Danny be thinkin'

Bible books I love

2010-06-10T16:03:00.000-07:00

This morning I had a conversation with a few friends regarding our favorite books of the Bible. I actually get asked this question frequently, so I thought I would blog about my top 7 books that I love to go to often, and discuss a bit on why I love them so much.

1) Nahum – Pure poetry. The book is only 3 chapters, and non Christian poetry scholars even agree that the poetic structure of the book is mesmerizing. Nahum’s name means compassion, but a peripheral reading of the book makes it look like God is all wrath against Nineveh as he pronounces judgment to that city just before he wipes them out. There are two verses in the first chapter that reveal that compassion for Israel is God’s motivation for his wrath against this great but vile city. Never has reading about death and destruction been accompanied by such beautiful literary structure.

2) Hebrews – I’m a huge fan of Jesus, and a huge fan of typology. Hebrews is the best place to read about both. We see Jesus as better. He is better than the prophets of old, better than angels, better than the priests, better than the sacrificial system, better than everything. This book is so full of rich biblical theology, that it inspires the reader to want to understand the scope of the story of redemption with greater clarity.

3) Ephesians – Who were you before Jesus? Who are you with Jesus? How did Jesus accomplish that? What is your role in the church? 4 major questions, this short book of just 6 chapters provides incredible answers.

4) 1 & 2 Samuel – The two books are meant to be read as one. The stories of the great kings of Israel, their interactions with God, and the inspiring life of the prophet Samuel draw me into a wonderful understanding of what life with God can look like for a Christian who desires God first. Failure is part of the Christian life, but God is a great redeemer. The book features war, courage, honor, trust, companionship, betrayal, and a crazy witch. The character of David shines even in his deepest sin as he seeks the heart of God.

5) 1 John – Do you ever struggle with apathy? Are you ever doubtful of the presence or love of God? Do you wonder what the love of God and the commandments of God have to do with your relationship to him? This little book has changed my life more than any other in the entire Bible, and it has saved me from the ledge more than once.

6) Nehemiah – This book has taught me more about leadership than any other book in Scripture. I’ve learned a lot about leadership from the pastoral letters of 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus, but this book helped me put all leadership principles into practice in powerful ways.

7) Isaiah – This book has taught me an incredible amount about the heart, character, and attributes of God. Never have I understood God’s hatred towards idolatry more that upon studying this book. If you want to understand this book you have to commit to it, but it’s worth it.

What is your favorite book of the Bible?

Sphere of Influence

2010-05-26T10:38:00.001-07:00

A few years ago I led a Bible study at my house on Monday nights. We called the group “Good Times”, because well, it was. The group lasted for some 3 years or so, and over those years many people came and went, but there was a pretty solid core that was there through most of it. We studied Colossians, 1 John, Ephesians, Daniel, and a few other books over the course of those years, and all of those studies were incredible, but I think most of our people from the group would agree that the most fruitful study we ever went through was in the book of Hebrews. That study changed people’s lives, and it was through that study that our little Bible study grew to about 30 people.

One of the guys that spent some time in that Bible study is a friend of mine named John Lawrence who has since moved to Texas. What is interesting about John is that he wasn’t in our study for very long, maybe a couple of months. He spent some time in my home outside of the study to hang out and play ping pong a few times, and he was attending Living Stones for a few years, but because of his brief time in the Bible study he wasn’t one of the people I would have picked as having been too heavily influenced by the study. It turns out he was. I recently received a package in the mail from John full of great resources for studying the book of Hebrews that he compiled over time and sent to me as a thank you for the impact that our Hebrews study had on his life. It was a very cool surprise from a friend I hadn’t spoken with in a couple of years. I can’t wait to study Hebrews again using the tools that he sent to me.

This experience got me thinking, it’s amazing the influence that we as Christians have on one another, often without even knowing it. I had a few good moments with John, studying the Bible and just hanging out with him and some other guys from time to time, but to now find out that he appreciated our study so much is a blessing and great reminder of the ways that God uses our experiences with one another to really encourage us and mold us in the faith. Glory be to God, quite a few incredible things happened in that group over the years. Currently, 14 of our small group leaders at Living Stones spent significant time in the Good Times Bible Study. That I can remember upon reflection, 4 different couples started dating in the study that is now married. There are at least 4 people that I can think of that were prayed for in our study as non-Christians, who then later attended the study and were saved by God.

I don’t say this to brag about how amazing that Bible study was, although it was very special, I say all of this as a consideration as to the incredible influence godly people have on one another when they obey God’s command to fellowship, pray, break bread together, and submit to the Apostles teaching. This was the frequent practice of the early church (Acts 2:42-47), and this lifestyle had great affect on the mission of God through the early church as people were being saved daily. How often do you consider your influence on other people? Have you been strategic in leveraging your influence on others for the sake of the Kingdom of God? Usually, as was the case with Good Times, your influence has great effect as a simple outflow of your love for others and your obedience to the calling of God. The people in that Bible study influenced one another so greatly because they loved each other, were in tuned with the Spirit of God, and cared for each other’s needs. Sometimes it also does us good to be strategic about using our influence in a powerful way, but most of us are unaware of the influence we have. As well, there are probably quite a few people in your life that have had great influence on you. When was the last time you told them that?

I think my major point of reflection here is that influence is like water. It’s one of the most powerful resources in the world, but most of us really take it for granted. We also protect our time so selfishly that we can’t really use our influence well, but according to Scripture, God uses your life as a letter from himself to an unsaved world, if you’re a Christian that is. How can you use your influence? If you’ve never thought about it, you should. As with Good Times, your small group might be a good place to start.

Trinitarian Prayer

2010-04-28T14:57:00.000-07:00

We talk about the Trinity of God a lot at Living Stones, as we should, and it has often rightly been said that understanding the Trinity is incredibly difficult. There is only one God after all, but that one God is somehow made up of 3 distinct persons. To separate them too far is to fall into heresy, because they are not 3 separate God’s. To unite them too far is also heresy, because Jesus the Son of God died on the cross, but it would be wrong to say that the Father died on the cross or the Holy Spirit died on the cross.

Because there are distinctives in the roles of the members of the trinity, I think it’s appropriate to read the Scriptures carefully and find out as much as we can about their distinct roles and submit to those distinctions. One of the areas where there might be distinction but this distinction is rarely explored and often debated when it is explored is prayer. As with anything, I think it’s clear that all three members of the Trinity are actively involved in prayer, but are there distinctions in Scripture about the various ways that they express their involvement?

Before I discuss the nature of Trinitarian prayer I want to be clear on two things: 1) this post is not necessarily an espousal of a specific position, but rather a discussion starter through a series of questions and observations. 2) The direction I tend to lean on this issue is not an official position of Living stones and if I had to guess by observing the prayers of our other elders I would say most would hold a different view on the issue (but again, I’m not necessarily espousing a view as much as exploring).

Model #1

For most people it seems that Trinitarian prayer simply involves praying to all 3 members of the Trinity of God. I know many people who pray to the specific members of the Trinity depending on the topic they are praying about so as to pray to the member of the Trinity most applicable. So for example, when praying about spiritual gifts they will pray to the Spirit, but when thanking God for the work of Jesus on the cross they will thank Jesus directly. After all, all 3 members of the Trinity are equally God, so it stands to reason that all 3 persons of the Trinity can hear our prayers equally and that it’s equally valid to pray to all 3, right? Maybe – and if this is the conclusion that someone comes to then I don’t see any reason to warn them that they are sinning against God. After all, there is no passage of Scripture that forbids praying to any of the 3 persons of the Trinity.

