vintage.
"How can I mix my exquisite wine with that of my neighbors?" asked one of the winegrowers invited to this covenanting. "I would sacrifice the unique variety of grape, the special climate of the year, the sweetness of a late harvest, the indefinable magic of bouquet, and I would violate my art as a winemaker. Impossible! Give up my distinct variety? Lose my separate self? I will not be adulterated in such a common cup."
So he corked a bottle of tap water, affixed his most beautiful label to the bottle, and at the time of the ritual poured the water ceremoniously into the vat. When the covenanting was solemnized, all filled their glasses for the communal draft, the toast that would seal commitment to community. As the cups touched their lips, all knew the truth. It was not wine. It was water. No one had been willing to pay the cost of community
.Long ago in a distant land, a prince dreamed of creating more than a geographical or political kingdom. He dreamed of establishing a community in which all persons were committed to each other in loyalty and equality, where every person sought the welfare of the neighbor even at a cost to the self. So the prince called a great meeting of all the heads of clans, all the wise and trusted people of the land, and dared to tell his dream. Each chieftain and his clan were invited to join in the foundation of a new society. As part of the community's inauguration, each was requested to search his cellar for the best wine produced from his ancestral vines. These treasured bottles would be uncorked, poured into a great communal vat, and blended, as the true community it represented, into a common vintage.
"How can I mix my exquisite wine with that of my neighbors?" asked one of the winegrowers invited to this covenanting. "I would sacrifice the unique variety of grape, the special climate of the year, the sweetness of a late harvest, the indefinable magic of bouquet, and I would violate my art as a winemaker. Impossible! Give up my distinct variety? Lose my separate self? I will not be adulterated in such a common cup."
So he corked a bottle of tap water, affixed his most beautiful label to the bottle, and at the time of the ritual poured the water ceremoniously into the vat. When the covenanting was solemnized, all filled their glasses for the communal draft, the toast that would seal commitment to community. As the cups touched their lips, all knew the truth. It was not wine. It was water. No one had been willing to pay the cost of community
Friday, July 20, 2007
The Fast and The Curious
Regan recently reminded me that the Early Church had some built in weekly reminders of the Passion and the Resurrection of Christ. They thought inappropriate to fast on a Sunday, because they saw that as the day to celebrate the Resurrection. Every week. They would fast on Friday. This was the day they would dedicate to remembering Christ's suffering.
We have decided to incorporate this beautiful practice of solidarity and remembrance. We don't post this to "disfigure our faces". I didn't get a chance to get Sam's thoughts on this, but Regan and I have both struggled with discipline. We only announce it to gain the accountability we need to not wimp out.
And now a prayer:
God, who are you?
What are you like?
We have studied and taught,
and we have but plumbed the surface.
What have you yet to reveal?
What would surprise us most about You?
You have removed the veil,
but we need eyes to see more fully.
What are you more excited about these days?
What are your hopes for us, for our children?
Where will we find you next?
While we wait for You to fully reveal yourself to us,
please, give us more hints and clues.
We are so curious.
We have decided to incorporate this beautiful practice of solidarity and remembrance. We don't post this to "disfigure our faces". I didn't get a chance to get Sam's thoughts on this, but Regan and I have both struggled with discipline. We only announce it to gain the accountability we need to not wimp out.
And now a prayer:
God, who are you?
What are you like?
We have studied and taught,
and we have but plumbed the surface.
What have you yet to reveal?
What would surprise us most about You?
You have removed the veil,
but we need eyes to see more fully.
What are you more excited about these days?
What are your hopes for us, for our children?
Where will we find you next?
While we wait for You to fully reveal yourself to us,
please, give us more hints and clues.
We are so curious.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Be Thou My Vision
I spent last week with the youth group in New Orleans doing mission work. As with most mission trips it was great and terrible; enjoyable and disheartening. I will detail more of the trip in subsequent posts, but for now be assured that there is much to celebrate and much to be sad about as we approach the 2nd anniversary of this horrific event.
The theme of the week was “Be Thou My Vision.” The first stanza reads:
Be thou my vision, O Lord of my heart.
Naught be all else to me save that thou art.
Thou my best thought, by day or by night.
Waking or sleeping, Thy presence my light.
The goal was to invite us to see the world as God sees the world. To see the possibilities and potential. To be filled with the life and the light in the world. It was a great challenge for me as I typically see faults and mistakes first before seeing any sort of promise that others might have.
But as the week unfolded, I couldn’t help but be reminded of what it means to be a child to enter into the kingdom. Elijah is at the age where he is beginning to imagine one thing to be another. About a year ago, everything was a “tent.” Whether covers, blankets, a coat, or even a hat, if it was over his head it was a tent. Now he is stuck on the movie “Cars.” He “drives” a lot of places by running and making car noises. Every vehicle he sees can be related to a vehicle in the movie. He just sees the world differently than I do. Elijah seems to fulfill Colossians 3:1-2:
“Since you have been raised to new life with Christ, set your sights on the realities of heaven, where Christ sits at God’s right hand in the place of honor and power. Let heaven fill your thoughts. Do not think only about things down here on earth.” (NLT)
In that truth lies what it means to make God our Vision. That we see things and people for what they could be not what they actually are. Oh how I wish I could see life like Elijah does.
Instead of seeing a sinful city now destroyed, I see the lives that were destroyed and are in need of restoration.
Instead of seeing people based on their race, I see them as another part of God’s diverse creation.
Instead of seeing people’s flaws, I see them as having so much to contribute to the body of Christ.
Instead of seeing my own selfishness, I see the cross and the self-sacrifice it entails.
