Something has been bothering me for a while, but until now I haven't had a chance to write about it. Prior to Christmas I was told that several churches across the country, and even some in my own community, were not going to have any worship services on Christmas Day. Honestly, when I first heard and read of those stories I thought it was a joke. Wouldn't that be like the beaches closing during the summer or the mountains closing during the fall? But sadly I found that the stories were true. I passed a couple of empty church parking lots on Christmas Sunday morning.
What I'm going to say next will not sit well with some, but I'm convinced that enough is enough. Frankly, I'm not concerned with who this might offend. I mean, what's next? No service on Easter Sunday? Doesn't that make sense? If you would cancel services on the day we've set aside to celebrate Christ's birth, why not cancel services on the day we've set aside to celebrate His resurrection?
What really gets under my skin are some of the lame excuses that were offered up to justify the Christmas cancellations. The most prominent one I heard is "we want to give our people some time to spend with their families." I'm sorry, but that's one of the most selfish things I've ever heard. Have we become so preoccupied with our own lives, families, and possessions that we can't find a few minutes to come and worship at God's house on Christmas?
By the way, I wonder what kind of testimony we set before the world when some of us chose to cancel worship. I can just imagine the irony in a lost person's mind as he/she considered that the Waffle House and Walgreens were open on Christmas but the church chose to close. For the last several years our culture has started to treat Christmas as just another day. Judging by the actions of some of our churches, perhaps the culture is right. Maybe Christmas is just another day.
I could be wrong, but I think the cancellation of services at Christmas was really done to give us a morning off so we could open gifts and play with our new toys. Maybe the greatest damage was done to our kids. What lesson did they learn by staying home on Christmas morning? Perhaps they got the impression that me and my gifts are more important than the Heavenly Father and His greatest Gift. The next time Christmas falls on a Sunday, I genuinely hope that every house of God will remain open for business.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Segregated Churches and Separated Truths
You've heard of "different strokes for different folks," but have you ever heard of different sermons for different shades? A recent experience brought that question to mind. One of the tools our church's website uses is Google Analytics. It is basically used to tell you who visited your website and how they got there. One of the features I enjoy is that it will tell you exactly what keywords someone entered to find your website.
While doing a recent study of our Analytics results, I noticed that someone from Oklahoma actually entered this phrase into the search engine: "2 Chronicles 20:1-30 black pastor sermons" (emphasis mine). I'll have to confess that I was taken back for a few minutes. Someone was not just searching for a sermon on that particular text - they were searching for a "black pastor" sermon on that text.
It caused me to wonder, "Does God's truth now come in different colors?" I mean, isn't it bad enough that our churches are already as segregated as they are? We're no longer satisfied with worshiping apart from one another based on categories of race, economics, etc. Apparently, even our messages need some semblance of segregation - one message for the white man, and yet another for the black man. What next? One message for the poor man and another for the rich man? One message for men and another for women? Why not one message for republicans and another for democrats?
My point is very simple: God's truth is universal. While there may be different applications for different audiences, I think we've got a problem when we start trying to discern and communicate God's truth through the filters of our own flawed preferences and categories. I'm certainly no super-Christian, but never once has it crossed my mind to do a search for a "white pastor" sermon. What would that even mean?
Rather than going to God with our biases, agendas, and preferences, perhaps we should go to God's Word as little children ready to receive what the Father has prepared for us. His truth requires no biases or subdivisions - not one set of truths for this audience and yet another set of truths for that audience. His truth transcends race, gender, economics, and any other category we'd like to throw over it. Rather than molding God's truth into our image, I hope we'll all allow His truth to mold our lives into the image of His Son. Maybe then our churches will look much less segregated and much more like heaven.
While doing a recent study of our Analytics results, I noticed that someone from Oklahoma actually entered this phrase into the search engine: "2 Chronicles 20:1-30 black pastor sermons" (emphasis mine). I'll have to confess that I was taken back for a few minutes. Someone was not just searching for a sermon on that particular text - they were searching for a "black pastor" sermon on that text.
It caused me to wonder, "Does God's truth now come in different colors?" I mean, isn't it bad enough that our churches are already as segregated as they are? We're no longer satisfied with worshiping apart from one another based on categories of race, economics, etc. Apparently, even our messages need some semblance of segregation - one message for the white man, and yet another for the black man. What next? One message for the poor man and another for the rich man? One message for men and another for women? Why not one message for republicans and another for democrats?
My point is very simple: God's truth is universal. While there may be different applications for different audiences, I think we've got a problem when we start trying to discern and communicate God's truth through the filters of our own flawed preferences and categories. I'm certainly no super-Christian, but never once has it crossed my mind to do a search for a "white pastor" sermon. What would that even mean?
Rather than going to God with our biases, agendas, and preferences, perhaps we should go to God's Word as little children ready to receive what the Father has prepared for us. His truth requires no biases or subdivisions - not one set of truths for this audience and yet another set of truths for that audience. His truth transcends race, gender, economics, and any other category we'd like to throw over it. Rather than molding God's truth into our image, I hope we'll all allow His truth to mold our lives into the image of His Son. Maybe then our churches will look much less segregated and much more like heaven.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
How Do We Make Decisions?
As I was returning from lunch this afternoon, I was listening to the Dave Ramsey Show. A gentleman called in with his dilemma. He basically admitted that he had lived in the casinos for a number of years, but that he left that scene about 2 years ago. While he said he had made a substantial amount of money gambling in the casinos, he basically implied that his lifestyle was turning into an addiction. Clearly, I commend the man for being willing to leave the casinos, even when he was making quite a profit off of them.
But the man's story was not finished there. He explained that he has learned many of this gambling ways from his father. Apparently, his father had not fared so well at the gambling tables. He explained that his dad had a $225,000 mortgage, but that because he was so far in gambling debt that he would not be able to make good on the repayment of the loan. So, the father set a proposal before his son. He said he would give his son what little bit of money he had left if his son would go and turn it into a profit at the casinos. The bottom line is that the son was calling Dave Ramsey because he had mixed emotions about returning to the casinos, but he didn't want to see his father lose his home either.
What kind of advice would you give to the young man if you were in Dave Ramsey's shoes? I can tell you what Mr. Ramsey said. He told the young man to tell his father: "I'm sorry Dad. I can't go back to the casinos to help you. I'm not going to give an alcohol his next drink." That's pretty good advice, and I suspect Mr. Ramsey's opinion has something to do with the fact that he professes to be a born-again Christian.
But still I'd like to know, what would you have counseled the young man to do? We can understand why the son might have mixed emotions about going back to the casinos, but would it really be all that wrong for the young man to go back so he can help his struggling father? Some would argue that returning to the casinos would really be the best thing for the young man to do if he really loves his dad.
Every day decisions like this have to be made. When the moment of decision comes, I wonder how you and I make decisions. Or how do we decide what kind of counsel to give when others have decisions like this that must be made. I sincerely hope that we are turning to the Word of God when these issues of life need to be determined.
If I were counseling this young man, I would have to tell him that returning to the casinos (or to any form of gambling) is not the answer. Why? Because God's Word condemns gambling. Not only did he rebuke Israel for sitting at the "tables of chance" (Isa. 65:11), but gambling flies in the face of everything God has said about the making and mastering of money. To gamble is to sin, and clearly we would not want to counsel anyone to walk in the paths of sin - no matter how well-intentioned they might be.
So what of the father who stands to lose his home? I would encourage the son to talk to his dad to see if he has any assets that can be sold to help meet the debts. If not, I would encourage the son to help his father secure an honest job that would help him in paying his debts. If the father were not capable of working due to handicap or disability, I would encourage the son to do all he can to help provide for some of his father's bills. But under no circumstances would I counsel the son (or the father) to go back to gambling.
But you say, "The father could lose his home." That's true, but such are the consequences of a life of sin sometimes. We can't just expect to live in a way that is contradictory to God and then not have to suffer the consequences along the way. And remember, the Bible says "Better is a little with the fear of the Lord, than great treasure with trouble" (Prov. 15:16). And again, "Better is the poor who walks in his integrity than one perverse in his ways, though he be rich" (Prov. 28:6).
So I hope you and I will consider how we make our decisions. As Christians, I'm convinced that biblical ignorance is not always our problem. Many times we know what God's Word says - we just don't always want to do it. When the decisions of life must be made in our own life and in the lives of others, I hope we'll be found turning to God's Word. God's path is not always the easiest one, but it is always best!
But the man's story was not finished there. He explained that he has learned many of this gambling ways from his father. Apparently, his father had not fared so well at the gambling tables. He explained that his dad had a $225,000 mortgage, but that because he was so far in gambling debt that he would not be able to make good on the repayment of the loan. So, the father set a proposal before his son. He said he would give his son what little bit of money he had left if his son would go and turn it into a profit at the casinos. The bottom line is that the son was calling Dave Ramsey because he had mixed emotions about returning to the casinos, but he didn't want to see his father lose his home either.
What kind of advice would you give to the young man if you were in Dave Ramsey's shoes? I can tell you what Mr. Ramsey said. He told the young man to tell his father: "I'm sorry Dad. I can't go back to the casinos to help you. I'm not going to give an alcohol his next drink." That's pretty good advice, and I suspect Mr. Ramsey's opinion has something to do with the fact that he professes to be a born-again Christian.
But still I'd like to know, what would you have counseled the young man to do? We can understand why the son might have mixed emotions about going back to the casinos, but would it really be all that wrong for the young man to go back so he can help his struggling father? Some would argue that returning to the casinos would really be the best thing for the young man to do if he really loves his dad.
Every day decisions like this have to be made. When the moment of decision comes, I wonder how you and I make decisions. Or how do we decide what kind of counsel to give when others have decisions like this that must be made. I sincerely hope that we are turning to the Word of God when these issues of life need to be determined.
If I were counseling this young man, I would have to tell him that returning to the casinos (or to any form of gambling) is not the answer. Why? Because God's Word condemns gambling. Not only did he rebuke Israel for sitting at the "tables of chance" (Isa. 65:11), but gambling flies in the face of everything God has said about the making and mastering of money. To gamble is to sin, and clearly we would not want to counsel anyone to walk in the paths of sin - no matter how well-intentioned they might be.
