Boring Dan

The transformative, never-irrelevant, kingdom-focused gospel of Jesus Christ

2011-10-05T22:48:00.002-06:00

A few months ago I went through all of the uses of the word "gospel" in the Bible and wrote out a rough summary of what I saw. This was before I had heard of the "King Jesus Gospel" of Scott McKnight. I still have not read that book or the several other popular treatments of the subject that are making the rounds right now. Thus, I don't know to what degree I agree or disagree with those guys. But here is the summary I wrote after looking at the Bible's uses of the word:

"The gospel begins with the proclamation of the coming of the kingdom of God/heaven. It will end in the same way, with the redeemed worshiping Christ in his eternal kingdom come to earth. In the middle, there is the revelation that this kingdom comes by way of the cross of Jesus, his resurrection, and faith in him. By faith in this Jesus, we are cleansed, and we are transformed into new creations, becoming a part of his kingdom even now as we wait for its full consummation. Thus, we are constantly seeking greater likeness to Christ and an identity that is more and more becoming of a citizen of the kingdom of heaven. We are seeking transformation, and that transformation always comes through Jesus, the cross, the resurrection, and faith in his future kingdom. God has established local churches to be the visible manifestations of that kingdom until Christ returns, so they should be gospel-centered communities of people who are constantly being transformed by the gospel. The gospel is always relevant and always life changing. It should permeate all of who we are, what we do, and what we communicate with our words and actions."

In summary of my summary, the gospel is all about the kingdom of Christ, it becomes good news to us through faith in the person and work of Christ, and it is the ongoing central reality of the Christian life.

Ned Flanders in the Fourth Century

2011-05-24T16:49:00.000-06:00

Christians get degraded in popular culture all the time. We see it in movies, TV shows, and just about everywhere else. Despite what many people might think, this is not a new phenomenon. Today I was reading a sermon delivered by Gregory Nazianzen in 362 AD, and I ran across this quote:

"We have become a new spectacle . . . to almost all wicked men, and at every time and place, in the public squares, at carousals, at festivities, and times of sorrow. Nay, we have already— I can scarcely speak of it without tears— been represented on the stage, amid the laughter of the most licentious, and the most popular of all dialogues and scenes is the caricature of a Christian."

Christianity has always been a subject of ridicule and laughter, and it will be that way until Christ returns. If you don't believe me, then just read 1 Corinthians 1:18-25. Instead of being outraged or seeking to improve our image, we're called to keep preaching (and living out) the message of the cross that the world finds so ridiculous.

The Bible and "Historical" Background Information

2011-05-19T16:23:00.001-06:00

There is a ton of false "historical" information about the Bible out there. Relying on historical factoids instead of digging into the Bible for answers is both lazy and a good way to perpetuate myths.

I want to emphasize this because lately I have been learning that more and more "historical" background information that I've heard is just not true. Here are some examples of what I mean...

-I used to occasionally repeat the story that in Old Testament times the high priest had a rope tied around his ankle when he entered the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement. This was because he was afraid of being struck dead in the presence God, in which case the other priests would use the rope to retrieve his corpse. That's a great story, isn't it? Unfortunately, it's not true. There's no mention of this practice anywhere in history until someone made it up in the middle ages.

-I had always heard that Gehenna was a big, burning trash dump outside of Jerusalem. This story really helps Jesus to illustrate what hell is like, right? Too bad that this trash dump apparently never existed--it was also an invention of the middle ages. (It's most likely that Jesus actually used the valley of Gehenna as an illustration of hell because of the horrific child sacrifices that the Old Testament tells us happened there. In other words, Jesus talked about Gehenna because he knew his Bible.)

-A sailor in the 1800s (or 1970s, or whenever) is said to have been swallowed by a whale and recovered alive, which supposedly proves the historicity of the book of Jonah. Again, these stories seem not to be true. They make the news in the same way that stories about people riding in alien spacecraft do. (And even if they were true, God's use of a sea creature to save Jonah's life was a miracle and therefore doesn't need any modern parallels to prove its historicity. Neither does the resurrection of Jesus or any other miracle in the Bible.)

Trevin Wax pointed out several of these popular "historical" myths in a great blog post. As I read it, I wanted to shout, "Preach it, Trevin!" ...

...But then today I was humbled by the truth about yet another myth I had thoughtlessly believed: that in New Testament times, Christians were baptized in the nude. After this story came up in conversation three times in a single week, I decided to check into whether or not it's true. Guess what? It's not. The first historical mention of nude Christian baptism is by Hyppolytus around the beginning of the third century, and it doesn't seem to have become a common practice until the fourth century. Christians were not baptized in the nude in New Testament times. In fact, absolutely nothing in the New Testament mentions nude baptism, which should have been my biggest clue to begin with.

The moral of the story is to trust your Bible. If you want to learn interesting things about the Bible and have it opened up to you in a whole new way, then read it. Pray through it, think hard about it, take notes on it, and notice where it makes references to itself. It is its own best historical background material. You can always trust it, even when certain stories you've heard about it turn out not to be true.

The Burden of Living In a Car-Dependent Nation

2011-04-26T12:05:00.002-06:00

Most cities in America have now been built in such a way that life without a car is next to impossible. Why did we start doing things this way? Here's a quote to chew on from a cutting-edge urban planning book from 1935:

"The cities will be part of the country; I shall live 30 miles from my office in one direction, under a pine tree; my secretary will live 30 miles away from it too, in the other direction, under another pine tree. We shall both have our own car. We shall use up tires, wear out road surfaces and gears, consume oil and gasoline. All of which will necessitate a great deal of work...enough for all."

Hmmm... I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time.

If Rob Bell is Right, Why Bother With Christianity?

2011-04-20T09:21:00.004-06:00

I read Rob Bell's new book Love Wins a couple of weeks ago. I decided to wait to post anything since the internet is not the best place to broadcast initial reactions of profound disagreement. If you want to hear my specific thoughts about the book, I'd love to talk to you. For now, I'll limit myself to a question:

If Rob Bell is right, then why would anyone bother to be a Christian? If God's love will save people apart from faith in Christ, then why should we go to the trouble of burdening ourselves with a time-consuming religion? Why not just eat, drink, and be merry (and support charities in Africa), for tomorrow love wins?

If you've read the book, please tell me why you think Rob Bell has decided to keep pouring his energy into the Christian religion. Force of habit? Desire for respect? A sense that Christianity matters more than he's argued? It's a mystery to me.

The Structure of Zechariah 7-8

2011-02-08T14:09:00.000-07:00

I taught on Zechariah 7-8 last week. After reading some commentaries and being especially tipped off by James Hamilton's take on it, it seemed pretty obvious that Zechariah structured these two chapters as a chiasm. But, I wasn't totally satisfied by the few proposals that I read about which parts of the chapter were intended to match other parts. Here is the way I think Zechariah intended it to be broken down:

***

A: 7:1-3 – Men from Bethel inquire of God at Jerusalem through priests and prophets

B: 7:4-7 – Former attitudes about fasting were wrong because attitudes about all of life were wrong (their question is answered with two more questions)

C: 7:8-10 – A call to a life of righteousness

D: 7:11-14 – The refusal of forefathers to listen, resulting in destruction

E: 8:1-8 – Restoration of Jerusalem from God’s perspective: begins with "jealousy and wrath," ends with with "faithfulness and righteousness."

E’: 8:9-13 – Restoration of Jerusalem from human perspective:

begins and ends with “let your hands be strong.”

D’: 8:14-15 – Unlike their forefathers, God will bring good to this people

C’: 8:16-17 – A call to a life of righteousness

B’: 8:18-19 – Fasts will one day be turned to feasts, so the real task is to love truth and peace (the men from Bethel had been asking the wrong question)

A’: 8:20-23 – Men from all nations will one day inquire of God at Jerusalem through average citizens (a kingdom of priests)

Overall message: God is doing a work that is much greater than simply rebuilding the physical temple, so His people should set their hope and faith toward the future rather than mourning the tragedies of the past.

***

I'm posting this for two reasons. First, I really benefited spiritually from studying this portion of Scripture and hope that others will also benefit. Second, I am hoping that people who are more knowledgeable than I am about these kinds of things might accidentally read this and offer their thoughts.

Sinful Anger as Described by the Colorado Driver Handbook (the last three bullet points are the best)

2010-09-01T09:50:00.000-06:00

"Could I become an Aggressive Driver?

Anyone is capable of becoming an aggressive driver. Some

drivers may be more likely to become aggressive. Here is

a series of questions developed by Leon James PhD., to

determine whether you have a greater potential to become

aggressive behind the wheel. Take a few minutes to ask

yourself these questions, and be honest with yourself.

Do you:

• Mentally condemn other drivers as incompetent or

stupid?

• Make negative comments about other drivers to those

riding with you?

• Close up space to stop other motorists from merging or

changing lanes?

• Prevent another driver from passing?

• Tailgate a driver to get them to speed up or get out of

your way?

• Angrily speed past another driver?

• Run a stop sign, red light or other traffic control device

out of frustration or anger?

• Honk or yell at someone to express your anger or

frustration?

• Make an obscene gesture at another driver?

• Pursue another vehicle to express your anger?

• Deliberately bump or ram another vehicle?

• Exit your vehicle to teach the other driver a lesson through

either a verbal exchange or physical confrontation?

• Fantasize about physically attacking another driver?

If you answered yes to these questions, even a couple

of these questions, you may be at risk to become an

aggressive driver."

Colfax Anvenue, the Inner City, and the Gospel

2010-07-21T20:36:00.001-06:00

We've lived in Colorado for almost two years, but I had never really been to Denver until yesterday. I've attended events in downtown Denver, and I've been to Denver's suburbs many times, but I had never really been to Denver itself. Yesterday, after returning books to the Denver Seminary library (which is in the suburbs), I decided to go walk around the North Capitol Hill neighborhood of Denver, especially Colfax Avenue. I did this partly because of my ongoing fascination with walkable neighborhoods and partly because I've heard so many people talk about what a terrible place Colfax Avenue is. I'd like to offer my initial impression of Capitol Hill/Colfax and also some reasons why I think that we as evangelicals tend to stay away from places like this.

The neighborhood:

-It's much more livable than my neighborhood. I live in a suburban setting where almost nothing can be accomplished without getting in the car and driving somewhere else. People who live close to Colfax have a huge advantage in this respect. They can live as real people in a real neighborhood with a real identity.

-It's much more interesting and culturally rich than my neighborhood. Within five minutes, I had walked past two concert venues, several non-chain restaurants, record stores, book stores, etc.

-It's much more diverse than my neighborhood. There did not seem to be an over-representation of any one race, ethnic group, or tax bracket.

-It's flooded with openly sinful behavior. Along with the good things, there are also adult book stores, cannabis shops, topless bars, etc.

-It desperately needs Christians and churches that will preach the gospel, but it has very few. As I explored and asked around, I found nothing of the sort. After researching a little today, I learned that there are a couple of gospel-preaching churches around there, but only a couple.

So why do Christians tend to stay so far away from places like this instead of planting churches and being salt and light there? I have a few ideas...

1. We view places like Colfax Avenue as "enemy territory". Instead of understanding that we've been entrusted with the only message that washes sin away, we tend to be afraid of the "bad" people. It's hard to comprehend that we aren't better than anyone, that we don't deserve the gospel more than anyone, and that we weren't inherently more likely to become Christians than anyone.

2. We tend to have more children than other people, and we want to raise them in big houses that have plenty of room for everyone. Those big houses are much cheaper in the suburbs. The problem is that the desire for a big house is rarely justifiable in light of... well, pretty much everything Jesus ever said. Besides, kids have grown up in cramped quarters for most of human history with no trouble.

3. We tend to want to raise our children in sheltered environments. As a father, I certainly understand. But I also think the desire to shelter our children might sometimes reflect laziness with respect to our willingness to be their spiritual mentors. It's easier to put problems out of sight than to deal with them. But just think how richly we could guide our children in obedience to Deuteronomy 6:7 as we "walk by the way" in an environment where there is so much more there to teach about. This, of course, requires the hard work of discipleship.

4. The model of church that we have learned in suburbs and small towns is almost impossible to duplicate in an urban setting. This model is dependent on owning big buildings, which can only be done in a dense metropolitan area by the wealthiest of churches. As a result, churches move out of urban areas and into the suburbs, church planters give up on their dreams of reaching the inner city, and seasoned Christians shy away from the few urban churches that do exist and instead join churches that feel more like the ones they grew up in.

5. We don't understand that the gospel destroys racial and ethnic barriers. We would prefer instead to remain with people who are just like us. It's easier and more comfortable. And don't "they" have people who can go and reach "them"? This kind of thinking is wrong not because it's old-fashioned but because it denies the gospel.

I'm sure many more reasons could be added, but these are just the ones I've been thinking about.

Based on this post there will probably be some who think that I am planning to become a church planter in Denver. This is not the case. Besides loving our church and our ministry there, I do not have the gifts that it takes to plant a church. But I hope that someone who does have those gifts will go and do it. I also hope that Christians who aren't vocational ministers will consider living in inner-city neighborhoods to be lights for the gospel where it's seldom preached.

More Eager

2010-07-17T21:06:00.000-06:00

My friend and former college roommate Josh Spilker is starting a new blog called More Eager about matters of the Christian faith, and he's asked me to be a contributor. Josh's other blogging endeavors (you can find them through his twitter page) have done really well. I'm curious to see what direction this new blog goes, how often I post there instead of here, etc. I hope it proves to be fruitful.

Death and Missions

2010-07-08T09:31:00.000-06:00

There are two things that I think we need to define better in the evangelical world: death and missions.

DEATH - I've been in a lot of Bible studies where we start talking about someone in the Bible being raised from the dead, and then one or more people in the group will mention that they had a family member who was raised from the dead. What they mean is that their family member lost vital signs for some short period of time and was resuscitated. That's not death. We need a clear spiritual definition.

MISSIONS - While researching a paper that I'm currently working like mad to finish (except right now because I'm blogging), I learned that over 80% of American short-term foreign mission trip participants go to the 1/3 of the world that is already the most reached with the gospel, and that their role is most often to provide resources to believers in poor countries. Providing resources is good, but is it missions? What about reaching the unreached? Should some of these be renamed "service trips" instead of "mission trips"? Is it missions whenever we leave our church building to do anything good? Is it missions if there is no cross-cultural engagement, or if we never try to reach unreached people with the gospel? I haven't even made up my mind about the answers to all of these questions. But if we count everything as missions, we will never do the hard work of genuine missions. Again, we need a better definition.

Now I'm back to church work and paper writing. Feel free to comment, but be aware that I might not get around to approving comments for a while since I am in a serious academic crunch.

An Update On the Previous Post for Those Who Might Not Know

2010-06-16T09:07:00.000-06:00

The GCR recommendations passed. Bryant Wright was elected president. Lots of little things happened in between. This hereby ends my week-long venture into blogging about the SBC.

A Primer for the 2010 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention

2010-06-09T20:56:00.005-06:00

I am by no means an insider in the Southern Baptist Convention, but I've been very interested in the way our denomination runs for several years. My goal here is to help people who know little about the SBC or its current events to understand enough to intelligently follow what is happening next week.

What Goes On and Where to Watch It Happen

Every year the convention has three main parts: Crossover, the Pastors' Conference, and the Annual Meeting:

Crossover is a large-scale evangelistic effort that takes place in the convention city (Orlando this year) the week leading up to the main events. Crossover Orlando is happening right now and continues through June 12, so please be in prayer for it.

The Pastors' Conference will be on Sunday and Monday. During this time, 14 preachers will deliver sermons to encourage and challenge pastors. Be sure to check out the schedule and the live stream.

The Annual Meeting is where the business of the SBC gets done. It will happen on Tuesday and Wednesday. Lots of things are included, but essentially it is a business meeting. Most of what's below deals with this part of the convention. Be sure to look at the schedule so you can decide when you want to follow along on the live stream.

How the Annual Meeting Works

The SBC is a denomination controlled by its churches, not one that controls its churches. In other words, it is a democracy. I am not an expert in the parlimentary procedures of the meeting, but here are the main points to know:

-Each church that is affiliated with the SBC can send up to 10 messengers to the Annual Meeting. Each messenger can cast one vote on any given issue. In this respect, a seminary president and a Sunday School teacher are on equal ground.

-Messengers can bring resolutions and motions. Honestly, I don't understand all of the differences between these two, so you're welcome to enlighten me in the comments if you're knowledgeable. But in general, resolutions must be submitted well in advance and motions can be brought to the floor during the scheduled Introduction of New Motions. These motions can get a little goofy sometimes, but they are an essential part of having a democratic denomination. I'll say more on this below in the section on Twitter.

-The heads of various SBC entities and organizations give reports on what has gone on in the past year. They have a great deal of freedom in what they can say in these reports, so sometimes they are more like sermons than reports.

-Several denominational positions are filled by a vote of the messengers. These include SBC president, first VP, second VP, and president of the following year's Pastors' Conference. The president is the most important of these because of the general influence that this role brings, as well as the power to make a number of committee appointments.