May God be my Vision and yours.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Restoration 2.0
I am the Restoration Movement. Carolands have been a part of the movement since its beginning. My great great great grandfather had his diploma from Bethany College signed by Alexander Campbell. My grandfather, aunt and cousin have all been employees of the Disciples of Christ.My brothers and I were all raised in a CoC/CC, and all attended Great Lakes Christian College. I have been a minister at a Stone Campbell church for all of my adult life. Add to this how thick my social networking is with Stone-Campbellites. There is some unintentional, built-in pressure to stick around and tow the party line.
Whenever I go back and study the early history, I find the dreams and deeds of the founders to beautiful and inspiring. The dream of Christian unity resonates with me, gets me rather excited. I am the Restoration Movement.
However, I am confronted, from time to time, with elements of the this brotherhood which can be disheartening. There are some things this unity movement does that hinders unity. I'll not detail that here. It has been discussed elsewhere, and divisive behaviors are not unique to this movement.
I do not write this to bash the Restoration Movement. I am the Restoration Movement.
Instead, I write this as I begin an experiment of to foster relationships with other churches in town. I believe that this has to be the first step toward "being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose." i.e. Unity.
Today, I will make an appointment with another minister in town to meat and pray for the community. Baby steps. This is an attainable goal for me. We'll call this "step one". And I will report back. It's time to be the Restoration.
May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Romans 15:5-6)
However, I am confronted, from time to time, with elements of the this brotherhood which can be disheartening. There are some things this unity movement does that hinders unity. I'll not detail that here. It has been discussed elsewhere, and divisive behaviors are not unique to this movement.
I do not write this to bash the Restoration Movement. I am the Restoration Movement.
Instead, I write this as I begin an experiment of to foster relationships with other churches in town. I believe that this has to be the first step toward "being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose." i.e. Unity.
Today, I will make an appointment with another minister in town to meat and pray for the community. Baby steps. This is an attainable goal for me. We'll call this "step one". And I will report back. It's time to be the Restoration.
May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Romans 15:5-6)
Graceful Quote
From Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment:
“At the last Judgment Christ will say to us, ‘Come, you also! Come drunkards! Come, weaklings! Come children of shame!’ And he will say to us: ‘Vile beings, you who are in the image of the beast and bear his mark, but all the same, you as well.’
And the wise and prudent will say, ‘Lord, why do you welcome them?’
And he will say: ‘If I welcome them, you wise men, if I welcome them, you prudent men, it is because not one of them has ever been judged worthy.’
And he will stretch out his arms, and we will fall at His feet, and we will cry out sobbing, and then we will understand all, we will understand the Gospel of grace! Lord, your kingdom come!”
Monday, July 16, 2007
Only the Essentials
Sticking to preaching, sharing, and focusing on only the core of Christianity and not straying into divisive arguments is one the hardest parts of Christianity for me to practice despite it being an essential to unity.
For example, one of the Sunday School teachers at my church always mentions how God knows the future. I find myself more of an open theist and do not agree with his approach to the foreknowledge God. Because of his approach, he comes to conclusions that I do not agree with. Some times I mention that if you take a different approach you can come to a different conclusion; other times I just sit in silence. It frustrates me that it is brought up all the time; however, in the grand scheme of things it really does not matter. You can be an open or classical theist and we can still agree on what it means to be a disciple of Christ.
I think part of my problem, if I am to honest, is that I am like the Athenians in Acts 17 that Paul shared the gospel with. I am fond of new ideas - to fond it seems. But if I am to be a person who brings about unity and experiences fellowship with those who disagree with me on a whole field of Biblical issues, I need to just focus on the core of Christianity and remain there. It's difficult because I think preaching on the core issues gets boring at times, but I need to not be this way.
For example, one of the Sunday School teachers at my church always mentions how God knows the future. I find myself more of an open theist and do not agree with his approach to the foreknowledge God. Because of his approach, he comes to conclusions that I do not agree with. Some times I mention that if you take a different approach you can come to a different conclusion; other times I just sit in silence. It frustrates me that it is brought up all the time; however, in the grand scheme of things it really does not matter. You can be an open or classical theist and we can still agree on what it means to be a disciple of Christ.
"I also have a message for the rest of you in Thyatira who have not followed this false teaching ('deeper truths,' as they call them -- depths of Satan, really). I will ask nothing more of you except that you hold tightly to what you have until I come." (Revelation 2:24-25)
"Go back to what you heard and believed at first; hold to it firmly and turn to me again. Unless you do, I will come upon you suddenly, as unexpected as a thief." (Revelation 3:3)
I think part of my problem, if I am to honest, is that I am like the Athenians in Acts 17 that Paul shared the gospel with. I am fond of new ideas - to fond it seems. But if I am to be a person who brings about unity and experiences fellowship with those who disagree with me on a whole field of Biblical issues, I need to just focus on the core of Christianity and remain there. It's difficult because I think preaching on the core issues gets boring at times, but I need to not be this way.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
The little things matter
Dwight L. Moody preached the following during the 1800s.
We must be ready to do little things for God; many are willing to do the great things. I dare say hundreds would have been ready to occupy this pulpit to-day. How many of them would be as willing to teach a dirty class in the ragged school?
I remember, one afternoon I was preaching, observing a young lady from the house I was staying at, in the audience. I had heard she taught in the Sabbath-school, which I knew was at the same hour; and so I asked her, after service, how she came to be there? "Oh," said she, "my class is but five little boys, and I thought it did not matter for them." And yet among these there might have been, who knows, a Luther or a Knox, the beginning of a stream of blessing, that would have gone on widening and ever widening; and besides, one soul is worth all the kingdoms of the earth.