So what of the father who stands to lose his home? I would encourage the son to talk to his dad to see if he has any assets that can be sold to help meet the debts. If not, I would encourage the son to help his father secure an honest job that would help him in paying his debts. If the father were not capable of working due to handicap or disability, I would encourage the son to do all he can to help provide for some of his father's bills. But under no circumstances would I counsel the son (or the father) to go back to gambling.
But you say, "The father could lose his home." That's true, but such are the consequences of a life of sin sometimes. We can't just expect to live in a way that is contradictory to God and then not have to suffer the consequences along the way. And remember, the Bible says "Better is a little with the fear of the Lord, than great treasure with trouble" (Prov. 15:16). And again, "Better is the poor who walks in his integrity than one perverse in his ways, though he be rich" (Prov. 28:6).
So I hope you and I will consider how we make our decisions. As Christians, I'm convinced that biblical ignorance is not always our problem. Many times we know what God's Word says - we just don't always want to do it. When the decisions of life must be made in our own life and in the lives of others, I hope we'll be found turning to God's Word. God's path is not always the easiest one, but it is always best!
Thursday, June 9, 2011
"Preacher, Does This Church Belong to You?"
That's definitely my favorite question I've been asked at VBS this year. Hanging with the kids is always so much fun. They're full of questions, and almost always they are very sincere and innocent when they ask them. God gave me quick grace to answer the little girl's question. I responded, "No honey, this church belongs to Jesus."
But a little later, I started thinking about my answer to the little girl's question. Did I answer her honestly? Can we genuinely say that this church belongs to Jesus? Of course, the church does belong to our Savior. He said in Matt. 16:18, "On this rock I will build MY church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." No doubt - the church belongs to Jesus.
So then, I guess we've got to answer the question, "Is this group of people really a part of Christ's church?" The church is the Body of Christ, and we know that we become a member of Christ's body at the very moment we place our faith in Him. All that is pretty elementary stuff, but what we need to determine is if we're acting like we belong to Jesus.
I'm convinced that if we belong to Jesus, we'll start doing what He says. So what did Christ tell us to do? He instructed us to do many things, but the last marching orders He left us with were these: "Go and make disciples" (Matt. 28:19). The last thing Christ wanted His church to know before He left this earth for heaven was "go and make disciples."
So back to that little girl's question. Does the church I pastor really belong to Jesus? Does the church you attend really belong to Jesus? There's a sure-fire way to find out. How many disciples are we making? How many unchurched people are we reaching? God help us all to answer these questions and to make sure that our churches belong to Christ.
But a little later, I started thinking about my answer to the little girl's question. Did I answer her honestly? Can we genuinely say that this church belongs to Jesus? Of course, the church does belong to our Savior. He said in Matt. 16:18, "On this rock I will build MY church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it." No doubt - the church belongs to Jesus.
So then, I guess we've got to answer the question, "Is this group of people really a part of Christ's church?" The church is the Body of Christ, and we know that we become a member of Christ's body at the very moment we place our faith in Him. All that is pretty elementary stuff, but what we need to determine is if we're acting like we belong to Jesus.
I'm convinced that if we belong to Jesus, we'll start doing what He says. So what did Christ tell us to do? He instructed us to do many things, but the last marching orders He left us with were these: "Go and make disciples" (Matt. 28:19). The last thing Christ wanted His church to know before He left this earth for heaven was "go and make disciples."
So back to that little girl's question. Does the church I pastor really belong to Jesus? Does the church you attend really belong to Jesus? There's a sure-fire way to find out. How many disciples are we making? How many unchurched people are we reaching? God help us all to answer these questions and to make sure that our churches belong to Christ.
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Judging a Book By Its Cover
My oldest son, Tanner, has become an avid reader. Just this past year he read about 40 or 50 books for his school's AR program and finished at the top of his class. I'll be honest - that's more books than I read in my entire K-12 experience. I've become a much better reader since then, but I definitely got off to a slow start. Tanner really got interested in the Percy Jackson series of books this past school year. He read all five in the series and just completed "The Lost Hero" a couple of months ago. Some of those books were hundreds of pages long with small font and no pictures. His mother and I thank God for his new-found love of reading.
And yet we had an experience at Wal-Mart a few months back. While perusing the book section of Mr. Walton's Supercenter, their was a book that immediately caught Tanner's attention. I'll have to admit I was impressed as well. It had a metallic cover with a Punisher-type skull on the front of it. It was just the kind of book that a young boy would be attracted to. Tanner asked if he could have it so I picked it up and read the back cover of the book.
After reading the back cover I turned to Tanner and said, "Trust me, you won't like this." I can't remember now exactly what the plot of the book was, but I knew it wouldn't interest my son. And yet he was smitten with the cover - he had to have the book. Realizing I wouldn't be able to talk him out of it, I decided to buy him the book. He was pumped about getting this shiny new book, but as he began to read it his enthusiasm turned into boredom. Needless to say, the book couldn't deliver what the chrome cover seemed to promise.
We've all been guilty of judging a book by its cover, but of course it's not just books that we judge. We're often guilty of judging other people based on their appearance. I was reminded of this while reading the words of Paul today. He asked the Corinthians: "Do you look at things according to the outward appearance?" (2 Cor. 10:7). If so, then Paul knew he was in trouble. Apparently the Corinthians had already started judging him. Some of them were saying, "his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible" (2 Cor. 10:10).
Paul was not the first person to suffer this kind of judgment. Remember, if had been left to Samuel's discretion, Eliab (David's oldest brother) would've been anointed Israel's next king. Samuel certainly wouldn't have anointed the ruddy young shepherd boy of Judah. God had to teach Samuel an important lesson: "Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart" (1 Sam. 16:7).
Were we alive when Jesus was still physically ministering on this earth, my guess is that none of us would've been drawn to His appearance either. Concerning the coming Christ, the Bible said, "When we see Him, there is no beauty that we should desire Him" (Isa. 53:2). The physical appearance of our Savior would've probably never drawn us to His saving power. But of course, Jesus didn't draw men unto Himself through good looks. Rather, we have all been drawn to our Lord through the power of the Holy Spirit.
So I would remind us all of that old adage: Don't judge a book by its cover. Satan has placed a lot of shiny books on the shelves of this life. But just a few pages into his story will show us that he can never deliver on what he's promised. The Bible says that he's the father of lies (John 8:44). Rather than picking up any number of his shiny volumes, I hope we'll all be compelled to pick up our Heavenly Father's book. The Bible may not be the most attractive book on the shelf, but it is the only one that can offer its readers a well-spring of life. When we allow the truth of its pages to saturate our lives, we'll never go looking for a refund.
And yet we had an experience at Wal-Mart a few months back. While perusing the book section of Mr. Walton's Supercenter, their was a book that immediately caught Tanner's attention. I'll have to admit I was impressed as well. It had a metallic cover with a Punisher-type skull on the front of it. It was just the kind of book that a young boy would be attracted to. Tanner asked if he could have it so I picked it up and read the back cover of the book.
After reading the back cover I turned to Tanner and said, "Trust me, you won't like this." I can't remember now exactly what the plot of the book was, but I knew it wouldn't interest my son. And yet he was smitten with the cover - he had to have the book. Realizing I wouldn't be able to talk him out of it, I decided to buy him the book. He was pumped about getting this shiny new book, but as he began to read it his enthusiasm turned into boredom. Needless to say, the book couldn't deliver what the chrome cover seemed to promise.
We've all been guilty of judging a book by its cover, but of course it's not just books that we judge. We're often guilty of judging other people based on their appearance. I was reminded of this while reading the words of Paul today. He asked the Corinthians: "Do you look at things according to the outward appearance?" (2 Cor. 10:7). If so, then Paul knew he was in trouble. Apparently the Corinthians had already started judging him. Some of them were saying, "his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible" (2 Cor. 10:10).
Paul was not the first person to suffer this kind of judgment. Remember, if had been left to Samuel's discretion, Eliab (David's oldest brother) would've been anointed Israel's next king. Samuel certainly wouldn't have anointed the ruddy young shepherd boy of Judah. God had to teach Samuel an important lesson: "Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart" (1 Sam. 16:7).
Were we alive when Jesus was still physically ministering on this earth, my guess is that none of us would've been drawn to His appearance either. Concerning the coming Christ, the Bible said, "When we see Him, there is no beauty that we should desire Him" (Isa. 53:2). The physical appearance of our Savior would've probably never drawn us to His saving power. But of course, Jesus didn't draw men unto Himself through good looks. Rather, we have all been drawn to our Lord through the power of the Holy Spirit.
So I would remind us all of that old adage: Don't judge a book by its cover. Satan has placed a lot of shiny books on the shelves of this life. But just a few pages into his story will show us that he can never deliver on what he's promised. The Bible says that he's the father of lies (John 8:44). Rather than picking up any number of his shiny volumes, I hope we'll all be compelled to pick up our Heavenly Father's book. The Bible may not be the most attractive book on the shelf, but it is the only one that can offer its readers a well-spring of life. When we allow the truth of its pages to saturate our lives, we'll never go looking for a refund.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
What If I Had Never Been Born?
Today is my 34th birthday. While I know that's still relatively young, I can honestly say I don't feel quite as young as I did 5 or 10 years ago. Many of my older friends tell me that it will only get worse. Gee thanks - just what I wanted to hear.
I think birthdays are kind of like milestones in our lives. They cause us to pause and reflect on where we've been, where we are, and where we're going. Today I stopped and asked myself this question: What things would be different if I were never born? Specifically, I wonder how many people would still be headed for hell if I had never been born. While I'm ashamed to admit it, the answer is not near enough.
I led my first person to faith in Christ when I was about 15 years old. I'll never forget it - I was on a youth Evangelism Explosion visit with Gary Boyd and Amy Shoemaker (now Garland). Gary told me that it was my turn to share the Gospel. We went to a nice home in Sequoyah Hills in Knoxville, TN. A teenage girl answered the door and we introduced ourselves and began to ask her about her church background. Then we came to the two big questions we were trained to ask: "If you were to die tonight, do you know that you would go to heaven? If God asked you why you should be allowed into heaven, what would you say?"