However, just because there are no verses forbidding praying in the way described above, does that necessarily mean that we should pray that way? In other words, if I had to guess I don’t think God is displeased by a Christian praying to the Holy Spirit, but has God given instructions for prayer in Scripture that might lay out a model for Trinitarian prayer that is different than the one mentioned in model #1? When I’ve asked these questions in the past people have simply responded with – “well why wouldn’t God want us to pray to Jesus or the Holy Spirit?” My response is always “I’m not sure”. But just because we can’t think of a good reason, doesn’t mean God doesn’t have one. So the question about Trinitarian prayer is not “why shouldn’t we follow model #1?” The question is rather “Has God instructed us in Scripture on how he would like us to pray?”

Consider some things with me. Although Scripture never forbids praying to either Jesus or the Holy Spirit, it also never once commands us to or even teaches us to. When the disciples asked Jesus how to pray, he prayed “Our Father in heaven” (Matthew 6:9). When Jesus prayed he obviously wasn’t going to pray to himself, but he never prayed to the Spirit either, he always prayed to the Father. When Paul wrote out his prayers in his letters, he always used “God” which was synonymous with the Father, or even specifically used the Father. He never wrote his prayers out to Jesus or the Spirit. Jesus often talked about us praying in his name, but he said to “ask the Father in my name” (John 15:16).

Many have argued that there are certain times in Scripture when people pray to Jesus, but I don’t buy those arguments. When Stephen cries out to Jesus as he is dying in Acts 7, is that a prayer? I don’t think it fits, he cried out to Jesus because he saw Jesus in the moment that he cried out to him (verse 56). He called to his savior who was visible to him. The same holds true for the argument made about Ananias praying to Jesus in Acts 9. He wasn’t praying, he was having an actual verbal exchange with a Jesus whom he could visibly see at the moment. This seems more akin to me talking to someone face to face than praying to them. There are other examples people use to prove that the Scripture sets precedent for us to pray to Jesus, but I’ve reviewed them all closely and none of them except possibly 2 Corinthians 12 seems like it could be seen as praying in the way that Christians usually experience prayer. As far as the instance in 2 Corinthians, even that passage is tough. Paul says that he asked the Lord to remove a thorn in his side. The word used in Greek is “Kurion”, which means Lord and is usually a reference to Jesus. However Paul quotes the response that he received from Jesus word for word. Was Paul just saying that this was the “sense” that he received from God as to the answer to his request? Are we missing something about the nature of the relationship between Paul and Jesus at the time? Was Paul in direct face to face contact with Jesus? It’s possible, that’s how Paul became a Christian after all. When Jesus taught us to pray to the Father, and Paul clearly addresses the Father in clearer passages in his writing on prayer, is this passage in 2 Corinthians enough to build a theology on to pray differently, especially when this passage has so many questions?

So if it’s possible that the teaching of Scripture is that we should pray to the Father, then does that leave the other 2 persons of the Trinity out of prayer? Not at all. In fact, I think the fact that the other two members of the Trinity have such active roles in other ways lends even more credibility to the possibility that it is the Father we should be praying to.

Model #2

In the Old Testament era people had to go to a priest to be represented before God. Because of their sin they didn’t have direct access to God on their own. Job even cried out for a mediator that would make it possible for him to be in true relationship to the Father. In the book of Hebrews in the New Testament in chapters 4 through7 the author lays out for us that because of the work of Jesus on the cross he is now our High Priest, and when we want access to the Father we now go through him. Jesus says the same thing in John 14:6 when he says that “no one comes to the Father except through me.” Our sin separated us from our Father in heaven, and getting back to the Father is the goal of salvation. When we are saved by Jesus, it is the Father whom we receive justification from. In 1 Timothy 2:5 Paul says “there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In Ephesians 5:20 Paul says that he gives “thanks always in everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus.” Is it possible that it is the Father who desires to be prayed to, and that we pray through Jesus as mediator rather than directly to Jesus? And what about the Holy Spirit? Well, in Romans 8 it says that when we don’t know what to pray that the Spirit prays on our behalf. But the Scripture also says in a few different places that we are to pray “in the Spirit” (Ephesians 6:18, Jude 20). It never says pray TO the Spirit, but rather IN the Spirit. To pray in the Spirit means to pray in the power of the Spirit, or in recognition of the presence of the Spirit of God who lives in you. As we pray to the Father, the Spirit gives us the ability to connect with Jesus as he mediates between us and the Father. It is the sealing of the Spirit and his power that guarantees that we are a part of the covenant family of God, making it possible for us to utilize the access that we have to the Father as secured by Christ.

All 3 persons of the Trinity active in prayer, but serving distinct roles. Just as all 3 members of the Trinity are active in salvation but with distinct roles. The Father chooses us to salvation, the Son secures our salvation, and the Spirit seals our salvation.

Model #2 says that we pray TO the Father, THROUGH the Son, and IN the Spirit.

Now even if I was to espouse model #2 as my view (which I may not be), I don’t think we have any reason to believe that God is displeased with people praying with model #1 in focus. I just believe that if there seems to be a pattern of what prayer looks like in Scripture, and if Jesus taught prayer a certain way, we should pay attention to that. Even if we could argue that 2 Corinthians 12, Acts 7, Acts 9, and similar passages teach that prayer to Jesus is just fine with God, it’s clearly not the biblical norm. So even then should the majority of prayers be directed to the Father? It’s a good question. What do you think?

Great Expectations - When to Leave a Church

2010-04-22T12:34:00.000-07:00

This post co-authored by Deacon Trevor Hallam

When Jesus entered the city of Jerusalem at the start of his final week before his death, many people called out to him saying “Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David! Hosanna in the highest!”

Hosanna is a word that implies adoration of the one receiving the comment – and the simple etymology of the word means “please save” or “save now”. In the context of the crowd’s expectations of the coming of the kingdom of David one thing is crystal clear – the people expected that as Jesus entered Jerusalem on that day that he was bringing an earthly kingdom with him that would realize prosperity for the Jews and freedom from Roman oppression. They expected salvation.

Jesus came to save but not in the way they expected him to. Because of this, many of these very same people were there one week later at the trial of Jesus yelling “Crucify him!”They had expectations of God – he didn’t meet their expectations – they bailed pretty quickly.

This got us thinking – what expectations do we have of the church that are fair – meaning expectations that the church should meet and if it doesn’t that we should indeed feel justified in bailing out? And on the flipside, which expectations do people have of the church that are really terrible reasons to bail on a church, but people often leave anyway because they are either too self focused or because they are expecting the wrong things?

Let’s begin with expectations we should all have. If your church is missing these things, leaving is probably best:

1) Christ centricity – A local church should be focused on Jesus in everything that they do, and it should be concentrated on drawing you closer to Jesus. Jesus must be recognized as the rightful head of the church.

2) Biblical preaching – Your local church must preach from the Bible. This doesn’t mean that the preacher has to have a physical Bible in hand. Reading verses off of a screen is still reading and preaching from the Bible. The physical book isn’t what brings life; it’s the words of God that bring life.

3) Provides avenues for worship – The goal of the local church is to provide a place for the community of believers to worship God. The church should also love to reach non believers with the message of the Kingdom of God with the purpose of drawing new people to worship.

4) Cares about being both wide and deep – For the church to be wide it must grow. If your church never grows, something is wrong. God is not opposed to numbers, in fact Luke often points to numbers of people being saved in Acts. If your numbers equate with saved lives, then celebrating numbers is a great way to recognize the power and grace of God in your church. At the same time, if your church is only wide but it isn’t deep then there is a strong chance that your church is full of people who just love to have their ears tickled but are not engaging in the mission. If your church isn’t growing deeper, it will eventually stop growing wide. Beware when a church puts little value in discipleship.