Away in America, a young lady was sent to a boarding-school, and was there led to Christ; not only so, but taught that she ought to work for Him, By-and-by she goes home, and now she seeks, in one way and another, to work for Him, but without finding how. She asks for a class in her church Sunday-school, but the superintendent is obliged to tell her that he has already more than enough of teachers. One day, going along the street, she sees a little boy struck by his companion, and crying bitterly. She goes up and speaks to him; asks him what the trouble is? The boy thinks she is mocking him, and replies sullenly. She speaks kindly, tries to persuade him to school. He does not want to learn. She coaxes him to come and hear her and the rest singing there; and so next Sunday he comes with her. She gets a corner in the school of well-dressed scholars for herself and her charge. He sits and listens, full of wonder. On going home, he tells his mother he has been among the angels. At first at a loss, she becomes angry, when a question or two brings out that he has been to a Protestant Sunday-school; and the father, on coming home, forbids his going back, on pain of flogging. Next Sunday, however, he goes, and is flogged, and so again, and yet again, till one Sunday, he begs to be flogged before going, that he may not be kept thinking of it all the time. The father relents a little, and promises him a holiday every Saturday afternoon, if he will not go to Sunday-school. The lad agrees, sees his teacher, who offers to teach him then. How many wealthy young folks would give up their Saturdays to train one poor ragged urchin in the way of salvation? Some time after, at his work, the lad is on one of the railway cars. The train starts suddenly; he slips through, and the wheels pass over his legs; he asks the doctor if he will live to get home; it is impossible. "Then," says he, "tell father and mother that I am going to heaven, and want to meet them there." Will the work she did seem little now to the young lady? Or is it nothing that even one thus grateful waits her yonder?
Friday, July 13, 2007
Yeah, what he said
Three quotes by Mike Yaconelli about holy fear:
These quotes are found in his book, Dangerous Wonder in a chapter called, "Happy Terror".
“I am beginning to wonder if we modern followers of Christ are capable of being terrified of God… As a result, we have ended up with a feel-good gospel that attracts thousands… but transforms no one.”
“The nice, nonthreatening God needs to be replaced by the God whose very presence smashes our egos into dust, burns our sin into ashes, and strips us naked to reveal the real person within.”
“If Jesus is the Son of God, we should be terrified of what He will do when He gets His hands on our lives; if the Bible is the Word of God, we should be quaking every time we read its soul-piercing words; if the church is the body of Christ, our culture should be threatened by our intimidating presence.”
These quotes are found in his book, Dangerous Wonder in a chapter called, "Happy Terror".
Thursday, July 12, 2007
A Reply to "A Failed Attempt at Unity - The Restoration Movement"
It is our hope that this blog becomes like the newsletters of yesterday (except without any related costs) in which readers write letters to us and conversations are started that lead all of us to be more fruitful. We have posted a new link in the bottom of the right column. It says, "If you have a question or a suggestion for a journal entry, please feel free to email us." Feel free to use it.
John Nugent replied to my posts "A Failed Attempt At Unity - The Restoration Movement" (Part 1, Part 2).
You may disagree with Campbell that the "intellectual" project he launched is not viable today, nor was it ever. But you make it sound like he was an ivory tower guy who needed to pull his head out of the clouds. I don't get those same vibes. What we see Campbell NOT doing (during a day when every one else was) is importing a finely tuned philosophical system that is beyond the reach of the common man and making that a prerequisite for doing theology. THAT approach is intellectual unity at its purest. Instead, Campbell took habits of thinking and reading that were gaining widespread, indeed worldwide, acceptance by the masses and putting them to work with Scripture alone. This was theology for everyman, and the average Joe found Campbell a thinker he could finally relate to. Of course, when what one reads of Campbell is his most intellectual work, one is tempted to think his project was a purely intellectual one, but all it takes is a brief sit-down in front of the massive collection of Millennial Harbinger volumes to realize his project was a grassroots, church life focused project. In fact, I think our movement's primary contribution to ecumenical conversations is its ecclesial flexibility and openness. While others spend an excessive amount of time speculating about Trinity and transubstantiation, our people were saying "what would it look like if we did communion like this?"
You insist that unity is achieved through shared "actions" not intellectual processes. That's exactly what Campbell was doing. The Church had three major shared actions among all denominations: Lord's Supper, Baptism, and Bible Reading. Campbell focused on these. When it came to hermeneutics, Campbell sat down with average Joe who always felt unworthy to read the Bible because he could never understand the deep theological prerequisites necessary for a valid reading. Campbell's advice to him was: "You read the newspaper, right? Well, read your Bible that way. And another thing, be sure to humbly receive it as God's word and do what it says." Of course, when Campbell had to justify this approach intellectually before intellectuals he speaks to them on intellectual terms, but don’t mistake these contextual conversations for an intellectualist approach to the Bible because that is not what Campbell recommended.
Regarding the project of identifying interpretive methods today and using them to unite, I think there is plenty of helpful fodder out there. Obviously you don't begin with highly contested methods that have not gained unity. You begin with methods that are gaining unity. It is not clear to me that the watch-a-movie-and-read-whatever-you-want-into-it" approach is fostering widespread agreement. Those producers may be gaining widespread exposure and they may have groupies in every state, but the masses are not buying it. That is not the way they read the paper or want people to interpret their speech actions. It's not what their college profs teach and Hollywood hardly represents the heartbeat of America. It represents the heartbeat of the entertainment world. Campbell was building off of a much more widely popular approach.
Narrative theory, on the other hand, is gaining momentum today. We are beginning to agree that dissecting a text as if it was a corpse to get at the root of every jot and tittle intention of the author is no longer the best way to read a book, although it may be helpful in a supplemental way. Rather we find it much more appealing to enter into the narrative world of the project, to provisionally accept some of its borderline presuppositions, and to try to hear the message conveyed by the work as a whole. We are agreeing that the forest needs as much attention as each individual tree. Many people would hear that and say, duh, that's common sense. My response is: Exactly! But that's not how they read the Bible. They microanalyze every phrase and get stuck at every one-liner that is hard to swallow and they miss the story. They obsess about theories of inspiration, composition, and authorship. The Bible has become a book not to read and enjoy but to read and defend. This is partly because of how Scripture is taught in Colleges. I am calling for a shift away from obsessing about introductory issues toward entering the narrative world of the text. A hermeneutic of unity teaches our students that what matters about Scripture is the message God is communicating through it not who wrote it, when, and with what degree of divine influence.