The Great Commission Resurgence Task Force Report

By far, the biggest issue leading up to the SBC Annual Meeting this year is the report of the Great Commission Resurgence Task Force. The messengers at the 2009 meeting voted to form this task force in order to bring recommendations this year of how the SBC can better fulfill the Great Commission.The report contains seven components/recommendations:

1) A new mission satement
2) Eight core values for the SBC
3) Creating a new category of financial contributions made by churches called Great Commission Giving, which would formally recognize designated contributions to SBC entities. (The current system only records undesignated contributions made through the Cooperative Program.)
4) Phasing out cooperative agreements between state conventions and the North American Mission Board so that NAMB's missionaries will be under its own control instead of state convention control. (Currently, NAMB sends over $50 million annually to state conventions, who then employ the NAMB missionaries in their states.)
5) Allowing the International Mission Board to evangelize foreign people groups who live in the United States
6) Moving promotion of the Cooperative Program from the national level to the sate level
7) moving about $2 million of annual budget money from the Executive Committee to the International Mission Board

Most likely, the recommendations will be voted on individually. #3 and #4 are the most controversial of these. Those who are opposed to the recommendations argue that the Great Commission cannot be carried out by moving money around and restructuring bureaucracy, and that what is needed is to encourage churches to do a better job at evangelism and giving. Those who support the recommendations argue that churches have been told to do a better job for many years with no results, that the current system has a bloated bureaucracy that wastes money intended for missions, and that the the worst option is the status quo.

Of those not serving on the task force, the biggest proponent of the recommendations is probably Jerry Rankin of the IMB (see his "Alternative Futures" blogs starting here). The biggest opponent is Morris Chapman of the Executive Committee (see his open letter).

Electing a President

Another issue to watch is the election of a new president. Johnny Hunt will complete his second one-year term at the meeting, and four men are expected to be nominated to take his place. Jed Coppenger has interviewed each of them on the Baptist 21 website. As a Floridian being nominated in Florida, Ted Traylor probably has the best chance of being elected. Still, anything could happen, including the nomination of someone completely unexpected at the last minute.

There is a good chance that big changes will be happening in the SBC because of the GCRTF recommendations, so the role of the president could be very important in how all of this unfolds.

Other Current Events and Things to Watch For

-Three SBC entities--Executive Committee, North American Mission Board, and International Mission Board--have presidential vacancies to fill. The new presidents will be picked by the trustees of those organizations, so this will not be a matter of business at the Annual Meeting. Still, it could be an important fact to know.

-People will be listening closely to Morris Chapman's Executive Committee report and Jerry Rankin's IMB report. This will be the last report before retiring for both of them, and as I noted above, neither have been holding back their opinions lately. No one knows whether these men will try to end on a pleasant note or voice their convictions candidly since they have nothing to lose.

-The number of Calvinists and/or non-Southern Baptists who have been invited to preach at this year's Pastors' Conference is much higher than usual. There have been a few grumblings over this, so it could become an issue. My prediction is that the preaching will be of a consistently high enough quality to keep Kevin Ezell from taking much heat over his invitations.

-Some of the minor issues from last year might come up again, including mixed opinions about Mark Driscoll and his Acts 29 church planting network.

-Ergun Caner, president of the seminary at Liberty University, is currently facing an internal investigation to determine whether he has been lying about the circumstances surrounding his conversion to Christianity from Islam. This will not be an issue of official business, but I would be surprised if it does not get brought up from the floor at some point. Depending on whether this happens and whether other people get named in the motions, it could cause a minor stir.

Keeping Up on Twitter and blogs

If you care to know what's going on at the convention, Twitter will be a valuable tool. Tweets about the meeting will be marked with #SBC2010 (and possibly also #GCR), so you can search for that and find out what's going on at any given moment. BUT, be aware that not everyone who tweets understands what's happening. 2009 was the first year that Twitter was widely used to comment on the proceedings, and a huge percentage of the comments were complaints about something that was said during the Introduction of New Motions (which is essentially an open mic time). These people did not understand that the denomination is a democracy in which any messenger can make any motion, no matter how strange it may be. So, it's good to use Twitter (and Facebook) to keep up, but pay attention to the tweets that give facts and not the sensational ones.

In addition to searching for the #SBC2010 hashtag, there are some key Twitter accounts you can follow to see what the SBC insiders and/or leaders are saying. Some that I'll be checking from time to time are Al Mohler, Russell Moore, Danny Akin, David Platt, Baptist Press, Thom Rainer, Jerry Rankin, Ed Stetzer, and James Smith.

Blogs can also be good places to keep up with what's going on. Baptist Press usually does a live blog of the meeting while it's going on. Some other blogs that will help you keep up are SBC Voices, SBC Today, and Baptist 21.

The SBC and the Kingdom of God

Some will hear the discussions of SBC business and dismiss them as political and irrelevant, not recognizing that the decisions that are made could potentially have a profound effect on the advancement of the gospel around the world. Others will get so caught up in the business and the controversies that they will lose sight of the big picture, confusing the Southern Baptist Convention with the kingdom of God. I hope that you and I can avoid both of these extremes. Many of the decisions made at the SBC Annual Meeting are of truly eternal importance, but our hope is in Christ and not in a denomination.

**UPDATE**
I've bumped into a handful of new issues to watch for that have come up in the few days since I wrote this post. Actually, the first one's not new, but it's come up again so I reconsidered my decision not to include it:

-There are two candidates for next year's Pastors' Conference president, both of whom have now been interviewed by Baptist 21. Troy Gramling's nomination is controversial, which is mostly because one of the staff members who serves under him at his church is a woman who calls herself a "pastor." He has a decent chance of winning despite this controversy since he is from Florida.

-Les Puryear has announced that there will be multiple small-church pastors nominated for the offices of 1st and 2nd VP as part of his SBC Majority Initiative.

-James Smith, editor of the Florida Baptist Witness, announced today in an editorial that he will bring a motion to make Baptist Press it's own entity with an independent board of trustees. This would remove it from the control of the Executive Committee. This could potentially be the second-biggest piece of business at the convention behind the GCRTF recommendations.

Using 1 Thessalonians 5:17 As An Excuse for Prayerlessness

2010-04-26T20:30:00.000-06:00

I've heard lots of Christians say something along the lines of, "It's hard for me to find time every day to devote to just sitting down and praying with my eyes closed, so I like to do what that one verse says and pray continually. I keep the conversation with God going all day while I'm working, driving, or whatever else I'm doing."

But then last week I was talking to a man who has the most vibrant prayer life of anyone I know, and he said something along the lines of, "I just don't know how to follow God's command to pray continually. It seems like no matter how hard I try, something always comes up as I'm going about my day that takes my full attention and draws me away from prayer."

Which one of these two statements do you think is more honest?

Just a thought.

Fasting Outline

2010-04-20T11:35:00.003-06:00

Below is an outline I used last week to teach on fasting. As with the prayer outline that I posted before, I thought this might be helpful to someone. And again, much (or most?) of this came from Don Whitney and his book Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life. I think this outline is longer than the one on prayer, but it took me less time to teach through, for whatever that's worth.

I. What Fasting Is (and is not)

a. Definition: “A Christian’s voluntary abstinence from food for spiritual purposes.” -Whitney

b. Types of Fasts in the Bible

i. With Respect to Food and Drink Intake

1. Normal Fast – abstaining from all food but not water (Matt. 4:2)

2. Absolute Fast – abstaining from all food and water (Ezra 10:6; Acts 9:9)

3. Supernatural Fast – abstaining from all food and water for a period of time that would be humanly impossible apart from God’s supernatural intervention (Deut. 9:9; 1 Kings 19:8)

ii. With Respect to Participation

1. Private Fast – on your own in secret (Matt. 6:16-18)

2. Congregational Fast – as a body of believers (Joel 2:15-16; Acts 13:2)

3. National Fast – as a nation (2 Chron 20:3; Jonah 3:5-8)

iii. With Respect to Scheduling

1. Regular Fast – scheduled on a regular basis (Lev. 16:29-31; Zech. 8:19; Luke 18:12)

2. Occasional Fast – done whenever needed, desired, or otherwise decided (Matt. 9:15)

NOTE: Most Christian fasting is normal, private, and occasional in nature.

c. What is NOT fasting

i. Eating – the Bible never calls something a fast if food is eaten.

ii. Prayerless hunger – “Fasting without prayer is a diet.”

II. What God Expects of Us (and what He does not)

a. Fasting is expected to be a normal part of our lives as Christians

Matthew 6:16 And when you fast…

Luke 5:35 and then they will fast in those days. (The days we’re in now.)

b. Private fasts are expected of us, while other types of fasting are optional

Matthew 6:17-18 ¹⁷ But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, ¹⁸ that your fasting may not be seen by others but by your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

c. Fasting is expected to be sincere, worshipful, and self-denying

Isaiah 58:3-4 Behold, in the day of your fast you seek your own pleasure, and oppress all your workers. ⁴ Behold, you fast only to quarrel and to fight and to hit with a wicked fist. Fasting like yours this day will not make your voice to be heard on high.

d. What is NOT expected:

i. The Bible does not require Christians to fast on a regular schedule, although many have chosen to do so.

ii. The Bible does not require Christians to fast for any particular length of time. It could be as short as missing one meal or as long as 40 days.

iii. The Bible does not require Christians to observe any particular type of fast other than private fasts. (But others can be good to do, such as congregational fasts.)

III. Good Purposes For Fasting (and bad ones)

a. Purposes for every fast

i. Obedience to God’s expectation that we do it

ii. To amplify our prayers and worship

Daniel 9:3 Then I turned my face to the Lord God, seeking him by prayer and pleas for mercy with fasting and sackcloth and ashes.

iii. To broaden our concerns and perspectives beyond your own needs

Isaiah 58:6-7 Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness, to undo the straps of the yoke, to let the oppressed go free, and to break every yoke? ⁷ Is it not to share your bread with the hungry and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

iv. To become more godly

1 Timothy 4:7 discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness

v. To be rewarded in eternity

Matthew 6:18 And your Father who sees [your fasting] in secret will reward you.

b. Occasion-specific purposes in the Bible

i. Seeking God’s guidance (Judges 20:26; Acts 14:23)

ii. Expressing grief (1 Sam. 31:13, 2 Sam. 1:11-12)

iii. Seeking deliverance or protection (2 Chron. 20:3-4; Ezra 8:20-21)

iv. Expressing repentance from sin (1 Sam. 7:6; Jonah 3:5-8)

v. Humbling yourself before God (1 Kings 21:27-29; Psalm 35:13)

vi. Expressing concern for the work of God (Neh. 1:3-4; Daniel 9:3)

vii. Overcoming temptation and dedicating yourself to God (Matt. 4:1-11)

viii. Expressing love and worship to God (Luke 2:37; Phil. 3:19)

c. Bad purposes for fasting

i. To lose weight

ii. To make God owe us something

iii. To be seen by others

Matthew 6:16 And when you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces that their fasting may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.

iv. Just for the sake of fasting

Zechariah 7:5-6 Say to all the people of the land and the priests, When you fasted and mourned in the fifth month and in the seventh, for these seventy years, was it for me that you fasted?

IV. What Steps to Take (and not to)

a. Steps NOT to take

i. Ignoring or forgetting about God’s call to fast

ii. Jumping into fasting without prayer

iii. Jumping into fasting without considering it medically

b. Steps TO take

i. Medically

1. If you have any concerns, get a doctor’s advice first. If your doctor says no, then do not fast. God is gracious and will understand.

2. If you haven’t fasted much before, start with missing only one, two, or three meals.

3. Don’t plan a fast for a period of time when you’ll be doing more vigorous physical activity than usual.

4. Drink plenty of liquids, especially water. (But don’t drink milk, smoothies, or other filling drinks, which would defeat the purpose.)

5. If you are fasting and feel like you might pass out, then thank God for the time of fasting He gave you and go get something to eat.

6. When the fast is over, don’t gorge yourself. Go back to eating a normal amount on a normal schedule.

ii. Spiritually and Practically

1. Pray about and plan for fasting. Put a date on your calendar today, perhaps Thursday, May 6, which is the National Day of Prayer.

2. During the fast, use the time when you would have eaten meals instead as time for reading God’s Word and praying. Each time you feel a hunger pain throughout the day, let it remind you to seek God’s face and to declare that your belly is not your god (Phil 3:19).

3. Abstain from more than just food when you’re fasting. Also take that time to step away from other things that you tend to indulge in such as TV, movies, music, internet, video games, etc. God wants it to be a time of self-denial.

4. Do good for others while you fast. If your fast doesn’t move you to act out your faith, then it’s just an empty ritual (see Isaiah 58:1-11).

Final thought: fasting as preparation for real suffering that God will take us through in the future

· The call to follow Jesus is a call to suffer (Luke 9:23-24; Phil. 3:7-11)

· Fasting can teach us how to find our joy in Christ even while we suffer; we look beyond the temporary pain and toward the eternal reward.

Romans 8:18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.

· Jesus suffered and died for us, and when we follow him we suffer also. Fasting is one step.

Prayer Outline

2010-04-14T14:22:00.004-06:00

Below is the main outline of a lesson that I taught the college & young adult group on prayer last week. It would be more reasonable to spend several weeks on prayer, but in this particular case I tried to pack in as much as I could in one week. There's obviously more that could be said. I thought some of you guys in internet land might benefit from the outline. Much of the material below comes from books by Don Whitney and Chuck Lawless.

I. Facts About Prayer

a. God only promises to hear the prayers of those whose sins have been washed away by trusting in Christ’s sacrifice for us on the cross.

i. God’s normal pattern is not to hear the prayer of unbelievers

Isaiah 59:1-2 Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save, or his ear dull, that it cannot hear; ² but your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you so that he does not hear.

ii. All believers have access to God in prayer because of Christ

Hebrews 10:19-22 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, ²⁰ by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, ²¹ and since we have a great priest over the house of God, ²² let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.

b. Prayer is Expected

i. Jesus Expects us to Pray

1. “And when you pray” (Matt 6:5, 7)

2. “Pray like this:” (Matt 6:9)

3. Luke 11:9-10 And I tell you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. ¹⁰ For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.

4. Luke 18:1 And he told them a parable to the effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart.

ii. God’s Word makes it clear

1. 1 Corinthians 7:5 devote yourselves to prayer

2. 1 Thessalonians 5:17 pray without ceasing

3. Hebrews 4:16 Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

c. Prayer is Learned – Luke 11:1 Now Jesus was praying in a certain place, and when he finished, one of his disciples said to him, "Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples.

d. Prayer is Answered

i. Psalm 65:2 O you who hears prayer

ii. Luke 11:9-10 And I tell you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. ¹⁰ For everyone who asks receives, and the one who seeks finds, and to the one who knocks it will be opened.

iii. If we don’t see an answer, it’s either our lack of perception or we are praying wrongly.

II. Satan’s Strategies to Mess Up Our Prayer Life

a. Telling us lies about prayer

i. Prayer isn’t really effective (we usually only think this secretly)

ii. We’re too far from God for him to hear or for it to matter

iii. We can manage a certain task or stage of life on our own

b. Tempting us to behaviors that make our prayers ineffective

i. In our relationships to others

1. Marriage - 1 Peter 3:7 Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way … so that your prayers may not be hindered.

2. Brother/close friend – Matthew 5:23-24 So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, ²⁴ leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

3. Anyone - Mark 11:25 And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses."

ii. In arrogant and selfish motives in prayer

Matthew 6:5-6 "And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. ⁶ But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

James 4:2-3 You do not have, because you do not ask. ³ You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions.

iii. In sinful thoughts and behavior that we are not willing to give up

Psalm 66:18 If I had cherished iniquity in my heart, the Lord would not have listened.

III. Practical Steps To Take

a. Intentionally plan times to pray

“Unless I'm badly mistaken, one of the main reasons so many of God's children don't have a significant life of prayer is not so much that we don't want to, but that we don't plan to. If you want to take a four-week vacation, you don't just get up one summer morning and say, "Hey, let's go today!" You won't have anything ready. You won't know where to go. Nothing has been planned. But that is how many of us treat prayer. We get up day after day and realize that significant times of prayer should be a part of our life, but nothing's ever ready. We don't know where to go. Nothing has been planned. No time. No place. No procedure. And you know as well as I that the opposite of planning is not a contagious flow of deep, spontaneous experiences in prayer. The opposite of planning is the rut. If you don't plan a vacation you will probably stay home and watch T.V. The natural, unplanned flow of spiritual life sinks to the lowest ebb of vitality. There is a race to be run and a fight to be fought. If you want renewal in your life of prayer you must plan to see it.” –Piper

b. Learn to Pray

i. By Praying – like learning a foreign language, practice is the best way to learn.

ii. By Meditating on Scripture

1. Begin with the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6:9-14

2. Make praying through Scripture a regular part of your life

iii. By Praying With Others

1. Learn by listening to seasoned prayer veterans

2. Learn principles of prayer from them, not catchy phrases to use

iv. By Reading About Prayer

-I personally recommend Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life by Donald Whitney.

c. Pray in different settings

i. By yourself

ii. With your family

iii. With church family

iv. With Christian coworkers (on breaks, etc.) and classmates

d. Pray persistently (see Luke 18:1-8)

e. Attempt great things for God in prayer—things that could only be credited to the power of God.