5) Has elders – If your church is not governed by a plurality of leaders, then there is a good chance that your church is being led by the will of your pastor rather than the will of God. The Holy Spirit speaks through a council of Godly men.

6) Provides godly mentors – If there are no mentors in the church that you can go to in order to ask questions and be discipled, then growth will be difficult. Small groups aren’t necessarily commanded in Scripture, but there is a biblical paradigm for them in the New Testament and they provide a great avenue for mentorship. If mentorship isn’t happening in the church – try to be an agent of change. And don’t disqualify someone’s ability to mentor you because of your own fears or worldly expectations. God often provides mentors in unexpected places.

7) Theological harmony of major doctrines – If you have theological disagreements with a church on primary issues – leave quickly. If you have too many theological disagreements on secondary issues of great importance then you should still support the church you disagree with, but leaving might still be what’s best. Theology always drives what we do as Christians. As you will see below – theological nit picking can be taken too far, but where massive disagreement is had it might be best to find a church where more agreement is found.

8) A place to use your spiritual gifts – Now this one needs clarification. If you have the gift of hospitality and your church doesn’t have a hospitality ministry should you leave – I say no. It just means that you need to be creative about how to use your gift to bless the people around you. But in general, if there are very limited avenues in the community you’re apart of for people to use their gifting, then it becomes difficult to obey God in the area of utilizing your spiritual gifts. The church should encourage people to serve using the gifts God gave them.

9) Concerned with missional living – The church should be concentrated on evangelism, mercy and justice, and working hand in hand with the Church of Jesus outside of its own local expression. If a church is too self focused and ignores its place in the bigger picture of the Kingdom then chances are it isn’t engaged in the mission of Jesus as holistically as it should be.

10) Loves to pray – If a church doesn’t emphasize prayer much then there is a chance that it is guilty of either or both of the following – 1) it isn’t involved in ministry with high enough stakes to need God’s help, or 2) It is too confident in its own strength and abilities and doesn’t feel the need to draw on God. Both of these are bad by the way.

11) Handles money wisely – If the church mishandles money, you shouldn’t trust its leaders with your soul. Be informed and ask questions – a church that is responsible with money shouldn’t mind being transparent about how money is being spent.

People often leave churches for terrible reasons that are based more on self focus and pride than Scripture. Here are 11 popular reasons that should be thought through before leaving:

1) The leadership makes mistakes – Leaders make mistakes. All of them. If you leave a church when your leaders make mistakes, you will be church hoping for the rest of your life. Try showing grace instead, and don’t be afraid to challenge your leaders respectfully when they make mistakes.

2) The church has cliques – Churches have cliques – almost all of them. Try being an agent of change rather than leaving. It’s not solely everyone else’s responsibility to become your best friend; you bear responsibility for reaching out as well. Most people that have told me that their church is full of cliques are the same people that never tried to do anything about it. When you reach out, serve others, and join small groups, the cliquey environment seems less prevalent.

3) It doesn’t meet all of your physical needs – First of all, no church can. There are too many individual needs with each person for a church to effectively meet them all. Secondly, it’s not the churches job to meet each and every need you have anyway. The church isn’t about you, it’s about Jesus and providing an avenue for you to worship him and be discipled in his way.

4) It doesn’t meet all of your spiritual needs – The church should be a place where you can grow spiritually to a degree, but no preacher can preach in a way that meets the exact spiritual need of every individual in the church. If the sermons aren’t deep enough for you – don’t leave the church – get off of your butt and feed yourself. The preacher should be more focusing on connecting with non Christians and babes in Christ who aren’t quite mature enough to feed themselves. And besides, if the constant preaching of the simple gospel isn’t deep enough for you then you aren’t as mature as you thought you were anyway. All of the most mature Christians I know are moved more by the gospel each time they hear it.

5) Musical style – There is a woman in our church that hates our music. She has a hard time singing along and doesn’t really understand our lyrics. She stays in our church because she has a ministry to younger women, loves her small group, and grows by hearing the sermons each week. She is a great model of selflessness. You won’t love everything your church does – but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be there.

6) Preaching style – Our church uses predominately expository preaching, but I’m always blown away by how many people consider topical preaching to be an unhealthy method. Just because you preach topically doesn’t mean that you ignore difficult passages, and preaching topically actually makes it easier to preach to the current needs of your congregation as a whole. By the way – the Sermon on the Mount was a topical sermon – Jesus seemed to use the method effectively.

7) Background and age of congregation – If you are in a church where very few people are “like” you – great. God likes variety. As long as you have Jesus in common with people, the gospel should be a good enough reason to help you fit in at any church regardless of the genre of people.

8) Theological nit picking – Earlier I stated that too many disagreements on important issues is a good reason to leave a church, but don’t take that too far. There is a woman in our church that disagrees slightly with how far we apply our complementarian theology, but she is a thriving member of our church and a small group leader. If you leave over small theological nuances, you will never find a church that fits.

9) Minor strategy/philosophy differences – If you leave a church when the elders make a decision you don’t agree with then ask yourself one question – do I think I should lead the church? Even the leaders disagree. To be frank, I think I disagree with about 30% of the decisions we make at elder meetings. But when the majority wants to go in a certain direction I respect the decision and keep my mouth shut, and I usually find out that the majority was right. Show humility.

10) Receive church discipline – The Bible commands leaders to carry out church discipline at times. If church discipline is brought to you from your leaders and you leave, then you are communicating that you need to be able to do church – and Christianity for that matter – your own way. You are not your own. You were bought with a price and saved into the church. If church discipline is carried out with you, be mature and take it like a man. Unless you’re a woman, then take it like a woman.

11) If you can’t serve exactly where you want – Sometimes people want to serve in places that they aren’t ready to serve in. Either they aren’t ready from a talent perspective, they haven’t proved that they are faithful with little, or their character disqualifies them. If you aren’t allowed to serve exactly where you want – don’t leave – do what you’re asked by leadership until they believe that you are ready. Again – show humility.

Obedience

2010-04-14T15:58:00.000-07:00

At Living Stones we talk quite a bit about the grace of God. Every week in our sermons, music, and welcomes we talk about God’s grace. This is a very good thing. If you don’t talk about the grace of God then you aren’t talking about the gospel. After all, “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,” (Ephesians 2:8). Romans 9:16 says that your salvation depends “…not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” You cannot work for God’s favor, he grants it to you by the work of his son Jesus and by the indwelling of his Holy Spirit.

Should we minimize the grace of God in any way? By no means, so please do not read that such a thing is my intention with what I am writing. I think the grace of God deserves the attention it gets, and even more so. But I do believe that our appropriate response and reverence for the doctrine of God’s grace also comes at the expense of another extremely important concept in the teaching of Scripture.

Obedience.

What often happens in churches, and I think I see it from time to time when I talk with people at Living Stones, is that we focus well on the extension of God’s grace to the elect, but we are so celebratory about this doctrine and about Jesus offering our pardon from sin as a free gift that we often neglect to focus equally on what our appropriate response to this doctrine should be. As such, we become what we think we have been saved from, ungrateful and rebellious. You see, according to the Scriptures, celebrating the grace of God through word only is not really celebrating at all. The Scriptures teach that one of the greatest ways to celebrate God’s grace is through obedience to his teachings and his call on your life. What most Christians fail to realize is that the Scripture also says that if you fail to celebrate the grace of God through obedience, then you probably haven’t actually experienced his grace at all, even if you show up at church a couple of times per month blindly believing that your safe as you completely ignore most of what God has called you to do. Romans 8:1 says that we are no longer under condemnation for sin, but remember, Romans 6:1-2 also remind us that this is not a license to continue smoking weed, getting drunk, looking at porn, sleeping with people you aren’t married to, or spitting filth from your mouth. Paul writes, “How can we who died to sin still live in it?”

