Random Thoughts from Rocky Top

Religious Liberty is Vanishing Before Our Very Eyes

2012-01-19T07:36:00.000-08:00

Recently I was saddened by a story I read in Baptist Press. The story mentions the plight of several privately-owned American businesses that have either been forced or probably will be forced to extend their services to homosexuals, regardless of their religious convictions. It's worthy to note that the businesses are all located in states where homosexual "marriage"/civil unions have been legalized. Also worthy of note is that the businesses are not just confined to one geographical area of our country. You can find these businesses all the way from New England to the Pacific Ocean.

What's troubling is that privately-owned, Christian businesses are being forced to do things that are clearly against their religious convictions. The last time I checked the Constitution, the first Amendment still says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." In siding with the plaintiffs in these cases, the courts have basically denied these business owners the freedom to exercise their religious convictions.

There are a couple of other things I've noticed about this story. First, none of the states who have homosexual "marriage"/civil unions laws on the books have allowed their citizens to vote on the issue. In every case, the courts have dictated to its citizens what the law will be. That is not government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It's actually called oligarchy - the rule of a few over many. In this case, it is the rule of the courts over the citizens. The plight of these businesses should remind us that it is not the place of the courts to create our laws. It is the place of the courts to interpret the laws that have been created by the citizenry and our elected officials.

Furthermore, did you notice how groups like the ACLU have taken up the cause of the plaintiffs in all these cases. What does ACLU stand for anyway? American Civil Liberties Union. Why is it that the ACLU never argues that the civil liberties of the Bible-believing Christians have been infringed upon when they are unable to practice their religion as they see fit? The ACLU always takes up the cause of the most radical left-wing groups among us. Pardon me if I think something smells a little fishy.

America is still the land of the free and the home of the brave. It is still a nation that was set aside for the free exercise of one's religious convictions. And in American's case, those religious convictions have always been Judeo-Christian in nature. Yet, the beautiful thing about this country is that no one has to practice either Judaism or Christianity. Our citizens have always been free to worship whom or what they will in whatever way they see fit.

If homosexuals want to worship their own gods or no god at all, that is entirely up to them. Many American citizens have fought and died for their right to do so. But what is not acceptable is that unelected officials are now forcing us to accept the homosexual lifestyle. Not only is that unconstitutional, it is ungodly. I would hope that every red-blooded American would rise up and stand against the erosion of our most fundamental religious rights. Even more, I pray that every blood-washed Christian will continue to speak the truth in love and ask God to send revival to the spiritual wasteland that our country has become.

Evolution, Adam & Eve, and the Age of the Earth

2012-01-10T10:39:00.000-08:00

LifeWay Christian Resources, one of the educational arms of the Southern Baptist Convention, recently released a study that is worthy of some consideration. LifeWay surveyed 1,000 Protestant (non-Catholic) pastors to gauge their views on evolution, Adam & Eve, and the age of the earth. As with most surveys, some results were expected while others were nothing short of shocking. In assessing the results I'd like to deal with the previously-mentioned issues one at a time. My ultimate desire is to share what God's Word has to say about each of the subjects in question.

Let's start with the issue of evolution. According to the survey, 64% of pastors strongly disagree that God used evolution to create human beings. 8% of pastors somewhat disagreed that God used evolution to create humans, so you might say that almost 75% (3 out of 4) pastors are fairly convinced that God didn't use evolution to create humans. On the other hand, 24% of pastors either somewhat or strongly agree that God used evolution to create humans.

While it's encouraging to see that most pastors believe the biblical account of creation, it's still alarming to me that 1 of 4 pastors either leans toward or is convinced of evolution. You might not think there is cause to be alarmed but I beg to differ. For starters, the plain testimony of Scripture is that God created the world in six days, and that on the sixth day He created man and woman in His own image (Gen. 1:26). To suggest that God used evolution to create humans is to contradict the truth of Scripture.

Since we've already mentioned the "image of God," I've got a question for those who would suggest that humans evolved: Where along the way did humans pick up the image of God in the evolutionary process? Was it in the transition from sea to land? Or perhaps it was in the evolution from ape to man. No evolutionist could ever answer these questions because there is no answer.

Let's move to Adam and Eve. 74% of Protestant pastors strongly agree that Adam and Eve were literal people, and 8% somewhat agree. That leaves 17% who either strongly or somewhat disagree that Adam and Eve were real humans. While I'm encouraged that the overwhelming majority of pastors affirm Adam and Eve's existence, it's still hard to imagine that almost 1 in every 5 Protestant pastors doesn't think that the two actually lived.

Of course, this is nothing new. Liberal college, universities, and schools of theology have been teaching for years that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are not literal. They've told us that the stories concerning Adam & Eve, Noah, etc., were just allegorical accounts borrowed from other cultures. In other words, they were just bed-time stories that people from all over the ancient world used to tell their kids when they tucked them in at night.

Here's the problem with that viewpoint. If Adam and Eve were not literal people, then there was no Garden of Eden. If there was no Garden of Eden, then there was never a time when man was first tempted and fell into sin. If there was no fall into sin, then there was no need for Savior. And of course, no need for a Savior means no need of a cross, a tomb, or a resurrection. Simply stated, if you're willing to take Adam and Eve out of the picture, you may as well remove Christ too. That may get you an "A" in your college Religion course, but that worldview is clearly not Christianity. So then, 1 of 5 Protestant pastors possesses a worldview that's not even Christian. Ouch! No wonder we're in the mess we're in.

Finally, let's consider the age of the earth. 43% of the pastors either somewhat or strongly disagreed that the earth is approximately 6,000 years old, while 46% to the opposing view. As you can see, pastors are clearly more divided on this issue than the others. I think it has to do with the fact that many well-meaning pastors are attempting to harmonize the precepts of modern science with the truths of Scripture.

To that end, a good number of pastors believe in some form of theistic evolution, whether it be day-age theories of creation, gap theories, etc. The idea is that God created everything that exists about 13.8 billion years ago. They believe that God either used evolution as His creation process, or they are forced to reinterpret the Bible to say that the six days of creation are actually eons of time that may have lasted billions of years instead of 24 hours.

Time will not permit me to provide all the reasons that I feel those well-meaning pastors are wrong, but I think it is very clear that the Bible is not on their side. The greatest problem with day-age theories, gap theories, and the like is that they attempt to use God as a bookend that they place in front of an atheistic worldview. To be frank, saying you believe the Bible while also declaring that the world is billions of years old is like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole - it just won't work.