I am not convinced Campbell is as easily defeated as the strawman he is set up to be. Campbell did not avoid all that was extra-biblical. He never sought to. He sought to marginalize what was extra-biblical. There is a big difference there that many people overlook. Campbell had a higher view of opinion than most people's brains today can handle. He could just as easily worship with a deist as a strict trinitarian because he refused to make their metaphysical speculations a matter of fellowship. What he sought to do was push extra-biblical topics out of the spotlight. They were not to be topics for preaching. We must preach the Gospel that unites. There will have to be conversations about what extra-biblical aspects of church life need to be dealt with (carpeting, A/C units, church camps, etc), but we do not pretend our ideas about these things are so strong that they should be the subject of our unity gatherings and Bible studies. It's not either we do extra-biblical things or not, but how much emphasis we place on them.
Similarly, Campbell did not believe that God stopped revealing himself in Deistic fashion. No one who's read him much accuses him of being deistic. Rather, he affirmed that what God has revealed to different individuals or even churches post-NT is not going to be the basis of worldwide Church unity. So God may convince Church X through a vision to start a homeless ministry on corner Y, but that revelation is binding on that Church alone, not all churches everywhere. What God revealed in Scripture is different, according to Campbell. What he revealed there is for all people everywhere. They will not apply it in the same way in an effort to be sensitive to their context, but it remains normative as a guide to their conduct. Campbell is willing to say, “God convicted you to do A, great! But be careful not assume that because he convicted you to do so that his will is for everyone to do likewise.” It does not surprise me that when God wants to get a Catholic’s attention, he gives them a vision of Mary. It does not surprise me that when he wants to grip a Pentecostal, he afflicts them with tongues. God meets people where they are. But Catholics are mistaken when they use such experiences to confirm the timeless validity of their Marian dogmas and Pentecostals are misguided to make tongue-speaking a necessary sign for genuine conversion. It is not clear to me that Campbell is saying anything more than don’t do this – if we make these mistakes our division will increase.
John Nugent replied to my posts "A Failed Attempt At Unity - The Restoration Movement" (Part 1, Part 2).
You may disagree with Campbell that the "intellectual" project he launched is not viable today, nor was it ever. But you make it sound like he was an ivory tower guy who needed to pull his head out of the clouds. I don't get those same vibes. What we see Campbell NOT doing (during a day when every one else was) is importing a finely tuned philosophical system that is beyond the reach of the common man and making that a prerequisite for doing theology. THAT approach is intellectual unity at its purest. Instead, Campbell took habits of thinking and reading that were gaining widespread, indeed worldwide, acceptance by the masses and putting them to work with Scripture alone. This was theology for everyman, and the average Joe found Campbell a thinker he could finally relate to. Of course, when what one reads of Campbell is his most intellectual work, one is tempted to think his project was a purely intellectual one, but all it takes is a brief sit-down in front of the massive collection of Millennial Harbinger volumes to realize his project was a grassroots, church life focused project. In fact, I think our movement's primary contribution to ecumenical conversations is its ecclesial flexibility and openness. While others spend an excessive amount of time speculating about Trinity and transubstantiation, our people were saying "what would it look like if we did communion like this?"
You insist that unity is achieved through shared "actions" not intellectual processes. That's exactly what Campbell was doing. The Church had three major shared actions among all denominations: Lord's Supper, Baptism, and Bible Reading. Campbell focused on these. When it came to hermeneutics, Campbell sat down with average Joe who always felt unworthy to read the Bible because he could never understand the deep theological prerequisites necessary for a valid reading. Campbell's advice to him was: "You read the newspaper, right? Well, read your Bible that way. And another thing, be sure to humbly receive it as God's word and do what it says." Of course, when Campbell had to justify this approach intellectually before intellectuals he speaks to them on intellectual terms, but don’t mistake these contextual conversations for an intellectualist approach to the Bible because that is not what Campbell recommended.
Regarding the project of identifying interpretive methods today and using them to unite, I think there is plenty of helpful fodder out there. Obviously you don't begin with highly contested methods that have not gained unity. You begin with methods that are gaining unity. It is not clear to me that the watch-a-movie-and-read-whatever-you-want-into-it" approach is fostering widespread agreement. Those producers may be gaining widespread exposure and they may have groupies in every state, but the masses are not buying it. That is not the way they read the paper or want people to interpret their speech actions. It's not what their college profs teach and Hollywood hardly represents the heartbeat of America. It represents the heartbeat of the entertainment world. Campbell was building off of a much more widely popular approach.
Narrative theory, on the other hand, is gaining momentum today. We are beginning to agree that dissecting a text as if it was a corpse to get at the root of every jot and tittle intention of the author is no longer the best way to read a book, although it may be helpful in a supplemental way. Rather we find it much more appealing to enter into the narrative world of the project, to provisionally accept some of its borderline presuppositions, and to try to hear the message conveyed by the work as a whole. We are agreeing that the forest needs as much attention as each individual tree. Many people would hear that and say, duh, that's common sense. My response is: Exactly! But that's not how they read the Bible. They microanalyze every phrase and get stuck at every one-liner that is hard to swallow and they miss the story. They obsess about theories of inspiration, composition, and authorship. The Bible has become a book not to read and enjoy but to read and defend. This is partly because of how Scripture is taught in Colleges. I am calling for a shift away from obsessing about introductory issues toward entering the narrative world of the text. A hermeneutic of unity teaches our students that what matters about Scripture is the message God is communicating through it not who wrote it, when, and with what degree of divine influence.