Final Thought: Prayer as a vital part of the daily battle for the kingdom of God
“Prayer is a wartime walkie-talkie, not a domestic intercom. It exists for advancing the mission, not for calling the butler to turn up the thermostat. Not that God is opposed to practical, nitty-gritty daily prayers. He simply wants all of them to relate to the mission of your life—that his name be glorified, that people live for fruitful ministry.” -Piper

My Search for a Normal Sounding Audio Bible

2010-03-29T10:54:00.004-06:00

For a long time, I've wanted an audio Bible that meets the following criteria:

1) The whole Bible, including the Old Testament
2) A good translation, preferably ESV or NASB, or even NKJV or NIV
3) No background music or sound effects
4) Not read in a dramatic or unnatural way

In the words of Bono, I still haven't found what I'm looking for.

Maybe it's because of undiagnosed ADD, but I have a hard time listening to most audio Bibles. All of them that I've found (other than Johnny Cash's New Tesament--see below) are done in a way that distracts me from the actual words. About half of them out there are done like a movie, with sound effects, music, and different actors for different characters. I guess those things are appealing to some people and maybe even help them pay attention, but when I hear them I start thinking, "How did they make that sound effect? Why did I just hear a splash? Who decided the music should be in a minor key right now? Is that the same actor from three verses ago or did they switch?" And then I realize that I've missed what's actually going on in the text. There's no need to "bring the words to life"--that's already been taken care of.

The other half of audio Bibles I've found say something on the cover like, "No sound effects! The words of Scripture as they were written!" But there's a problem for a distractible person like me, which is that these versions are still read dramatically. Some are less dramatic than others, but none that I've found are just simple, normal sounding readings. Even the most normal seem forced and unnatural. I can't listen to this kind of reading without thinking of William Shatner's version of Rocket Man.

So far, the closest to a normal reading that I've found is Johnny Cash Reads the Complete New Testament. Yes, I did laugh a little at the beginning as he read through the genealogy of Jesus. But after a couple of chapters I got used to the idea of Johnny Cash pronouncing difficult words, and it was great from there on out. He has a distinctive voice, but his cadence and inflections sound very natural. Unfortunately, he didn't record the Old Testament before he died.

Just to be clear, I don't have any problem with people listening to dramatized audio Bibles. If they help you understand the message of Scripture, then by all means keep it up. It probably means you have better concentration than I do. They just aren't helpful for me.

So, does anybody know of a complete audio Bible that sounds like a normal person is reading it?

New Look

2010-03-26T11:13:00.002-06:00

I got an email this morning from Blogger about a new program they have that makes it easier to format the look of blogs. So I tried it, and here you have the result.

For the background, I was torn between this picture of old books and a giant close-up of a hamburger. I'm still not sure I made the right decision. I really like hamburgers.

The Death of Single Adult Ministry

2010-03-12T16:44:00.008-07:00

I have a rather unique assignment at church. I am the 'Minister of Singles/College and Career,' which means that I do my best to reach anyone older than high school age who is not married, plus a small handful who are. Most people don't understand this and either call me the College Pastor or the Singles Pastor, or sometimes even the Youth Pastor (maybe because I'm young?). My usual explanation is, "I serve people ages 18 to death who aren't married."

In reality I minister to two demographics that would normally be assigned to two different people. One is college students and 20-somethings, and the other is single adults. These are two very different worlds. Just as you would never use the term college ministry to refer to a place where a 45-year-old widow would fit in, the word singles should never be used to talk about college and young adult ministry--they really don't like that word. These two sets of people are in different life situations and are looking for different things, which is why it's important to keep the terminology straight.

There's a curious trend nationally with respect to these two areas of ministry. Churches have steadily increased their level of interest in reaching college students and 20-somethings, but they have dramatically decreased their interest in single adults. Last year I attended the Single Adult Ministry conference, which is the national conference for singles ministers, and there were only about 150 people there. In years past, there have been as many as 5 times that in attendance. This is not because the conference has declined in quality. It's because the number of churches employing a singles minister has fallen by a huge factor in the past 10 years or so.

Essentially, single adult ministry is dying a slow death nationwide. Nearly every Christian single adult that I know can name a thriving singles ministry that they were part of in the past. Inevitably, stories about those ministries end with, "But then it just fizzled out," or, "But the church decided to shut it down." Now they are hungry for something like what they used to know, but it is completely off the radar screen at most churches.

The explanations that churches give for moving away from doing singles ministry are usually predictable. They go something like this: "It was great to have so many singles here, but it turned into more of a meat market than a ministry. The singles who came were fickle in their commitment to the church, and most of them never got involved in doing ministry. Plus, we were always having to deal with strange men who seemed like sexual predators, and that can become a legal issue."

The problem with these excuses is that they are exactly the same difficulties that come up in ministry to young adults. And yet, most churches consider it a badge of honor to have their pews (or theater chairs, etc.) filled with 20-somethings.

So with that said, here are a few possible reasons why I think so many churches have moved away from supporting ministry to single adults:

1) 20-somethings are who churches have really wanted all along. These people came to groups called "singles" in the 1970's and 80's, and even into the 90's. Those were the glory days of singles ministry. But then as time passed, a "singles group" came to mean a room full of people over 30 (or 40, or 50) who are mostly divorced. That's not what churches thought they were getting into, and it's not nearly as glamorous as a room full of people in their 20's. So in this way, the shift toward young adult ministry might just be a shift back to the original intent of most of the singles ministries of decades past.

2) Singles are not valued highly enough to have resources dedicated to them. I've heard church leaders boast about how their churches are full of young families, children, teenagers, college students, and 20-somethings. But I've never heard a pastor say, "It's awesome to see how many single people over 40 God has brought into our fellowship." Granted, assigning lesser value to this demographic is probably not conscious or intentional, but it is often very real.

3) Church leaders are almost all married. This is not a bad thing, but it is a reason why many churches overlook ministry to singles. I can even sometimes see this tendency in myself. I can relate best to the life situations that I have experienced, and being single well into adulthood is not one of those.

4) Churches still don't usually know what to do with divorced people. It's much easier just to try to forget about the whole thing.

5) The word singles has taken on a meaning in our culture that does not translate well to a church setting. I actually had someone ask me not long ago if our singles ministry was kind of like Christian speed dating. I nearly laughed and then realized this person was serious.

6) Churches have come to believe the stereotypes about singles ministry. As I mentioned before, the term meat market often comes up.

I'm sure I could make a longer list if I took the time, but those are the big ones.

As churches have moved away from doing singles ministry, the need has only grown. A conservative estimate is that now 40% of the adults in the United States are single. And yet in our metro area of over 600,000 people, there are exactly two singles ministers. Admittedly, a church must be fairly large to employ a singles minister, but this is still sad.

So what do you think? Why is singles ministry no longer trendy? Are single adults worth the time and money it takes to reach them?

Fasting as Preparation for Future Suffering

2010-03-07T15:59:00.005-07:00

Lately I've been doing some deeper investigation into fasting. One of the things that I'm discovering is the connection between fasting and suffering.

A Christian should expect to suffer and should be prepared for suffering at all times. Contrary to some of today's popular teachings, this fact is all over the New Testament. Here are just three of the many passages that show us that a Christian life is one of suffering:

Philippians 3:7-8, "But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ."

1 Peter 2:20-21 "But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps."

Luke 9:23-24, "If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will save it."

I want to propose that fasting is a practical way for us to prepare ourselves spiritually for suffering that we will experience in the future.

First, let me note that when I use the term fasting, I mean intentionally abstaining from food for a period of time for the purpose of seeking God. I have heard and read some who say that there are other kinds of fasts, such as not watching television or not speaking, but I do not see such a "fast" ever mentioned in the Bible. There is value to abstaining from certain things besides just food, and a person who is fasting would be wise to do so. But if you are eating, you are not doing what the Bible calls fasting. Biblical fasting is seeking God by going without food. Obviously, there are some people who cannot fast for medical reasons, and I am not saying that they should. But for most Christians, fasting is not only an option but a discipline that Jesus indicated that he expects us to exercise, telling us that it is a means of storing up eternal rewards (see Matthew 6:16-18).

The point about food is important because food is necessary for life. Fasting means giving up something that you must have in order to live. Of course, we limit the amount of time that we fast so that our lives are not actually in danger, but it still hurts. After only a few hours of fasting, our bodies begin to alert us. We begin to suffer, and it does not stop until the fast is ended. It is a type of suffering that is unique. It is real suffering, yet it is temporary and does not harm us or anyone around us. It is difficult to think of anything else that could be described in that way.

This makes fasting an ideal training ground for us. It is more than just hunger pains. There is a purpose. We are filling ourselves with the Holy Spirit rather than with what we put into our bodies (Ephesians 5:18). We are affirming that it is the Word of God, not food, that gives us life (Deuteronomy 8:3). We are worshiping God while our belly cries out for us to worship it instead (Philippians 3:19). We are demonstrating that Christ is more valuable to us than what the world offers (Philippians 3:8). And we are physically denying ourselves for the sake of following Christ (Luke 9:23).

There will come a time in the future for all of us when we experience suffering that is beyond our control, and fasting before that time comes will help us endure it. Someone close to us will die, or we will contract a serious disease, or God will call us to be missionaries in a hostile country, and so on. When that time comes, those of us who fast will have a spiritual muscle that's already built up to help us say, "I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us," and, "In all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us" (Romans 8:18, 37).

I should mention that I have not found any explicit connection made in the Bible between fasting and preparing for future suffering. But I do think it is a valid point, especially in light of 1 Timothy 4:7, which says, "Discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness." Fasting is a discipline, and persevering through suffering is godly. Fasting is also a way to "put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes" (Ephesians 6:11). In other words, fasting gives us strength to withstand spiritual attacks, which include various forms of suffering. It is obviously not the only way to prepare for suffering, but it is near the top of the list together with Bible intake and prayer.

Fasting has many benefits and purposes, but I would especially encourage you to consider fasting with the goal of being like Christ in his sufferings, both now and in the future.

This guy actually reads my blog...

2010-03-01T13:41:00.004-07:00

That's you, Dave! My loyal reader.

And yes, I do plan to make a real post sometime soon.

Bad News for My Favorite Bible

2009-12-21T13:34:00.005-07:00

Since about two years ago, my favorite Bible has been the ESV Daily Reading Bible (which shall hereafter be referred to as ESVDRB). Here are it's pros and cons:

Pros: great translation; good reading plan (OT once, Psalms and NT twice in a year); laid out in normal Bible order (as opposed to most one-year Bibles that are laid out by calendar date); three ribbon bookmarks to keep your place in each section of the reading plan; convenient to carry; convenient to use in personal devotions, church, and teaching.

Cons: no concordance, cross references, or really anything but the bare text (this doesn't bother me since I've got enough resources elsewhere); terrible binding that falls apart every few months and has to be hot glued.

Over the weekend I emailed Crossway Books, who publishes the ESV, and asked whether there are any plans to make the ESVDRB available in leather so that I could put away the hot glue gun. Here's the response I got:

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for your interest in the ESV.

We do not have any immediate plans to publish the ESV Daily Reading Bible with a different cover. In fact, this edition will actually be going out of print. We do appreciate hearing from our customers and will note that you have mentioned that you would benefit from this particular format in a different binding.

We apologize for the inconvenience you have experienced. Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance in the future.

I assume the reason the ESVDRB is going out of print is because of poor sales, which I suspect has a lot to do with a rumor that caught on about it missing dates in the margins. I went through the whole thing, and this simply isn't true. So sad.

My advice to all of you who read this is to go and order your copy of the ESVDRB while you still can, and start saving up the $100 or so it will take to have someone bind it in leather after it falls apart. That's what I'll be doing.

Welcome Benjamin

2009-09-05T09:41:00.004-06:00

I doubt this is news to anyone who reads this blog, but Micah and I were surprised and very glad to welcome Benjamin Eager Wiginton to the world on Wednesday. He was a month early, which made his middle name (a family name) fitting. He was 6 lb 1 oz, and 19 inches. He is very healthy and should be going home with us later today.

I feel like I should have something profoundly moving and theological to say about him along the lines of the the heavenly Father's love for those of us who trust in Christ, who are His adopted children. I'm sure I'll be figuring out more about that in time, but right now I'm just overwhelmed by the joy of being his dad. I've not historically been one to enjoy close contact with babies, so the fact that I have so much love for him and feel so comfortable with him tells a story in itself.

For those of you who like pictures, here are some.

Misconceptions About Satan (Part 1)

2009-08-09T20:59:00.003-06:00

There are a lot of misconceptions about Satan among Christians. In this post I'll address some that portray Satan as bigger and stronger than he actually is. If you take the Bible as seriously as I do, then by then end of this list you will probably want to comment about the great deal of power that Satan does have, so in part 2 I'll talk about the misconceptions about Satan that go to the opposite extreme. Here we go...

Ten misconceptions about Satan that give him too much credit:

1. Satan is God's exact opposite.
Too often Christians think of Satan as being God's evil twin. This kind of dualistic thinking puts Satan on the same level as God and draws more from pagan influences than from the Bible (think yin-yang). Satan is not some sort of evil balance to God's goodness. Instead, Satan was created by God (originally as a good angel) and is nowhere close to being as powerful as God. There is no question of which one will be victorious in the end because it is not a fair fight. God is infinite, and Satan is finite.

2. Satan is everywhere.
Only God is present at all times in all places. Only God is always with you. Satan is bigger and faster than we are, but he can't be everywhere at once.

3. Satan knows everything.
Only God knows everything. Satan is good at figuring things out and is definitely smarter than I am, but he is not omniscient. If he knew everything (the future, etc.), he would have known it was a bad idea to rebel against God.

4. Satan can hear your thoughts.
There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that would lead us to think that Satan can read minds or hear people's thoughts. On the contrary, Solomon says to God in 1 Kings 8:39, "You alone know the hearts of all the sons of men." Satan might have a pretty good idea of what you're thinking by watching you and getting to know you (my wife is good at that, too), but he doesn't actually hear our thoughts.

5. Satan can plant a thought in your mind.
I hear this one used a lot in Christian circles as an excuse for hateful, lustful, or otherwise impure thoughts. Many Christians have bought into the Loony Tunes theology that the devil is always sitting on your left shoulder, whispering evil thoughts into your mind's ear. But if Satan can't read minds, he definitely can't control thoughts. Besides, Jesus taught clearly that impure thoughts are sinful in themselves. If Satan could plant those thoughts in our minds against our will, then Jesus couldn't have found us guilty of thinking them.

6. Satan's power on earth is unlimited.
There are places in the Bible that call Satan the "god of this world" and other similar titles. Many Christians have read too much into these titles and think that Satan has unlimited power, at least on earth. The most obvious place to see that this is not true is in the first chapter of Job, where Satan has to go and ask permission from God before he's allowed to test Job. Satan has no power at all beyond what God permits.

7. Satan is responsible for everything we consider to be bad.
I have heard people give the devil credit for causing everything from earthquakes to faulty sound systems. We shouldn't be so quick to say that he's behind everything we don't like. Anyone who has children knows that they don't always understand when something is meant for their good (curfews, vegetables, shots, etc.). Blaming every unpleasant situation on Satan ascribes near-sovereignty to Satan, and those who do this will undoubtedly end up labeling many of God's actions as demonic.

8. Satan can make you sin.
The devil did not make you do it. When we sin, we have chosen to do it ourselves and are completely responsible for it. Satan often presents us with temptations, but he is not capable of forcing us to give in. 1 Corinthians 10:13 says, "No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it."

9. Satan is the cause of every temptation.
The Bible does say that Satan offers us temptations, but it also talks about temptations that happen when Satan is not around: "But each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death" (James 1:14-15). Everyone since Adam and Eve, with the exception of Jesus, has been born with a sinful nature. We are quite good at providing our own temptations.

10. Satan can prevent God's plan from being carried out.
This is closely related to 6 and 7. Satan is frequently credited with having brought about circumstances that prevented Christians from accomplishing their ministry goals, and thus Satan is said to have gotten in the way of God's plan. For example, Satan gets the credit for bringing rain on the day a group was going to pass out tracts on the street, making the electricity go out during a worship service, making the Supreme Court outlaw prayer in schools, etc. The first problem with this is that we are claiming to know God's plan in advance. The second problem is that we are claiming that Satan's power is greater than God's. God is big, and God is in control.

That's all for now... check back soon for part 2.

Quote of the Day

2009-08-05T16:20:00.002-06:00

If you're one of the three people who have read this blog before, you know that sometimes I complain about people misusing Greek and Hebrew when studying or teaching the Bible. One of my pet peeves is when big points are made based solely on a study of some particular word in the original language. Today I ran into an excellent explanation of why this isn't a good idea in John Feinberg's book No One Like Him:

"How do we use Scripture to determine the meaning of each attribute [of God]? A typical method defines a divine attribute by appealing to the meaning of the biblical term that names the attribute. Hence, if we understand the etymology and basic 'dictionary meaning' of terms that speak of God as eternal, loving, wise, etc., we automatically know what the divine attribute is.

This strategy for defining the divine attributes is seductive (as well as very popular) but methodologically flawed. It confuses defining a term with defining a concept.

. . . In order to understand the concept a writer wants to communicate, we must understand his words as he uses them in a particular context. That means that we are not likely to ascertain any thought pattern (concept) associated with the word by looking at it in isolation from a specific sentence, and certainly not by looking at the root words from which it is derived."