I've got an idea. Why don't we just believe God's Word and go on? The Bible says that man was created in the image of God, so forget evolution. The Bible says that Adam & Eve were real humans with real sins who needed a real Savior to set them free. And in providing the genealogies of our Savior, the Bible confirms that the earth is not 13.8 billion years old. It is much younger than the modern prophets of science would have us to believe.

We've got a choice to make. Either we can believe God's Word, or we can accept the arguments of the secular humanists. But whatever we do, we can't ride two horses. It's time for us to get with God or go with the world. I think Joshua said it best: "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Josh. 24:15).

No Worship Service on Christmas Day? Really?

2011-12-29T07:59:00.000-08:00

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.

Segregated Churches and Separated Truths

2011-08-16T11:35:00.000-07:00

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.

How Do We Make Decisions?

2011-06-16T11:13:00.000-07:00

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!

"Preacher, Does This Church Belong to You?"

2011-06-09T17:40:00.000-07:00

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.

Judging a Book By Its Cover

2011-06-01T08:09:00.000-07:00

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.

What If I Had Never Been Born?

2011-05-24T11:18:00.000-07:00

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.

Feeding Rover After the Rapture

2011-05-18T13:45:00.000-07:00

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.

A Christian Response to Osama Bin Laden's Death

2011-05-03T08:28:00.000-07:00

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).

Good News for Both Sides of the Tracks

2011-04-21T12:02:00.000-07:00

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.

Have We Become "Gospel-Hardened?"

2011-04-04T06:27:00.000-07:00

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."

Churches Have Changed, But Have They Changed for the Better?

2011-03-31T07:34:00.000-07:00

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.

A President Who Refuses to Defend the Law

2011-02-24T12:19:00.000-08:00

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:

"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.

Why Did Jesus Come to Earth?

2011-02-22T13:47:00.000-08:00

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.

Does God's Word Direct Us to Accept Everyone?

2011-02-02T07:55:00.000-08:00

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.

Sexual Orientation and Belmont University

2011-01-27T11:41:00.000-08:00

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.

The Slippery Slope of Abortion in America

2011-01-24T07:24:00.000-08:00

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.

Just Because Mom & Dad Can Doesn't Mean They Should

2011-01-20T11:04:00.000-08:00

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.

How Does a Christian Live in Faith?

2011-01-13T08:21:00.000-08:00

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.

The Encouraging Word - 12/19/10

2010-12-20T12:35:00.000-08:00

Can we really be sure that Jesus is God's Messiah? Thank God that the Bible answers that question. Check out the answer here. Have a very Merry Christmas as you celebrate the birth of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

The World That John Lennon Imagined

2010-12-09T07:28:00.000-08:00

On December 8, 1980, John Lennon was killed outside his home in New York. Naturally, yesterday marked 30 years since the singer's death. By all popular accounts, John Lennon was perhaps the brightest light in a supergroup that changed the course of modern history. That being said, I'll have to confess I'm not much of a Beatles fan. Their music has never really appealed to me, but I certainly acknowledge the fact that the Beatles are adored by many others. For that reason, I know I run the risk of angering a few folks with what I'm going to write, but it's a risk I'm willing to take.

On October 11, 1971, John Lennon released what may be his most popular song of all-time. The song Imagine soared to #1 in both Canada and Australia, and it would go on to reach #3 on the US Billboard charts. Even Lennon himself hailed the song as being just as good as anything he'd ever written with the Beatles. I just want to ask a simple question: What exactly did John Lennon imagine? Read the lyrics for yourself:

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

John Lennon imagined a world of "no religion" - a world devoid of any concept of heaven or hell. Since heaven and hell are both biblical doctrines, I don't think it's a stretch to say that John Lennon would've eagerly invited a world without the Bible. And of course, in a world with no religion it appears that all references to God would no longer be necessary because apparently no God exists. It's no wonder then that Lennon envisioned a world where all the people were "living for today."

With that being said, it's strange to me that some Christians are attracted to the music of John Lennon. Do we share John Lennon's worldview? If so, then there's no way we can call ourselves followers of Christ. In regard to heaven, Jesus said it was a very real place where He was going to prepare a place for all those who believe in Him (John 14:2). And as for hell, Jesus also said it was a very real place of fire and brimstone - a place where "their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched" (Mark 9:44, 46, 48). And while Lennon may have longed for a world without religion, James (the brother of Jesus) called all Christians to demonstrate pure and undefiled religion: "To visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world" (James 1:27).

I don't know what kind of world you imagine, but I hope you'll join me in rejecting the world that Lennon envisioned. While peace and sharing are both qualities that we should desire in the world today, we are naive and just dead wrong if we think lasting peace and sharing are going to come apart from Christ Jesus. Everywhere the socialist/communist overtones of Lennon's imaginary world have been tried, they have failed miserably (Nazi Germany, Red China, USSR, etc.). But where the grace of God has been offered through the preaching of the Gospel, souls have been saved, lives have been changed, and the entire world has been transformed.

Lennon once opined: "Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink. I needn't argue with that; I'm right and I will be proved right." 30 years after his death, Lennon is gone but our Lord Jesus remains. His Gospel continues to ring out all over the world. And someday soon, Jesus will come back to rapture all those that belong to Him. "Even so, come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev. 22:20). The coming Kingdom of Christ - that's the world I'm imagining.

Is Jesus Coming Back on May 21, 2011?

2010-12-06T13:14:00.000-08:00

According to Harold Camping, President of Family Radio, that is precisely the date that Jesus is going to come back to rapture His church. He also opines that God will destroy the world on October 21, 2011. You can check out all his predictions and pronouncements by clicking here.

Mr. Camping now stands in a long line of others who have predicted the time of Christ's return. To see just one list of failed predictions, check out this website. What's amazing to me is that people are still trying to predict the date of Christ's return, even after so many failed attempts. What's even more amazing to me is that people are still listening to those that would attempt to predict the time of Christ's return.

What does the Bible say about the time of Christ's coming? Here are just a few samples from Scripture:

"Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect" (Matt. 24:24).

"Therefore, if they say to you, 'Look, He is in the desert!' do not go out; or "look, He is in the inner rooms!' do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be" (Matt. 24:26-27).

"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only" (Matt. 24:36, emphasis mine).

"Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming" (Matt. 24:42).

"Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect" (Matt. 24:44).

"Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming" (Matt. 25:13).

All of these passages can be found in what is commonly referred to as "the Olivet Discourse" - an extending teaching by Christ in which He spoke specifically to believers concerning the end of time. Clearly, if Christ wanted us to know the date of His coming, He would've surely given it to us somewhere within these verses. Not only did Jesus refrain from providing us with a date, but He said time and again that no man would know the time of His coming. I could've also written out a number of other passages that indicate the very same thing: Mark 13:32, Acts 1:7, 1 Thess. 5:2, 2 Pet. 3:10, and a host of others.

Probably the most often used illustration of Christ's coming employed by Jesus and the other writers of Scripture is "a thief in the night." Has your home, car, etc. ever been broken into? If you had known when the interloper was going to break in, you probably would've been there waiting on him - guns locked and loaded. That is precisely the point that Jesus made in Matt. 24:43. Just as you didn't know when the thief was going to come and steal your things, so we don't know when Christ will come and rapture His church.

So, if you ever hear anyone offer a prediction about the coming of Christ (other than the fact that He is coming), be sure to turn him off as quickly as possible. He is a false teacher and you will be misled if you continue to ingest his false teachings. While we don't know the day or hour of Christ's coming, we praise God that He will return: "This same Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven" (Acts 1:11). When the Day of Judgment comes, I earnestly hope you are counted among those who "have loved His appearing" (2 Tim. 4:8).

The Encouraging Word - 12/5/10

2010-12-06T07:23:00.000-08:00

All of us will probably finish life in one of two ways - with integrity or in disgrace. Would you like to know what will keep you from finishing in disgrace? If so, click here.

The Encouraging Word - 11/28/10

2010-11-29T06:20:00.000-08:00

Have you ever listened to the testimony of a person who has no home, no family, and no transportation? If not, here's your chance. Meet John Ford. God is doing an awesome work in his life and our church has been blessed just to get to know him. Listen to his powerful testimony here. God has literally taken this man off the streets and is using him for His glory. Hallelujah - what a Savior!

The Encouraging Word - 11/21/10

2010-11-22T06:28:00.000-08:00

This week's Encouraging Word asks the following question: How do you respond to the truth? Few people seem to want to tell the truth, far fewer seem to want to hear it, and even fewer respond to truth in the appropriate way. I hope we'll all learn a lesson from King Jeroboam and receive the truth with all humility. Have a great week.

Are People Born Gay? (Part 4)

2010-11-17T07:19:00.000-08:00

It's hard to bring this discussion to an end. There is so much more I'd like to say, but it's time to bring these posts to a conclusion. In doing so, I'd like to share with you three things the church needs to realize concerning this issue of homosexuality.

First, the world (and even some churches) are going to continue to promote the lie that people are born gay, despite the fact that Scripture, good science, and even philosophy teaches us otherwise. For that reason, we can expect the media (TV, internet, music, etc.), retailers, and even our government to continue to push the homosexual agenda. For the past two years, the current administration has declared June to be "Gay Pride Month" in the United States. And as I mentioned, some churches have even gotten in on the act. Entire denominations are now proclaiming the merits of the homosexual lifestyle. Where those denominations once denounced homosexuality as sin, they are now celebrating it as an alternate lifestyle. These types of things will only grow worse if our Lord continues to tarry in His coming. It's for good reason we say, "Even so, come Lord Jesus!" (Rev. 22:20).

Second, if you faithfully teach and share what the Bible has to say about homosexuality, you will be despised by many. You will be called narrow-minded, mean-spirited, and just plain ignorant. You will be marginalized as a mind-numbing neanderthal who hasn't made his way out of the caves and into the light quite yet. But didn't Jesus tell us to expect such things: "If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you...if they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you" (John 15:19, 20). Paul echoed the words of our Savior in his second letter to Timothy: "The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables" (2 Tim. 4:3-4). We must decide if we are going to cave in to political correctness, or if we're going to stand with the Savior and "preach the Word" (2 Tim. 4:2).

Finally, as the Body of Christ we've got to do much more to share the truth with homosexuals and love them to the Savior. This is where I have to take a long look in the mirror. I have to confess that I've made fun of homosexuals and said some very hurtful things about them. But how much time have I spent trying to reach them for Christ? Didn't Jesus die for homosexuals too? I hope we'll all remember that Christ spent a great deal of His ministry around those whom the religious right had excommunicated - the lepers, the harlots, the tax collectors, the demon-possessed, etc. It's time to ask ourselves some hard questions. Would homosexuals feel welcome in our churches? Do our houses of worship feel more like hotels for saints or hospitals for sinners? God help us to reach reach men, women, boys, and girls of every status and lifestyle with the life-changing Gospel of our Savior (Rom. 1:16).

Are People Born Gay? (Part 3)

2010-11-16T12:35:00.000-08:00

Having considered the biblical and theological references to homosexuality, I'd like to turn some attention to the scientific and philosophical aspects of this issue. Let's consider science first. A friend of mine called my attention to a recent article that appeared in the Knoxville News-Sentinel. It can be accessed by clicking here. The writer of the guest column, Lucille Griffo, shares the story of the time when her son told her that he was gay. In the midst of telling her story, Ms. Griffo sets forth this statement as an undeniable scientific fact: "(Homosexuality) is a biological reality."

Is Ms. Griffo right? Do the findings of science back up her claim? Consider this: In 2003, Dr. Francis Collins worked with many others in completing what is now known as the Human Genome Project. Afterwards, Collins wrote a book about the project entitled "The Language of God." Here's what he had to say about the possibility of homosexuality being an unavoidable, predetermined condition: "An area of particularly strong interest is the genetic basis of homosexuality. Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20% (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations" (p. 260, "The Language of God").

In other words, one of the world's most renowned scientists does NOT believe that homosexuality is a predetermined condition someone is born with. He chooses to say rather that a person might be born with a predisposition to homosexuality, just as some people are born with a predisposition towards alcoholism or drug abuse - most likely due to exposure to those substances prior to birth. But notice the key difference though - a predisposition is NOT a predetermination. In other words, just because someone might be born with a predisposition towards alcohol or drugs doesn't mean that the person is completely incapable of avoiding the life of an alcoholic or a drug abuser. A person with a predisposition towards alcohol or drugs must still choose to be an alcoholic or a drug user. Likewise, while a person might have some sort of predisposition to homosexuality (and the jury is still out on that), that person still must choose to be a homosexual. So then, Ms. Griffo's statement of "biological fact" is really no fact at all. No wonder she didn't bother backing up her claim with any sort of credible scientific evidence.