I am not convinced Campbell is as easily defeated as the strawman he is set up to be. Campbell did not avoid all that was extra-biblical. He never sought to. He sought to marginalize what was extra-biblical. There is a big difference there that many people overlook. Campbell had a higher view of opinion than most people's brains today can handle. He could just as easily worship with a deist as a strict trinitarian because he refused to make their metaphysical speculations a matter of fellowship. What he sought to do was push extra-biblical topics out of the spotlight. They were not to be topics for preaching. We must preach the Gospel that unites. There will have to be conversations about what extra-biblical aspects of church life need to be dealt with (carpeting, A/C units, church camps, etc), but we do not pretend our ideas about these things are so strong that they should be the subject of our unity gatherings and Bible studies. It's not either we do extra-biblical things or not, but how much emphasis we place on them.
Similarly, Campbell did not believe that God stopped revealing himself in Deistic fashion. No one who's read him much accuses him of being deistic. Rather, he affirmed that what God has revealed to different individuals or even churches post-NT is not going to be the basis of worldwide Church unity. So God may convince Church X through a vision to start a homeless ministry on corner Y, but that revelation is binding on that Church alone, not all churches everywhere. What God revealed in Scripture is different, according to Campbell. What he revealed there is for all people everywhere. They will not apply it in the same way in an effort to be sensitive to their context, but it remains normative as a guide to their conduct. Campbell is willing to say, “God convicted you to do A, great! But be careful not assume that because he convicted you to do so that his will is for everyone to do likewise.” It does not surprise me that when God wants to get a Catholic’s attention, he gives them a vision of Mary. It does not surprise me that when he wants to grip a Pentecostal, he afflicts them with tongues. God meets people where they are. But Catholics are mistaken when they use such experiences to confirm the timeless validity of their Marian dogmas and Pentecostals are misguided to make tongue-speaking a necessary sign for genuine conversion. It is not clear to me that Campbell is saying anything more than don’t do this – if we make these mistakes our division will increase.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
A Day to Praise the LORD
My wife and I keep a blog about our journey toward adoption. Much of it deals with the struggle of waiting for the agency to find a child to refer to us. This what I wrote yesterday morning:In the last 24 hours 4 more people from the forum received referrals. Three
of them are behind us on the list.
So, how does this make me feel? So hopeful we could a referral today, I could sing. So jealous that I want to punch one of these happy new mothers. Just kidding... kinda. So frazzled that my back is more tense than Mid-East peace talks. So desperate to share with anyone who would ask. So annoyed with anyone who would ask. So trusting in the Lord that I know the story He is weaving is one I'll tell with glee for the rest of my days (yes, GLEE). So tired of hearing people tell me that it is in God's timing. So disappointed in my spiritual immaturity that I can't inspire all of you with my unwavering faithfulness and hope.
I said that this defined my emotional state at 10:15, and I would let you know what 10:16 was like.
At 3:30 pm, we received our call. We got a referral for a baby girl. We are in awe of the Lord.
Yesterday at lunch, hung between my fretting rants and blessed elation, Cindie asked me what the theme of Sunday's sermon was. My answer: "Great Is Thy Faithfulness".
As the words came out of my mouth, I knew that He would be serving up a mighty humbling illustration that day. I knew it. I was both excited and embarrassed, bright-eyed and red-faced.
Anyway... Thank you, Lord for your faithfulness. You deliver the goods every time. When doubt was playing games with my mind, you were but moments away from ringing my doorbell. Thank you.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
On Keeping score
Do you know how many people in your church connected relationally with another
brother or sister in Christ last week? Probably not, but I bet you know how many
sang songs and passively listened to a sermon.
Skye Jethani- Leadership writer on attendance figures
Monday, July 9, 2007
My Thoughts On Live Earth and Such
We put our kids to bed Saturday night, plopped down on the couch, and flipped the television on. The choices, like normal for someone without cable on a Saturday night, were dismal. I could watch 48 Hours Mystery or some other boring shows, or I could watch Live Earth.
It was fairly entertaining. It was strange to me that most of the musicians were from my high school days or prior. But where was Pearl Jam, U2, or Neil Young? I had the feeling that I was not their target audience, nor was a good chunk of the American population. Where was a popular country band (I do not count Keith Urban) or some popular Christian act? I wondered why they were not trying to have popular acts from across the American musical spectrum, but then I realized that they were trying to make environmentalism hip and I, and others, are not hip. "Hip" might not even be a hip word any more.
In the back of my head was a constant ringing that this show was such a great brainwashing program that all the dictators from the present and past would be smart to take notes. You see names of "converts" scrolling across the bottom of the screen as they text in their allegiance. They bring up famous converts to talk to you in between emotionally draining musical acts. On this level I found it all a little disturbing and cult-like.
Wrapping the whole conversation up in the "global warning" lingo does not do it a service since I am one of the wackos (at least according to polls) that does not believe global warming is man-made. But I do not need to believe in the big concept of global warming in order to take practical steps to be better on the environment, which I do believe is a Christian responsibility.
I can do most of the Live Earth pledge, but I will not sign the petition because I do not believe in carbon offsetting.
Denis Hayes, the president of the Bullitt Foundation said it well:
Because we should not isolate our Christian beliefs to just one compartment of my life, I had to allow this program to interact with my Christian beliefs. Obviously, the Madonna orgy dance routine was something I should not dwell on, but that is not what I am talking about. I contemplated whether I am doing my job leaving a minimal carbon footprint and whether that is something God is concerned about.
Christians should be some of the forerunners in conserving our environment. Creation was made by God for us to enjoy, not destroy. We need to work with groups that have the same goal rather than to alienate them based upon them disagreeing with us on evolution or global warming. Many people who have different beliefs than us on those issues still share practical applications with us. It is on that common ground that we need to stand and interact with those around us.