Now don’t get me wrong, the Corinthian church was into some really terrible stuff and Paul still said that he was confident that the Grace of God was upon them. But he then sent 3 different letters to sternly warn them that they were possibly on a path to destruction, and in 1 Corinthians 5 he even commanded that a man in the church be thrown out of the congregation for unrepentant sin.

In Matthew 28:18-20 Jesus tells his followers to make disciples. This doesn’t only mean to lead them to Jesus; it means to train them in the way of Jesus. Of future disciples he said that they needed to do 2 things, be baptized, and “observe all that I have commanded”.

In Luke 6:46 Jesus asks his followers “Why do you call me Lord, Lord, and do not do what I tell you?” Ephesians 2:10 says that were have been “created in Christ Jesus for good works”. 1 Peter 1:15 says “but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct”.

Are you saved by the grace of God ALONE? Absolutely. Is it necessary for your faith to be accompanied by obedience and good works in order for your faith to be alive and legitimized? You better believe it, or you have more trouble than you realize. James 2:14 says “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?” This is a rhetorical question – the answer is no. In verse 17 James says “So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

So what does it look like to obey Jesus? 2 Timothy 2:21 says “if anyone cleanses HIMSELF from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work.” The Holy Spirit definitely cleanses us through sanctification, but the Bible also says to work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. This Timothy passage says that it’s your responsibility to cleanse yourself from what is unclean, unholy, sinful, and dishonoring to God. How do I do that? 2 Peter 1:3 says that “His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness”. The power of God in your life delivers to you the necessary means to obey God. When you think you can’t shake a sin pattern, then what you are actually saying is that you think that your sin is more powerful than God. Do you really want to say that? I hope not.

So if you’re sleeping with someone you’re not married to, drinking too much, looking at porn, speaking in ways that are not becoming of the calling to which you’ve been called, dealing with people in business with a lack of integrity, or dealing with any other intentional sin, I think the Scripture and the power of God lead you to one great piece of counseling for your first action step – you should stop doing that.

Meat market or family business?

2010-04-06T16:38:00.000-07:00

On the Living Stones elder team, we’ve been talking a bit lately about what role the church can play in uniting singles in our church in godly romantic relationships. Obviously because we have such a young congregation we have a lot of single people, and we have heard quite a bit from many of our singles that finding godly partners is very difficult, which is strange, because there are so many singles attending service and serving together every single week.

Many churches have singles ministries, and most people in those churches aren’t offended by that. We’ve specifically decided not to have a singles ministry, at least for now, because of two major concerns 1) those ministries are often more about catering to consumer, meat market mentalities, and 2) another ministry just busies people up with “church stuff” even more, keeping those people from having the extra time to live missionally.

Instead of having specific singles ministries that people are usually not offended by but aren’t always that effective, some of us in church leadership have tried simply introducing godly single people to one another or having get togethers where Christians can hang out in a non threatening environment and meet one another. For some reason, we’ve had a few people in our church get offended by this. So my question is – why?

I have had a few people say to me that it isn’t the role of the church to pair people up or play “love connection”. Really? Where is your verse for that? I would love to see it. I think such opinions are based on a strong misunderstanding of what the church is. Remember, the church is not a building where worship happens; the church is a people who worship together. And while worship is our primary objective, the way that we worship God takes on many forms. The church is not just a group who sings songs together once a week; the church is a family of people who do life together. If your brother, sister, or close friend had a friend that they wanted you to meet would you become grossly offended at the suggestion and tell them that it wasn’t their role to hope that you find a wonderful and godly partner in life? Most of us wouldn’t mind.

So why is the leadership of a church prohibited from playing a role in helping godly people in the church find each other? Is marriage a good thing? The Scripture says yes. Is marriage a part of life? Yes. Do we counsel married couples? Yes. Do people often come to me as a pastor and ask my advice on whether or not they should marry a certain person? All the time. So why is it any different if I decide to have a fun event where both married people and singles can attend, and where some singles may find each other and benefit the church through healthy and kingdom minded romance? I have heard many people object to such a thing, but I haven’t had a biblical or kingdom minded reason placed alongside of these objections.

Is there a command in Scripture that says that church leaders are responsible for pairing up couples? No, there isn’t. But that doesn’t prohibit me or another elder or deacon from doing it. There a lot of things that we do that aren’t commanded in Scripture but people agree are good, healthy, and kingdom minded. For example, there is no deacon meeting in Scripture, but I think our deacons would agree that when we have them they are good. The question is not “does Scripture command it?” the question is “does Scripture forbid it?”, and if not, does it fit with a biblical ethic? I think godly men and women finding each other is consistent with the mood of Scripture, so helping people find each other serves a kingdom minded purpose.

Finally, because there have been instances lately of couples finding each other through introductions or fun events, and because conversations have been had about what role the church might be able to play in helping people find each other, comments have been made that “Living Stones is too concerned with playing match maker lately and its all I hear about”. This reaction is far too extreme. The last time I checked, we have never dedicated a service or even an officially organized church event around this issue, but we still proclaim the name of Jesus every time we meet. Jesus is our concern, and I think Jesus is concerned that godly relationships are built in our church. Healthy relationships mean a healthy church family. Is that a bad thing to spend time working on?

Expedition Africa

2009-07-01T18:46:00.001-07:00

Every so often a T.V. show hits the air that draws me close to God. Usually it’s something on either The History Channel or Discovery, and has something to do with the world around us. I know many Christians often complain about these same networks putting on programming that promotes ideologies that are very contrary to the Christian world-view, but this has never really bothered me. Sure such a practice creates misconceptions about our God and our faith, but rather than complain about this I have always seen it as my job as a Christian to correct the misconceptions and challenge some of the too easily accepted ideologies of the world. In many ways I’m actually very thankful for such networks teaching us what they do, because the truth that shines forth from these networks draws me closer to God as I learn more about his creation.

In the past I’ve been drawn in by shows such as “Planet Earth”, “the Universe”, “Shark Week”, and documentaries about great people of the past. Currently the show grabbing my attention is The History Channels “Expedition Africa”.

Now to be honest, the personalities on this show aren’t all that engaging, but by the third episode I had quickly learned that the explorers weren’t the stars of the show, God is. Now let’s be clear, this isn’t the attempt of the shows producers in any way, but when you watch the show from a proper Christian world-view I’m not sure how we can see the show any other way.

When crossing the plains our explorers come across a myriad of animals that we would never see anywhere but in a zoo, and these animals are living in these plains in much the same way we would in a big city. They are sharing the same watering holes, lying near each other in the tall grass, and just living life in their little animal society. Its awe inspiring.

At one point the explorers walk near a few giraffe’s, not more than 50 yards away, just jogging along. Within the radius of a few miles they find lions, hyenas, hippos, baboons, pythons, wild cows (no joke), and an elephant or two. Humans don’t just trek through these plains often, although there are small villages near by, but these animals just go on living without us just fine. It was like their own little city.

The reminder – 1) God is a God of beauty who makes beautiful things. 2) Those animals aren’t there for our benefit; they are there because God likes them. Life is more about him then us. The fact that God has great interest in us is a blessing, not a right.

Why do you hate...?