Now I'd like to consider some of the philosophical issues surrounding God, humans, and homosexuality. Many people (such as Bishop Swiley) have said, "God made me this way. He made me homosexual." Just think about this: Would God create a person homosexual and then deny him/her the opportunity to enjoy the lifestyle He created them for? And yet, that's what some would have us to believe. If God created some people homosexual, then why would he go to such great pains to prohibit the homosexual lifestyle in His Word? What kind of god would do such a thing? Clearly not the righteous, holy, and loving God of the Bible. That's almost like saying God created some people simply so He could damn them into an eternity in hell, apart from any volitional act on their part. Again I ask, what kind of god would do that? Not any kind of God I would desire to serve, and clearly not the God of Scripture who says that He "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4).

One final thought for you and I to consider: Did you know that the average life expectancy of a homosexual is typically many years shorter than that of a heterosexual? Not convinced? Read this article. It will provide you with links to several studies that have produced similar findings. That begs the question: If God does indeed create homosexuals and celebrates their lifestyle, then why are their life expectancies substantially shorter than that of their heterosexual counterparts? Just food for thought.

At this point, I trust you will join me in concluding that Scripture, science, and philosophy all stand in clear opposition to homosexuality. Having resolved that, I'd like to share some practical considerations we should all be thinking about as part of the Body of Christ. Stay tuned for Part 4 - the final post in this series.

Are People Born Gay? (Part 2)

2010-11-16T07:05:00.000-08:00

In my last post, I considered most of what Bishop Swiley had to say about homosexuality in the OT. The only other OT figures he mentioned in his statements were David and Jonathan (about the 31:00 mark). With no biblical justification, the Bishop simply states that while David probably wasn't gay, "I'm sure Jonathan was gay." No explanation of how he arrived at that conclusion, but apparently no explanation is required. It should be enough for us to accept it just because the Bishop believes it. Forgive me if I'm not so apt to accept everything the Bishop believes.

I have a pastor friend who has said on many occasions, "It's not just what false teachers say that gets them in trouble - often it's what they fail to tell you that really derails them." The same is true in this case. I wonder why the Bishop didn't deal with other OT texts such as Deut. 23:17, 1 Kings 14:24, 22:46, and 2 Kings 23:7. My guess would be one of two reasons: Either he doesn't know those passages exist, or he has no acceptable interpretation of them. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he doesn't know that texts are in God's Word.

Moving now to the Bishop's thoughts on the New Testament. For starters, he doesn't even mention what Christ had to say about Sodom and Gomorrah (S & G). Our Lord actually mentions S & G five times in the Gospels (Matt. 10:15, 11:23-24, Mark 6:11, Luke 10:12, 17:29). While some of those may be parallel passages, it doesn't change the fact Christ used S & G as an example of God's wrath against human sin. Again, I found it interesting that the Bishop couldn't bring himself to mention these passages.

I will give the Bishop some credit though. At least he did mention Romans 1 in his discussion of the issue. His statements concerning this text are among the most eye-opening of all (about the 32:00 mark). In essence, he says that while Paul may have been "dead on" concerning the doctrine of Christ, he was dead wrong about relationships and human sexuality. After butchering what Paul taught about Christian marriage, he then says that if a person follows Paul's teaching to its conclusion then he'll be led to believe that "if you don't worship you turn gay." In passing, he also surmises that "most worship leaders are gay." I didn't know the Apostle Paul was talking about music ministers in Romans 1.

Then comes his most telling admission of all: "While the Bible may be inspired, it is not infallible." In other words, we simply can't trust everything the Bible teaches. This is the heart of the issue. Either we believe the Bible is God's Word or we don't. Listening to the Bishop, it's clear that he can't successfully explain away what the Bible has to say about homosexuality. So then, when he can't win his argument on the grounds of sound biblical interpretation, he is left with one final resort - charge the Bible with being a book of errors. I'd like to say that I've had this discussion/debate with many liberal thinkers, but this is the first time someone has actually come out and said that the Bible simply can't be trusted. This is by far the most telling revelation of all the Bishop's remarks. The statement really speaks for itself.

Before I conclude this second post, allow me to briefly mention two NT passages that the Bishop must've overlooked (and who can blame him if he believes the Bible is really a book of errors). 1 Timothy 1:10 clearly condemns the practice of sodomy. And 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 couldn't be any more plain: "Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites...will inherit the kingdom of God." So the Bible is very clear that homosexuality is sin. Either we can receive what God has said as being truth, or we can explain it away by putting it in the category of error. I choose to receive Scripture as the divinely inspired and inerrant truth of Almighty God (2 Tim. 3:16).

Up to now, I've simply dealt with the question of this post from a biblical/theological perspective. In the upcoming posts, I'll be dealing with the issue from a philosophical and scientific perspective. I hope you'll "stay tuned" and share these thoughts with others.

Are People Born Gay? (Part 1)

2010-11-15T14:08:00.000-08:00

This is a huge question that many people are asking today. It's a question I was confronted with once again the other day as I read the recent story of an Atlanta-area megachurch pastor. The pastor's name is Bishop Jim Swiley and he leads The Church in the Now. You can read the full NPR story by clicking here.

I strongly encourage you to visit the NPR website and read the story for yourself. Not only can you read a brief story about Biship Swiley, but they've actually included the church service video in which the Bishop affirms his homosexuality. I also encourage you to watch the video. I've taken many statements and included them for discussion within this post.

I'll have to admit, this is one of the most fascinating things I've ever watched. After a few preliminary remarks, the Bishop states that there are two things in his life that are absolute: his call to ministry and his sexual orientation (about 6:15 mark). If you were to watch the Bishop's entire statement, you would find that he says over and over that his homosexuality was not something that he chose. He states emphatically that God made him that way. To prove his point he uses a number of comparisons, such as: race, pregnancy, a woman's menstrual cycle, eye color, and even heterosexuality. The idea is that just as he didn't choose to be white, neither did he choose to be homosexual - it was unavoidable.