It was fairly entertaining. It was strange to me that most of the musicians were from my high school days or prior. But where was Pearl Jam, U2, or Neil Young? I had the feeling that I was not their target audience, nor was a good chunk of the American population. Where was a popular country band (I do not count Keith Urban) or some popular Christian act? I wondered why they were not trying to have popular acts from across the American musical spectrum, but then I realized that they were trying to make environmentalism hip and I, and others, are not hip. "Hip" might not even be a hip word any more.
In the back of my head was a constant ringing that this show was such a great brainwashing program that all the dictators from the present and past would be smart to take notes. You see names of "converts" scrolling across the bottom of the screen as they text in their allegiance. They bring up famous converts to talk to you in between emotionally draining musical acts. On this level I found it all a little disturbing and cult-like.
Wrapping the whole conversation up in the "global warning" lingo does not do it a service since I am one of the wackos (at least according to polls) that does not believe global warming is man-made. But I do not need to believe in the big concept of global warming in order to take practical steps to be better on the environment, which I do believe is a Christian responsibility.
I can do most of the Live Earth pledge, but I will not sign the petition because I do not believe in carbon offsetting.
Denis Hayes, the president of the Bullitt Foundation said it well:
The worst of the carbon-offset programs resemble the Catholic Church's sale of indulgences back before the Reformation. Instead of reducing their carbon footprints, people take private jets and stretch limos, and then think they can buy an indulgence to forgive their sins. This whole game is badly in need of a modern Martin Luther.
Because we should not isolate our Christian beliefs to just one compartment of my life, I had to allow this program to interact with my Christian beliefs. Obviously, the Madonna orgy dance routine was something I should not dwell on, but that is not what I am talking about. I contemplated whether I am doing my job leaving a minimal carbon footprint and whether that is something God is concerned about.
Christians should be some of the forerunners in conserving our environment. Creation was made by God for us to enjoy, not destroy. We need to work with groups that have the same goal rather than to alienate them based upon them disagreeing with us on evolution or global warming. Many people who have different beliefs than us on those issues still share practical applications with us. It is on that common ground that we need to stand and interact with those around us.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
Doing Our Works Before Men - A Message From Augustine
The thing that amazes me in being a Christian is that messages preached over 1500 years ago are still relevant today. The preaching style might have been different back then but the message was the same. Here is an excerpt from a message from Augustine of Hippo who lived from 354-430 AD.
"Take heed, therefore," Jesus says, "that you do not do your righteousness before men to be seen of them. We are to take heed that we do not live righteously with the intent to be seen by men and that we do not place our happiness in being seen by men. "Otherwise you have no reward of your Father who is in heaven." The issue is not being seen by men but it is in being righteous with the intent of being seen by men.
For if the issue was doing our righteousness secretly as to not be seen by men, what would become of the statement made prior to this one: "You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it gives light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works"?
But he did not set up this as the end for He added, "and glorify your Father who is in heaven." Jesus is finding fault with people whose purpose for right actions is to be seen by others. If we act rightly with the design of being seen of men after Jesus has said "Take heed that you do not do your righteousness before men," then we have made Jesus' words empty and He has added nothing to our life. Hereby, it is evident that He has said these things, not to prevent us from acting rightly before men, but to prevent us from acting rightly before men with the purpose of being seen by them.
For the apostle also says, "If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." In another place he says, "Please all men in all things, even as I also please all men in all things." Those who do not understand the principle we are talking about here today think these verses are a contradiction. The explanation is that the apostle has said that he does not please men because he was accustomed to act rightly, not with the express design of pleasing men, but of pleasing God. Through these actions, he wanted to show God's love and turn men's hearts by that very thing in which he was pleasing men. Therefore, he was both right in saying that he did not please men because in that very thing he aimed at pleasing God and right in authoritatively teaching that we ought to please men, not in order that this should be sought for as the reward of our good deeds, but because the man who would not offer himself for imitation to those whom he wished to be saved could not please God.
No man can possibly imitate one who has not please him. A man who is looking for a ship to take him to his homeland would not speak absurdly if he said, "It is not a ship that I seek but my native country." So the apostle also might fitly say, "In this work of pleasing men, it is not men, but God that I please because I do not aim at pleasing men. It is also my desire that those whom I wish to be saved may imitate me."
The apostle says a similar thing in regard of an offering that is made for the saints: "Not because I desire a gift, but I desire fruit." The apostle was saying that in seeking their gift, he sought not really the gift but the fruit, for by this proof it could appear how far they had advanced Godward. The proof would be shown if they would offer willingly that which was sought from them not for the sake of his own joy over their gifts but for the sake of the fellowship of love.
When Jesus went on to say, "Otherwise you have no reward from your Father who is in heaven," He points out that nothing else except that we ought to be on our guard against seeking man's praise as the reward of our deeds. We need to avoid thinking that it is through man's praise that we attain to blessedness.
Friday, July 6, 2007
The Perfect Life
Quotes from The Life of Moses by Gregory of Nyssa on “perfection”
“One limit of perfection is the fact that it has no limit.”
“The perfection of human nature consists perhaps in its very growth in goodness.”
“This is true perfection: not to avoid a wicked life because like slaves we servilely fear punishment, nor to do good because we hope for rewards, as if cashing in on the virtuous life by some business-like arrangement. On the contrary…we regard falling from God’s friendship as the only thing dreadful and we consider becoming God’s friend the only thing worthy of honor and desire. This…is the perfection of life.”