Twitter and the Southern Baptist Convention

2009-06-24T10:06:00.003-06:00

The annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention is wrapping up today. I was not able to attend, but thanks to the internet I hardly feel like I've missed it. This year's meeting will probably be remembered most for Tuesday night's landslide victory in favor of appointing a "Great Commission Resurgence Task Force", which was essentially a vote to implement the GCR Statement. But the second most significant aspect of the convention seems to have been the rise of Twitter in alerting the world to every ugly detail of the proceedings.

This year everyone and their mother brought their Twitter-activated cell phones into the convention hall, and people watching the live internet feed signed up for Twitter accounts as well. As thousands of "tweets" (I hate that word) went out yesterday with the hash tag #SBC2009, the whole world was watching. Unfortunately, the founders of the SBC did not have Twitter in mind in 1845, and the meeting is no more twit-friendly today than it was then.

I should explain something about the Southern Baptist Convention to those of you who are unfamiliar. Unlike many denominations who are ruled from the top down by appointed priests or elders, the SBC is ruled from the bottom up by its churches. Each church in the denomination can send a maximum of ten messengers (essentially delegates) to the annual meeting, and these messengers are the ones who have the power to vote, introduce motions, etc. This year there were nearly 9,000 registered messengers. Because the power is in the hands of the messengers, the churches are in charge of the bureaucracy and not the other way around. This democratic structure is what allowed the SBC to reverse its drift toward liberalism 30 years ago while many other denominations could not be rescued. It is a beautiful thing in my opinion.

Part of the beauty of our Baptist democracy is freedom of speech, in that any messenger can introduce any motion that they wish. When you put out open mics for a group of 9,000 people, it's impossible to avoid hearing some very strange and embarrassing statements coming through the loud speakers. As far as I know, someone has said something crazy every year since 1845. Usually the crazy motions contain a technical flaw related to the rules of order and are thrown out, and even if they manage to go to a vote they get dismissed by the other messengers.

But when the democratic proceedings of the SBC hit Twitter yesterday, the world did not understand. The vast majority of the tweets had to do with the off-the-wall motions that were brought up during the open mic time. Many of those watching from outside got the impression that if something was said at a microphone, then surely it must be the voice of the denomination. In addition to Twitter, videos of the open mic times have been posted to YouTube and promoted on a number of blogs. Thanks to these user generated media, rumors are spreading all over the internet that the Southern Baptist Convention is going to boycott Pepsi, ban Mark Driscoll's books from Lifeway stores, do other terrible things to Mark Driscoll, ban all secular music, and start using only the King James Version of the Bible. All of these were made as motions by who-knows-who, but none will happen.

As the tweets went out from the convention, outsiders' responses ranged from cries of sadness by members of other denominations to cries of "I told you so" by liberal critics. What none of them understood was that everything was proceeding as usual, that the strange motions are individual opinions, and that the denomination as a whole is as strong as ever. The truth finally came to light Tuesday night when the very forward-looking GCR Task Force (see first paragraph) was approved by a vote of 95% to 5%. Once that motion was approved the Twitterverse got quiet very quickly, as it tends to do when there is a lack of things to criticize.

This year's convention will bring changes to the denomination. The GCR Task Force will likely recommend some significant changes, some fresh new leaders will start taking the reigns (David Platt is the most obvious), and some of the old leaders may even step down as a result of their opposition to the will of the messengers. But one needed change that I doubt anyone foresaw is a shift toward a style of meeting that does not lend itself to the huge misperceptions that were broadcast this year on Twitter. I do not have any ideas of how to accomplish this, and it might not be possible at all if we're to preserve our democratic structure. Either way, next year the SBC will have no choice but to acknowledge that Twitter has power to change the world's perceptions about issues much bigger than what a celebrity had for breakfast.

Top 10 Bad Bible Teachings

2009-05-06T09:36:00.002-06:00

I accidentally started thinking about this when I was writing one of those silly, narcissistic facebook notes where you answer questions about yourself. I answered a question about pet peeves, and now I can't stop answering that question.

These are ten of the most common errors in biblical interpretation that I hear taught in various places. All of these are taught with good intentions, and most even have truth somewhere in them. That's why they're common, but that's also why we have to be more careful. My hope in posting these errors is that some people who teach the Bible will read this and be driven to invest even more time and study in their preparation to teach.

Here's the list:

10. The practice of 'claiming' promises that are in the Bible
Some of the promises God makes in the Bible are intended for us and some are not. For example, I once heard someone 'claim' the promise of Joshua 1:3, "Every place on which the sole of your foot treads, I have given it to you." This was a promise made to Joshua and the Israelites, and I seriously doubt that God intended it to mean He would give land to every person who reads this verse. There are legitimate applications of this promise for Christians in that we will receive an eternal inheritance from God, but to use that verse to demand something from God in this life is irresponsible. Also, there are lots of promises in the Bible that none of us would ever want to claim. If you doubt this, go read Nahum 3:5-6.

9. Using a commandment from the Law of Moses as an ethical imperative
Huge portions of the New Testament are dedicated to the teaching that Jesus fulfilled the Law and that we are no longer bound by it. Yet, it is still common to hear someone quote a verse in Leviticus as proof that something they don't like is sinful. For example, it's common to hear someone quote Leviticus 19:28 as evidence that it's a sin to get a tattoo. There's just no way to get that kind of teaching to fit with what the New Testament says about the Law. From a Christian perspective, ethical imperatives can only come from the New Testament.

8. Dismissing a commandment from the Law of Moses as unimportant
On the flip side of #9, we have to remember that the entire Bible is still the Word of God. Just because the Law is not binding on followers of Christ doesn't mean it's unimportant. After all, why would the Son of God fulfill every word of an irrelevant document? Even when certain commands in the Old Testament are explicitly reversed by the New Testament, there are still principles in those verses that can teach us important truths about God an how He wants us to live. For example, many of the dietary laws of the Old Testament had to do with avoiding the pagan practices of the culture around them. If the Israelites weren't supposed to boil a goat in its mother's milk, then maybe we shouldn't behave the same way as the culture around us either.

7. Using Proverbs 29:18 to prove that "casting a vision" is important
Yes, it's important for leaders to have an idea of where they want to go in the future. That's true. What's not true is that you can prove that point by tossing around the line, "Where there is no vision the people perish" (KJV). It's funny to me that Christian leadership gurus who would never dare preach from the King James Version in their churches suddenly adore it when it comes to this verse. Check a modern translation and you'll find out why. The "vision" that the Bible is talking about has nothing to do with modern leadership principles. It's talking about the literal sort of vision that God would give to a prophet and use to reveal truth to His people. In other words, it's the Word of God that keeps us from perishing, not the vision-casting abilities of a pastor.

6. Using Philippians 4:13 to say we can literally do anything
The verse reads, "I can do all things through him who strengthens me." This is truly a great verse--in context. If you read the two verses that come before it you can see what Paul means by it. He has been through many hardships, and by the power of Christ he can endure them all. This shows us that by trusting Christ we can face any situation God brings into our lives. It does not mean that if you had just a little more faith in Jesus you could bench press an extra 20 pounds, or levitate, or make all your wildest dreams come true.

5. Drawing distinctions between the different Greek words for "love"
All of us who've been around Christian culture for a while have heard that there are several words for "love" in Greek and that each word refers to a specific kind of love. Usually the crowning moment of this lesson is that 'agape' is the kind of love God has for us and is the best love of all. I hate to be the one to burst the bubble, but this is just not true. Some of the Greek words that have made it into this teaching are never found in the Bible at all. The ones that are in the Bible are used interchangeably in a variety of contexts. In fact, there is one instance in the Septuagint (the ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament) when 'agape' actually means 'rape'. When you're trying to figure out what a Greek word for 'love' really means, the context of the verse is the best way to find out. Usually it just means love.

4. Using John 3:16 to say God loved the world "so much"
John 3:16 is certainly one of the greatest verses in the Bible about the astonishing love that God has shown in giving us His Son. But, the word "so" in that verse does not mean "so much". It would actually be better translated "thusly" or "in this way". John 3:16 is not about the amount of love that God has for the world but the way in which He shows that love. That doesn't mean God loves us any less than we've always thought, it just means that the verse isn't talking about the amount of love.

3. Using Revelation 3:20 to say that Jesus is knocking on the door of your heart
In this verse Jesus says, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock..." I think we can say from Scripture that the Lord legitimately offers a call to be saved to everyone who hears the gospel. But, this verse is not about that. This verse is addressed to a local church that has essentially shut Jesus out of their congregation. Jesus is knocking on the door of the church in this verse, not the door of someone's heart.

2. Taking Jeremiah 29:11 out of context
I know I'm messing with a lot of people's favorite verse here, but you need to know what it's really about if it's going to be your favorite verse. Here it is: "'For I know the plans I have for you,' declares the Lord, 'plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.'" This verse gets claimed pretty often in the fashion of #10 on this list. But before you claim it, read the verses and chapters that surround it. All of the false prophets are telling the people of Judah that everything is going to be fine, but Jeremiah is delivering an unpopular message from God that their nation will be destroyed and that they will become slaves in a foreign land. First of all, this verse is addressed only to the people of God, so it applies today only to people who know and trust God. Secondly, it is given as a message of hope as the people are about to be carried off into exile for 70 years. What it means is that even though God takes His people through some incredibily difficult times, He has a plan that is bigger and better than we understand.

1. Saying that the Great Commission really means "As you go"
The verse says, "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations..." (Matt. 28:19). The mistaken teaching is that if we knew Greek we'd know that it really means "as you go" instead of "go". I've written about this before, so I won't go into too much detail. The basic truth is that if you knew Greek you would find out that it still means "go". The Greek is a little weird, but I dare you to find a translation of the Bible that says "as you go". The reason you won't find one is that even in Greek it really is a command, not a passive suggestion. How are you going to reach all nations "as you go" anyway? Jesus' words tell us that we really should go out of our way to share the good news.

That's all. I hope this makes you want to study your Bible more.

What's the Point of Going to Heaven?

2009-04-08T19:14:00.002-06:00

I am more conservative than most guys my age. I like being a Southern Baptist, driving a Grand Marquis, and wearing sweaters. Even as a teenager I enjoyed old hymns more than the praise and worship sets at youth camp, which at the time usually made scratching “a back next to ya” a prerequisite to glorifying God. One of the popular songs during those years--which I have since come to appreciate--was I Could Sing of Your Love Forever. Often during this song the worship leaders would pause to tell us over the sound of gentle guitar strums that this was what we would one day be doing in heaven for all eternity. As they went on to repeat the chorus several more times, I secretly became a little less excited about heaven. “But hey,” I thought, “singing a really long praise song sure beats going to hell.”

I was glad when I later learned that eternity is not what the 1990’s worship leaders said it was. Singing will certainly be a part of what we do, but the Bible tells us that the eternal existence of believers will be a fully functional, multi-faceted life that’s lived in physically resurrected bodies inside a perfect city called New Jerusalem (Rev. 20-22). Personally, this sounds much better to me than a never-ending song service.

Still, the guys at camp did get the most important thing right, which is that the central focus of heaven is the presence and glory of God. Ever since Adam and Eve were banished from Eden, God began revealing His plan to bring us back into His presence. The signs were increasingly clear: Noah’s ark, Mt. Sinai, the tabernacle, the temple, the incarnation of Christ, and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit all point forward to a time when “the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God” (Rev. 21:3). In fact, Jesus’ definition of eternal life is, “that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent,” and, “to see my glory” (John 17:3, 24). Heaven may be more than singing, but it is all about worship.

The 17th century theologian John Owen wrote, “Many will say with confidence that they desire to be with Christ and to behold his glory. But when asked, they can give no reason for this desire, except that it would be better than going to hell.” Jesus is the point of having eternal life, not just a means to it. Without understanding this even people who consider themselves Christians are likely one day to hear Him say, “I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness” (Matt. 7:23). The way to eternal life is not just to know that heaven is good but to trust in and worship Christ as the reason for living eternally.

Is the Church Relevant?

2009-03-16T12:07:00.003-06:00

**A note of business: Lately I've been posting notes on Facebook rather than blogging since what I write is much more likely to get read there than here. This time I have double posted as an experiment to see whether anyone cares about this blog. If you want the blog to keep existing, make a comment so that I know someone reads it.**

Recently one of the students at our Thursday night College Bible Study submitted the discussion question, “Do you think the church is relevant in today’s culture?” This is a great question. How can an institution based on ideas that are thousands of years old be relevant to a culture that is increasingly bored with organized religion and obsessed with whatever is new? The ongoing debate about this issue has made relevant one of the biggest buzz words in American Christianity. But what does it truly mean to be relevant?

The world defines relevance in its own way. In the last two centuries or so the idea has arisen that whatever is newer is better. Our consistent progress in technology has led to the assumption that all changes in culture are also forms of progress. This results in constant pressure on churches to reflect whatever is the latest trend and to concentrate on whatever people are feeling “right now”. Ironically, churches that give in to this pressure often find themselves in an embarrassing situation years later when they are still basing their ministry on the trends of decades past and are unable to attract younger generations. Battles ensue, new trends replace old ones, and the cycle repeats.

The most defining element of any true church, however, is that its central message is the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is certainly not a new or trend-setting issue, nor do most people perceive this message as important to their lives. In fact, the Bible itself tells us plainly that the lost world around us will never think our message is relevant. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 1, “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing,” and, “we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.” But Paul also tells us in this same passage that even though the gospel is irrelevant in the eyes of the world, “to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” This is possible because “the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”

God has ordained the church to be the institution that preserves and preaches the gospel. Our message means the difference between eternal life and death for every human being. It is easily the most relevant issue of all time, but no one can grasp its relevance until they believe it and are born again. Although the world does not understand it, the church is relevant to everyone because the gospel is relevant to everyone. The church only becomes irrelevant when the gospel stops being its focus.

Go West, Young Man

2008-10-02T13:05:00.001-06:00

As of last night I am free to let everyone know that Micah and I are moving to Colorado in a few weeks. I've accepted a call from Vista Grande Baptist Church in Colorado Springs to become their Minister to Singles. As we make the transition I want to comment a bit about what this means.

The place we are leaving
We are walking away from a wonderful church, which is a hard thing to do. There is nothing about Sand Spring that makes us want to leave it. We have been constantly encouraged by the members, pastor, and staff. The greatest blessing has been the students we have worked with as we have seen so many of them go from unbelief to salvation to maturity. My goal all along has been to help them stand on Christ as their foundation. As I remove myself from the structure of their faith, I am praying that they will rest solidly on Him as the cornerstone and not be moved. I am also praying that they will understand the value of their church and remain dedicated to it during the time between leaders. I know that God has someone in mind to take over in my place, and there is untold potential for what can happen when that person comes.

The place where we are going
Micah and I have felt the Lord leading us out of the South for quite some time. We know that the Gospel is needed everywhere, but the needs are much greater outside the "Bible Belt". Despite being home to a number of large Christian organizations like Focus on the Family, Colorado Springs has a very different spiritual landscape than Kentucky. The Colorado Springs metro area has three times fewer churches per capita than were we live now and nine times fewer Baptist churches. Fewer than 20% of the people there have a church background. Also, there are more than 200,000 single adults in the area but only a handful of churches with ministries targeting them. Single adults are perhaps the most commonly neglected group of people in churches today, and the Lord has laid their needs heavily on our hearts.

Not only are we going to fertile ground for the Gospel, we are also getting to serve in a phenomenal church. In our two visits we have been extremely impressed with the pastor, the staff, the lay leaders, and the members. We can tell that Vista Grande is a church that loves the Lord with heart, soul, mind, and strength. We couldn't be more excited to get to be a part of what God is doing there.

We are confident of the Lord's leading as we go. Whether you are someone we are having to say goodbye to, someone that we will soon serve alongside, or someone else, I hope that you will join us in praying for both of these churches and communities.

A Youth Minister's Take on Bristol Palin

2008-09-02T20:18:00.001-06:00

Sometime yesterday in the middle of a hurricane most of us heard the news about Bristol Palin, daughter of John McCain's VP pick Sarah Palin. The picture on the left is of Bristol holding her baby brother Trig. Bristol, who is 17 years old, is now five months pregnant. Some people feel that this is a disgrace to the Palin family. I disagree.

The sad truth is that teen pregnancy in America is not rare at all. We are living in a culture that glamorizes sexual immorality, and no one is more drawn to glamorous things than teenagers. Teenagers of all races and religious backgrounds are giving in to temptation and finding themselves with unplanned pregnancies.

The even sadder truth, however, is that only the workers at abortion clinics understand just how common teen pregnancies really are. The option of abortion is an attractive one to these girls and their families. All they have to do is end the pregnancy and forget anything ever happened. No shame, no gossip, no responsibility. That is why we never learn about the majority of teen pregnancies. This is true even in churches. I heard someone say that the doors of abortion clinics are kept open by Baptist deacons who take their daughters across state lines under the cover of night. This is more true than we realize.

Knowing the horrific truth about the unborn children who are killed every day to preserve their familys' pride and comfort, I can't help but to respect young women like Bristol Palin who decide to grant life to their sons and daughters. This is not to say that I condone the behavior that got Bristol into this situation in the first place, but I'm sure she has already shed enough tears over what has happened that she does not need to hear a lecture from someone like me at this point. From the perspective that every life is precious in the eyes of God and in light of the grim reality of the decision that most teen mothers make, I rejoice with the Palins as they welcome a new child to their family.