As if all this were not eye-opening enough, things really get interesting when he shares what he believes the Bible to teach concerning homosexuality (roughly the 28:00 mark). He takes the Bible passages (that he cares to mention) in chronological order. First among them is the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (S & G) found in Genesis 18:16-19:29. The Bishop argues that S & G had nothing to do with homosexuality. It is really a story that teaches the evils of "gang rape" and thus S & G can't be used as a standard when speaking to the issue of homosexuality. For that reason he suggests that the biblical story of S & G should be "taken out of the mix" when addressing the subject.

The Bishop's interpretation of S & G lacks a knowledge of the Scriptures, though it is the charge of biblical ignorance that the Bishop later goes on to lay at the feet of any who would challenge his position. Had the Bishop read Ezekiel 16:49-50, perhaps he would've recognized that his interpretation of the S & G situation is just plain wrong: "Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me: therefore I took them away as a I saw fit." I'll be the first to agree that Sodom's sin was not just homosexuality, but to act as though homosexuality wasn't a part of it is just flat dishonest with the text. The "abomination" Ezekiel speaks of is clearly that of homosexuality because Jude would go on to say that S & G had "given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh" (Jude 7). So, while the Bishop may want to take Gen. 18-19 out of the mix, the whole of Scripture won't allow him to do so.

The Bishop then goes on to mention the passages dealing with homosexuality in Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. The former passage clearly says: "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination." Once again, the Bishop says we can't bring those passages into the mix. He tells his listeners that they "don't want to play the Leviticus card" (roughly 30:20). Basically, he argues that since the rest of the Levitical laws don't all apply to New Testament believers, neither should these. Is he right? Clearly the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament no longer apply to New Testament believers. Christ perfectly fulfilled every requirement of the Law (Matt. 5:17), so that now through faith in Him we can be fully justified (Rom. 5:1). So while Christ may have removed the necessity of keeping the OT ceremonial laws, in no way did he remove the moral precepts of the OT. If that were so, why not discard the Ten Commandments? Is the Bishop suggesting that we scrap the whole of the OT? The ceremonial laws of the OT were grounded in the moral precepts of God, and in this case that includes the fact that homosexuality has always been and will always be sin.

That's enough for now. I'll address more of the Bishop's theology later and speak to the heart of the issue at that time.

The Encouraging Word - 11/14/10

2010-11-15T06:33:00.000-08:00

We live in a world filled with many modern conveniences. The days of carrying water are over thanks to indoor plumbing. No more need of lighting kerosene lamps as we have electricity in our homes. And aren't you thankful for disposable diapers? Yet, amid the world of conveniences we enjoy, I wonder if we've allowed our worship to become convenient as well. Check out this week's encouraging word by clicking here. Let's pray that our worship NEVER becomes convenient.

The Encouraging Word - 11/7/10

2010-11-08T07:05:00.000-08:00

This week's Encouraging Word is taken from Luke 16:19-31. It can be accessed here. Do you believe hell is a literal place of fire and brimstone? Do you think unbelievers will have to suffer forever in a place of weeping and gnashing of teeth? What about heaven? Do you think there is a place of golden streets and crystal seas where people can spend their eternity when they die? The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus answers these questions for us. I hope you'll take the time to check it out. Have a great week!

The Encouraging Word - 10/31/10

2010-11-02T08:38:00.000-07:00

What a great day to be alive. We have more opportunities to share the Gospel of our Lord than ever before. As we think about the possibilities of today and tomorrow, we should never forget about the legacy passed on to us by those of yester-year. This week's Encouraging Word takes a look back to the men of the Reformation. After all, October 31st is not just "All Hallows' Eve," it is Reformation Day. Check out the three battle cries of the Reformation by clicking here. Be sure to fast forward to 13:30 to hear the message. Have a great day in the Lord!

Tanner's first time to play for the Lord

2010-10-31T21:02:00.000-07:00

What Does the Church Stand On?

2010-10-27T13:58:00.000-07:00

I had to be in Knoxville this morning to officiate the graveside service of a deceased loved one. On the way back to Morristown, I decided to take a short trip down a country road just to take in some of the fall foliage that graces this season. In doing so, I drove by a church sign. I love church signs because they often have some pretty creative messages. I know that many churches use their signs as a means of expressing their identity to the community.

The sign I passed this afternoon bore the following message: "We Stand on the KJV Bible." I thought about that for a minute. If the church sign is typically used to express an identity to the community, then what was this church trying to say about itself? Let me be quick to say that I'm not interested in getting into a debate about what translation someone uses. I'm certainly not interested in getting into the KJV-only debate. Personally, I study and preach from the NKJV, but I also use the KJV, NIV, NASB, and a number of other translations in sermon preparation. I also attempt to study the original language of the Scriptures - Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

Here's the question I want to ask: What does the church stand on? Does the church stand on a commitment to a Bible translation? Does it stand on a commitment to a particular denomination or convention? Does the church stand on what might be its long-standing traditions? While all those things might influence the ministry and operation of a church, I would think that the church might want to make an even greater public declaration of its identity. How about this - "We Stand on the Rock of Ages. His Name is Jesus Christ."

If you want people to know what translation of God's Word you prefer, that's fine - tell 'em. If you want people to know your denomination, traditions, etc., then tell them all that as well. But before all those, why not tell them about Jesus. After all, He alone is the Cornerstone of the church (1 Pet. 2:7).

The Encouraging Word - 10/24/10

2010-10-25T07:34:00.000-07:00

I hope you'll take the time to consider this week's Encouraging Word. This week's Word has to do with what happens When God Ceases to Be Your Greatest Love. You can listen to it here. God bless you as you seek to serve Him this week.

The Encouraging Word - 10/17/10

2010-10-18T12:05:00.000-07:00

This week's Encouraging Word comes from 1 Kings 9-10. Upon hearing the message, I hope you'll be persuaded that the world can't help but take notice when God decides to bless someone or something. Just click here to hear the sermon. I pray you'll be encouraged and challenged in your faith.

Get Out and Vote!

2010-10-14T07:37:00.000-07:00

As I understand it, early voting has already begun in several of the counties throughout Tennessee. I intend to get out and vote very soon. Why? Well, there are several reasons. One good reason to vote is that many men and women have died defending our right to do so. When we fail to vote, I think it's a slap in the face to those who have paid the ultimate price to insure that we will continue to be a nation governed of the people, by the people, and for the people. Furthermore, voting is the way of democracy - it is what ultimately separates us from being like the socialists, Marxists, and communists of the world.