Thursday, July 5, 2007
How I spent “Independence Day”
I am by no means a patriot. I don’t celebrate the 4th of July. I don’t sing the “Star Spangled Banner.” I won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance. My major affiliation with this nation comes by virtue of my being a resident – born and raised. At the same time, I do not wish any ill upon this country. I have heard some Christians calling for God’s judgment against America because of immorality while others seem to hate America to the point of encouraging terrorism. I am in neither camp. In addition, I am also uncomfortable whenever I see Christianity and Nationalism mixed. This syncretistic viewpoint can be seen the American flag hanging in places of worship, by singing country praising songs in worship services, in church billboards that cite praying for our nation as a test of one’s allegiance to God and in bumper stickers that seemingly demand that God “Bless our nation”. And if you ask some, they would say these things are normative for good Christians.
I, however, do not combine nationalism with religion. My being an American has little to be celebrated. As a result, I did not observe 4th of July dwelling on the glory of freedom and our superiority over other nations. In fact, we had youth group last night and I did a lesson focusing on loving enemies, even enemies of the State. I referred specifically to Osama Bin Laden, but I am sure there are other enemies that could be named. So, instead of glorying in America, I prayed for those, regardless of nationality or religion, who would wish others harm. After all, these are Jesus’ commands on the way to deal with enemies and persecutors (Matthew 5:44). Not by disparaging them with racial or religious slurs. Not by bombing or shooting them. And definitely not by hating them.
Is such an attitude “un-American”? Probably. But for me it is not about piling on Bush. Rather, it is about living as an alien in a strange land who has allegiance to another kingdom.
CIY
The youth group from my church went to their first Christ In Youth Conference. So, Tuesday I went over to visit them. I have been to ten weeks of CIY. They were a big part of my young spiritual walk. But I have not been to one in eight years. Here are some of my quick-hit thoughts:
1. I did not like th music that much. This was neither a surprise or a big deal. They were not selecting music for people my age. The kids from my group said they liked it.
For me the songs were not memorable. I could not sing one of them to you two hours after the event. The lyrics were not going to be mistaken for something Rich Mullins wrote, either. They weren't terrible, but they were not great either.
I hope this is my age talking. I hope the kids can latch on to those songs. I hope when they are alone and in need of encouragement, reminders of God's presence and goodness, that those songs will be readily available to help them.
2. The speaker was interesting. A gifted communicator. He had a constant stream of hooks including; audience participation, props, pictures, humor, and suspense. This was very good, especially given the audience and setting.
I would not give him demerits for his lack of depth. This is CIY, after all. But his lack of clarity was more of a problem. He talked about being "in Christ". He said it was different than being around him or knowing a lot about him. But he never really told us how it was different. I hope the other groups were able to cover that in the youth group time.
3. They seem to have abandoned more dressy attire for celebration. Bravo! As a teen, I did enjoy all those girls purtied up, but it was not at all helpful for the purposes of the week.
4. My church kids quietly made fun of "the kid" who was constantly trying to get attention from everyone at CIY. I felt defensive, because... I was that kid.
5. A girl that was in junior church when I led it in college was now representing GLCC. I was more glad to see the fruits of good work than I was sad to realize how old this made me.
6. I saw Barry Zimmerman in tights.
7. I'm really exciting to hear more from our group when they get back.
1. I did not like th music that much. This was neither a surprise or a big deal. They were not selecting music for people my age. The kids from my group said they liked it.
For me the songs were not memorable. I could not sing one of them to you two hours after the event. The lyrics were not going to be mistaken for something Rich Mullins wrote, either. They weren't terrible, but they were not great either.
I hope this is my age talking. I hope the kids can latch on to those songs. I hope when they are alone and in need of encouragement, reminders of God's presence and goodness, that those songs will be readily available to help them.
2. The speaker was interesting. A gifted communicator. He had a constant stream of hooks including; audience participation, props, pictures, humor, and suspense. This was very good, especially given the audience and setting.
I would not give him demerits for his lack of depth. This is CIY, after all. But his lack of clarity was more of a problem. He talked about being "in Christ". He said it was different than being around him or knowing a lot about him. But he never really told us how it was different. I hope the other groups were able to cover that in the youth group time.
3. They seem to have abandoned more dressy attire for celebration. Bravo! As a teen, I did enjoy all those girls purtied up, but it was not at all helpful for the purposes of the week.
4. My church kids quietly made fun of "the kid" who was constantly trying to get attention from everyone at CIY. I felt defensive, because... I was that kid.
5. A girl that was in junior church when I led it in college was now representing GLCC. I was more glad to see the fruits of good work than I was sad to realize how old this made me.
6. I saw Barry Zimmerman in tights.
7. I'm really exciting to hear more from our group when they get back.
Monday, July 2, 2007
A Failed Attempt at Unity - The Restoration Movement (Part 2)
Part one is here.
The main problem I struggle with in dealing with the thoughts of Alexander Campbell is that I am enthralled by the idea that we should speak only on thoughts that the Bible is clear on and remain silent on the rest. I wish it was possible, but I just cannot see it as being so. Whenever we decide to step away from the intellectual and put our beliefs into practice, we will inevitably be doing things in an area of that is extrabiblical. When we take action on whether to hire a minister or not, to have a building or not, to give money to a certain cause or not, we make a stance on something that is not an essential in the Bible, yet they are all areas that we must take a stance on. Intellectual unity on the essentials by itself cannot not bring about genuine unity.
In order to take Campbell's approach one has to take a near-deistic approach to Christianity. Let me label that approach “Biblistic” if you will. In this approach God quit revealing truth to people at the time of the writing of Revelation or whatever book one would argue was the last written book of the Bible. In this belief Campbell came closest to replicating for biblical studies what Bacon did for science. But the biblistic approach is extrabiblical in itself by making the statement that all revelation is done. Campbell's approach has to be wrong because it is self-contradicting and not internally consistent.