While I can't remember exactly how the young lady answered that question, I remember that she indicated some doubts about her relationship with Jesus. God allowed me the privilege of sharing the Gospel with her. I can vividly remember being scared and trying to remember everything I wanted to say. I'm sure it was probably one of the more lackluster Gospel presentations that's ever been given, but God used it to save the soul of that teenager. I praise God that He allowed me, Gary, and Amy to be a part of that experience.
But as I look back over these 34 years, for every one time I faithfully shared the Gospel with someone, there were probably at least 10 or 20 other opportunities that I squandered. Those opportunities were missed either because I had a fear of failure or rejection. While I praise God that he has used me to see a good number of souls added to His Kingdom, I'm ashamed that many others remain separated from His grace simply because I was unwilling to share. Too many people are still on the road to hell, and unless I do something about it their blood will be required at my hands (Ezekiel 33:8).
Perhaps you share some of my concerns. Whose life is radically different because you and I were born? We can live in nice homes, drive nice cars, make large salaries, and belong to fancy clubs, but that will probably do very little to change someone's life - much less their eternity. I hope the burden of Jesus will become ours as well: "I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is still day; the night is coming when no one can work" (John 9:4). When the night comes, I hope we'll all be found leading the lost to a saving knowledge of Christ.
I think birthdays are kind of like milestones in our lives. They cause us to pause and reflect on where we've been, where we are, and where we're going. Today I stopped and asked myself this question: What things would be different if I were never born? Specifically, I wonder how many people would still be headed for hell if I had never been born. While I'm ashamed to admit it, the answer is not near enough.
I led my first person to faith in Christ when I was about 15 years old. I'll never forget it - I was on a youth Evangelism Explosion visit with Gary Boyd and Amy Shoemaker (now Garland). Gary told me that it was my turn to share the Gospel. We went to a nice home in Sequoyah Hills in Knoxville, TN. A teenage girl answered the door and we introduced ourselves and began to ask her about her church background. Then we came to the two big questions we were trained to ask: "If you were to die tonight, do you know that you would go to heaven? If God asked you why you should be allowed into heaven, what would you say?"
While I can't remember exactly how the young lady answered that question, I remember that she indicated some doubts about her relationship with Jesus. God allowed me the privilege of sharing the Gospel with her. I can vividly remember being scared and trying to remember everything I wanted to say. I'm sure it was probably one of the more lackluster Gospel presentations that's ever been given, but God used it to save the soul of that teenager. I praise God that He allowed me, Gary, and Amy to be a part of that experience.
But as I look back over these 34 years, for every one time I faithfully shared the Gospel with someone, there were probably at least 10 or 20 other opportunities that I squandered. Those opportunities were missed either because I had a fear of failure or rejection. While I praise God that he has used me to see a good number of souls added to His Kingdom, I'm ashamed that many others remain separated from His grace simply because I was unwilling to share. Too many people are still on the road to hell, and unless I do something about it their blood will be required at my hands (Ezekiel 33:8).
Perhaps you share some of my concerns. Whose life is radically different because you and I were born? We can live in nice homes, drive nice cars, make large salaries, and belong to fancy clubs, but that will probably do very little to change someone's life - much less their eternity. I hope the burden of Jesus will become ours as well: "I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is still day; the night is coming when no one can work" (John 9:4). When the night comes, I hope we'll all be found leading the lost to a saving knowledge of Christ.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Feeding Rover After the Rapture
Most of you are probably aware that a false teacher named Harold Camping has predicted that Christ will return to rapture His church on this Saturday - May 21, 2011. I wrote a blog post about Mr. Camping's false teaching several months ago. While Mr. Camping's prediction will be proven bogus when the clock strikes midnight this Saturday, it has managed to accomplish one thing. Apparently, it has caused Christians to think about the welfare of their pets following the Rapture.
Until last Wednesday, I had no idea that post-rapture pet care had become such a thriving business. Check out this article that a church member shared with me to see what I'm talking about. There are at least 3 post-rapture pet care services that want your business. Two of them are run by atheists, and the third is a Christian-owned service that claims to coordinate "with atheist animal lovers nationwide who volunteer to take care of left-behind pets." The price for post-rapture pet care services range anywhere from $10-$135.
While I can appreciate the fact that Christians want Rover taken care of in the event of their departure, I find all this post-rapture pet care stuff to be a little disturbing. A few initial observations immediately come to the surface. First, this seems more like a money-making scheme than anything else. If the Christians aren't going to be here to insure that their pets are taken care of, what makes them think that they will be? Are they just going to take the atheists' word for it? And by the way, when the rapture occurs all the atheists will realize that they've been left behind. Do we really think that pet-care is going to be their top priority?
The greater concerns are biblical in nature. Christians, instead of investing our money in the post-rapture care of our pets, why not use our money for the pre-rapture salvation of the lost? The fact that a group of Christians would be concerned in working with atheists to provide pet care rather than presenting them with the Gospel is a telling sign of how misplaced our priorities have become.
To me, that's the most tragic part of this whole story. Are "Christians" now going to be known more for their love of pets than for the lost? Perhaps we already are. Statistics tell us that nearly every mainline Christian denomination in America is now baptizing fewer and fewer people with each passing year. Is it any wonder? We're now thinking more about the earthly welfare of our pets than we are the eternal destination of the lost.
God help us never to forget these words of a certain rich man whom Jesus said is now burning in hell: "Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame" (Luke 16:24). If God's people would often stop to consider the eternal destiny of those who die lost apart from Christ, my guess is that post-rapture pet care services would become a thing of the past.
Until last Wednesday, I had no idea that post-rapture pet care had become such a thriving business. Check out this article that a church member shared with me to see what I'm talking about. There are at least 3 post-rapture pet care services that want your business. Two of them are run by atheists, and the third is a Christian-owned service that claims to coordinate "with atheist animal lovers nationwide who volunteer to take care of left-behind pets." The price for post-rapture pet care services range anywhere from $10-$135.
While I can appreciate the fact that Christians want Rover taken care of in the event of their departure, I find all this post-rapture pet care stuff to be a little disturbing. A few initial observations immediately come to the surface. First, this seems more like a money-making scheme than anything else. If the Christians aren't going to be here to insure that their pets are taken care of, what makes them think that they will be? Are they just going to take the atheists' word for it? And by the way, when the rapture occurs all the atheists will realize that they've been left behind. Do we really think that pet-care is going to be their top priority?
The greater concerns are biblical in nature. Christians, instead of investing our money in the post-rapture care of our pets, why not use our money for the pre-rapture salvation of the lost? The fact that a group of Christians would be concerned in working with atheists to provide pet care rather than presenting them with the Gospel is a telling sign of how misplaced our priorities have become.
To me, that's the most tragic part of this whole story. Are "Christians" now going to be known more for their love of pets than for the lost? Perhaps we already are. Statistics tell us that nearly every mainline Christian denomination in America is now baptizing fewer and fewer people with each passing year. Is it any wonder? We're now thinking more about the earthly welfare of our pets than we are the eternal destination of the lost.
God help us never to forget these words of a certain rich man whom Jesus said is now burning in hell: "Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame" (Luke 16:24). If God's people would often stop to consider the eternal destiny of those who die lost apart from Christ, my guess is that post-rapture pet care services would become a thing of the past.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
A Christian Response to Osama Bin Laden's Death
As I was watching TV on Sunday evening, some breaking news flashed across the screen. The reporter said that there was a "big announcement" that was fixing to come from the White House. Fox News actually broke the story before the White House had a chance to do so: "Osama Bin Laden is dead." Once the news broke, the reporter was filled with joy. He happened to be interviewing a retired general, and at one point they gave one another a high five.
I'll have to admit that when I first heard the news, my heart was excited as well. For me it was a great relief to know that justice had finally been served. But as I continued to watch the coverage that evening and early the next morning, I saw people dancing and yelling in the streets of Washington, New York, and several other places. It caused me to stop and wonder, "Is all this celebration really a Christian response to the death of a wicked man?"
I've wrestled with that question for the last 24-48 hours, but I think the Holy Spirit has reminded me of some things I'd like to share with you. First, I think it is completely appropriate for us to rejoice over the fact that justice has finally been served. Romans 12:19 reminds us that vengeance belongs to the Lord, and the following verses of chapter 13 make it very clear that God has chosen our governing officials as a means of executing that vengeance: "For he (the government) is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minster, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (v. 4). God has finally brought Osama Bin Laden to justice and for that we say, "Amen!"
And yet, I wonder what God thinks about all this celebration and high-fiving going on. Should we rejoice over the death of a wicked man? I think we can agree that our response to Bin Laden's death should be like our Lord's. So what is our Lord's response to his death? "As I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live" (Ezekiel 33:11). If God took no pleasure in the death of Osama Bin Laden, neither should we. Rather than killing the world's most notorious terrorist, it would've been the pleasure of our Lord to have saved him through the shed blood of His Son Jesus. And yet, it seems that Bin Laden was not willing to come, much like the Jews during the ministry of our Savior (Matt. 23:37).
In all our joy and celebration, have we stopped to consider that Osama Bin Laden split the gates of hell wide open, if in fact he died lost apart from Christ? Is that really a happy thought for us? If it is, something is desperately wrong. Rather than rejoicing over the death of a wicked man, our hearts should break that he now has no further opportunity to be reconciled to God. It should also remind us of the missionary mandate to reach the world for Christ while there is still time.
The Holy Spirit laid one final thought on my heart. We tend to put guys like Osama Bin Laden in the same category with people like Hitler and Stalin. Whether most people would say it or not, they often tend to think that hell is really reserved for those kind of people. We tend to think that they were "worse sinners" than us. But consider what Jesus said: "Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3). The death of Osama Bin Laden should cause us to examine our own hearts to see if we are really children of God.
So let us rejoice that justice has been served, but let's take a look in the mirror as well. Are we burdened over the spiritual condition of the lost? And could it be that we ourselves are one of those lost apart from the saving grace of Jesus? Let us all thank God that we still have a chance to receive Him and that we can compel others to do the same. Let's save our rejoicing and high-fiving for the salvation of a lost person. As Jesus said, "There will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent" (Luke 15:7).
I'll have to admit that when I first heard the news, my heart was excited as well. For me it was a great relief to know that justice had finally been served. But as I continued to watch the coverage that evening and early the next morning, I saw people dancing and yelling in the streets of Washington, New York, and several other places. It caused me to stop and wonder, "Is all this celebration really a Christian response to the death of a wicked man?"