2009-06-23T16:54:00.000-07:00

Have you ever noticed that when it comes to certain things in life, most people are pretty much the same? If I was to say that I was looking for a “good” parking spot, just about everyone on earth would know exactly what I meant. They would automatically interpret “good” to mean “close”. No one ever asks the question, what do you mean by a good parking spot? At the same time, I don’t have to say “I’m looking for a close parking spot”. In this instance “good” and “close” is the same thing even though the words are not synonyms by any means. Because of this, it assumed that everyone on earth would obviously agree on what a “good” parking spot was. What if someone doesn’t agree? What if you were driving in a car with me and I proclaimed ecstatically that I found a great parking spot, and then I parked in the last spot in the lot. You’d think I was a bit off right? The question that I often find myself asking however, is why do most people agree with so many things in life on what is better than something else? Is it because those things are better, or because people are trained by culture to think they are better? If someone simply had a different perspective on things, could they actually see beauty in things that most people find irritating? As more of a fun post than anything else, I thought it would be interesting to list my top ten things in life that most people hate, and that I actually kind of enjoy because I’ve had the fortune of gaining a different perspective on these things. These are things that I think people are trained by culture to hate because most people do hate them, but they sort of assume they are bad because they have always heard everyone else say that they are bad. I would ask you all to consider, are these things really as bad as most people assume them to be. After reading, it would be great if you would respond with one of your own.

10) Baseball on T.V. –
O.k. so not everyone hates baseball on television, but I often hear from fellow sports fans that baseball doesn’t match up to other sports on T.V. because its too slow, takes too long, and is just boring. Instead of boring, I see the slow pace of the game as relaxing, and the strategy of the game as interesting to dissect.

9) Boredom –
You’re thinking, really? Yes really. I actually think being bored is underrated as it provides me time to reflect and organize my thoughts. People should really give planned boredom a chance; it’s actually…well…kind of fun.

8) Movie subtitles –
Many people refuse to watch foreign films unless they are dubbed over in English. When you dub over a film you lose the timing and emotion of the actors, the intensity of the editing, and the feel of the movie changes for the worse. If your excuse is that you don’t read fast enough, the more foreign films you watch the quicker of a reader you become. It’s a win – win situation.

7) Commercialism at Christmas –
This one is especially big for my fellow lovers of Jesus. For some reason people assume that commercializing the birth of Jesus is a bad thing. I have yet to hear a good reason why. The more it’s commercialized, the longer it stays accepted in the mainstream. Because of the commercialization we have Christmas specials on network television that often include the gospel and Christmas music about Jesus being played in fast food restaurants for an entire month. What’s wrong with that?

6) Big business –
You often hear people say that they hate Starbucks for putting mom and pop coffee shops out of business, or that they hate multiplexes for putting little movie houses under, or that Wal-Mart kills smaller grocery outlets. So what? These same people usually say that they support capitalism. Do you see the hypocrisy? The big stores put the little ones under because people like the big ones better. Our society is built on allowing people a choice and people are choosing big business. Why should this upset us? Don’t get mad at Wal-Mart, get mad at everyone you know who shops there. It’s their fault. Besides, Starbucks being a big business allows them to donate MILLIONS of dollars to deserving charities each year, something small coffee houses can’t do.

5) Grocery shopping –
I think people are trained to assume that we are supposed to hate grocery shopping. I love it. It relaxes me. I take my time, use the hour or so to reflect on life, and pay attention to new products that I and my family might enjoy. Try thinking of grocery shopping like this and it might change your whole perspective.

4) Miley Cyrus –
And other celebrities like her. For some reason its trendy to slam on certain celebrities. I know some actually do some dumb things that bring it on. But why does it become trendy to slam on people like Miley Cyrus? I don’t get it. What did she ever do to you…or anyone else for that matter? It’s popular to be annoyed by many celebrities that actually aren’t that annoying. I actually think Miley is talented. O.k. call me a little girl, I’m just using her to make a bigger point.

3) Long lines –
People hate long lines because they are impatient. When I am at a store I often get in the longest line on purpose, and this practice along with many others has trained me to be a more patient person. I rarely get frustrated at anything anymore and this is a major reason why.

2) Censorship –
Not on a political level but on a personal or business level. Many people think it’s wrong to censor. Wal-Mart and stores like it wont sell parental advisory versions of any music, so if you wont edit your album than you’ll have to sell it somewhere else. Green Day recently released a press statement condemning the act and calling Wal-Mart on the carpet. I think Green Day should realize that Wal-Mart is a business that has right under our laws to sell or not sell anything they want. It’s not “right” or “wrong” on their part, it’s their right. If you don’t like it, buy and sell your music somewhere else, why is that so hard?

NUMBER 1) Rainy/overcast weather –
For some reason when someone hopes for “good weather” they always mean the same thing – warm weather and clear skies. I think warm weather and clear skies is overrated. I love a light rain and some clouds in the sky – why can’t this be what people mean when they say they want “good” weather. Are we all trained and programmed to love warm weather because that’s what the status quo considers “good” weather, or do we really like it better. Maybe I’m weird but I don’t. I can’t wait for a news weather man to one day say “hey everyone, look for great weather this week, low 60’s with a lot of clouds and a great chance of rain.”

What do you think? Send me yours or critique mine.

One more try.

2009-06-10T12:47:00.000-07:00

So I think I realized something. The main reason my blog doesn’t stay consistent is because I think I have little faith that there are many people actually reading it. After a few blogs in a row with no feedback at all, I got disenchanted with the whole thing and thus the reason for the lull. And then recently I received a flurry of comments from people asking “where’d the blog go?”

So here I am. In reality, I should be motivated enough by even a few people out there that feel like what I write each week (when I’m actually writing each week) helps them think about something in some way that they hadn’t before. So here it is, one final attempt to rebuild a readership and maintain a consistent blog. If it doesn’t work this time then I'm sure I will just give it up for good, but I really think I will keep it going this time.

For motivation, if you read something intriguing, post a comment and let me know. It always helps.

The 2012 Theory

2009-03-17T11:09:00.001-07:00

Many of the questions we received at our recent God and science forum don’t have much to do with science so they aren’t on the docket to be answered. Although this next question fits the “non-science” criteria, I thought it deserved some attention anyway because it can be seen as remotely scientific in nature.

How should Christians regard things such as the Mayan calendar? What are your thoughts on the 2012 theory?

To be honest, although this theory based largely on the Mayan calendar has many scientific elements to it, this is more a question about religion than science. Because the final cycle of the Mesoamerican long count calendar ends in December of the year 2012, and because of some strange things set to happen in our solar system around the same time, many believe that the year 2012 will either bring the end of the world, or will do the opposite, and bring some massive level of advancement to the human race.

The reality is this. Most of the thoughts brought forth in the various 2012 theories are more metaphysical than scientific – having their roots in the New Age movement, and scientists are downplaying the events causing change in the solar system of that year as fairly normal and harmless occurrences (normal except for the extreme rarity in which they occur, every 225 million years or so). If you’re looking for extensive info on this theory and all it entails simply Google “2012”. But as far as how we as Christians should regard this theory, I say not at all.

Close encounters of the third kind!

2009-03-06T11:55:00.000-08:00

Is life possible on other planets, if so would God have created this as well?

Yes it’s possible. Is it likely, I’m not sure? I think I’m much more open to the idea of little green men than most Christians are, but the universe is 98 billion light years across. Since God is about his glory, then I just don’t see any reason to rule out the possibility that he has other intelligent life forms on other planets in the distant universe worshiping him. The reality is its speculation. The Bible doesn’t address the possibility in any fashion, so there isn’t much point in putting energy into it from a theological perspective. From a scientific perspective I agree with the spending of money to search for other life as this serves as a way for us to understand God’s universe better.