Use Your Words!

2008-08-13T09:25:00.004-06:00

I can't remember where I was a few weeks ago when I got this little card. I think it was handed to me along with my receipt at a Christian bookstore. Here's what it looks like:

When I saw it, my first inclination was to scream, but that would not have been appropriate. Instead I smirked like I was better than everyone around me, but then I realized that was not appropriate either. So instead I carried it home with absolutely no expression on my face (I might have coughed--I'm not sure), scanned it into the computer, and waited a long time to write something about it under the pseudonym of Boring Dan.

There are two big problems with what is written on this card. The first is the main quote from Francis of Assisi. It is one of the most popular quotes from Christian history, but it has a serious flaw. Part of the message of this quote is good, which is that we should live out our faith through our actions toward other people. The implication, though, is that it is usually not necessary to use words to preach the gospel. But what is the gospel? By definition it is "good news". How does one learn good news if not through words?

Suppose that all of the violence ended in Iraq, that I did not know about it, and that someone wanted me to know this good news. If they hugged me and smiled, I would not know why. If they brought me to a gas station where the prices had fallen dramatically, I would not know why they had fallen. If they invited me to a party where everyone in the room was celebrating the good news but never brought it up, I would not understand the celebration. They only way I would ever get the message is through words that told it, whether written or spoken. In the same way, the only way anyone can ever comprehend the good news of God's grace is through words. It is always necessary to use words.

The Bible demonstrates this truth beautifully. First of all, there is the fact that the Bible itself is a book of words. Apart from the words of the Bible we might have a vague understanding of God's existence as Creator, but we would never truly know Him. The words of the Bible also tell us explicitly that no one can come to a saving knowledge of God apart from the gospel being given to them through human language. Read this passage from the tenth chapter of Romans, which makes a far better case than I ever could about how necessary words are:

For, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!" But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our message?" Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.

Words are more important than we realize. Jesus is called the Word of God; it was with words that God created the universe out of nothing; God made humans in His image, which is defined in part by the spoken language that sets us apart from all other creatures on earth; God revealed himself for thousands of years through prophets who spoke His words, and it is through a book of these words that He continues to reveal Himself today; Jesus said that "by your words you will be justified and by your words you will be condemned;" and the passage above tells us that it is only through hearing a message of words that sinners like me can have any hope for eternal life. If you are a believer in Jesus as your Savior, I don't need to go any further in proving this point about words than to ask you to consider how you came to believe. No matter what other circumstances were involved, you believed because you heard (or read) words that explained who Jesus is and what He has done for us.

The second big problem with this card is that the word words is crossed out and replaced with a list of various media as though these could actually replace words in the telling of the gospel. Granted, some of these media (chat rooms, blogs, messages, vlogs, ...) are legitimate ways that words could be used to tell the gospel. But how are art and photographs, for example, going to bring someone to faith in Jesus? The answer is that they are not. Perhaps they could play a role of softening the emotions in order that someone would go on to believe the verbal message of the gospel, but without the verbal message they are useless. The same is true for music, videos, and events. If someone understands the gospel through those media it will be because of the words they contain and not because of the media themselves.

I would even go as far as to say that the new trend of emphasizing visual media in Christianity borders on idolatry. An idol is essentially something that can be seen that is honored above or alongside our God, who is unseen. Nearly every time I go to a youth ministry conference or read a recent book on church ministry I'm told that the new generation is a visual generation who cannot adequately understand God apart from visual imagery. To me this seems a little too much like what happened when the Israelites had just come out of Egypt. They knew that a great God had brought them out of Egypt, and they had grown up in a culture of visible gods, so they decided to try to represent God visibly. They fashioned a golden calf and bowed down to it and proclaimed that this was the God who had brought them out of Egypt. God's response to this was not, "Thank you for worshiping me in a way that helps make it so real to you." Instead, He was so angry that He nearly destroyed them on the spot.

Please don't misunderstand me. I don't have a problem with the existence of Christian visual media. I even make my own videos from time to time to help illustrate biblical principles. What I do have a problem with is when worship centers on the visual rather than the verbal and when the spoken gospel message is clouded over by visual media and other distractions. I admit that I am very impressed by the technology and showmanship that I have seen at many worship services, but I'm sure the Israelites were even more impressed by a beautifully crafted calf made of pure, shimmering gold.

We worship a God who is greater than anything this world has to offer, yet we have never seen Him. That's why we are to set our minds "on the things that are above, not on things that are on earth," and why "we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen." Just as Jesus said to Thomas, who had doubted that Jesus had been raised from the dead, "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." It is for this reason that we are told to "walk by faith, not by sight." And where does this faith come from? Art? Videos? Kind deeds done by strangers? No. Instead, "Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ."

UPDATE: As it turns out, the theme of John Piper's Desiring God Conference next month will be The Power of Words and the Wonder of God. It looks like it will be along the same lines as what I've written here, except much better. I probably won't get to go.

The Alcohol Problem

2008-07-04T11:38:00.007-06:00

I have put off writing this entry for a while because I have good friends who will undoubtedly disagree with me. I do not want to damage those friendships. That is not my goal. My goal is to get these friends and other Christians who drink alcohol to consider some reasons why it may be best to abstain. Much of this is borrowed from Danny Akin, whose article can be downloaded here. Here is my list of reasons why I believe it is best for today's Christians to completely avoid alcoholic beverages:

1. Drinking alcohol sets an example that could lead other people and their families into terrible suffering. I'm sure you know someone whose life has been torn apart by alcoholism, whether the addiction was their own or someone else's. We all know people who have lost loved ones to drunk drivers or whose marriages have ended because of alcoholism. When Christians drink alcohol, they are sending a message that could do more than just "hurt their witness" (although that is also a strong possibility). Even if you are somehow strong enough to drink in moderation, most of those who see you drinking are not that strong. Your consumption of alcohol as a Christian sends a message to those around you that drinking is acceptable, and those people will probably not understand the nuances of your opinions on moderation. Your example could unintentionally lead to alcoholism, broken homes, and even to the death of the innocent. In this respect, abstaining from alcohol is a matter of Christian love and social responsibility.

2. Every drink of alcohol carries with it the risk of losing one's sobriety. All of us have probably seen someone become drunk, and we all know that the person who is drinking is almost never aware of quite how drunk they are. When someone thinks they are fine, you can tell they are a little bit off. When they think they are "buzzed", you know they are drunk. When they admit they are drunk, it is well beyond the point of no return. Why should Christians who claim to drink in "moderation" think that they are exempt from this? I have personally witnessed multiple Christians getting drunk and even ending up with hangovers when they started with the intention of moderation. The Bible not only condemns drunkenness, but it commands us to be sober-minded. Does the stuff really taste good enough to risk falling into sin so easily?

3. There is reliable documentation that the tamest alcoholic beverages of today are far more potent than the wine that Jesus drank. Wine was usually watered down intentionally in biblical times in order to make it last longer. A popular formula was three parts water to one part wine. The goal was not to have a great tasting wine but a long lasting, sanitary beverage. Proverbs 23:31 even gives a warning about undiluted wine: "Do not gaze at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup, when it goes down smoothly." What we have today is much more like what the Bible calls "strong drink," a beverage which Jesus did not drink. It took a great deal of time and effort to get drunk on wine in those days, but getting drunk on strong drink was fast and easy (like it is today).

4. Modern sanitation makes the drinking of alcohol unnesessary. Many Christians who support the comsumption of alcohol like to point to 1 Timothy 5:23, where Paul says, "Stop drinking only water, and use a little wine..." However, they often neglect the rest of the sentence: "because of your stomach and your frequent illness." In biblical times every drink of water carried with it the risk of disease, so it was helpful to take an occasional drink of aclohol to help kill stomach viruses. Today we do not have this problem, so we have no need to drink alcohol.

I will stop there for now, but I encourage you to read Dr. Akin's article, where he gives several more great biblical reasons to abstain.

I have no doubt that many people who read this will quckly label me a legalist, but I think that is just a knee-jerk reaction. Examine what I have written carefully and tell me whether I have declared all consumption of any sort of alcohol to be sinful. I cannot do that without accusing my Lord and Savior of sin. However, I do firmly believe that in today's world of widespread sanitation and easy access to potent beverages the Christian principles of wisdom, sober-mindedness, and love for our neighbor should lead us to total alcohol abstinence.

2008-04-21T10:57:00.000-06:00

I went to see Ben Stein's new movie Expelled on Friday. It is a documentary, but I can say with certainty that you will not find it boring because none of the nearly twenty high school and junior high kids I took with me did. Stein interviews most all of the major players on both sides of the Darwinism / ID debate and exposes some frightening truths.

The main thrust of the movie is that the "Big Science" establishment has been severely and unjustly punishing free thinkers who dare to question Darwinian theory, labeling them as creationists, religious fanatics, and even terrorists, regardless of their backgrounds. Stein has an excellent grasp on the philosophy of science, which truly is the issue in this case more than the science itself. Stein does not attempt to prove that Intelligent Design is correct but to expose the disturbing level of hypocrisy and censorship that exists in the Darwinian establishment.

He also prods the Darwinists enough that some of them--including Richard Dawkins--make some unexpected statements about the possibility of intelligence in biological design and the philosophical implications of Darwinian theory. One of the most shocking moments in the film is an interview with a caretaker at one of the historical sites of the holocaust . . . but I don't want to give away too much. I would recommend this movie to anyone, but especially to those who are concerned with issues of social justice, free speech, and scientific inquiry.

Humble Advice for Church Seekers

2008-03-29T18:46:00.002-06:00

Not long ago Micah and I had a conversation with a young couple (about our age) who were having trouble deciding on a church to join. Their problems had to do partly with doctrine and partly with people, which is not uncommon. Since so many Christians find themselves in this situation, I'm offering some advice to anyone who may need help picking a church. I should preface this by saying that I think Christians should only change churches when they move to a new community, when their current church ceases to preach the gospel, or in a circumstance so extreme that they would not be ashamed to stand before the judgment seat of Christ and explain why they left. Having said that, here are ten things to consider when you must decide where to join:

1. Give up your dream of a perfect church with perfect people and decide that you will commit to a local church no matter what. Churches are made up of real people, and those people do not
usually end up being everything you want them to be. They get things wrong, they plan bad programs, they make hurtful comments, and they get on your nerves. It is God's desire that you look past these things, love the people as Christ loves them, and make a commitment for the long term. Church seekers who consider their options, throw their hands up in the air, and decide to "have church" at home with their families on Sundays are in blatant disobedience to Christ. He commanded us to love one another, and the local church is primary setting for that love. Moreover, 1 John 2:19 calls into question whether someone who abandons the church can be considered a Christian at all. Before you make up your mind on a particular church, you must make up your mind that you will make a long-term commitment to a church with flaws.

2. Find a church that preaches the true gospel. This is not only important but is the difference between joining a true church or a false church. Paul alerted the churches of Galatia in the first century that false gospels had begun to spread, and today there are more than ever before. The true gospel, he said, is the message that eternal justification comes only through faith in Jesus Christ. You need to join a church that preaches the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the literal bodily resurrection of Christ, the reality of heaven and hell, and that salvation is by faith alone--not by good works, political action, or anything else. This is a non-negotiable.

3. Make sure the practices of the church accord with your view of God's commands in Scripture. There are some differences of opinion among true, gospel-proclaiming churches about how church should be done, which is why most denominations exist. For example, you cannot have a church that both baptizes babies and does not baptize babies. Personally, I think it would be most obedient to God for every Christian to be part of a church whose practices were Baptist in form, even if the word "Baptist" is not on the sign. You need to search the Scriptures for yourself and decide what you think about baptism, the Lord's Supper, charismatic gifts, and church government, then join a church whose views match yours. In some very rare situations a Christian might live in an area where the only church that preaches the true gospel is one that has the wrong view on baptism or another church practice. Only in this extreme circumstance would I suggest that someone is right to join such a church.

4. Evaluate your beliefs on other issues and be a little flexible. All issues of Christian doctrine are important. Some ought to be make-or-break issues when finding a church (like points 2 and 3), but some should not. If you feel strongly about some particular issue, then it is best to find a church whose views match yours. However, if you have strong opinions about more than two or three of these issues, then you will probably never find a church that matches all of your views. If that describes you, then you need to be a little flexible, understand that you can still have fellowship with Christians who disagree on secondary matters, and join a church. I once knew a family who hadn't attended church together in a decade because there were no churches in their community that only used the King James Version of the Bible. You are just as foolish if your views on election, dispensationalism, or eschatology prevent you from finding a church home.

5. Don't be an elitist. Way, way too many people compromise their beliefs so that they can join a church that's more sophisticated than their parents' church. If this is you, you need to turn off the computer, get on your knees, and repent immediately. Often the churches that are most faithful to God are the ones with the least educated people and the most reinforcements of Christian stereotypes. In fact, God planned it that way. Here is how Paul explained it to the church in Corinth: "Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him."

6. Pay attention to the sincerity of the people. Many Christians make the mistake of joining a church based on how similar they are to the people in that church. It's much better to consider how sincerely the people desire to do the will of God. This will be evidenced in their friendliness, their attitude toward evangelism and missions, their attentiveness during worship services, how well they treat their pastor and other staff, and their conversations. The people may not be smart, attractive, wealthy, young, or the same race as you, but none of those things matters much if they are sincerely seeking the Lord. Often a good indicator of a church's faithfulness and sincerity is the number of new converts who are there, but this is not always the case.

7. Join a church where the pastor preaches the Bible. Notice that I didn't say "from the Bible". There is a big difference between getting a steady diet of God's Word and getting a steady diet of the pastor's opinions with Bible verses thrown in. Every preacher has to do a sermon on a topic every once in a while, but constant topical sermons demonstrate a lack of confidence in the sufficiency of God's Word.

8. Consider how you could serve the church. Jesus said that he came not to be served but to serve. We are to do the same.

9. Examine the church's programs and budget. I put this point low on the list on purpose, but it's still something to consider. Looking at the church's programs helps you figure out how you can serve, what kinds of opportunities are available, what your children will be doing (even if you don't have them yet), and how busy you will be. The budget shows you where the church's priorities are. If maintenance costs on the pipe organ exceed missions giving, or if the pastor can barely survive on his salary while the church builds a gym, something may be wrong.

10. Pray a lot, go back and read the first three points, and make up your mind. Find a church that proclaims the truth and just join it. Don't be a pansy.

The Future and Freedom

2008-02-11T11:50:00.001-07:00

Al Mohler is one of many Christian thinkers that I greatly respect, and I couldn't help but to quote this paragraph from his blog. It very succinctly sums up a topic I've been pondering for a while and briefly mentions another topic of interest to me:

"Western liberal thought has long been shaped by the myth of inevitable progress. This is inevitably fueled by a legitimate celebration of developments ranging from democracy to air conditioning and antibiotics. There are also legitimate grounds for celebrating moral progress on fronts including slavery, racism, and other issues. The liberal mistake is to assume that this means that all moral change is progress. This mistake is accompanied by an assumption that moral progress always means the expansion of individual autonomy."

I would only adjust this idea to be applied beyond just liberal thought. I think the delusion of the superiority of the future has permeated virtually all areas of thought in the West. Just think of the way that the words yesterday, today, and tomorrow are used in political speeches. It doesn't make much difference whether you're listening to a Democrat or a Republican; yesterday was a time of backward thinking and flawed systems, today is better but needs improvement, and tomorrow promises the perfect harmony of all of our ideals. Or, think of how the word primitive has taken on an exclusively derogatory tone in our age of supposed progress. There was a time when institutions sought eagerly to be primitive in the positive sense of regaining the forms and principles of their founding (e.g. the Primitive Baptists, whom I don't think got everything right but do have a great name). Somewhere in the wake of the industrial revolution we in the West observed that technology was making remarkable progress over time, but we mistakenly concluded that new ideas will always bring similar progress to society over time. It was this sort of "progressive" Western thinking that brought about the two world wars and the holocaust. Shouldn't we have learned something there? The Nazi party doesn't have to be involved for popular new ideas to lead to degradation.

Another topic Mohler mentioned was the similarly blind assumption that individual freedom is always good. Often Christians follow the thinking of the majority in this respect as well, but we of all people should know better. We know that we are completely dependent on God to sustain us, and that our pursuit of autonomy from Him is what led us into the sin and death from which we needed salvation in the first place. Also, God has established the church as the place where we are to grow and improve not as autonomous individuals but as parts of the community that is called the body of Christ. Even God Himself exists as three-in-one, with the Son in perfect submission to the Father, and with the Spirit in perfect submission to the Father and the Son.

Most parents know that small children are better off not exercising autonomous free will. Otherwise they would let them run across busy streets, play with matches, and drink antifreeze. Yet for some reason we think there is a magical age when we are suddenly better off to do whatever we want and to learn from our mistakes. That is foolish and destructive.

And to chase a rabbit, I think our inflated opinion of individual autonomy has led to most Christians to a flawed solution to theological problem of evil. It goes something like this: "God allowed evil to enter the world because He loved us so much that He gave us free will, and we used our free will for evil instead of good." That doesn't make much sense to me because I don't understand how free will could have so much inherent value as to be worth the eternal condemnation of billions of people. There is another solution to the problem of evil that I think works much better than this one, but I will save it for another time.