I've wrestled with that question for the last 24-48 hours, but I think the Holy Spirit has reminded me of some things I'd like to share with you. First, I think it is completely appropriate for us to rejoice over the fact that justice has finally been served. Romans 12:19 reminds us that vengeance belongs to the Lord, and the following verses of chapter 13 make it very clear that God has chosen our governing officials as a means of executing that vengeance: "For he (the government) is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minster, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil" (v. 4). God has finally brought Osama Bin Laden to justice and for that we say, "Amen!"
And yet, I wonder what God thinks about all this celebration and high-fiving going on. Should we rejoice over the death of a wicked man? I think we can agree that our response to Bin Laden's death should be like our Lord's. So what is our Lord's response to his death? "As I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live" (Ezekiel 33:11). If God took no pleasure in the death of Osama Bin Laden, neither should we. Rather than killing the world's most notorious terrorist, it would've been the pleasure of our Lord to have saved him through the shed blood of His Son Jesus. And yet, it seems that Bin Laden was not willing to come, much like the Jews during the ministry of our Savior (Matt. 23:37).
In all our joy and celebration, have we stopped to consider that Osama Bin Laden split the gates of hell wide open, if in fact he died lost apart from Christ? Is that really a happy thought for us? If it is, something is desperately wrong. Rather than rejoicing over the death of a wicked man, our hearts should break that he now has no further opportunity to be reconciled to God. It should also remind us of the missionary mandate to reach the world for Christ while there is still time.
The Holy Spirit laid one final thought on my heart. We tend to put guys like Osama Bin Laden in the same category with people like Hitler and Stalin. Whether most people would say it or not, they often tend to think that hell is really reserved for those kind of people. We tend to think that they were "worse sinners" than us. But consider what Jesus said: "Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3). The death of Osama Bin Laden should cause us to examine our own hearts to see if we are really children of God.
So let us rejoice that justice has been served, but let's take a look in the mirror as well. Are we burdened over the spiritual condition of the lost? And could it be that we ourselves are one of those lost apart from the saving grace of Jesus? Let us all thank God that we still have a chance to receive Him and that we can compel others to do the same. Let's save our rejoicing and high-fiving for the salvation of a lost person. As Jesus said, "There will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who do not need to repent" (Luke 15:7).
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Good News for Both Sides of the Tracks
I live in Morristown, TN. It's a wonderful place to live. Morristown is best described as Small-town, USA. There's a tight, family feel throughout the community. We still have service stations that offer full-service. Local farmers still set up their produce stands right in the heart of town. My wife and I could not ask for any better place to raise our children.
There are some train tracks that run right through the middle of town. The tracks run from east to west and most of the folks around Morristown tend to think of the tracks as something of a boundary line. Everything north of the tracks is the northside of town, and likewise for the southside.
Generally speaking, most of the residents would probably agree that the "nicer amenities" are found on the northside of town. Most of the nicer homes are found north of the tracks. The largest and most ornate church buildings are found there as well. The northside is also home to Morristown's country club. I could go on, but you get the picture.
The southside of town is a little different story, especially towards the middle of the city. A large number of middle income folks used to live in small homes on the southside of town, but many of them have now relocated to the suburbs. Consequently, their old homes have either been sold or have been passed on to loved ones after their death. Homes on the southside are often a little older, in need of repair, and many of them have become rental properties. The southside of town is also home to the local Housing Authority, also known as "the projects" to most of the locals.
While driving over the tracks today, a thought occurred to me: "It doesn't matter what side of the tracks you live on. The Gospel is good news to everyone on both sides of the tracks." We often like to put people in categories, but God doesn't do that. The Bible says that "the rich and the poor have this in common, the Lord is the Maker of the all" (Prov. 22:2). As such, the Gospel of Jesus Christ "is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes - first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" (Rom. 1:16).
How good it is to know that God's saving power and awesome love is not just good news for a few. The death, burial, and resurrection of our Savior is God's gift to all mankind (1 Tim. 2:4). That begs the question: If the Gospel really is good news for everybody, why do we tend to share it only with those who are most like us? Could it be that sometimes those on the northside of the tracks aren't interested in those on the southside, and vice versa?
Perhaps this will serve as a reminder to us that there won't be a set of train tracks running down the middle of heaven. We'll only have one class of people in glory - the Bride of Christ. God help us never to forget that we have the privilege of sharing His good news with everyone. Maybe the greatest way we can honor our Savior during this Easter season is to share His Gospel with those on both sides of the tracks. In doing so, we might be called "a friend of tax collectors and sinners" (Matt. 11:19). That's OK - it won't be the first time that's ever happened. I think it happened to a man from Galilee about 2000 years ago.
There are some train tracks that run right through the middle of town. The tracks run from east to west and most of the folks around Morristown tend to think of the tracks as something of a boundary line. Everything north of the tracks is the northside of town, and likewise for the southside.
Generally speaking, most of the residents would probably agree that the "nicer amenities" are found on the northside of town. Most of the nicer homes are found north of the tracks. The largest and most ornate church buildings are found there as well. The northside is also home to Morristown's country club. I could go on, but you get the picture.
The southside of town is a little different story, especially towards the middle of the city. A large number of middle income folks used to live in small homes on the southside of town, but many of them have now relocated to the suburbs. Consequently, their old homes have either been sold or have been passed on to loved ones after their death. Homes on the southside are often a little older, in need of repair, and many of them have become rental properties. The southside of town is also home to the local Housing Authority, also known as "the projects" to most of the locals.
While driving over the tracks today, a thought occurred to me: "It doesn't matter what side of the tracks you live on. The Gospel is good news to everyone on both sides of the tracks." We often like to put people in categories, but God doesn't do that. The Bible says that "the rich and the poor have this in common, the Lord is the Maker of the all" (Prov. 22:2). As such, the Gospel of Jesus Christ "is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes - first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" (Rom. 1:16).
How good it is to know that God's saving power and awesome love is not just good news for a few. The death, burial, and resurrection of our Savior is God's gift to all mankind (1 Tim. 2:4). That begs the question: If the Gospel really is good news for everybody, why do we tend to share it only with those who are most like us? Could it be that sometimes those on the northside of the tracks aren't interested in those on the southside, and vice versa?
Perhaps this will serve as a reminder to us that there won't be a set of train tracks running down the middle of heaven. We'll only have one class of people in glory - the Bride of Christ. God help us never to forget that we have the privilege of sharing His good news with everyone. Maybe the greatest way we can honor our Savior during this Easter season is to share His Gospel with those on both sides of the tracks. In doing so, we might be called "a friend of tax collectors and sinners" (Matt. 11:19). That's OK - it won't be the first time that's ever happened. I think it happened to a man from Galilee about 2000 years ago.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Have We Become "Gospel-Hardened?"
Yesterday I had the privilege of attending the Bible Drills of my church's local Baptist association. While there I had the chance to catch up with one of my pastor friends. I noticed he wasn't wearing his usual "Sunday best." Instead, he was wearing a blue polo shirt. As I got a little closer, I noticed it read "Honduras Mission Trip." My pastor friend explained to me that his church had just returned from a great mission trip to Honduras. He said they saw 148 people pray to receive Christ as Savior during the course of their trip. Praise the Lord!
After we spent a few minutes rejoicing over what God had done, I asked him a question: "Why don't we see God doing things like that in America today, especially where we pastor here in the South." His response to me was very simple: "I think we've become Gospel-hardened." I knew what my pastor friend was talking about, but I don't think I'd ever heard it put quite that way before. What my friend was trying to say is that in many cases the people of our churches and our communities have heard the Gospel so many times, it's almost as if they've become immune to it.
Let me give you an example. Have you ever been sick for a long period of time only to have the doctor prescribe you a good dose of antibiotics? If you have, then you know that antibiotics are very effective at treating illness...at least for a little while. Yet after a while, the body begins to grow accustomed to the presence of the antibiotics. As a result, they no longer do the job they were intended to do. The body's immune system no longer feels the power of the antibiotics.
I'm concerned that perhaps that's exactly what has happened with the Gospel in America, especially in the South. It seems like the people of our churches have been exposed to the Gospel so much that they are no longer excited by it's saving power. Could we even say that the Gospel has become "past-tense" in some of our churches? It's something that I responded to "way back there" when I walked an aisle, prayed a prayer, visited my preacher, etc.
We find some of the same attitudes when we go witnessing in our communities (which by the way is not near often enough). We share the Gospel with folks and ask if they've placed their faith in Christ. Some people respond by saying, "Oh yeah, I've already done that." I'm usually tempted to ask, "Why aren't you and your family in church?" If you think about it, a Christian that never goes to church is like a car that never drives down the road. When others are asked about the Gospel, they seem completely disinterested. "I've heard it all before" they might say.
So what's the problem? Has the Gospel lost its power? Absolutely not! It is still "the power of God unto salvation for everyone that believes" (Rom. 1:16). So why is it that people all over the world are coming to faith in droves, while the people of America seem to be totally indifferent? Perhaps it's because we've become too prosperous. We have faired so well that the Gospel has become like an unnecessary antibiotic to us. God help us.
What's the answer? I think we've got to pray that God would remove the spiritual blinders that the "god of this age" has placed over the minds of the people inside and outside our churches. We may even need to pray that God would remove His hand of prosperity and protection so that people will see once again their need for a Savior. Maybe when that happens, the people of our churches and communities will move from being Gospel-hardened to Gospel-humbled. What a day it will be when Christians can genuinely sing that old song again, "I stand amazed in the presence of Jesus the Nazarene, and wonder how He could love me - a sinner condemned unclean."
After we spent a few minutes rejoicing over what God had done, I asked him a question: "Why don't we see God doing things like that in America today, especially where we pastor here in the South." His response to me was very simple: "I think we've become Gospel-hardened." I knew what my pastor friend was talking about, but I don't think I'd ever heard it put quite that way before. What my friend was trying to say is that in many cases the people of our churches and our communities have heard the Gospel so many times, it's almost as if they've become immune to it.
Let me give you an example. Have you ever been sick for a long period of time only to have the doctor prescribe you a good dose of antibiotics? If you have, then you know that antibiotics are very effective at treating illness...at least for a little while. Yet after a while, the body begins to grow accustomed to the presence of the antibiotics. As a result, they no longer do the job they were intended to do. The body's immune system no longer feels the power of the antibiotics.