Campbell's attempt at unity was genuine and well meant, but it failed. His approach will always fail no matter what generation attempts to mimic it unless Christianity were limited to being a purely intellectual endeavor. It is necessary for every generation to adopt extrabiblical practices in order to properly demonstrate the gospel to our culture. Doing church in a house almost seems simplistic enough that we can avoid extrabiblical actions, but simple church even has many extrabiblical actions. Extrabiblical actions cannot be avoided; we must be responsible and sensitive to insure that all of our extrabiblical teachings and practices are beneficial to the body of Christ rather than divisive.
A reply to my thoughts by John Nugent is here.
The main problem I struggle with in dealing with the thoughts of Alexander Campbell is that I am enthralled by the idea that we should speak only on thoughts that the Bible is clear on and remain silent on the rest. I wish it was possible, but I just cannot see it as being so. Whenever we decide to step away from the intellectual and put our beliefs into practice, we will inevitably be doing things in an area of that is extrabiblical. When we take action on whether to hire a minister or not, to have a building or not, to give money to a certain cause or not, we make a stance on something that is not an essential in the Bible, yet they are all areas that we must take a stance on. Intellectual unity on the essentials by itself cannot not bring about genuine unity.
In order to take Campbell's approach one has to take a near-deistic approach to Christianity. Let me label that approach “Biblistic” if you will. In this approach God quit revealing truth to people at the time of the writing of Revelation or whatever book one would argue was the last written book of the Bible. In this belief Campbell came closest to replicating for biblical studies what Bacon did for science. But the biblistic approach is extrabiblical in itself by making the statement that all revelation is done. Campbell's approach has to be wrong because it is self-contradicting and not internally consistent.
Campbell's attempt at unity was genuine and well meant, but it failed. His approach will always fail no matter what generation attempts to mimic it unless Christianity were limited to being a purely intellectual endeavor. It is necessary for every generation to adopt extrabiblical practices in order to properly demonstrate the gospel to our culture. Doing church in a house almost seems simplistic enough that we can avoid extrabiblical actions, but simple church even has many extrabiblical actions. Extrabiblical actions cannot be avoided; we must be responsible and sensitive to insure that all of our extrabiblical teachings and practices are beneficial to the body of Christ rather than divisive.
A reply to my thoughts by John Nugent is here.
Sunday, July 1, 2007
Obedience Is Not The Goal
Genesis 12:1-4a reads:
Abraham was left with a crazy decision. Was he going to let the world choose what was rational or was he going to let God? We all know that he gave it all up to follow God. But his struggle was not over after he made the initial decision to pack up and leave. From that day on he was faced with a decision every moment he chose to continue traveling. Every step was another decision to continue in the promise. The life of irrational obedience to God is not one in which we make one decision in the past, are baptized, and have a conversion experience and are all done. Eventually, the irrational decision becomes who we are and we are confronted with a new area of our life that needs to change. Our spiritual journey is one in which we must take steps every moment of every day and continue on the way that God has placed us on.
A sculpture does not instantaneously develop from a piece marblet. It must be carefully designed and chiseled into the wonderful work of art by a master craftsman for it to become a beautiful sculpture that all can see. It is the same with us. We must lose some of what we were in order to become what God wants us to become. This losing what we were and becoming what we are not is obedience.
However, we must be careful in being obedient. The process of becoming obedient is not the goal. Too often it becomes such and leads to dying spiritual lives and dying churches. There is nothing more dangerous than replacing the proper goal with a false one. For Abraham, the goal was not beginning the journey or the journey itself. Obviously, it was necessary for him to begin the journey and to continue every day to become the Person of the Promise, but his obedience was just a necessary tool to get to the goal.
When we make obedience the goal of our faith, we fall into the pit of legalism. Legalism is the inevitable conclusion of setting the goal one or two rungs too low on the ladder. Legalism usually does not focus on a bad thing; it just focuses on the wrong thing. Legalism is just a good intention made into a wrong goal.
To avoid the legalism of obedience, we must keep focused on what the real goal is. The goal, as children of the Promise, is the same goal that Abraham had: To be a blessing. Obedience is just one of the rungs on the ladder that gets us there.
Now the Lord said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." So Abram went, as the Lord had told him.
Abraham was left with a crazy decision. Was he going to let the world choose what was rational or was he going to let God? We all know that he gave it all up to follow God. But his struggle was not over after he made the initial decision to pack up and leave. From that day on he was faced with a decision every moment he chose to continue traveling. Every step was another decision to continue in the promise. The life of irrational obedience to God is not one in which we make one decision in the past, are baptized, and have a conversion experience and are all done. Eventually, the irrational decision becomes who we are and we are confronted with a new area of our life that needs to change. Our spiritual journey is one in which we must take steps every moment of every day and continue on the way that God has placed us on.
A sculpture does not instantaneously develop from a piece marblet. It must be carefully designed and chiseled into the wonderful work of art by a master craftsman for it to become a beautiful sculpture that all can see. It is the same with us. We must lose some of what we were in order to become what God wants us to become. This losing what we were and becoming what we are not is obedience.
However, we must be careful in being obedient. The process of becoming obedient is not the goal. Too often it becomes such and leads to dying spiritual lives and dying churches. There is nothing more dangerous than replacing the proper goal with a false one. For Abraham, the goal was not beginning the journey or the journey itself. Obviously, it was necessary for him to begin the journey and to continue every day to become the Person of the Promise, but his obedience was just a necessary tool to get to the goal.
When we make obedience the goal of our faith, we fall into the pit of legalism. Legalism is the inevitable conclusion of setting the goal one or two rungs too low on the ladder. Legalism usually does not focus on a bad thing; it just focuses on the wrong thing. Legalism is just a good intention made into a wrong goal.
To avoid the legalism of obedience, we must keep focused on what the real goal is. The goal, as children of the Promise, is the same goal that Abraham had: To be a blessing. Obedience is just one of the rungs on the ladder that gets us there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