There is an interesting hypocrisy I find in many Christians regarding this issue. When it comes to our own testimony about God we say things like “always tell your testimony”, or “no one can deny what God has done in your life”, or “your testimony is your great witnessing tool”, so that we build up testimony about a God no one can see as a valid argument to others as to why we believe in him. Then when we hear people give testimony of alien encounters we think they are crazy, superstitious, or making it up. What’s the difference? Our testimonies often sound just as crazy to people who don’t believe as those people preaching about aliens sound to us. Now I certainly believe that there are a ton of other reasons to believe in God than a person’s testimony, but when we close ourselves off to possibilities that God has not closed off himself, I think there is something contradictory about that.

Rapid Fire!

2009-03-04T10:24:00.000-08:00

Today I’m going to answer a few of the questions from the God and science forum on one blog because there were many questions that require very short answers.

Q. Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons?

A. This is impossible to know and I’m not sure that the answer matters much. If they had them then God created them that way, but obviously they would not have received them in the way that the rest of us did.

Q. Are you saying that Jesus evolved from an amoeba?

A. No, in fact at the forum we said the opposite. We all made it clear that we do not believe in large scale evolution which would teach that all living things had a common ancestor evolved from a single cell organism. We all believe in smaller scale evolution which includes mutations within kinds, and that natural selection and speciation are common occurrences. We all believe however that humans are a unique creation by God as are “kinds” of animals.

Q. Is the behemoth in Job actually a dinosaur?

A. I don’t think we can know the answer to this question because the Bible isn’t clear about exactly what the behemoth was. But it is clear that dinosaurs existed and that they were really cool.

Q. How does the Bible explain the ice age?

A. It doesn’t. This is one of many occurrences that happened on earth that does not get discussed in the Bible. The Bible is not a history book looking to catalogue all that has ever happened, it’s a story about God redeeming his people. The ice age doesn’t fit the criteria for what God was trying to accomplish in Scripture.

Q. What about shape shifters?

A. I have no idea.

God and science answers begin!

2009-03-03T09:39:00.000-08:00

Well everyone, last Sunday was fun for me. I love talking theology and science at the same time. I hope it was informative. We received about four times as many questions as could be answered in one night, so Jordan and I are going to try and tackle these questions on our blogs over the coming weeks. Please keep checking back until your question is answered.

Here is the link to Jordan’s blog – www.faithfulreason.wordpress.com.

My first question is this – After Cain is sent away, who is his wife if only Adam, Eve, and Abel existed?

First of all – JOIN A SMALL GROUP! Sorry for the shameless plug, but this topic was addressed in every small group last week and I love to see people in small groups, so please get in one so you can get answers to questions like this. But I will still give the short answer here.

Adam, Eve, and Abel were not the only people on earth. The Bible discusses these few people, but the Bible rarely gives the entire story surrounding many issues because this is not the Bible’s purpose. It is widely believed that Adam and Eve had had many children, grandchildren, and maybe even great grandchildren by the time Cain killed Abel and was sent into exile. Cain most certainly married one of his sisters, which sounds bad now but would not have been an issue in his time. The reason – because genetic defect is why marriage of close relatives today is so vile. In Cain’s day their genetics were still too pure to be an issue. Now lets get this strait, God himself bans incest in the Scripture. But the vile nature of incest was a later development that Cain did not have to worry about, and God did not ban it until later. To populate the earth, sibling marriage was necessary.

Movies...

2009-02-08T20:26:00.001-08:00

I know, my last post promised a blog every Friday. I forgot. But here it is a few days late. And for the first time, this blog has little to do with spirituality. As many of you know I am a movie freak. I have a movie pod cast on itunes called filminfocus that I co-host with Jason Spencer, so check it out, its free. Also, I post movie reviews on a website flixster.com, username sanjurosamurai. I’ve seen most major films released in 2008, and I wanted to recommend my top 10.

1) Changeling
2) The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
3) The Dark Knight
4) Burn After Reading
5) Kung Fu Panda
6) Gran Torino
7) Vicky Christina Barcelona
8) Defiance
9) Revolutionary Road
10) Doubt

Keep in mind, some of these are rated R, but there is some great commentary in these films on the human condition and important philosophical themes – well – except Kung Fu Panda that’s here just because its fun.

Im Back!

2009-01-30T11:46:00.000-08:00

Hey everyone! I’m back. I know I know, it’s been like 3 months since I’ve blogged. But here’s the thing, I have decided to rededicate myself to blogging by keeping myself on a very strict schedule. From now on, at a minimum, I will be posting something new (and hopefully interesting) each and every Friday. I could do more through the week, but Friday will be the standard day for the blogs.

This time, I’m back with purpose. I’m helping Harvey answer some of the questions that were texted in during the service last weekend. Here are some of your questions and my answers.

Q: Does the tree of life, as well as the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, maybe refer to an analogy of some sort?

A: First I have to be sure that I understand the question. If you are asking if the tree’s are not actual but analogous in nature – then the easy answer is no. The trees are real, and we know that because the text gives us no reason to believe otherwise. Many have said that these trees sound mythological so they must be, but the Great Wall of China doesn’t sound realistic either and we all know that it exists. Come on, a wall that big that can be seen from space, I don’t believe it!

If you believe that the trees are real but are asking if they double as analogous to something else – Maybe, but that’s surely not the point of the trees. They are actual trees that serve an actual purpose in the designed plan of God, and their purpose is very clear in Scripture.

Let’s look at another one.

Q: If man has a sense of God in them, then doesn’t that contradict total depravity?

A: I’m not sure how it would. By “sense” I assume you’re referring to the image of God in man. The image is broken by the fact that we are born totally depraved, but the image is not removed completely. Keep in mind, there is a difference between “total depravity” and “utter depravity”. We are born totally depraved in that we are not righteous on our own because of sin and we need God’s righteousness (Romans chapter 3). But we are not born utterly depraved, which is the idea that man can do nothing good. We do things that are good as an extension of being made in God’s image even thought the image is broken.

Next question.

Q: Adam and Eve’s kids have to have sex with each other to multiply the population?

A: Yes. It is repulsive today to marry siblings, but God did not make a law against it until the time of Moses. The issue of deformities of the children would have been a non issue because the reason that some children of sibling parents have deformities is because those siblings have the same genetic defects that they received from their parents, and the defects then become magnified and passed on. This early in the line of this family genetic defect would not be an issue because Adam and Eve didn’t have any. It takes many generations for defects to gain potency.

It is impure today to have such incest – but since there were no moral, legal, or genetic problems in the days of Adam and Eve, and since this was the only option, this has to be what happened.

Peter and Paul

2008-10-02T09:21:00.000-07:00

If Peter is the “rock” upon which the church is built, why is it that Paul wrote most of the New Testament?

I guess this is sort of an odd question because it assumes that the writing of the New Testament is the role of the person on whom the church is built. Peter did write sections of the New Testament, but it’s true that Paul wrote more than Peter, as did John and Luke. In actuality, I don’t believe Paul wrote most of the New Testament. The other books make up more writing than Paul’s works, and although Paul wrote more letters I believe Luke’s writings take up more actual space despite the fact that he only wrote two books.

But I digress. Paul was simply in a better place to write the things that were necessary for the New Testament by virtue of the fact that he was the traveler of the two and did more missionary work. Paul’s letters covered a lot of ground. Peter being a foundation for the church had nothing to do with literature; it had to do with his actions as recorded in the first twelve chapters of the book of Acts. Peter was the preacher at Pentecost in Acts 2, which is the moment that most people believe the church itself was born. Peter then went on to lead the early church as other leaders were brought up in the faith.