I'm concerned that perhaps that's exactly what has happened with the Gospel in America, especially in the South. It seems like the people of our churches have been exposed to the Gospel so much that they are no longer excited by it's saving power. Could we even say that the Gospel has become "past-tense" in some of our churches? It's something that I responded to "way back there" when I walked an aisle, prayed a prayer, visited my preacher, etc.
We find some of the same attitudes when we go witnessing in our communities (which by the way is not near often enough). We share the Gospel with folks and ask if they've placed their faith in Christ. Some people respond by saying, "Oh yeah, I've already done that." I'm usually tempted to ask, "Why aren't you and your family in church?" If you think about it, a Christian that never goes to church is like a car that never drives down the road. When others are asked about the Gospel, they seem completely disinterested. "I've heard it all before" they might say.
So what's the problem? Has the Gospel lost its power? Absolutely not! It is still "the power of God unto salvation for everyone that believes" (Rom. 1:16). So why is it that people all over the world are coming to faith in droves, while the people of America seem to be totally indifferent? Perhaps it's because we've become too prosperous. We have faired so well that the Gospel has become like an unnecessary antibiotic to us. God help us.
What's the answer? I think we've got to pray that God would remove the spiritual blinders that the "god of this age" has placed over the minds of the people inside and outside our churches. We may even need to pray that God would remove His hand of prosperity and protection so that people will see once again their need for a Savior. Maybe when that happens, the people of our churches and communities will move from being Gospel-hardened to Gospel-humbled. What a day it will be when Christians can genuinely sing that old song again, "I stand amazed in the presence of Jesus the Nazarene, and wonder how He could love me - a sinner condemned unclean."
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Churches Have Changed, But Have They Changed for the Better?
I was surprised to pick up my local newspaper recently and find an opinion column entitled "Old Time Religion." The column was written by a local writer who just happens to be a Christian and a member of a local church. She shared a recent experience about a young man coming to her and inviting her and her family to his church. To quote the writer, she said the invitation went like this: "You and your husband and kids really ought to come to our church. We don't sing any of that old timey music and nobody has to wear church clothes. You just come anyway you are, and nobody cares what you do the rest of the week. You just come and enjoy worship services and leave with a really good feeling."
Needless to say, the writer wasn't too impressed with the invitation. While she thanked the young man for the invite, she also told him that she already had a church home and that she and her family would continue to worship there.
When I hear and read stories like this, I'm reminded yet again that churches have changed quite a bit over the last decade or so. Naming all those changes would be virtually impossible, but I think it would be beneficial to mention a few. As the young man mentioned, the music of many churches has changed. Where churches once incorporated a lot of hymns into their worship, many of those hymns have now been labeled as "old timey music." Consequently, they've been abandoned for songs with a much more modern sound.
I'm certainly not against music that has a more contemporary feel. In fact, I like a good deal of the music that gets air-time on contemporary Christian radio stations. Yet, I wonder if it's good that some modern churches have done away with the "old timey music." I learned some of the richest and deepest theology of my life through the singing of those old standards. Our music has definitely changed, but has it changed for the better?
The young man also indicated that church attire has changed over the last several years. I would agree. When I was a kid, it would have been unthinkable to get up on Sunday morning and wear shorts and bluejeans to worship. Now we find it to be a common occurrence. Why the difference? I think it has to do with a new attitude about worship. As the young man said, "You just come anyway you are." To me, it begs the question: Why did the old-timers feel that they needed to dress up when they went to God's house? Perhaps it was because they were trying to present the very best they had to God. "Church clothes" have surely changed, but I wonder if they've changed for the better.
And as the young man indicated to the writer, at his church you can come and worship "and nobody cares what you do for the rest of the week." I doubt that is the message that the young man's pastor was trying to send, but it's pretty sad that he received that impression. Maybe the young man got that impression because it seems that even the message of many churches has changed. In some churches, doctrines that have stood intact for centuries are now being cast to the wayside.
Rob Bell, pastor of a contemporary megachurch in Grand Rapids, Michigan, just recently wrote a book called Love Wins. In the book, he essentially denies the biblical doctrines of heaven and hell. That's right - the man who is a pastor of what is supposed to be an evangelical church denies the bibically-based and historically-cherished doctrines of heaven and hell. The message and the doctrines of many churches have changed, but have they changed for the better?
Clearly, there are no shortage of changes in our churches, but my concern is that our churches don't have THE CHANGE they most desperately need. I'm talking about the kind of change that comes from a life that's totally surrendered to Jesus Christ. We can change our music, our clothes, our buildings, and anything else we want to. But until the people in our churches are changed, our world will continue to see most of our churches as an irrelevant and unnecessary joke. Perhaps they're right.
Needless to say, the writer wasn't too impressed with the invitation. While she thanked the young man for the invite, she also told him that she already had a church home and that she and her family would continue to worship there.
When I hear and read stories like this, I'm reminded yet again that churches have changed quite a bit over the last decade or so. Naming all those changes would be virtually impossible, but I think it would be beneficial to mention a few. As the young man mentioned, the music of many churches has changed. Where churches once incorporated a lot of hymns into their worship, many of those hymns have now been labeled as "old timey music." Consequently, they've been abandoned for songs with a much more modern sound.
I'm certainly not against music that has a more contemporary feel. In fact, I like a good deal of the music that gets air-time on contemporary Christian radio stations. Yet, I wonder if it's good that some modern churches have done away with the "old timey music." I learned some of the richest and deepest theology of my life through the singing of those old standards. Our music has definitely changed, but has it changed for the better?
The young man also indicated that church attire has changed over the last several years. I would agree. When I was a kid, it would have been unthinkable to get up on Sunday morning and wear shorts and bluejeans to worship. Now we find it to be a common occurrence. Why the difference? I think it has to do with a new attitude about worship. As the young man said, "You just come anyway you are." To me, it begs the question: Why did the old-timers feel that they needed to dress up when they went to God's house? Perhaps it was because they were trying to present the very best they had to God. "Church clothes" have surely changed, but I wonder if they've changed for the better.
And as the young man indicated to the writer, at his church you can come and worship "and nobody cares what you do for the rest of the week." I doubt that is the message that the young man's pastor was trying to send, but it's pretty sad that he received that impression. Maybe the young man got that impression because it seems that even the message of many churches has changed. In some churches, doctrines that have stood intact for centuries are now being cast to the wayside.
Rob Bell, pastor of a contemporary megachurch in Grand Rapids, Michigan, just recently wrote a book called Love Wins. In the book, he essentially denies the biblical doctrines of heaven and hell. That's right - the man who is a pastor of what is supposed to be an evangelical church denies the bibically-based and historically-cherished doctrines of heaven and hell. The message and the doctrines of many churches have changed, but have they changed for the better?
Clearly, there are no shortage of changes in our churches, but my concern is that our churches don't have THE CHANGE they most desperately need. I'm talking about the kind of change that comes from a life that's totally surrendered to Jesus Christ. We can change our music, our clothes, our buildings, and anything else we want to. But until the people in our churches are changed, our world will continue to see most of our churches as an irrelevant and unnecessary joke. Perhaps they're right.
Thursday, February 24, 2011
A President Who Refuses to Defend the Law
Today I was both shocked and saddened to learn that the President of the United States is refusing to allow the Department of Justice (DOJ) to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The DOMA became the law of the land in 1996 when both houses of Congress approved it and President Clinton signed it. Simply stated, the DOMA says that the federal government will only recognize marriage as being between a man and a woman. It also grants each state the privilege of determining marriage laws for its own individual state. As part of DOMA, no state is required to recognize the homosexual marriages that might be permitted in other states.
This law has been defended by the DOJ for the last 15 years, and rightfully so because it is the LAW of the land. And yet, now we have a President who seems to think that the law of the land is no longer worthy of a defense by the DOJ. While this is hard to believe, I found that the President's actions are not unprecedented. There have been a few cases when the DOJ has declined to defend statutes.
Those rare cases can be broken down into three categories. The first category include cases in which intervening Supreme Court decisions have rendered the defense of the statute untenable. Clearly this first category does not apply in this case of the DOMA. The second category involves statutes that in the DOJ's view infringe the constitutional powers of the President himself. Again, that does not apply in this case of the DOMA.
The third and smallest category involves statutes that the President has publicly condemned as unconstitutional. This third category actually does apply in this case because the President just recently said that he believes Section 3 of the DOMA is unconstitutional. But even with that being said, that is only his opinion, and the last time I checked his opinion is not the law.
Think about this: Each president recites the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:
Much of the info I gathered for this post came from a Georgetown Law Professor named Nan Hunter. You can access her thoughts here. She is by no means a "conservative" thinker. And yet, she came to this conclusion in 2009: "While it is not impossible for the DOJ to refuse to defend the DOMA, it would be an extraordinary act for them to do so" (emphasis mine). Ms. Hunter, I couldn't agree with you more.
I hope all this grieves your heart just as much as it has mine. More importantly, I hope this is yet another wake-up call to remind us to pray for our President and governing officials. In this case, not only are they governing in a way that is irresponsible, but they're leading in a way that is unbiblical. We know what God did in places like Sodom and Gomorrah, and Judah, and Rome when the powers that be decided to endorse the homosexual lifestyle - one that God consistently calls an abomination.
How can we hope to avoid the same fate they experienced if we open wide the door to homosexual marriage? Clearly we won't, nor should we. If God judged homosexuality back then, He will continue to do so today. Let us pray that our leaders will learn a lesson from history (and the Scripture) and that they will change course immediately. Revival is the only hope left for our land. I'm praying that it will begin at the house of God and that it will touch both the houses of Congress and even the White House.
This law has been defended by the DOJ for the last 15 years, and rightfully so because it is the LAW of the land. And yet, now we have a President who seems to think that the law of the land is no longer worthy of a defense by the DOJ. While this is hard to believe, I found that the President's actions are not unprecedented. There have been a few cases when the DOJ has declined to defend statutes.
Those rare cases can be broken down into three categories. The first category include cases in which intervening Supreme Court decisions have rendered the defense of the statute untenable. Clearly this first category does not apply in this case of the DOMA. The second category involves statutes that in the DOJ's view infringe the constitutional powers of the President himself. Again, that does not apply in this case of the DOMA.