The point is that there are two faulty assumptions in popular Western thought: that new ideas will always lead to progress over time, and that more individual freedom is always better than less individual freedom. Of course some new ideas are good and some forms of freedom are good, but Christians need to aware and skeptical of the sweeping assumptions of the world around us.

Go Read This

2008-02-05T18:30:00.000-07:00

My good friend and former college roommate David Roach covered the New Baptist Covenant Celebration last week for Baptist Press. For those who don't know, the NBCC was a joint meeting of most of America's more liberal-leaning Baptist denominations that featured speeches by Jimmy Carter, John Grisham, and Bill Clinton. After it was over David wrote an excellent editorial about why it is not inappropriate or unloving for Christian groups with different core values not to cooperate with each other. Go read it here.

Why I Love the Southern Baptist Convention

2008-01-17T12:03:00.000-07:00

I don’t know of a time when the Southern Baptist Convention has ever been popular among the general public. Sadly, it has also been verbally abused lately by a number of young ministers within it, most of whom are trying to be “relevant” as far as I can tell. As a twenty-something blogger, recent SBC seminary graduate, and SBC church staff member, I fit the demographic of these attackers perfectly. Instead of following in my peers’ footsteps, I would like to explain what I most love about the Southern Baptist Convention. These points are intended to help those who are less informed gain appreciation for the SBC, not to bring anything new to the table for insiders.

1. Its doctrinal integrity and the Baptist Faith and Message
The main reason I choose to identify myself as a Southern Baptist is because of our denomination’s commitment to faithfully follow what God has revealed to us in the Bible. The vast majority of churches in the SBC have always held firmly to the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, and by His grace the denomination itself has shifted back to its biblical roots in recent decades. Whereas most large Protestant denominations are taking steps away from biblical truth, the SBC has become an organization that is thoroughly committed to it. The SBC’s statement of faith, the Baptist Faith and Message, is an excellent summary of this truth. It not only contains biblical descriptions of basic doctrines such as the nature of God and salvation, but it also matches what I believe to be the Bible’s teachings concerning everything from the roles God has given to men and women to the proper mode of baptism. I am well assured that within the SBC I will find faithful, like-minded followers of Christ acting as denominational leaders, missionaries, professors, pastors, and regular folks sitting in the pews.

2. Its commitment to missions and evangelism
Ever since the first meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1845, missions and evangelism have been top priorities. The Foreign Mission Board (now the International Mission Board) was established right away to help Baptist churches spread the gospel abroad, and a domestic missions agency (now called the North American Mission Board) came soon afterward to see souls saved and new churches planted across the United States. If you have attended an annual meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention recently you know that this trend continues today. We carry out denominational business because it is necessary, but at these meetings it is clear that we are a gospel-minded people who want to see God glorified in real lives being transformed through faith in Christ.

3. Its service to local churches
The Southern Baptist Convention has always existed to serve local churches. Considering the roles of the SBC’s agencies makes this apparent. The mission boards enable churches to pool their resources to send missionaries so that even small churches that could never fund their own missionaries can do their part. The seminaries train pastors for the local churches. LifeWay (a.k.a. the Sunday School Board) provides a huge range of services for local churches, from Bible study materials to youth camps to church architecture. The list goes on and on. The SBC does not exist to promote itself but to support local churches in making disciples of all nations.

4. The autonomy of its local churches
The Southern Baptist Convention’s churches are completely self-governing. This is a foreign concept to some Christians since many denominations have a top-down approach in which denominational leaders issue orders that their churches must follow. In the SBC, each individual church makes its own orders. Even when the SBC makes resolutions and recommendations to churches, the final decision on all church matters falls in the hands of the congregations themselves. The most drastic thing that the SBC can do to a church is to ask it not to associate itself with the denomination any longer. Those of us who have studied church polity know that this kind of structure is called congregational church government and is not limited only to the SBC. However, the SBC is one of very few denominations that is consistent on this point. SBC churches are a part of the denomination because they have chosen to be, not because of any control by a hierarchical structure.

5. Accountability to its local churches
Not only are SBC churches self-governing but they actually govern the denomination itself. The SBC was established with a democratic process built in that makes its agencies and leaders accountable to local churches. Instead of a top-down system, the SBC is controlled from the bottom up. It was this characteristic of the denomination that allowed a drastic change in leadership and doctrinal direction to take place from 1979 to 1993. By that time the seminaries and bureaucrats of the SBC had gone the direction that most denominations do by shifting away from belief in the Bible as the inerrant Word of God—a belief that the SBC had been founded upon 134 years earlier. When the local churches were made aware that the SBC’s leadership did not share their core beliefs, they protested with their votes at the annual meetings. For the first time in history a grassroots movement of faithful church members overruled the bureaucracy and caused a major Christian denomination to undergo a rapid shift back toward biblical truth. I do not know of any other denomination in which this could happen.

6. The Cooperative Program
The Southern Baptist Convention has a system of receiving funds from churches whereby all tithing members of SBC churches can be assured that their money will help to send missionaries and serve a number of other worthy Christian causes. This system is called the Cooperative Program. Rather than each arm of the SBC having to raise all of its own money, the CP allows contributions from churches to be pooled and distributed according to need. This ensures that our foreign and domestic missions efforts remain well-funded, that social justice is upheld in various ways, that our seminaries can keep tuition low, that Christian causes can be fought for in the American legal system, and much more.

7. Its present leadership
Most of the attacks on the Southern Baptist Convention come in the form of insults and accusations against specific denominational leaders. The media love to attack them for their belief in biblical doctrines and paint them as narrow-minded. Some young SBC pastors love to attack them for no apparent reason, which I suppose is based on my generation’s growing disrespect for authority. Personally, I have nothing but respect for these men. I admit that I don’t know most of them personally, but those whom I do know are men of integrity with a dedication to Christ that I rarely encounter. Our denomination’s leaders serve in their roles because of their willingness to take up their cross daily and follow Him, not because they have a desire to climb a ladder. These are men who have healthy private devotional lives, who do personal evangelism regularly, and who lead their families faithfully in the ways of the Lord. Moreover, I have seen in them a willingness to recognize problems in themselves and in the denomination and to make appropriate changes. These men have the kingdom of heaven on their minds and not the things of this world, and I am glad they are there to provide examples to us of what it looks like to live godly in Christ Jesus.

How Not to Read the Great Commission

2007-12-04T12:33:00.000-07:00

I guess all of us develop pet peeves in our area of specialty, whatever that area may be. Mine is when people use bad Greek to misinterpret Scripture, especially the Great Commission. I encountered my pet peeve the other day as I was preparing a Sunday School lesson for junior high students and found this in the material:

"Most of us are familiar with the Great Commission [Matt. 28:18-20] . . . Did you know that the beginning of the command is best translated from the Greek to the English to read, 'As you go, make disciples'? . . . Sometimes we read it to mean go and take a mission trip somewhere far away . . . This was not the meaning Jesus was trying to teach. Jesus was trying to teach us that wherever life takes us (and for you it just happens to include your school campus), we are to make disciples."

One problem is that he is wrong about the Greek. He has probably taken a class in Greek before, which allowed him to see that the word for "go" is a participle, which would in ordinary circumstances mean "as you go." What he didn't take into account is that the participle is part of a very specific grammatical construction that Matthew always and without exception uses to make the participle into a direct command. Thankfully, the translators of your Bible did know about this, which is why they translated it as "Go". I will personally write you a check for $20 if you own a print Bible that translates it "as you go."

The bigger problem is that this is a place where getting it right really matters. If Jesus meant, "As you go," then Christians don't really have to worry about going out of our way to tell anyone the Good News of Christ; we just need to tell people if they happen to cross paths with us (which, of course, is also true since our own nation is included in "all nations"). But as it truly is written we have a responsibility to go places where we usually would not go so that we can fulfill the specific purpose of making disciples. After all, we all agree that Jesus said "make disciples of all nations". Which one of us is going to just happen to stumble across an isolated tribe in the rain forest as we go about our daily business?

Here are some rules when you hear someone talk about Greek or Hebrew in the Bible:
1. Know their credentials. Just because someone brings up Greek doesn't mean they know a lot about it.
2. If a preacher or teacher uses Greek or Hebrew to bring a fuller meaning to the passage, he might be right. If he uses Greek or Hebrew to bring a different meaning to the passage, he is probably wrong.
3. You should buy several English Bible translations if you don't have them already. (Notice I said "translations", not "paraphrases"; you don't need The Message.) If you don't know Greek or Hebrew, the best way to get closer to the original meaning is to compare different translations to each other. If a preacher or a commentary writer translates a verse in a way that none of your English Bibles' translators did, trust your Bible.

Thanks for reading my rant. I hope it was at least a little bit helpful.

Happy Reformation Day

2007-10-31T07:19:00.001-06:00

490 years ago today Martin Luther kicked off the Protestant Reformation when he mailed his 95 Theses to several leaders of the Roman Catholic Church and posted a copy on the door of the Schlosskirche in Wittenburg. Here are a few of the theses for your reading pleasure:

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

What I've been doing since the last post...

2007-09-07T12:35:00.000-06:00

Wednesday night we had the grand opening of the new youth room at church. Here are some pictures to help you get a feel for what kind of a project this was...

Here are some shots of what the area we were working with looked like before we tore out walls and ceilings:

And here is the attic space that was above the area. This space used to be the youth room (circa 1970-2002?), until the church learned that it was against fire codes for anyone ever to set foot up there:

Here is some wall tearing and ceiling raising, which was done in late May by a really great group of volunteers from Franklinton, Louisiana:

After the volunteers left, the summer was spent with waves of hired workers coming in to do heating and air conditioning, plumbing, wiring, drywall, paint, carpet, etc...

Here is what it looked like last week:

And here's what it looked like this week as we worked straight through Labor Day and meal times to make our deadline:

That last picture is our contractor and his sidekick... they really did work hard, I promise.

And finally, here is last night's grand opening, which was also the premier of our newly revamped Wednesday night youth worship service:

I didn't do my own count, but I'm told that we had 61 kids and 15 adults there for a total of 76. That's more than double what we had been averaging on Wednesdays, which I think is pretty cool. I guess that's to be expected with all the hype surrounding the grand opening, but based on the feedback I got last night I feel pretty confident that our numbers will stay stronger than they were before.

Hooray for a God who continually gives us far more than we deserve, and hooray for an old, traditional, country church that is willing to pour its resources into reaching teenagers with the Gospel.

The Trinity in the Old Testament

2007-05-17T11:11:00.000-06:00

As a Christian I believe that God has been a Trinity (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, three-in-one) since eternity past, which means that He was a Trinity in the time of the Old Testament as well as in the New Testament. There are many examples of this fact and many volumes written on the topic. Micah and I are in the process of reading through the Bible together, and a few days ago we ran across a chapter in Judges with a fairly obvious example of God manifested as a Trinity that neither of us had ever noticed before. In Judges 13 the Angel of Yahweh (translated LORD in all-caps in most English Bibles) comes to Manoah and his wife to announce that the woman's barren womb will be opened and that she will give birth to Samson. After the couple speaks with the Angel of Yahweh he ascends into heaven in the flame of a burnt offering that they present to Yahweh. Here is the passage that follows that event (Judges 13:21-25, ESV):

21The angel of the LORD appeared no more to Manoah and to his wife. Then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the LORD. 22And Manoah said to his wife, "We shall surely die, for we have seen God." 23But his wife said to him, "If the LORD had meant to kill us, he would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering at our hands, or shown us all these things, or now announced to us such things as these." 24And the woman bore a son and called his name Samson. And the young man grew, and the LORD blessed him. 25And the Spirit of the LORD began to stir him in Mahaneh-dan, between Zorah and Eshtaol.

In case you didn't catch it (like I didn't all the times when I read this before), here's how the Trinity is present:
1. I believe Manoah when he says that he and his wife "have seen God." They have seen a person that is God Himself manifest before humans in an earthly setting. This is Jesus Christ. In fact, most--and arguably all--of the appearances of someone called "the Angel of Yahweh" in the Old Testament are appearances of Jesus. Again, there are volumes written on this subject.
2. Clearly God the Father is also present. He sends the Angel of Yahweh, he accepts the burnt offering and grain offering as Yahweh, He exercises providence over the lives of Manoah and his wife to bring about the birth of Samson, and He blesses Samson.
3. The Spirit of Yahweh in v. 25 is (obviously) God the Holy Spirit, who comes to stir the heart of Samson.

This is nothing new or groundbreaking, but I found it too good not to share. Now go and worship the triune God of the Bible.

Emir Caner on God vs. Allah

2007-04-24T07:08:00.000-06:00

Here is a really great article related to my post from back in November about defining whether or not someone believes in the true God or a false god. Emir Caner is a former Muslim, so he speaks mostly to the issue of God vs. Allah. Those who have encountered it will also pick up on the fact that he is subtly attacking the "camel method" of evangelizing Muslims that has become popular on the mission field, in which Christians call God "Allah" and use the Koran as a primary source to try to convince followers of Mohamed to honor Jesus. I have seen the Camel method in action first-hand on the mission field, and in my opinion someone like Caner needs to attack it outright and quit beating around the bush. I'll write about that some other time, though (probably). For now, go read Caner's article. Also keep in mind that he wrote this for a Southern Baptist publication, so he talks a lot about Southern Baptists.

2007-04-11T06:42:00.000-06:00

I hope you don't mind reflecting on Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection even though I am a few days late for Easter. Here is a music video of a song about Jesus' last hours by a Dallas indie band called Steamboat. This was my favorite song sometime around the summer of 2001, I think.

A Short Review of a Short Book

2007-03-20T12:05:00.000-06:00

I had never heard of Dan Lucarini's book Why I left the Contemporary Christian Music Movement until I got it as a Christmas present a few months ago. From the title and the cover I had thought it would be a tale of the evils of the money-hungry Christian music business told from the perspective of a former CCM band member. The subtitle should have clued me in a little better, though: Confessions of a Former Worship Leader. This book is a weapon of the worship wars that some of us have already forgotten, and Lucarini has defected from the "Contemporaries" to fight for the "Traditionals."

The book describes Lucarini's conversion as a secular rock musician, his 20 years or so leading contemporary worship music for congregations as large as 500, and arguments for his new convictions against the use of contemporary music in Christian worship. These arguments constitute the majority of the book's content. Although I hoped to find a thorough description of his personal exodus from the contemporary Christian movement, very little was said of that process in his life. The brief mentions that he does make of it led me to believe that it was caused by a combination of his wife's long-held beliefs on the matter, his own study of Scripture, the influence of a traditionally-minded pastor, and a recognition of genuinely destructive patterns that often accompany contemporary worship.

Lucarini's main argument against the use of contemporary music in worship is the style's association with a sinful and worldly lifestyle. This theme emerges in most of the book's chapters. Attacking the common argument of Rick Warren and others that music styles are amoral apart from their lyrics, he writes, “Decades of rock music in our culture have permanently stamped that music style with the dimension of immorality. Changing the lyrics and substituting Christian musicians cannot remove that stigma,” (91). He repeatedly cites 1 Thes. 5:22, "Abstain from all appearance of evil," to argue that if rock music is commonly associated with evil acts then we should not use it in worship. While Lucarini's words on this matter sometimes border on sounding a little over-the-top in a Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell kind of way, at other times he states things with a profound wisdom that ought to make any Christian with a bent toward edginess take a step back to evaluate themselves: "We must understand that saints are literally those being sanctified or ‘set apart’ from the world for God’s own glory. Therefore let us move further from worldliness in our music choices" (126).

In my opinion modern worship music in most cases never even sounds enough like modern secular music to present a stumbling block to most people. However, many of Lucarini's arguments caused me to seriously consider how worship ought to be done differently in light of some of the legitimate dangers that accompany contemporary worship as it is often done. Here are a few:

-Lucarini dedicates a chapter to explaining how the "come as you are" message of much contemporary worship music goes too far and communicates the message of "come as you are and stay that way." Instead, as Lucarini explains, God requires us to conform to His holiness after we come to Him. He shows that the Bible teaches worship primarily as an act of humbling ourselves out of godly fear, whereas much of contemporary worship is about "looking up and feeling good" (56). "True worship must produce a sense of fear in the worshipper toward the worshipped" (57).

-Lucarini says that Contemporary worship services frequently emphasize the music as much or more than the preaching, focusing on "ushering people into the presence of God" rather than preparing them to hear His Word preached. This emphasis communicates--intentionally or not--that subjective religious experience is superior to the objective truth of Scripture. (((Beyond what Lucarini says about this, I would like to add a note here that people cannot be ushered into the presence of God by music. Hebrews 10:19 ff., along with much of the argument of the entire book of Hebrews, shows us that we can only enter the presence of God through the blood of Christ. In fact, if we were to somehow usher an unbelieving person into the presence of God it would mean instant death for them because of His holiness and their unforgiven sin.)))

-Lucarini argues that contemporary worship is too often designed asking the question "Will the people like it?" first and the question "Will God like it?" second. This is a legitimate problem in both traditional and contemporary churches. However, contemporary churches are probably more prone to the temptation to please people before pleasing God since the style itself was born out of a desire to accommodate the culture. Lucarini points out that a worship service is a ministry to God first and to people second.