When you lose someone

2008-09-30T12:16:00.000-07:00

Here is the beginning of question answering time. If you asked a question at the Q&A a while back, check in with this blog and Harvey’s blog for answers to your questions.

Q – Why does God take the people you love away from you? Is he punishing you?

A – This is an interesting question because it is only asked in cultures like the United States where we are fairly consumed by individualism. The question is focused on the self, when in reality God taking a loved one away from you has more to do with that loved one than it does you. We often think of our circumstances from a fairly selfish perspective when life actually isn’t about us.

There is an instance in Scripture where loved ones were taken from a man and that man was center stage. Job had his entire family taken away from him and the testing of his faith was the issue at hand. But for the most part, when a person is taken away from you (I’m assuming you’re referring to death), then you need to realize it has nothing to do with you and everything to do with God. God does everything for his glory, and the timing of people’s deaths fall in line with God seeking glory for himself.

When you lose someone you love you can’t take it personally. God’s plans include you but are not limited to you; he is doing things so big we could never comprehend them.

New blog flurry coming soon

2008-09-09T17:50:00.000-07:00

Wow, have I been horrible about my blogs lately or what. As I did once before, I am going to re-energize this blog with a flurry of blogs. I have tons of questions to answer from the Q&A we had at Stones recently. However, it must wait until I get home from vacation in one week. Next week expect a new blog almost everyday for a while.

Bland Rice

2008-07-30T16:33:00.000-07:00

Lately, I have spent a considerable amount of time pouring into the Old Testament. I am loving it. In the spring I took the Pentateuch class at the Bible College, and since then I have been studying post exilic books like Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah. This was much of the basis of my solitude that I wrote about in my last post.

I am writing about it because I feel that I would be remiss if I did not spend time encouraging more people to study the Old Testament. Many people find the Old Testament to be like fried rice. Some restaurants that serve fried rice serve a delectable and moist treat with meat, eggs, vegetables, and even seafood in the rice. Some fried rice is bland and uninteresting. The best fried rice is among the best food ever, I get excited thinking about it. But when fried rice is bad, it’s uneatable.

The Old Testament however, is less hit or miss than people think. When people have a hard time being intrigued by the Old Testament it’s usually because they are too lazy to put the time in to find out what it is really saying – like people who don’t like fried rice because they are too lazy to find the restaurants that prepare it the best. I don’t care if you have to buy commentaries, create Old Testament study groups, or take classes at the Bible College; you have to pour into this spiritual goodness. The best part is – it is only through an understanding of the Old Testament that one can truly understand the New Testament and Christ himself. Without a balanced view into the whole Scripture, your picture will always be incomplete.

Solitude

2008-07-25T15:19:00.001-07:00

Three friends of mine and I just got back from a four day trip to the middle of nowhere. We drove out Monday morning and came home last night, spending our time camping, resting in the joy of the Lord, and reading the Scriptures. On this trip, we slept on hard ground, went to the bathroom outside behind rocks and under trees, never bathed and rarely changed our clothes. Sounds awful and un-relaxing right?

While I came home with a soar back and greasy hair, I also came home rejuvenated for the next season of ministry. I came home with a new and channeled insight into the Word of God, and I think a more sanctified heart and mind. On this trip, my friends and I studied the book of Nehemiah, as well as the often debated theme of mission and evangelism in the Old Testament. Our findings were profound, but that is a topic for another post.

Solitude is a must for any Christian. The reason why we haven’t learned to connect with Yahweh or study our Bible properly is because we seldom (if ever) get alone with God and seek his face on the Scripture. I don’t mean an hour in your quiet time, I mean for hours in a day or series of days. While on our trip, we studied the word of God for 7-8 hours a day for four strait days. It was invigorating.

God showed me some amazing things on this trip. Not just about Scripture, but about creation and about my own sin. I got real with God and he got real with me, he spoke to me. Plan time to get away to be with the Savior, even if its not in the middle of nowhere like where we went, just get away. Be intentional about your time with God, and he will be intentional with you. This week was another of the many moments where God touched me in a special way and changed my life.

Thank you Father.

The demands of society

2008-07-09T15:48:00.000-07:00

Can Morality survive in an age of consumerism?

This is a question being asked by philosophers today, and I believe it is the right question. When philosophical circles began posing this question, it quickly hit me as one of the most important questions of the last forty years. The United States and other like-minded countries are more consumer driven than ever, but as with most things, I don’t believe people ever stop to reflect on the ethical consequences of their life-styles. This is because philosophy isn’t practical enough. While the common man toils away in this life doing common things and assuming that life is in the status quo, the intellectuals who know that the rest of us are killing ourselves with our poor decisions are on high eating ambrosia while sitting on their golden toilets that sing to them as they…ya know. All the while, they are writing books on the most important challenges facing our world, but writing them in such a way that no one will read them except other intellectuals who already recognize the problem. All this serves to do is help smart and informed people affirm to one another how smart and informed they all are, while leaving out 95% of the population in the process. Even if the intellectuals put their heads together to find a consensus in the solution to this problem that only they know about, their solutions end up in the same books read by the same people. While the informed sit about, smiling and toasting themselves at dinner parties because they have solved the world’s problems, the rest of society wouldn’t (and couldn’t) be the wiser.

So then… what about our question from above? Consumers run about all day sucking in everything they can at the least possible cost or sacrifice to themselves, completely oblivious to the fact that they are compromising their character along the way. Integrity, nobility, loyalty, and honor are becoming things of the past because society has gone the way of the consumer. Reporters are trapped in an endless pit of reporting only the negative aspects of their beat, whether in sports, entertainment, or their own neighborhoods—because such reporting is lucrative. The most successful reality shows on television are the ones with the most sex and drama, and television today would be unrecognizable to anyone that has been dead 30 years or more. Why has the debauched become such a big seller, and why have formerly noble aspects of society either been corrupted or gone the way of the dodo? One word: “demand”.

Demand is that word that economists love and loathe at the same time. Demand is what makes the world go around. If the general populous wants something, enterprise will have no choice but to supply it or drown. The world can be a very sink or swim place. Because people demand the things that are generally immoral, suppliers are throwing their principles out of the window to cash in. Unfortunately, the problem is so old now that the sons and daughters of the people on the front-lines of compromise are being raised without this old code—this former sense of morality—because their fathers and mothers left it behind so long ago that it’s barely detectable anymore.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating prudishness. I watch Rated-R movies and see some great benefits in society sort of “relaxing” a bit from its former need for perfection and censorship. But at the same time, I often fantasize about the days when my parents were kids and they could turn on the television to family-oriented shows rather than MTV’s The Real World in Chattanooga (…or wherever they might go next. I think they are running out of earth for that show, so maybe we’ll see Real World: Uranus sometime soon). Why do want to watch people have sex, cheat by having sex with someone else, then hate each other with a passion while living with the pain of betrayal. The answer is simple—sin. Because we have sin, we like to watch other people have it too—and because there is a demand for sin from the consumers and because we live in a consumer driven world—morality gets the backseat or sometimes pushed out of the car entirely.

I’m not looking to be un-American here; I’m not trying to rid the world of capitalism. I’m just crazy enough to want my capitalism with a heavy dose of conscience and character. When consumers are the conscience of our nation, then morality has a hard time surviving. In the end, it can’t survive. This is why moralism doesn’t work and why the Bible rejects moralism so emphatically. Moralism is a philosophy that says that morality is the goal of human life. Intrinsic within this philosophy is that man can accomplish his own sense of morality. The reality however is that humans left to their own morals and no authority or rescue from themselves will always fail to do what is best for society. Because of this, people need the Spirit of God as their conscience and guide. This is also why we can never make the mistake of allowing consumerism into the church. So the next time you find yourself in a church service thinking, “I don’t like the way we do that”, remember one thing: the church isn’t here to meet your demands.