The third and smallest category involves statutes that the President has publicly condemned as unconstitutional. This third category actually does apply in this case because the President just recently said that he believes Section 3 of the DOMA is unconstitutional. But even with that being said, that is only his opinion, and the last time I checked his opinion is not the law.
Think about this: Each president recites the following oath, in accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."In other words, it is the President's job to "defend the Constitution of the United States." While I understand that the DOMA is not the Constitution, clearly the legislative branch of our government has determined the DOMA to be a law that is constitutional. For this President to instruct the DOJ not to defend a law that has been deemed constitutional by both houses of Congress and a U.S. President is both irresponsible and incomprehensible.
Much of the info I gathered for this post came from a Georgetown Law Professor named Nan Hunter. You can access her thoughts here. She is by no means a "conservative" thinker. And yet, she came to this conclusion in 2009: "While it is not impossible for the DOJ to refuse to defend the DOMA, it would be an extraordinary act for them to do so" (emphasis mine). Ms. Hunter, I couldn't agree with you more.
I hope all this grieves your heart just as much as it has mine. More importantly, I hope this is yet another wake-up call to remind us to pray for our President and governing officials. In this case, not only are they governing in a way that is irresponsible, but they're leading in a way that is unbiblical. We know what God did in places like Sodom and Gomorrah, and Judah, and Rome when the powers that be decided to endorse the homosexual lifestyle - one that God consistently calls an abomination.
How can we hope to avoid the same fate they experienced if we open wide the door to homosexual marriage? Clearly we won't, nor should we. If God judged homosexuality back then, He will continue to do so today. Let us pray that our leaders will learn a lesson from history (and the Scripture) and that they will change course immediately. Revival is the only hope left for our land. I'm praying that it will begin at the house of God and that it will touch both the houses of Congress and even the White House.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Why Did Jesus Come to Earth?
Today I had the privilege of visiting an institution of higher learning. I went to listen to a speaker who came to talk about the ultimate purpose of Christ's coming to earth. The speaker gave a passionate lecture for about 40 minutes. He was very engaging and clearly he possesses a wonderful gift of communication. The speaker concluded that Jesus came to this earth to establish the kingdom of God. With that I heartily agree, but still it begs the question: What is the kingdom of God and how did Christ instruct His followers to establish it?
According to the speaker, the kingdom of God is essentially the reign of Jesus Christ over all the earth. He explained that Christ's kingdom is ultimately established through the means of social justice - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc. He said that "justice, and love, and changing the structures of the social order" are the reasons for which Christ laid down His life on Calvary's cross. As the speaker brought his message to a conclusion, he urged the students and faculty to "change the world through social justice."
I found myself nodding in agreement with much of what the man said. He said things that I wish every church could've heard. But still, I found myself wondering, "Did Jesus really come to change the social order? Was that His ultimate purpose for coming and dying on the cross?"
I'd like to submit that Christ did not come simply to change the social order. His coming was not just about feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, and relieving the burdens of the afflicted. While Jesus certainly did all those things (and much more), that was not His ultimate purpose for coming to earth. Even Jesus acknowledged "the poor you have with you always" (John 12:8). Now matter how much "social justice" we do, there will always be those who have a multitude of physical and material needs.
So why did Christ come? Christ came to this earth to pay the penalty for our sins through His death on the cross. By dying in our place, Jesus satisfied the wrath of His holy Heavenly Father. His death on the cross has opened wide the gates of heaven to all those that will place their faith in Him. Jesus also came to make disciples out of each one of us. That means He has commissioned us not only to follow Jesus, but to teach others how to do the same.
Let me explain. When Jesus met Saul on the road to Damascus, Saul was a murderer. In fact, he was going to Damascus to kill Christians. Saul was in a state of reprobation (rejected by God), but Jesus wanted to do a work of transformation in his life. Jesus said it was for this purpose that He wanted to send Saul to the Gentiles: "to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me" (Acts 26:18).
In other words, Jesus did not come merely to change the social order. He came to transform human souls - to turn us from darkness to light! Don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with changing the natural order of things, but lasting change will never occur until sins have been forgiven and souls have been saved. You can feed the hungry, clothe the poor, and relieve the afflicted all you want, but until Christ transforms human souls it's all for naught.
I've written this post for this reason: We need to be careful that we don't change the Gospel of Christ from a life-transforming message into a humanitarian campaign, otherwise known as "the social gospel." I'm convinced that Christ and his followers would not have even recognized such a perversion of the Gospel. Remember, Paul challenged the Galatians with these words: "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the Gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:6-8).
So what is the true Gospel? Why did Jesus really come? This same Paul provides us with the answer: "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief" (1 Tim. 1:15). May we never tire of sharing the Gospel of our Lord with both the rich and the poor - the blessed and the afflicted. Then, and only then, will the social order be radically changed for the glory of God.
According to the speaker, the kingdom of God is essentially the reign of Jesus Christ over all the earth. He explained that Christ's kingdom is ultimately established through the means of social justice - feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc. He said that "justice, and love, and changing the structures of the social order" are the reasons for which Christ laid down His life on Calvary's cross. As the speaker brought his message to a conclusion, he urged the students and faculty to "change the world through social justice."
I found myself nodding in agreement with much of what the man said. He said things that I wish every church could've heard. But still, I found myself wondering, "Did Jesus really come to change the social order? Was that His ultimate purpose for coming and dying on the cross?"
I'd like to submit that Christ did not come simply to change the social order. His coming was not just about feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, and relieving the burdens of the afflicted. While Jesus certainly did all those things (and much more), that was not His ultimate purpose for coming to earth. Even Jesus acknowledged "the poor you have with you always" (John 12:8). Now matter how much "social justice" we do, there will always be those who have a multitude of physical and material needs.
So why did Christ come? Christ came to this earth to pay the penalty for our sins through His death on the cross. By dying in our place, Jesus satisfied the wrath of His holy Heavenly Father. His death on the cross has opened wide the gates of heaven to all those that will place their faith in Him. Jesus also came to make disciples out of each one of us. That means He has commissioned us not only to follow Jesus, but to teach others how to do the same.
Let me explain. When Jesus met Saul on the road to Damascus, Saul was a murderer. In fact, he was going to Damascus to kill Christians. Saul was in a state of reprobation (rejected by God), but Jesus wanted to do a work of transformation in his life. Jesus said it was for this purpose that He wanted to send Saul to the Gentiles: "to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me" (Acts 26:18).
In other words, Jesus did not come merely to change the social order. He came to transform human souls - to turn us from darkness to light! Don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with changing the natural order of things, but lasting change will never occur until sins have been forgiven and souls have been saved. You can feed the hungry, clothe the poor, and relieve the afflicted all you want, but until Christ transforms human souls it's all for naught.
I've written this post for this reason: We need to be careful that we don't change the Gospel of Christ from a life-transforming message into a humanitarian campaign, otherwise known as "the social gospel." I'm convinced that Christ and his followers would not have even recognized such a perversion of the Gospel. Remember, Paul challenged the Galatians with these words: "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the Gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:6-8).
So what is the true Gospel? Why did Jesus really come? This same Paul provides us with the answer: "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief" (1 Tim. 1:15). May we never tire of sharing the Gospel of our Lord with both the rich and the poor - the blessed and the afflicted. Then, and only then, will the social order be radically changed for the glory of God.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Does God's Word Direct Us to Accept Everyone?
My last blog post had to do with Belmont University. If you read it, you know that the school just recently added "sexual orientation" to their non-discrimination policy - a move that basically paves the way for them to hire gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, and trans-gendered individuals. The school's trustee chairman indicated that the school would remain true to its Christian heritage when it relieved a lesbian soccer coach of her duties. Yet, within a matter of days the school "changed its tune" when a wealthy music mogul made a $10,000,000 donation to the school. Funny how that kind of money has a way of helping individuals and institutions to change their minds.
I learned about this story primarily through the writing of Lonnie Wilkey, editor of the Tennessee Baptist Convention's Baptist & Reflector. He basically took Belmont University to task for compromising under the weight of the almighty dollar. Since then, others have taken exception with what Lonnie had to write. One such writer, Chris McCain of The Tennessean, published an article entitled "Following God's Word Means Accepting Everyone."
That brings me back to my original question: Does God's Word really direct us to accept everyone? The answer to that question depends on how one defines the word "accept." If by "accept" someone means that we are to love everyone and seek their salvation and discipleship, clearly the answer to that question is yes. If you read Mr. McCain's article, it's very clear he's not using that definition of "accept." For him, acceptance means a complete endorsement of someone's lifestyle - in this case, the lifestyle of a homosexual. He argues that "to label homosexuality as a sin places human limits on God's love." In other words, unless you're willing to completely endorse the lifestyle of a homosexual, you're short-changing the love of God.
I'd like to respectfully disagree. It is entirely possible for a Christian to love everyone without condoning their sinful behaviors. Since Mr. McCain made reference to Jesus in his article, it will aid us to look at how Jesus dealt with similar situations of sin. John 7:53-8:11 shares with us the story of the woman who was caught in adultery. When given a chance to condemn her to death, Christ looked down at the adulterous woman and forgave her sins. In doing so, he demonstrated the love of God.
It's at that point of the story where our liberal friends always seem to stop, but her story was not finished there. What did Jesus say next? "Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more" (John 8:11). The fact that Jesus loved the adulterous woman didn't stop Him from confronting her with her sin and calling her to repentance. In doing so, he demonstrated the holiness of God. So then, if we're going to be faithful to our Lord, we must also demonstrate God's love and holiness. We can't do that if we start accepting every sinful lifestyle that comes down the pike.
And by the way, if "following God's Word means accepting everyone," I wonder if Mr. McCain would be in favor of Belmont "accepting" pedophiles under the school's non-discrimination policy? What about polygamists? Or perhaps even those who practice bestiality? If following God's Word means accepting everyone, shouldn't those who practice such things also be considered for hiring by the school?
Obviously, Mr. McCain doesn't really mean everyone when he says everyone. He wants to define who "everyone" is. Here is Mr. McCain's dilemma: The choice is not his to make. The choice is God's to make and He settled it a long time ago when He gave us His precious, inerrant Word. Rather than giving lip-service to God and distorting the truth of His Word, my prayer is that we will all continue to demonstrate both His love and holiness by "speaking the truth in love" (Eph. 4:15). Our world needs Him now more than ever.