But of course the most important reason we should vote is because it is good stewardship in the eyes of our God. He has given us this privilege of voting, and with it we can put in office those individuals who will stand up and support biblical values. In these hard economic times, some would have us to believe that the most important issues of the day are job creation, the economy, and so forth. While those are certainly issues of vital importance, the moral issues of the day will always be #1 in the sight of our God.

Not convinced? Consider what the Bible says about evil King Ahaz and his reign over Judah: "The Lord brought Judah low because of Ahaz king of Israel, for he had encouraged moral decline in Judah and had been continually unfaithful to the Lord" (2 Chron. 28:19). Jobs come and go. The economy is prone to periods of fluctuation. But evil and moral decline in the land is something that our holy God will not tolerate.

When we vote, we have the opportunity to put in office those folks who will stand up for God and the truth of His Word. I sincerely hope you'll take the time to consider where each of the political candidates stands on the moral issues of the day. Pray that God will show you who to vote for. Then go and cast your vote for those men and women who will unashamedly stand with the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The future of our wonderful republic depends upon your prayers, your witness, and your votes.

Why Do You Do the Right Thing?

2010-10-13T06:35:00.000-07:00

Have you ever thought about that question? Do you do the right thing because "it's just the right thing to do?" Perhaps you do the right thing because that's the way you were raised. Maybe your tendency to do good things is motivated by your desire to be liked. Consider this verse written about King Amaziah in 2 Chron. 25:2 - "He did what was right in the sight of the Lord, but not with a loyal heart."

It's commendable that Amaziah did a multitude of things that pleased the Lord. After all, there were a good number of the kings of Judah who came before him that did great evil in the sight of the Lord. For that reason, Amaziah was certainly an "upgrade" from some of what Judah had known in her past. But was it enough for Amaziah to "do what was right in the sight of the Lord?" Apparently not, because the writer was sure to add the final clause of the verse: "but not with a loyal heart."

Here's my take on Amaziah. As you read the rest of chapter 25, you'll find that Amaziah did seek the face of the Lord and that he did heed the advice of God's man for a while. But just as soon as he defeated the Edomites, he must've felt that he didn't need God's help anymore. For that reason, he brought the idols of the Edomites back home to Judah and started worshiping them. Consequently, God's prophet came to him and asked, "Why have you sought the gods of the people, which could not rescue their own people from your hand?" (v. 15) Good question.

Here's the bottom line: Amaziah did what was right in the sight of the Lord until he got what he wanted. After that, he sensed no loyalty to God, but instead he turned aside to idols. So then, he did what was right not because he loved God, but because he loved what God could do for him. That sounds like much of what we hear in the "prosperity preaching" that floods the airwaves these days. For that matter, it sounds like the way we too often approach our relationship with God.

Is that the reason you pray? Is that the reason you read God's Word? Is that the reason you show kindness to others? Do you do those things because you desire Him above all others, or do you do them because you desire what He might do for you? I think the words of the Apostle Paul would be appropriate here: "Whether you eat or whether you drink or whatever you do, do all for the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31). Let's live each moment for the glory of God, not because we're looking for something in return, but because we're in love with Him and we want to see His Name lifted far above all others.

Does It Really Matter How Old the Universe Is?

2010-10-12T12:01:00.000-07:00

Throughout the annals of human history, our forefathers overwhelming accepted the idea that the universe is only thousands of years old. That all began to change about 150 years ago when Charles Darwin released his On the Origin of Species. Since then, multitudes of well-meaning Christians have attempted to defend the Scriptures against the attacks of the scientific community. In doing so, a number of creation theories have emerged within the Christian community. The most popular among them is the day-age theory - the idea that the "days" of the creation account were not 24-hour periods, but that they were much longer, overlapping epochs of time. Such theories have made the acceptance of evolutionary worldviews not only permissible but even expected within many Christian communities. In other words, Christians no longer have to be bound to the archaic notion that the earth is only thousands of years old.

Does the age of the universe really matter? Clearly a multitude of Christians have answered that question with a resounding "no." What do you think? More importantly, how does the Bible answer that question? I challenge you to spend a few minutes reading this article. If, after reading the article, you think the age of the universe doesn't matter, I'd be shocked. As the author clearly demonstrates, there are certain "theological costs" associated with evolutionary old-earth thinking. Feel free to share your thoughts.

The Encouraging Word - 10/10/10

2010-10-11T12:26:00.000-07:00

Happy Columbus Day everyone! Hope you'll take the time to consider this week's Encouraging Word. You can check it out here. I wonder if you and I are attempting to give God "gifts UNfit for a king."

How Will Everyone Feel When You're Gone?

2010-10-05T10:45:00.000-07:00

Have you ever thought about that question? I was reminded of it again this morning as I read through a portion of God's Word. There was a young man named Jehoram who just happened to be the oldest son of good King Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. 21). Jehoshaphat wasn't a perfect man, but clearly he loved the Lord and did a great deal to turn the hearts of Judah back toward the Lord. When Jehoshaphat died, Jehoram became king in his place. Not only did he fail to share his father's passion for God, but he did all he could to direct Judah's worship away from the Lord and toward the gods of the nations.

After several years of King Jeroham's ungodliness, the Lord's prophet (Elijah) sent a letter to his palace. It basically told the king that his wife, children, and possessions would all be carried away and that he himself would die a miserable death. Literally, that his intestines would "come out by reason of the sickness, day by day" (2 Chron. 21:15). Awful to say the least.

Here's the point I really want to make. When Jeroham died, the Bible says that "his people made no burning for him, like the burning for his father" (v. 19). In other words, nobody mourned or grieved over his death. In fact, the Bible plainly says that "he reigned in Jerusalem eight years and, to no one's sorrow, departed" (v. 20). They didn't even bury him in the tombs of the kings. He was forty years old, he was dead, and no one cared. Frankly, they were glad he was gone.

The story of Jeroham is tragic, but thankfully his is not the only one contained in Scripture. For a moment longer, consider the story of a lovely woman named Tabitha. The Bible says "this woman was full of good works and charitable deeds which she did" (Acts 9:36). It so happened that she became sick and died in the city of Joppa. What I really want to emphasize is what happened when she died. The Bible says that when Peter had come to the upper room where Tabitha's body was that "all the widows stood by him weeping, showing all the tunics and garments which she had made while she was with them" (Acts 9:39). Consequently, God raised Tabitha from the dead through the ministry of the Apostle Peter. I'm sure it was quite a party among the saints and widows the day that Tabitha was raised from the dead.