-"Music styles can and should be judged by their contemporary moral association” (109). I agree with this to the extent that we are talking about the morals with which those being led in worship associate that music style. For example, if the elderly members of a church cannot undo a mental association between distorted guitar sounds and drug use, then there is nothing wrong with doing away with electric guitars while leading them in worship. As Lucarini argues, adjusting the music to account for those who have such mental associations is what God would expect us to do based on the principle of 1 Corinthians 8 about accommodating the "weaker brother." Even with teenagers there are limits to how far a music style should be pushed; I would not want the youth praise band at my church to sound like Jay Z since most teenagers associate that sound with immorality, even if they like it. That would undoubtedly cause some of them to stumble.

-When unchecked, contemporary worship often mimics the sexuality of secular music in subtle ways. "When you combine the sensual dancing with the immodest dress of the women on the platform, you place a very large stumbling block in front of the men in the congregation" (71). Sensual dancing and immodest dress can be tackled by a few private conversations, but Lucarini also points out that the environment itself can become a sexual stumbling block: "We dim the lights, we design the music to move people where we want to take them, and we create the special mood, the right atmosphere. What is wrong with this? It is exactly what the world does to create sexual intimacy. Secular musicians use the same music styles and environmental methods to draw people into sexual intimacy with them" (72). Why hadn't I ever noticed this before? People who have become numb to the sexually charged culture around us will probably reject this point, but he's still right. There doesn't have to be skin and gyrations for something to be sexual. To help make his point Lucarini also tells of marriages that he saw damaged or destroyed among the members of praise bands when the setting facilitated unhealthy relationships between musicians.

-Lucarini also argues--rightly so, I think--that music style is not something over which Scripture gives us grounds to cause faithful members to leave a church: "We can all agree that a pastor has the biblical imperative to send away divisive ‘sheep’ after scriptural church discipline has failed to bring about repentance; but does the Bible also teach that a pastor may drive away the good and faithful sheep because of a new music programme? Of course not, but Contemporary pastors have found justification for it nonetheless" (77). It is better to stay with music that some consider boring than to divide a flock of faithful believers.

-Contemporary worship music can easily become a performance that does not lead the congregation to worship. Lucarini writes of one church, ". . . some [congregation members] admitted they were intimidated into silence by the great singers in the worship team ‘belting it out’ on the platform. After all, what average congregation can compete with a group of gifted, microphoned vocalists blasting a melody from a stage, especially with an accompanying rock band?" (114)

With regard to famous contemporary Christian performers, Lucarini recalls the following from his time in his days of church ministry when he would frequently take the youth group to concerts: "The CCM artists became role models for different kinds of immorality: indecent dress, rebellious images, improper crushes on married men by young girls, lustful interest in sexy females by adolescent males. It makes no difference that the artists may not have intended this to happen or that they claimed their ministry for God rises above such things . . . These artists allowed themselves to become ‘idols’ to the teens, often in the literal sense of encouraging worship" (117-118). This is true far too often and is a good warning.

Additionally, Lucarini mentions some musical problems that face congregations using a contemporary style. He says that the syncopated rhythms of contemporary music are difficult to learn (especially in white cultures) and even more difficult to read from sheet music. This has resulted largely in the demise of sheet music in the hands of the congregation, thus leading to the demise also of the beautiful harmonies often heard in traditional hymn singing.

Despite many positives, there was room for improvement in this book. While Lucarini's life experiences certainly qualify him to speak on this topic, it could have been argued much more convincingly had he written the book together with his pastor or someone else with formal biblical training. He bases several points on possible lexical definitions of Greek and Hebrew words, but it will be clear to those trained in these languages that he has never been taught how to do a proper lexical study. He can also come across at times as arguing that rock music is bad just because it is bad, so readers who do not begin with a desire to take him seriously will find many opportunities to throw tomatoes. Also, while Lucarini did convince me that contemporary worship is frequently flawed and perhaps even inappropriate in some settings, he never presents a compelling biblical argument that the music style should be abandoned altogether.

For the sake of full disclosure I must admit that I have always preferred traditional hymns over contemporary praise music. This was true even when I was a teenager in the youth group, and it was true even while I was going to hardcore, indie, and punk rock shows nearly once a week in college. There is something that has always appealed to me about the sacred reverence of Christian worship when it is so clearly set apart from the world. Lucarini has affirmed the validity of my traditional worship preference at a time when the forces of Christian culture are telling me that it means I am stuck in the past and don't care about unbelievers. However, I still see my preference merely as a preference. While Lucarini did make me feel like it's ok that I want to use a hymn book instead of a projection screen, and while he showed me a number of problems that need to be fixed in many contemporary worship settings, he did not convince me that I should break up the youth praise band at church.

True Social Justice In the Kingdom of Christ

2007-02-19T09:58:00.000-07:00

I posted a comment a few days ago on Marty Duren's blog that got absolutely no response whatsoever. I think this lack of interest in what I said was because I opted to write something that I've wanted to say for a long time rather than joining the debate over Donald Miller that started up in the other comments. Now that I've written something I might as well turn it into a post of its own...

A common trend these days is that the farther left a church is theologically the more they preach about social justice. Most of these churches are dead or dying, but of the small percentage that is growing I think their emphasis on social justice is a major draw compared to traditional evangelical churches. Emergent and liberal churches have identified a major deficiency in their evangelical neighbors, and they have done so rightly in most cases. Those of us who still hold to orthodox (little "o") Christianity would do well to take the criticism from the left and follow Jesus's teachings in the area of loving our neighbors. We ought to do far, far more to provide for those who are victims of injustice, whether at home or abroad.

That having been said, one of the biggest problems in most churches–emergent, liberal, or otherwise–who do stand for social justice is a horrible inconsistency in that area. There is an almost comic irony in the arrogance and elitism that often drives these churches. They make the wealthy, respected, intellectual, and hip people of the world the targets for recruitment into their churches and treat the lowly and outcast people as charity projects. It is easy to forget that all classes of people are our equals in the eyes of the Lord and are potential brothers and sisters in Christ. They don’t allow for the possibility that the homeless man downtown could someday be their pastor if social justice is truly carried out toward him.

The New Testament calls us to adjust our concept of social justice to go beyond helping the needy, fighting AIDS epidemics, and lobbying congress to end the suffering in Darfur. In addition to such things, the social justice of the Bible calls us to drop our attitudes of elitism, to eliminate the idea of a "target demographic" for our churches, and to consider ourselves lower than those whom we have treated in the past as charity projects. God takes great delight in saving and calling out leaders for us from among the lowest rungs of society: “For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.” -1 Cor. 1:26-29. With this (and James 2 and the rest of 1 Cor. 1:18-2:8) in mind, it disappoints me that we are doing so much to reach those whom the world considers to be wise, powerful, strong, and noble, and doing so little to target the foolish, the despised, and the weak. I honestly believe that it is the prideful tendencies of our hearts that makes us want to save celebrities, CEOs, and hipsters more than hillbillies and immigrant farm workers.

Aside from ranting about other people and their churches, my thoughts on this topic actually came about through conviction over my own sin when I was reading the passage from 1 Corinthians that I quoted above. Sometime in my college years I developed a seriously flawed view of myself as one who was elevated above the commoners of the world (which, I think, is a popular sin among college students). This pridefulness wasn't always obvious since I regularly did community projects like volunteering at a homeless mission. But when I was at church my sin truly came alive as I unconsciously looked down on the people who seemed unsophisticated, most of whom had heavy Southern accents. I even felt embarrassed sometimes when I brought visitors from my snooty college to the church because there were so many people there who seemed like walking stereotypes of Southern Baptists. But as the words of 1 Corinthians sunk in, I realized that I have no right to consider myself more deserving of God's grace than anyone else. God loves to save the people that the rest of the world mocks and degrades, and that's what He will continue to do until Christ returns. Let's humble ourselves and join Him in that effort lest we be ashamed at the end of the age when the first become last and the last become first.

How the Jehovah's Witnesses Helped Me Learn the Truth About God

2006-11-21T14:57:00.000-07:00

Sometime before I started seminary I started wondering how to define whether or not someone believes in the God of the Bible. I think this question was on my mind in large part because of the efforts of liberal wings of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam to unite together in worship following 9/11. If I recall correctly, President Bush even gave a speech around that time in which he declared outright that Christians and Muslims worship the same God (or is it "god" with a little g?). Not only that, but the US government has granted millions of dollars to religious institutions like Fuller Theological Seminary to do research that might prove that Muslims, Christians, and Jews all believe in the same God.

Out of all this came a quest on my part to determine exact rules for knowing when the god in question is and is not the God of the Bible. This quest lasted for a couple of years and fizzled out with little success. Most who argue that God and Allah are not the same being cite the differences in their character, i.e. Allah is cold and impersonal and God is not. The problem with this understanding is that its logical conclusion would be that any two Christians who believe something different about God's character would then be serving two different gods, no matter how small the difference. For example, one who believes that God double-predestines would be serving a different God than the person who believes He only single-predestines. This logic troubled me, so I asked one of my theology professors how far one has to veer in his belief about God before he starts believing in a different god altogether. His answer was, "How much hair do you have to lose before you're bald?" This was not helpful.

I hadn't thought much about this question again until Saturday morning, when two Jehovah's Witnesses interrupted my efforts to fry some bacon by knocking on my front door and trying to convert my wife. I came to her rescue and ended up talking to the two men for nearly half an hour. They went around and around trying to tell me that Jesus was not God but a created being. I got out my Greek New Testament and showed them that Jesus really is God, which I don't think they expected from someone who lives on a gravel road (many thanks to Southern Seminary). I showed them from Scripture that God is three-in-one: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They weren't ready to submit themselves to what the Bible says, but one of them stayed quiet and seemed to be listening carefully, so there may be hope. The lesson that I learned from them came at the end when I asked them if I could pray for them. Their answer was no. They said that if I wanted to pray for them on my own then that's my business, but that they wouldn't bow down with me as I prayed to my "Trinity God." The funny thing is that without giving any thought to the issue of the previous paragraphs, I had already decided that I would not let them pray for me either if they asked. We both stood there and agreed that their god is not the same as my God, and then we parted ways.

The lesson that I learned from the Jehovah's Witnesses was that any god that is not the Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is not the God of Christianity. While it's true that Christians, Muslims, and Jews all claim to worship the God of Abraham, it is also true that the God of Abraham has now shown us that He is three-in-one. Anyone who rejects the deity of Christ and the Holy Spirit serves a different god than the God of the Bible. This makes a lot of sense in light of 1 Peter 1:21, which says, "Through him [Jesus] you believe in God." This solves the question of whether other religions might be trying to worship the same God as us. For example, I feel confident in saying that the Jewish religion of today does not try to worship the right God in the wrong way, but that it serves a different god altogether from the one it served in the days of Moses. My confidence in this statement comes in their rejection of Jesus and the Holy Spirit as God.

The Jehovah's Witnesses didn't solve all my problems, though. I am still not sure where to draw the line within Trinitarian Christian faith when someone's idea of God seems far from what the Bible tells us. For example, I am not sure whether open theists (those who claim God does not know the future) worship a different god. To be fair to my theology professor, this is probably the kind of situation he was thinking of when he made the bald joke. Maybe someday God will help someone figure this out definitively and they can let me know. If that's you, then please comment.

A good way to spend an hour... while you do something else

2006-10-23T09:03:00.000-06:00

If you are at all interested in Fundamentalism, Evangelicalism, the ermerging church movement, life in the Southern Baptist Convention, or how all those things relate to each other, I highly recommend that you download the mp3 of Russell Moore's lecture entitled "Confessions of a Fundamissional Dean: Are Southern Baptists Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, or What?", which can be found here. I wanted to post something about this earlier, but I just now figured out where the mp3 is. Forgive me if this lecture has already been discussed on lots of other blogs, but I have mostly stopped reading them.

What are the Ten Commandments?

2006-10-02T07:28:00.000-06:00

Somebody at the seminary (I can't remember if it was my ethics professor or someone else) mentioned a couple of weeks ago that hardly anyone who is outspoken about getting the Ten Commandments posted in public buildings can list all ten of them. This is a pretty sad indicator of the lack of basic biblical literacy that's out there. Watch this video.

Marriage and the End Times

2006-06-22T13:55:00.001-06:00

As most of you know, I took this beautiful woman as my bride on the tenth of this month. It's impossible to get married without doing some reflection, unless you're in Vegas. We were not, so I spent some quality time thinking it all through. God used that time to teach me some tremendous truths about Himself, His relationship with us, and the Second Coming of Christ. I know it probably sounds strange that I would learn about the Second Coming by reflecting on marriage, but keep reading and hopefully you'll understand.

The most obvious thing that was apparent to me about God in this whole process was His grace. By giving me Micah, He gave me a gift more precious than I could have ever thought to ask for. It is clear to both of us that He has been preparing us for each other throughout our whole lives up to this point. Even when neither of us knew that the other existed, He was graciously and lovingly working to mold each of us to match the other. He was laboring meticulously to bring us joy while we sat blindly unaware. What a great God He is to give us so much when we deserve nothing more than to die in our sin.

But God has also helped me to understand that this gift of each other has a higher purpose, which is to paint a picture of the relationship between Christ and the Church. Ephesians 5:22-33 has more to say about marriage than I have time to comment on right now, but the key verse is 32: "This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church." The "mystery" here is marriage. When Christ came and gave himself up for those whom he would eternally save we found out what marriage had meant all along. Marriage was established by God in the garden of Eden and throughout all humanity to give us a picture of how Christ loves those whom he saves. This fact not only helps me to praise God for what He has done to save us, but also gives me a life-long challenge of making our marriage conform to its antecedent. It is my job to love Micah "as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish." (Eph. 5:25-27)

It was by thinking through this picture in the weeks leading up to the wedding, reading more Scripture, and considering my personal experience of it all that I gained a much greater understanding of the eschatological nature of marriage, particularly the wedding itself. I had a special advantage over most men in this thought process in that Micah and I have always been a long-distance couple. As the wedding drew close and closer I yearned more and more for her to be with me in a final sense, but she was still hundreds of miles away. The promise of having this woman whom I loved so much finally coming to live with me was so fantastic that a part of me had trouble believing that it could ever come to fruition. But the days kept passing, and before I knew it I was standing at the steps of the sanctuary watching my bride dressed in spotless white walking toward me to become mine for as long as we both shall live. We pledged our love and devotion to each other in a covenant before God, and she came at last to live in my house.

In the same way, the Church is the bride of Christ, yet the groom is not yet here. We are already his, but we have not yet experienced the fullness of his love by dwelling with him in person. We are in a sort of long-distance relationship with our Savior. As we wait for Christ's return we are waiting for the greatest wedding of all time, the wedding about which all other weddings were created. We have been apart from Christ for so long that it seems like it can't be true that he will ever return, but we also know that his promise is true. There will be a day when he will come upon the clouds and greet us face to face. We will all stand before the great white throne, and those whom he has washed whiter than snow with his blood will be separated from those covered in filth. Then he will take us, the Church, as his bride and live with us in person for eternity in the New Jerusalem.

Not only does this wedding image make sense, but there is ample language in the New Testament to show us that it is God's intent. In the parable of the ten virgins in Matthew 25, the coming of Christ is announced as, "Here is the bridegroom! Come out to meet him," and is pictured as a wedding feast in which Christ marries the wise virgins. The kingdom of heaven is also pictured as a wedding feast in Matthew 22 and it's synoptic parallels. Perhaps the most clear reference is in Revelation 19:6-9, where the Second Coming is unmistakably referred to at length as a wedding. "Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his Bride has made herself ready; it was granted her to clothe herself with fine linen, bright and pure--for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints" (7-8). It's not hard to see from all this that God made human weddings as a picture of Christ's future return.

Of course all this is fun an exciting for Christians to think about, but it also taught me a lot about what our attitude toward the Second Coming should be. I have never looked forward to anything as much as I looked forward to marrying Micah, and I probably never will again (although I'm sure the birth of a child in a few years will come close). God gave me a firm conviction that my longing for Christ's return ought to be even greater than my longing was to take Micah as my wife. Surely Christ himself is yearning to win the final victory over death and dwell with us forever; we ought likewise to yearn for the same thing. Our Savior, who is near in Spirit but far in his resurrected body, will soon come to live with us forever. We should follow his lead in praying with fervor daily, "Thy kingdom come!"

Study Your Bible Responsibly

2006-04-21T10:28:00.000-06:00

Last night I was sitting in at the Bible study for teenage guys that we started up a few weeks ago when I found something in the study material that reminded me of how irresponsible I used to be with the Bible. The person who wrote the study did something just like I would have done a few years ago. The argument went something like this:

-Ephesians 4:25 says "Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor..." (NIV)
-The Greek word for "falsehood" literally refers to the masks used in Greek theater.
-Therefore Paul is telling us to take off our masks.
-Therefore Paul's point is that we need to "be real" with each other.

As great as this may sound, it is a gross misuse of Scripture. First of all, whatever connection between theater masks and the Greek word pseudos there may ever have been is just not there in the New Testament. The meaning of a word is determined by its contextual usage, not by the history of how anyone has ever used it. If it meant "theater mask", then the Bible translators would have put that in the English--they weren't trying to hide anything. The person who wrote this study doesn't know Greek, or at least doesn't know how to use it responsibly. Secondly, it doesn't take very long to look at the whole chapter leading up to this verse and see why Paul started the verse with a "therefore". He was telling the Ephesian church what to do about divisions that had partly been caused by the spread of false teachings, particularly false teachings about sin. The person who wrote our study really wanted verse 25 to be about "being real", but it's not. It's about putting an end to lies that had spread about what true Christian beliefs and a godly lifestyle ought to look like and replacing them with loving conversations about the truth.