I learned about this story primarily through the writing of Lonnie Wilkey, editor of the Tennessee Baptist Convention's Baptist & Reflector. He basically took Belmont University to task for compromising under the weight of the almighty dollar. Since then, others have taken exception with what Lonnie had to write. One such writer, Chris McCain of The Tennessean, published an article entitled "Following God's Word Means Accepting Everyone."
That brings me back to my original question: Does God's Word really direct us to accept everyone? The answer to that question depends on how one defines the word "accept." If by "accept" someone means that we are to love everyone and seek their salvation and discipleship, clearly the answer to that question is yes. If you read Mr. McCain's article, it's very clear he's not using that definition of "accept." For him, acceptance means a complete endorsement of someone's lifestyle - in this case, the lifestyle of a homosexual. He argues that "to label homosexuality as a sin places human limits on God's love." In other words, unless you're willing to completely endorse the lifestyle of a homosexual, you're short-changing the love of God.
I'd like to respectfully disagree. It is entirely possible for a Christian to love everyone without condoning their sinful behaviors. Since Mr. McCain made reference to Jesus in his article, it will aid us to look at how Jesus dealt with similar situations of sin. John 7:53-8:11 shares with us the story of the woman who was caught in adultery. When given a chance to condemn her to death, Christ looked down at the adulterous woman and forgave her sins. In doing so, he demonstrated the love of God.
It's at that point of the story where our liberal friends always seem to stop, but her story was not finished there. What did Jesus say next? "Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more" (John 8:11). The fact that Jesus loved the adulterous woman didn't stop Him from confronting her with her sin and calling her to repentance. In doing so, he demonstrated the holiness of God. So then, if we're going to be faithful to our Lord, we must also demonstrate God's love and holiness. We can't do that if we start accepting every sinful lifestyle that comes down the pike.
And by the way, if "following God's Word means accepting everyone," I wonder if Mr. McCain would be in favor of Belmont "accepting" pedophiles under the school's non-discrimination policy? What about polygamists? Or perhaps even those who practice bestiality? If following God's Word means accepting everyone, shouldn't those who practice such things also be considered for hiring by the school?
Obviously, Mr. McCain doesn't really mean everyone when he says everyone. He wants to define who "everyone" is. Here is Mr. McCain's dilemma: The choice is not his to make. The choice is God's to make and He settled it a long time ago when He gave us His precious, inerrant Word. Rather than giving lip-service to God and distorting the truth of His Word, my prayer is that we will all continue to demonstrate both His love and holiness by "speaking the truth in love" (Eph. 4:15). Our world needs Him now more than ever.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Sexual Orientation and Belmont University
Within the last few days, the trustees of Belmont University voted to add "sexual orientation" to the school's nondiscrimination policy. In other words, they don't want a person's sexual preference to make any difference at all when a person is considered for employment at the university. You can read the story here. In order to understand the impact of this decision, it will probably aid you to know some things about the school's history.
I'm certainly no expert when it comes to the history of Belmont, but since I'm the pastor of a Tennessee Baptist Church (TBC) that was in cooperation with the school until just a few years ago, hopefully I can make a few informed statements. Belmont was a school created by the Tennessee Baptist Convention in the early 1950's. As with the other TBC institutions of higher learning, the purpose of the school was to train young men and women to be champions for Christ - whether serving him in Christian ministry or in the secular world.
Since its inception, music has played a strong influence on the livelihood of the college. That's not hard to understand, especially since Belmont is located in Music City, USA (Nashville). Many popular singers/songwriters received their education at the University, and consequently a good number of them have become influential donors since their graduation. To put it in a nutshell, Belmont relied heavily upon the TBC during its early years. As time passed, dependence on the TBC wained as the school became increasingly dependent upon the substantial gifts of some wealthy donors.
Many so-called "Christian schools" have gone down that path. It's almost as if you can see gold becoming their god right before your very eyes. Decisions are made much less on biblical convictions, and much more on what will attract the almighty dollar.
The recent decision by the Belmont Board of Trustees is just another very sad sign of this disturbing trend. And yet, this trend is really nothing new. In fact, it's as old as the Bible itself. Just consider men like David, Solomon, and a host of others. So long as they were ruddy little shepherd boys and ignorant young men calling on the wisdom of God, they made decisions based on God's Word and God's favor was added to their lives/kingdoms. Yet when they begin to prosper, somewhere along the way they allowed their prosperity to turn them away from following the Lord. In the cases of David and Solomon, both of them ended in some manner of disgrace because they failed to completely trust the Lord and heed His commands during their latter years.
In my opinion, that is precisely what has happened to Belmont. In this situation of their lesbian soccer coach, they had a wonderful opportunity to step up and shine bright for Christ, declaring the uncompromising truth of Scripture. Instead, they chose the path of least resistance. For every guy like me who writes to confront the institution with their sin, there will be many deep-pocketed donors who will assure them that they made the right decision.
What can we take from this? We better be very careful who we align ourselves with. We can align ourselves with the counselors and resources of this world, but I'm sure of this - none of them will be there to stand in judgment for us when we are called to give an account to Christ. What has Jesus said? "Whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 10:33). Are we Christians? Then let us stand on the Word of God. If weren't not willing to stand on His Word, then let's stop giving lip-service to God. There is simply too much at stake. There is a world out there watching this situation unfold and they're looking for someone to lovingly declare the truth of God's Word.
I certainly wish Belmont no ill will. My prayer is simply that the school's leadership would repent of this decision, ask the Lord for forgiveness, and begin again to lovingly share the truth of God with a world that so desperately needs to hear it. Now is no time for compromise.
I'm certainly no expert when it comes to the history of Belmont, but since I'm the pastor of a Tennessee Baptist Church (TBC) that was in cooperation with the school until just a few years ago, hopefully I can make a few informed statements. Belmont was a school created by the Tennessee Baptist Convention in the early 1950's. As with the other TBC institutions of higher learning, the purpose of the school was to train young men and women to be champions for Christ - whether serving him in Christian ministry or in the secular world.
Since its inception, music has played a strong influence on the livelihood of the college. That's not hard to understand, especially since Belmont is located in Music City, USA (Nashville). Many popular singers/songwriters received their education at the University, and consequently a good number of them have become influential donors since their graduation. To put it in a nutshell, Belmont relied heavily upon the TBC during its early years. As time passed, dependence on the TBC wained as the school became increasingly dependent upon the substantial gifts of some wealthy donors.
Many so-called "Christian schools" have gone down that path. It's almost as if you can see gold becoming their god right before your very eyes. Decisions are made much less on biblical convictions, and much more on what will attract the almighty dollar.
The recent decision by the Belmont Board of Trustees is just another very sad sign of this disturbing trend. And yet, this trend is really nothing new. In fact, it's as old as the Bible itself. Just consider men like David, Solomon, and a host of others. So long as they were ruddy little shepherd boys and ignorant young men calling on the wisdom of God, they made decisions based on God's Word and God's favor was added to their lives/kingdoms. Yet when they begin to prosper, somewhere along the way they allowed their prosperity to turn them away from following the Lord. In the cases of David and Solomon, both of them ended in some manner of disgrace because they failed to completely trust the Lord and heed His commands during their latter years.
In my opinion, that is precisely what has happened to Belmont. In this situation of their lesbian soccer coach, they had a wonderful opportunity to step up and shine bright for Christ, declaring the uncompromising truth of Scripture. Instead, they chose the path of least resistance. For every guy like me who writes to confront the institution with their sin, there will be many deep-pocketed donors who will assure them that they made the right decision.
What can we take from this? We better be very careful who we align ourselves with. We can align ourselves with the counselors and resources of this world, but I'm sure of this - none of them will be there to stand in judgment for us when we are called to give an account to Christ. What has Jesus said? "Whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 10:33). Are we Christians? Then let us stand on the Word of God. If weren't not willing to stand on His Word, then let's stop giving lip-service to God. There is simply too much at stake. There is a world out there watching this situation unfold and they're looking for someone to lovingly declare the truth of God's Word.
I certainly wish Belmont no ill will. My prayer is simply that the school's leadership would repent of this decision, ask the Lord for forgiveness, and begin again to lovingly share the truth of God with a world that so desperately needs to hear it. Now is no time for compromise.
Monday, January 24, 2011
The Slippery Slope of Abortion in America
By now I'm sure many of you are familiar with the horrific story of brutal murder that has come ringing out of Philadelphia, PA. If you haven't read the story, take a look at it here. Kermit Gosnell, a 69-year-old family practitioner posing as an abortion doctor, was recently charged with the murder of a 41-year-old woman and seven infant children. If you read the report of the Pennsylvania DA on the case, you are actually led to believe that Gosnell was responsible for the murder of hundreds more babies and at least one more adult. Without getting too graphic, Gosnell would fully deliver the babies, jab a pair of scissors into the back of their necks, and cut their spinal cords. As wicked as partial-birth abortion is, it seems to pale in comparison to this.
Of course, it's unthinkable that this kind of murder could happen in the United States of America. But did these horrific events take place in a vacuum? In other words, what circumstances created an environment where this type of murder could take place? Clearly the legalization of abortion in 1973 opened the floodgates to some of the grizzly practices we're seeing today. While I'll admit that illegal abortions were commonplace in America before Roe v. Wade, I think it's clear that legalized abortion has done very little to clean up what is a barbaric, abominable act in the eyes of God.
Here's what really gets me in this whole conversation. How can we say that a child inside the womb has fewer rights than a child of the same age outside the womb? Do people really believe that a child outside the womb is a human being, but that one inside the womb is not? You can dress it up, clean it up, and call it whatever you wish, but God's Word calls it the shedding of innocent blood (cf. 2 Kings 21:16). In Bible times, Judah was judged because it shed so much innocent blood during the reign of Manasseh. What makes us think that America will somehow avoid the judgment of God for committing similar sinful acts?