A king dies, and no one cares. A sweet little lady from Joppa passes away, and scores of widows come to mourn her death. Everyone was glad when the king died. Everyone was heartbroken when Tabitha passed away. I wonder how everyone will feel when I'm gone. I wonder how they'll feel when you're gone. I don't know about you, but I want to live my life in such a way that I will be missed when I'm gone. I genuinely hope it is a day of sadness and mourning, not because of anything I've done, but because I want people to say "I experienced the love of God through the ministry of that man." Let's live our lives for the glory of God, and just maybe someone will be sad when we're gone. Let's also thank God that they won't have to "sorrow as others who have no hope" (1 Thess. 4:13).

Don't Tell Them Jesus Loves Them Until You're Ready to Love Them To

2010-10-04T13:11:00.000-07:00

Christian artist Steve Camp released a song by that title in the late '80s. After listening to a story of one of our church's retired pastors, I was reminded of that tune. The man who shared the story with me is one of my dear friends in this world. I admire him because he worked tirelessly for a number of years attempting to pastor God's flock and reach others with the Gospel of Christ. All the while, he held down a full-time job, doing the work of a bi-vocational pastor. I love bi-vocational pastors. They're never invited to speak at big conferences or chair large committees, but I'm convinced that some of them are God's most devoted followers in all the earth.

The story goes like this: My pastor friend was sitting home with his family one Sunday afternoon several years ago when there was a knock at his door. When he opened the door he saw one of his church members and another man he didn't recognize. The church member explained that the unknown guest was a young man who owned a local service station in town. The young service station owner just happened to be Catholic and the church member had been witnessing to him for some time. He brought the young man to the pastor's house in the hope that the pastor would be able to reach him with the Gospel.

Normally the young man would be working on Sunday afternoon, but he decided to close his service station on account of his friend's persistence. The pastor welcomed both men inside. It wasn't long until my pastor friend shared the Gospel with the young man. It was very clear to the pastor that the young man was under conviction. When the pastor extended an invitation to the young man to receive Christ as His Savior, he said something like this: "I believe everything you're saying, but there is something you must know. If I surrender my life to Christ, my family will disown me and I'll have nowhere to stay."

My pastor friend looked at the young man and asked him this question: "Is that the only thing keeping you from surrendering your life to Jesus?" The young man confessed that it was. The pastor asked the young man to look down the hallway of his home and directed his attention toward one of the bedrooms. The pastor asked him, "Do you see that bedroom at the end of the hall?" The young man acknowledged that he could see it. The pastor then extended this offer to the young man: "If you'll surrender your life to Christ, you'll never have to worry about a place to stay. That bedroom will be yours. Furthermore, you'll always have a chair at my table."

The young man was stunned. He looked directly into the eyes of the pastor and asked, "Do you really mean that?" The pastor responded in the affirmative. Just then, the young man said, "Let's pray." Then and there, the young man gave his life to Jesus - all because one man was willing to open his home and share his food with a new believer in Christ.

I'm so glad my pastor friend came by this morning and shared that story with me. It caused me to wonder if I would be willing to go to the same lengths to see someone saved. Would I open my home to a complete stranger? Would I offer him/her a place at the table? We tell people that Jesus loves them all the time, but is it really a good idea for us to do so if we're not willing to love them to? Those lost apart from Christ will never know that "God is love" (1 John 4:8) until they experience God's love working through us. That reminds me of another old adage: "They'll never care how much we know, until they know how much we care." How much does that lost soul mean to you? What you're willing to sacrifice to see him/her saved will provide you with the answer to that question.

The Encouraging Word - 10/3/10

2010-10-04T07:40:00.000-07:00

Be sure to check out this week's Encouraging Word. It comes to us from Rev. David Hawkins, Director of Missions for our Nolachucky Baptist Association. You can access his message here. Let's be sure to remember the works and wonders of our Almighty God. He is worthy to be praised!

One of the Godliest Men You've Never Heard Of

2010-09-27T13:22:00.000-07:00

Every moment spent in the presence of God is time well-spent. This morning was no exception. During my quiet time, the suggested reading for today involved two amazing biblical stories. One of the stories was Paul & Silas, and their imprisonment in Philippi. I'm sure you know the story - God amazingly delivered them from captivity and brought salvation to the very man who had imprisoned them (Acts 16).

The other story I read this morning came from 2 Chronicles 18 and had to do with one of my favorite characters in the all the Bible. My guess is that he is one of the godliest men you've never heard of. The man's name was Micaiah. Micaiah was a prophet of the Lord who lived in the northern kingdom of Israel. It's only by the providence of God that Micaiah even lived in the northern kingdom. One would've expected to have found a prophet of the Lord in Judah (the southern kingdom) following the division of Israel. That's because Jeroboam had kicked all the priests, Levites, and prophets of the Lord out of the northern kingdom when he took control. I'm sure Micaiah spent many lonely days in the northern kingdom of Israel as a result.

Let me summarize Micaiah's story. One day evil King Ahab (of the northern kingdom) decided that he wanted to go to war with one of his enemies. He asked good King Jehoshaphat (of the southern kingdom) if he would go to war with him. Jehoshaphat foolishly agreed to go, but at least he had enough sense to ask Ahab if there was a prophet of the Lord who could seek God's will before they went. The only such man left was Micaiah, and Ahab knew it. This is what he said about the prophet of the Lord: "There is still one man by whom we may inquire of the Lord; but I hate him, because he never prophecies good concerning me but always evil" (v. 7). And rightfully so, because Ahab was a wicked man and was leading Israel to to forsake the Lord. Micaiah was a man of God - no amount of money could persuade him to be anything less than a prophet of the Lord.

So they sent for Micaiah. When they went to get him, the messenger told Micaiah to let his word be like that of Ahab's 400 false prophets: "Let your word be like one of them, and speak encouragement" (v. 12). By the way, there are a lot of false prophets preaching a message of peace and encouragement in America these days. One of them stands in an old basketball arena each Sunday. His "message of encouragement" is nothing new - it is an old tactic that Satan has been using for thousands of years to distract God's people from hearing "the whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:27). Sadly, we live in a generation that is too biblically illiterate to see through it. There's nothing wrong with encouragement - we just need to be sure the encouragement we're offering is God's encouragement and not the invention of man.