I'm not just ranting (although I am ranting a little). I really do have a useful point to make from all this. Here it is: all Christians must study the Bible responsibly, especially those who teach it. It's very easy to get away with teaching it irresponsibly, especially to children and youth. But someday every Sunday School teacher, small group leader, and preacher will have to give an account before God for what they taught.

To make this post helpful, here are a few tips for studying and teaching the Bible that I could have used back when I pulled stunts like the one I just told about:

1. The Bible should always be your primary source when you study and when you teach. Never focus your personal devotional time, your preparation, or the lessons you teach on any other book. If you do focus on a different book (such as The Purpose-Driven Life, etc.), call it a "book study" and not a "Bible study".

2. Responsible Bible studying means spending time studying the Bible. You can't prepare a faithful lesson in 20 minutes.

3. For any passage you teach, always try to figure out why the biblical author put it there and what he meant by it. That means you have to read the whole book, not just a few verses.

4. After you've decided what the biblical author meant, make your main point the same as his main point. I guarantee that whatever you want to say isn't as good as what he wants to say.

5. If you don't understand something the Bible says, look to the Bible itself for answers before you turn to other sources. 90% of the time you'll find the answer by reading the rest of the chapter or the book. 9% of the time you'll find the answer in other parts of the Bible. 1% of the time you'll have to look to notes in your study Bible or some other books to find the answer.

6. After you've studied your Bible for the answers, look at some commentaries. The best online resource for this point is Calvin's commentaries (which very rarely say anything about "Calvinism", so don't worry if you're not into that). Crosswalk.com has some good stuff, too. Think through the issues the commentaries bring up and adjust your lesson accordingly.

7. If you don't know Greek and Hebrew, trust your English Bible. English translations are by far the best resources we have for telling us what the Bible says in the original languages. Read several translations to get a good sense of the meaning.

8. If you don't know Greek and Hebrew, don't try to used them. The worst Christian book I ever bought was the Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible. Here's why:
-Grammar is more important to meaning than vocabulary, and I didn't know Greek or Hebrew grammar.
-I only tried to use Greek and Hebrew when I wanted my Bible to say something different than what it said.
-I searched through every possible meaning of a word and picked out whichever one I liked best.
-I used it to make myself sound smart by mentioning Greek and Hebrew in Bible studies. People who actually know the languages usually don't do that.

9. If you don't know Greek and Hebrew, it's possible to learn them on your own if you're willing to work hard. Some preachers try to make it sound like you have to be a genius to learn them, but that's just their egos talking. All you really have to be able to do is memorize charts, rules, and vocabulary. If you're interested, leave me a comment and I'll point you to some resources.

To sum up, the goal of studying the Bible for God to change our hearts and minds. Let His words work on you instead of you working on them.

Youth ministry at its finest

2006-04-04T09:38:00.000-06:00

Thanks to Josh Spilker for sending me a link to the following article from the Augusta Chronicle. Enjoy...

'RocHouse' host hopes work sets good example for youths
By Virginia Norton | Staff Writer
Friday, March 24, 2006

Jeremy Williamson's ministry to youths has taken a twist.

After seven years as a youth pastor and several seasons on the syndicated Christian youth cable show RocHouse Cafe, he has a new platform: modeling.

When people hear he's into modeling, they say he's going the way of the world, he said.

"(But) the entertainment industry has to be reached," he said. "We need people inside there."

He has to watch what he eats and work out more in the gym. With years in the ministry, though, and his own graphics design firm, Jmiah Design, "I am no kid."

"It is all for a purpose," said Mr. Williamson, 29. "God is not into vanity."

A graphics design friend recommended him as a clothing model to her client last fall.

"It was really wild," he said.

He sent the client his measurements and pictures from his portfolio, and was hired.

During a photo shoot, Mr. Williamson models several brands of clothing. The crew takes him to locations such as California beaches.

"Some are really cool, surfy," he said.

Though his work has not yet been published, the client is sending his pictures for movie casting.

"It is all coming together," Mr. Williamson said.

The work he did in television for RocHouse has given him a portfolio.

He says being a model has elevated him in the eyes of young people; they seem glued to everything he says.

"Young people look at the entertainers as the role models. It is a scary thing," he said. "We have to have people who are positive role models and who will not get caught up in the hype."

His modeling also ties into his wife 's interest in cosmetology. Nikki Williamson, also a co-host on RocHouse, is his partner in ELECT Ministries, a parachurch youth ministry. Together they can teach young people how to look their best but keep it balanced so they do not become insecure, Mr. Williamson said.

"Young people can still keep their fashion sense and be godly at the same time," he said.

Reach Virginia Norton at (706) 823-3336 or virginia.norton@augustachronicle.com.
From the Saturday, March 25, 2006 printed edition of the Augusta Chronicle

More to come next week...

2006-03-16T11:24:00.000-07:00

A couple of weeks ago I read an article at the website of a youth ministry magazine that announced the "death of cool" and the "birth of real". I won't have time to write what I want to about this until about a week from now, but I'd like to get your opinions in the mean time. As Christians, to what degree should we seek to be "cool", or to be "real", or is there something else altogether that should be the goal of our human interactions?

I Heart Kevin Shrum

2006-03-10T08:28:00.000-07:00

All of you Southern Seminary people who read this [=Robbie] need to be in chapel this Tuesdayto hear Kevin Shrum preach. He has been a pastor, mentor, friend, and all-around nice guy to me. Even after three years of seminary he's still one of my top five favorite living preachers, and he's the only preacher I've ever seen who can stomp his foot in a way that actually helps get his message across.

No Comment

2006-03-03T13:22:00.000-07:00

No one has ever commented on this blog. Has anyone ever read it? Doubtful.

Why Jesus Came

2006-02-28T12:07:00.000-07:00

In the four gospels Jesus makes a number of direct statements about why he came. I have wanted to investigate and compare all these statements for a few months, and since it is mildly relevant to a paper I am writing this semester I went ahead and made a list of them all. I tried to group them by theme at first, but that didn’t work very well. They are listed here in order of canonical appearance, with passages that parallel one another grouped together. Enjoy…

Matthew 5:17 – “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”

Matthew 9:13 – “But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”
Mark 2:17 – On hearing this, Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
Luke 5:32 – “I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

Matthew 10:34-35 – “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn 'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law”
Luke 12:51 – “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.”

Matthew 20:28 – “just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
Mark 10:45 – “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”

Mark 1:38 – Jesus replied, "Let us go somewhere else—to the nearby villages—so I can preach there also. That is why I have come."
Luke 4:43 – But he said, "I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other towns also, because that is why I was sent."

Luke 4:18-19 – “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor.”

Luke 12:49 – “I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!”

Luke 19:10 – “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.”

John 3:17 – “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”

John 6:38 – “For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.”

John 6:51 – “I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

John 9:39 – “Jesus said, "For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind."

John 10:10 – “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.”

John 12:27-28 – “Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. Father, glorify your name!”

John 12:46-47 – “I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness. As for the person who hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge him. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it.”

John 18:37 - "You are a king, then!" said Pilate. Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."

Blue Like... Not Jazz?

2006-02-22T19:38:00.000-07:00

Today Mark Coppenger did a lecture on Donald Miller's book Blue Like Jazz. I found it very interesting and entertaining, so I am posting my notes from the lecture for all to see here. Keep in mind that I have not read this book, and that these notes may not be written exactly the way Coppenger would have wanted me to write them...

10 Things That Donald Miller's Blue Like Jazz Is Blue Like That Are Not Jazz:

1. Blue like blue states--Miller says that he doesn't like it when Christians are political, but he takes relentless jabs at Republicans.

2. Blue like the Blue Light Special--Miller is big on marketing and getting people to hear you. His main marketing tactic is self defacement, which is not the same thing as authenticity.

3. Blue like blue blood--Miller displays an elitist attitude in that he looks down on big-haired evangelists, people who pass out tracts at bus stops, etc.

4. Blue like Berry Blue Jello--He's like nailing Jello to a wall; he'll hack on people who are political in one way but then himself be political in another way; he says judgmentalism isn't cool, but then he says it was cool when John the Baptist called the Pharisees snakes. Etc.

5. Blue like Blue Oyster Cult--The book is a sort of throw-back to the 60's. Just like we look back on the hippies now and say they were kind of silly, we'll probably look back to this line of thought some day the same way.

6. Blue like black and blue--Miller likes to show off his wounds and sound abused. He shows everyone how he's gotten hurt in traditional Christian settings. He doesn't recognize that we've all been hurt and most of us keep going.

7. Blue like working blue--Miller gets little thrills from his readers by throwing in profanity and acting like a bad boy. It's a lot like comedians who get a cheap laugh with vulgarity when they can't come up with better material.

8. Blue like Pabst Blue Ribbon--Miller promotes beer with such light-hearted ease that one would be led to forget that it's a killer.

9. Blue like blue ice--Miller loves dropping blue ice on things that are sacred. Most notably, he dismisses Christian doctrine as mathematical and dull. Russell Moore has said that he's like Schleiermacher with a soul patch. Just like Schleiermacher (the "father of Protestant Liberalism"), he reduces Christianity to feeling and experience. He is following the pattern of old-line Liberalism by trying to update Christianity for modern times. If we follow what he says and just "lighten up" with regard to theology, we are destroying a legacy that the heroes of the faith fought for.

10. Blue like a blue screen--There's a smoke-and-mirrors aspect to Blue Like Jazz. Miller claims that his ideas are designed to reach people, but everything he says we need to do is whatever he wants to do. He hasn't backed up his claims with evidence of having brought more people to the Lord by doing what he does. Not only that, but he dismisses the preferences of people who aren't like him as the wrong way to do things, especially bus-stop tract distributors and door-to-door evangelists and the like.

Coppenger ended by saying this (I'm not sure if I have the last sentence right): "Winston Churchill said, 'Before you're 30 if you're not liberal you have no heart. After you're 30 if you're not conservative you have no brains.' Donald is 31 now. [It's time to turn around.]"

In the Q&A time at the end Don Whitney also made a comment that Miller didn't even make any attempt at all to use Scripture to back up his arguments. Coppenger said that doing so would make Miller guilty of "doing math".

The End.

I know some people won't like this post, but so many of us younger Christians have become Miller disciples that I thought it could be helpful to hear a different opinion.

Our Attitude Toward God's Word

2006-02-17T12:03:00.000-07:00

The other day in Hershael York's preaching class he told us something that Bruce Ware said that struck him when Ware was being interviewed for a faculty position at Southern. It seemed pretty great to me, too, so I'm going to say it here...

If there is any portion of the Bible that we don't love, then our attitude is not in line with God's will. Those of us who are "conservative" claim that every word of Scripture is God-breathed, but too often there are portions of it that we simply tolerate instead of embracing them whole-heartedly. It's too easy for our attitude about some of its claims to become, "I don't like it, but since it's God's Word I'll accept it and live by it." If we don't like it, the problem is not with the Bible but with us. Either we don't understand it properly or our own sinful presuppositions are hindering our ability to believe, and it's more likely the latter.

One example that I think many of us can relate to is that of the Bible's multiple claims that men and women have different roles in the family and the church. It says very unambiguously that men are to be the leaders in both of those institutions. For a long time I had an attitude that this didn't really make any sense, but that I would grudgingly go along with it because that's what the Bible says. You know what that attitude is? It's pharisaism, and Jesus had something to say about it: "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.'" I want not only to honor God by saying that He's right in what he wrote about men and women, but to draw my heart close to Him and love every word He has said about the matter. I want to get rid of every worldly influence that has crept into my mind about gender's meaninglessness and replace it with an admiration of God's glorious plan in distinguishing the two halves of humanity from one another. I want to embrace the beauty of marriage as a picture of Christ giving himself up out of love for the church. I want to see how our distinct gender roles reflect those within the Trinity, with the Father as the head and the Son and Spirit in perfect submission. In short, I want what God has said about men and women to make me love Him more. Any hint of disbelief is my problem, not His.

Of course this applies not just to gender role passages but to everything that in Scripture that makes us uncomfortable. We must not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewing of our minds.

20-Year-Old Junk Mail

2006-02-06T10:07:00.000-07:00

Every youth minister knows what it's like to get a never-ending stream of junk mail addressed to former youth ministers. They can probably all relate to the little thrill I got when I found a newsletter waiting for me in the church office today with a name going further back in church history than ever before, addressed to a youth minister whom I understand hasn't served here in nearly 20 years. Much has changed in Baptist life since those days, and this particular piece of mail served to highlight those changes. Back then the church was run by a staff that had a very different way of looking at the Bible, and the Southern Baptist Convention was in turmoil over such issues.

What I got was the "Mainstream Baptist Network Journal." I knew that when I flipped through its 16 pages I would find plenty of snide remarks about my personal convictions about the Bible and the present leadership of the SBC--those didn't surprise me. What was most remarkable was that the two articles that were the most hateful toward "Fundamentalism" were written by a man that was friends with my parents those 20-some years ago at the church where my brother and I were baptized back in Texas. If I recall correctly, he was a pleasant fellow with a good demeanor about him. He was never one that I would have picked to write the following:

"[Fundamentalism] is a temporary movement brought about by the rapid societal changes that have occurred in America over the last 120 years that lead many people to embrace fear as their primary worldview. Their children are not scared of progress and growth. Fundamentalism in America will die out in two generations. It has no foundation in Scripture, despite all the Bible talk, and no grounding in the real world. It is a temporary, primarily-political movement."

The whole matter seems ironic to me when I put it into the perspective of my family's experience at First Baptist Abilene. Having spent three years now at what this guy would call a "Fundamentalist" seminary, I know that what he's fighting against is not a political movement but the beliefs and convictions about the Bible that my whole family has always held. In fact, the majority of that church held those same beliefs while its leadership flew to denominational meetings across the country to battle against them. How did they get away with it? Doublespeak. (See entry from 1/24/06 for more on this.) I have heard my dad say many times that the pastor "didn't sound like he believed a word he was saying" when he preached. Thankfully, my dad led us out of that church when he realized that he was "drying up" spiritually. It's not surprising that so many denominations have died away after rejecting the inerrancy and authority of God's written Word.

On a mildly-related and disconcerting note, the same guy who wrote the paragraph I quoted above also had this to say about Rick Warren's address to the Baptist World Alliance (?!): "[Warren] is not a fundamentalist in the slightest. Yes, he has taught '40 days of purpose' in some fundamentalist churches but there is nothing fundamentalist about what he is teaching." I'd really like to know what Warren said... this could be a new issue before we know it. That's a whole other matter, though.

P.S.-Jerry Sutton's book on the conservative resurgence is probably the best book out there on about the change in the SBC over the last 27 years for those of you who are interesting in knowing what all this is about.

A Good Article

2006-01-26T08:40:00.000-07:00

I really like Russell Moore's article on the spiritual danger of blogging. Read it and tell him how much you appreciate it.

Insight from Ralph Elliott on Baptist Controversy

2006-01-24T12:47:00.000-07:00

Last night I finished (mostly) a paper for my Baptist history class on the Ralph Elliott controversy, which was the first big "moderate vs. conservative" battle that came to the floor of the Southern Baptist Convention. I ran across a quote in a book that Elliott wrote about the controversy that I found interesting.

Here's some background: Ralph Elliott was an Old Testament professor at Midwestern Baptist Seminary who published a commentary on Genesis in 1961 through the Baptist Sunday School Board. Because of who wrote this book and who published it, it was expected to be a model of Southern Baptist belief. It was actually only a model of the modernistic methods of biblical criticism that had infested the seminaries. Elliott said that Adam and Eve weren't real people, that Melchizedek was a priest of Baal, that the flood was not universal, that God didn't really tell Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, etc.

These paragraphs from Elliott's book (see above) give insight into why he got in trouble while the many other professors who believed the same things did not:

"'Doublespeak has become an insidious disease within Southern Baptist life. Through the years, the program at Southern Seminary has acquainted students with the best in current research in the given fields of study. Often, however, this was done with an eye and ear for the 'gallery' and how much the 'church trade' would bear. Professors and students learn to couch their beliefs in acceptable terminology and in holy jargon so that although thinking one thing, the speaker calculated so as to cause the hearer to affirm something else. When I taught at Southern Seminary years ago, we often said to one professor [Clyde T. Francisco] who was particularly gifted at this 'doublespeak' game, that if the Southern Baptist Convention should split, he would be the first speaker at both new conventions.

"One of the serious difficulties for me personally during the 'Genesis controversy' was a running debate with a particular Southern professor who constantly counseled me to use the doublespeak technique. When the difficulties came, he said he believed the same thing on these issues, but I got into trouble and he did not because I did not know how to communicate. What he meant was that I did not know how to doublespeak. My contention was that I got into trouble because I sought to communicate an unambiguous message, and so we never found agreement.

"It is my personal belief that this doublespeak across the years has contributed to a lack of nurture and growth and is a major factor in the present problems. The basic question is one of integrity rather than the gift of communication."

My special thanks to the 2 people who cared enough to read to the end.