There's no question that abortion has created quite a slippery slope here in America. Legalized abortion led to partial-birth abortion and now this. Is there any end in sight? Only if God sends us the revival we so desperately need. My prayer is that revival will begin in each of our hearts, that it will transform our families, and that it will so move upon the houses of God across this land that finally our culture will be radically changed for the glory of Christ. Then, and only then, will the slippery slope of death be transformed into a holy pursuit of life.
Of course, it's unthinkable that this kind of murder could happen in the United States of America. But did these horrific events take place in a vacuum? In other words, what circumstances created an environment where this type of murder could take place? Clearly the legalization of abortion in 1973 opened the floodgates to some of the grizzly practices we're seeing today. While I'll admit that illegal abortions were commonplace in America before Roe v. Wade, I think it's clear that legalized abortion has done very little to clean up what is a barbaric, abominable act in the eyes of God.
Here's what really gets me in this whole conversation. How can we say that a child inside the womb has fewer rights than a child of the same age outside the womb? Do people really believe that a child outside the womb is a human being, but that one inside the womb is not? You can dress it up, clean it up, and call it whatever you wish, but God's Word calls it the shedding of innocent blood (cf. 2 Kings 21:16). In Bible times, Judah was judged because it shed so much innocent blood during the reign of Manasseh. What makes us think that America will somehow avoid the judgment of God for committing similar sinful acts?
There's no question that abortion has created quite a slippery slope here in America. Legalized abortion led to partial-birth abortion and now this. Is there any end in sight? Only if God sends us the revival we so desperately need. My prayer is that revival will begin in each of our hearts, that it will transform our families, and that it will so move upon the houses of God across this land that finally our culture will be radically changed for the glory of Christ. Then, and only then, will the slippery slope of death be transformed into a holy pursuit of life.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Just Because Mom & Dad Can Doesn't Mean They Should
I am still a relatively young man (or at least I like to think so). I feel blessed that God has given me opportunities to serve him in a number of different ways - as husband, father, pastor, coach, etc. While attempting to serve the Lord in those capacities, I have noticed a disturbing trend among those of my generation. Why is it that many in my generation continue to remain dependent upon their parents? Maybe I'm off base, but it just seems to me that more and more young people are having to rely on their parents to pay their bills, raise their children, and provide for their livelihood.
I mentioned how blessed I have been to serve God in a number of ways. I am also blessed to have two of the greatest parents who have ever lived. I understand that not everyone can say the same thing, so I thank God often for the wonderful parents he blessed me with. I'll never forget the wise counsel my parents gave me when I was considering marriage. I had just bought an engagement ring for my soon-to-be fiancee and I was so excited to bring it home and show it to mom and dad. I remember them both looking at it and agreeing that it was a lovely piece of jewelry.
But what they did next helped to provide me with one of the great lessons of my life. They explained to me that when I got married, no longer was I going to be supported by them. Rather, I would then be self-supporting as it would be up to me to "man-up" and seize the responsibility that marriage/parenthood brings. I thank God that I have two parents who loved me enough to teach me about marriage and responsibility.
And yet as I look at the trends of our culture, I wonder if there were some in my generation who never had that conversation with mom and dad. Perhaps they did, but maybe they just didn't listen to mom and dad's instruction. As a coach, I see more and more children being brought to the ballpark by grandma and grandpa - not because they're helping to give the grandkids a ride, but because they have custody of them. When the parents do show up, sometimes they are high, drunk, or obviously just in no position to raise children.
So, this is a challenge to all those in my generation: It's time for us to step up and take responsibility for ourselves and our families. Just because mom & dad can afford to support us doesn't mean that they should. In fact, many parents can't afford to support their children and grandchildren, yet they often feel pressured to bail them out. We should not be putting this kind of pressure on the people who raised us.
What's the answer? First and foremost, let's make sure that we've surrendered our lives to Christ. We will never do an adequate job of assuming responsibility in our homes until we have placed our faith in the Savior. Furthermore, let's decide that we're going to pursue a close walk with our Heavenly Father. Remember, the favor of God comes "by humility and the fear of the Lord" (Prov. 22:4). Finally, we should let the words of Ecc. 9:10 ring in our hearts and minds each day: "Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might."
Mom and Dad raised us to be big boys and big girls. Now I pray we'll trust God and act like it.
I mentioned how blessed I have been to serve God in a number of ways. I am also blessed to have two of the greatest parents who have ever lived. I understand that not everyone can say the same thing, so I thank God often for the wonderful parents he blessed me with. I'll never forget the wise counsel my parents gave me when I was considering marriage. I had just bought an engagement ring for my soon-to-be fiancee and I was so excited to bring it home and show it to mom and dad. I remember them both looking at it and agreeing that it was a lovely piece of jewelry.
But what they did next helped to provide me with one of the great lessons of my life. They explained to me that when I got married, no longer was I going to be supported by them. Rather, I would then be self-supporting as it would be up to me to "man-up" and seize the responsibility that marriage/parenthood brings. I thank God that I have two parents who loved me enough to teach me about marriage and responsibility.
And yet as I look at the trends of our culture, I wonder if there were some in my generation who never had that conversation with mom and dad. Perhaps they did, but maybe they just didn't listen to mom and dad's instruction. As a coach, I see more and more children being brought to the ballpark by grandma and grandpa - not because they're helping to give the grandkids a ride, but because they have custody of them. When the parents do show up, sometimes they are high, drunk, or obviously just in no position to raise children.
So, this is a challenge to all those in my generation: It's time for us to step up and take responsibility for ourselves and our families. Just because mom & dad can afford to support us doesn't mean that they should. In fact, many parents can't afford to support their children and grandchildren, yet they often feel pressured to bail them out. We should not be putting this kind of pressure on the people who raised us.
What's the answer? First and foremost, let's make sure that we've surrendered our lives to Christ. We will never do an adequate job of assuming responsibility in our homes until we have placed our faith in the Savior. Furthermore, let's decide that we're going to pursue a close walk with our Heavenly Father. Remember, the favor of God comes "by humility and the fear of the Lord" (Prov. 22:4). Finally, we should let the words of Ecc. 9:10 ring in our hearts and minds each day: "Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might."
Mom and Dad raised us to be big boys and big girls. Now I pray we'll trust God and act like it.
Thursday, January 13, 2011
How Does a Christian Live in Faith?
This is a huge question and one that there appears to be much confusion about. Unfortunately, religion has done very little to clarify the matter. In many cases, religion has only added to the confusion that already exists. Some would have us to believe that living in faith means that you know exactly what God is going to do. For instance, there are many who teach that if a person is sick, all he has to do is believe that he is going to be made well. Essentially, that man's faith forces the hand of God - if he only believes strongly enough, things will happen just as he thought they would.
But I ask you, is that really how faith works? As with all other matters, we'll want to see what God's Word has to say about our question. It will help us first to define what faith is. Thankfully, the Bible provides us with a very straight-forward definition of faith: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Heb. 11:1). Fair enough, but what does that mean? The context of this verse has to do with the promises of God; namely His promise of salvation and the truths of His Word. So essentially the author of Hebrews is telling us that a man of faith believes the Word of God. Having been fully persuaded of God's truth, he then orders his life accordingly.
So how does it work? Again, it will aid us to consider the examples provided in the Bible. One awesome example is provided in Romans 4. In that amazing chapter of God's Word, Paul teaches us about the faith of Abraham. He said that it was by faith alone that Abraham was saved: "Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3). How do we know that the righteousness of God equals salvation? Because Paul would later go on to write that "the Lord shall not impute sin" to those who have placed their faith in Christ (Rom. 4:8).
So we know that Abraham was saved through faith, but how did he live by faith? The Bible answers this question too. It says that Abraham was "fully convinced that what (God) had promised He was also able to perform" (Rom. 4:21). Please don't miss this! Faith doesn't mean that you know what God is going to do. Rather it means that you are completely persuaded that God has the power to do anything you ask or anything He has promised.
Just because you believe God is going to do something, does that mean He is bound to do it? Of course not! That's not faith, that's presumption. Consider this example. Let's say you've got a huge debt that needs to be paid and you don't have the money to pay it. Presumption believes that God is going to pay off all my debts. Faith believes that God is able to pay off all my debts. Does faith require that He will? No, in fact faith may require that God will provide you with a job that will allow you to pay all your debts.
Bottom line: Living by faith means living each moment in full confidence that the all-powerful God of heaven and earth "is able to do exceedingly, abundantly above all we can ask or think" (Eph. 3:20). Don't ever presume to know that God will do; just live your life in full confidence that He is more than able to do all things for the glory of His name.
But I ask you, is that really how faith works? As with all other matters, we'll want to see what God's Word has to say about our question. It will help us first to define what faith is. Thankfully, the Bible provides us with a very straight-forward definition of faith: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Heb. 11:1). Fair enough, but what does that mean? The context of this verse has to do with the promises of God; namely His promise of salvation and the truths of His Word. So essentially the author of Hebrews is telling us that a man of faith believes the Word of God. Having been fully persuaded of God's truth, he then orders his life accordingly.
So how does it work? Again, it will aid us to consider the examples provided in the Bible. One awesome example is provided in Romans 4. In that amazing chapter of God's Word, Paul teaches us about the faith of Abraham. He said that it was by faith alone that Abraham was saved: "Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:3). How do we know that the righteousness of God equals salvation? Because Paul would later go on to write that "the Lord shall not impute sin" to those who have placed their faith in Christ (Rom. 4:8).
So we know that Abraham was saved through faith, but how did he live by faith? The Bible answers this question too. It says that Abraham was "fully convinced that what (God) had promised He was also able to perform" (Rom. 4:21). Please don't miss this! Faith doesn't mean that you know what God is going to do. Rather it means that you are completely persuaded that God has the power to do anything you ask or anything He has promised.
Just because you believe God is going to do something, does that mean He is bound to do it? Of course not! That's not faith, that's presumption. Consider this example. Let's say you've got a huge debt that needs to be paid and you don't have the money to pay it. Presumption believes that God is going to pay off all my debts. Faith believes that God is able to pay off all my debts. Does faith require that He will? No, in fact faith may require that God will provide you with a job that will allow you to pay all your debts.
Bottom line: Living by faith means living each moment in full confidence that the all-powerful God of heaven and earth "is able to do exceedingly, abundantly above all we can ask or think" (Eph. 3:20). Don't ever presume to know that God will do; just live your life in full confidence that He is more than able to do all things for the glory of His name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)