Here was Micaiah's response to the king's messenger: "As the Lord lives, whatever my God says, that I will speak" (v. 13). I love that verse. God so impressed that verse of my heart that I had a little plaque made and placed on our church's pulpit with those words. If that's not the desire of my heart when I stand to preach, then I need to sit down and go find something else to do. I have nothing to offer anyone, but the power of God's precious Word has the power to transform lives.

Well, to finish Micaiah's story, he was persecuted for preaching God's Word, but the results of the war vindicated his preaching. Not only was Israel thoroughly beaten in war, but Ahab's life was taken and King Jehoshaphat barely escaped death, and that was only because God intervened on his behalf. Micaiah was a man who would not be shaken. It didn't matter that every other prophet in Israel had sold out to evil King Ahab. Micaiah wasn't working for King Ahab - he was laboring for the King of Kings. I hope we'll all learn from this mighty man of God. Now that you've heard his story, I hope you'll be challenged to go and live life for an Audience of One.

The Encouraging Word - 9/26/10

2010-09-27T07:35:00.000-07:00

This week's installment of the Encouraging Word comes from 2 Corinthians 5:17. The message is entitled Change You Can REALLY Believe In. You can access the message here. I hope it will cause you to rejoice in change everyone can believe in.

Where's the Beef?

2010-09-21T07:05:00.000-07:00

Remember those old Wendy's ads with the little lady that used to ask that question? Maybe this video will refresh your memory. Sometimes I wonder if that little lady's question couldn't be applied to some of the "songs of worship" that our churches offer up to God these days. Don't misunderstand me. I LOVE much of the praise music we sing in our worship services. "In Christ Alone" is a perfect example of a newer praise song that has both substance and a more contemporary sound. I think we should definitely be singing a "new song" (Ps. 96:1) unto the Lord.

But with that said, some of the newer praise music has earned the 7-11 reputation (7 words repeated 11 times). Some would say there is nothing wrong with that. After all, some of the highest praise in Scripture makes use of repetition. They would point to a passage such as Isaiah 6:3 as an example: "Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts, the whole earth is filled with His glory." I would certainly agree that repetition has its place in our praise. And yet, I'm still prone to wonder if much of the modern praise music has become so repetitive and shallow because we've simply run out of anything to say. I have finished singing some worship songs and thought to myself, "Where's the beef?"

Say what you will about hymns, but I don't think that much of the modern verse captures the substance of some of those great songs. I was reminded of this recently when our minister of music, Mike Martin, led us in the singing of "Rock of Ages, Cleft for Me." Just consider the second stanza:

Not the labors of my hands

Can fulfill Thy laws demands.

These for sin could not atone;

Thou must save, and Thou alone.

In my hand no price I bring,

Simply to thy cross I cling.

In that one stanza, man's sinfulness is confessed. The need for an atoning sacrifice is demonstrated. The worthless of man's works to make reconciliation with God is clearly seen. The truth of Jonah 2:9 is plainly professed: "Salvation is of the Lord" (Jonah 2:9).

I don't know about you, but when I sing a powerful hymn like that I'm not left wondering about "the beef." The substance is there. It all begs the question: Where did the hymn writers of yester-year get their substance from? From the same place the song writers of today can get theirs' - the precious, timeless, inerrant Word of God. What a day it will be when the worship of today is met with the power of God's Word and the leadership of His Spirit. Then we will finally have worship "in Spirit and truth" (John 4:23-24).

The Encouraging Word - 9/19/10

2010-09-20T12:19:00.000-07:00

Each week I'm going to post a link to my most recent Sunday morning message. You may not have time to listen to it - trust me I understand. But if you do, I hope it encourages your heart, challenges your walk, and helps you to live more godly in Christ Jesus. Please feel free to comment! Check out this week's sermon here.

Have You Ever "Googled" Yourself?

2010-09-20T07:33:00.000-07:00

Maybe you've tried this out before. If you have a common name, consider yourself lucky. We live in a day and time where it seems anyone can write anything about anybody without any repercussions. Not too long ago I googled myself and found this story that had been written a few years ago: Todd Stinnett Takes Issue. If I believed every word of what this person wrote about me, I don't think I'd like myself too much either. So then, a bad thing about blogs is that they give others a chance to write what they will about you - often anonymously, as was the case in the story above.

And yet, the good thing about blogs is that they give you a chance to let others know you in your own words. On this occasion, I'd like to respond to some of the things that were said about me in the story above. First, I do not, nor have I ever felt that Tennessee Baptists who don't agree completely with the Baptist Faith & Message 2000 (our doctrinal statement) are "second-class." Just because two Baptists don't agree doesn't mean that they aren't still brothers/sisters in Christ. It's quite unfortunate that someone would seek to explain how I feel about others, especially when they've never met me. But, such is the landscape of the 21st century blog world we live in.

Second, I have no desire to "remove the word 'Baptist' from the name of the state convention." I'm Baptist-born, Baptist-bred, and when I die I hope to be Baptist-dead. Just because I believe that the leaders and trustees of our committees and institutions should faithfully represent the doctrinal commitments of Tennessee Baptists doesn't mean that I want us to take the word "Baptist" out of our name. Again, that was another very unfortunate interpretation of my position.

Finally, I don't think it is fair to suggest that those of us who value doctrinal accountability throughout all spheres of TBC life are not eager to "get on with the mission of our calling." It is entirely possible for someone to be passionate about fulfilling the Great Commission while also being passionate about the doctrines we hold dear as cooperating Baptists. From the Schleitheim Confession of 1527 to the BF&M 2000, Baptists have always been a people that have defined fellowship along doctrinal lines. Yet, that has not worked to deter our evangelistic spirit. We continue to offer men, women, and children the Living Word through the power of the written Word.

Some of you will read this blog and go google yourself. If you find something you don't like or that is not true, it's not the end of the world. Remember, Christ said we would have to suffer much more than false accusations for His name's sake (John 16:33). If you do find something you don't like, I would challenge you to do what I've attempted to do - respond! Don't let others define who you are. Let the world get to know you in your own words. Above all else, shine bright and bear faithful witness for Christ.

My First Blog Entry

2010-09-16T07:49:00.000-07:00

Hey everyone - this is my first attempt at blogging. I guess I should've been here a long time ago, but when you're a husband, father, pastor, student, coach, etc., you only have so much time on your hands. Very simply, I want this blog to be just another means of bringing glory to my Heavenly Father. He is worthy of all praise and glory forever! I hope this blog will encourage your spirit, challenge your thinking, and compel you to walk closer to Christ. If you like what you find here, please share it with others.