Generosity

2008-06-24T16:04:00.000-07:00

A question recently sent in at Living Stones asks, “When is it wrong to spend money on things you don’t need?”

Always.

Just kidding.

Seriously, I spend money on myself all the time and I don’t feel guilty one bit. Sometimes I take that too far though and the Holy Spirit whispers, “Hey, what are you doing?” Essentially what we see in Scripture is a call on the life of the believer to live a life characterized by consistent generosity. Enjoying life through the blessings that God provides is not wrong in and of itself, but when your enjoyment comes at the expense of helping other people when you have abundance but they have a need, then you are flat out in sin. Period.

Generosity is required of you by your God if you follow Jesus. If you are a squanderer, believe it or not but the Scripture says that God removes his blessing from your life (Malachi 3). To seek what God expects from you read passages like Matthew 25, and 2 Corinthians 8 and 9. These are great passages on generosity and how we should use our resources to further God’s Kingdom rather than hold things back out of fear or selfishness.

The Nazarite Vow

2008-06-17T15:47:00.001-07:00

A question recently asked at Living Stones reads, “Is there a practical reason for not eating grapes in the Nazarite Vow in the Old Testament?”

The Nazarite Vow is described by Moses in Numbers chapter 6. Essentially, the vow would be taken by an Israelite for the purpose of connecting to God during a certain period of time. During this time a person would deal with sin issues or apathy and build on their relationship with God.

During the vow, one of the things that a person would give up was wine and any other grape product. The purpose of the vow was to give up practical things that people experienced as a part of everyday life, things that were seen as normally being blessings from God. Grapes and wine were things enjoyed by Israelites daily and were considered blessings, so they were among the things given up.

So you want to be a leader?

2008-06-05T16:32:00.000-07:00

A question we received at Living Stones reads, “What are your qualifications for a leader at Living Stones?”

That depends on the level of leadership you aspire to.

At Living Stones we have three basic levels of leaders, the highest form of leadership is the Shepherd Team, then we have a deacon team, and thirdly we have a team of small group leaders. Many small group leaders are deacons and Shepherd Team members.

We strictly follow the guidelines for leaders found in Scripture. To be a member of the Shepherd Team a person must fit the qualifications found in 1 Timothy 3:1-7. To be a deacon or small group leader a person must fit the qualifications found in 1 Timothy 3:8-13.

Essentially we follow these guidelines, test a person to see how willing they are to serve, and check to see if they are an advocate for the church which includes attendance at communions and baptisms. If a person has strong character and serves faithfully in the ministry for an extended period of time, and if that person is willing to lead and take on the burden and responsibility, then they are brought into leadership in some form.

Think more to love more

2008-06-04T17:51:00.000-07:00

A question we received on a comment card at Living Stones a while back asked the following, “Do you believe it is the duty of Christians to understand the apologetics of the faith in addition to the Scriptures?”

First of all, you said duty.

And the answer is yes, absolutely, unequivocally, positively, without a doubt it is our responsibility. And not just for some, but for every Christian.

For those that are unaware of what apologetics is, allow me to define it; apologetics is essentially the art of defending the Christian faith. The question is obviously asking about apologetics in forms other than biblical ones, because some apologetics are found in the Scripture themselves. 1 Peter 3:15 tells us to always be “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you”. This verse is telling us to be prepared to answer the questions of the skeptics. On Mars Hill in Acts 17, Paul quoted pagan poets to prove a point about Jesus.

The only way to truly be ready to answer any question is to study in a broad range of topics. I spend almost as much time studying philosophy and science as I do theology, because my theology will only be taken seriously by the non-believer if they can see that I understand the world outside of the Scriptures enough to point people to the truth. All truth is God’s truth, not just the truth found in Scripture. Scripture is certainly the only concrete, trustworthy, authoritative, and verifiable truth, but God’s truth is everywhere. You can’t go to the Bible to learn that 2+2=4, but God designed mathematical truth.

Sometimes using the truths of science and philosophy and showing their consistency with Scripture is the only way to get a skeptic to see you as a ‘thinking person’ as opposed to a ‘closed-minded fundamentalist’. Most skeptics’ questions won’t have to do with Scripture—they will ask questions about epistemology, science, or metaphysics. If we say, “I don’t know what those are but I know God loves you”, then we lose any effectiveness in evangelism and we disobey the command in Scripture to love God with our entire mind. We are called to be wise in how we approach non-believers (Colossians 4) and engage people in any way we can with the truth without falling into sin ourselves. Anyone who tells you that studying the intellectual disciplines outside of Scripture is sin hasn’t read the Scripture.

This is a call, and we all have a responsibility to it—but most of us just ignore it because we think it’s harder than it actually is.

Just a theory

2008-06-03T16:33:00.001-07:00

Here is a FAQ here at Living Stones – “How do we maintain our faith with mounting scientific evidence of our origins from evolution?”

My answer is easy – show me the evidence.

I was recently accused of being a “narrow minded, ignorant, religious zealot” for stating that there really isn’t any truly compelling evidence that points to evolution. The person told me that I was blinded by a desire for God and that I was ignoring the truth that science was producing. I challenged that person on some things and less than an hour later I had this person completely dumbfounded and struck by the realization that he could not produce a single bit of truly concrete evidence that pointed towards evolution.

It just doesn’t exist.

The theory of evolution isn’t held by idiots. Intelligent people interpreted their observations and created a theory that might lead to something more substantial. More than a century later the evidence that all evolutionists agree needs to be produced has yet to be. The fossil record has produced interesting points of study, but has yet to produce anything that proves that any creature has ever evolved from one phyla of living thing to another. In fact, many former evolutionists have recently jumped ship so to speak, leaving their theory to be defended not by objective thinkers but by scientific fundamentalists.

For me, holding to the faith is easy because God has proven himself while evolutionists have not.

The meaning of meaning

2008-06-02T14:48:00.001-07:00

Have you ever thought about ‘meaning’? What is meaning? How does a person properly communicate meaning and does meaning mean anything?

Lost yet?

Stay with me, because this is important. Consider the phrase “God is good”. What does that mean? The phrase—standing by itself—could mean many things; but much more needs to be known about the phrase before it has any real meaning. If a Hindu or Muslim used this phrase, it would mean something entirely different that if a Christian said it. A Hindu could be referring to any number of things as God, and a Muslim would be referring to Allah, while a Christian would obviously be referring to Yahweh who is the God of the Bible. Without any background, a Christian might hear this phrase on television or see it in a magazine and think, “Amen, of course he is good.” Then, when that Christian turns off the TV or closes the magazine he or she is reading, he/she may be shocked to realize that he/she is reading a new age magazine who’s god is—well—everything.

For any sentence, phrase, or proposition to carry meaning it needs these integral ingredients. First of all, the words in the proposition need to have a ‘sense’. What is meant by sense is that the words in the sentence can be understood in and of themselves. We need to understand the meanings of the words ‘God’ and ‘good’ to understand that God is good. Second, we need to understand the ‘referent’ of the proposition. In our phrase God is good, we need to know which God is being referred to and what is meant by the word good when it is used as a description of God. Third, we need an ‘assertion’. The assertion is basically the intent behind the phrase, and the assertion can only be understood if we know things about the person asserting the phrase. Who is the person? What are that person’s beliefs? Who is their god and what do they believe goodness to be? Why are they using that particular proposition at this particular time?

Thinking through anything you hear and read with these guidelines is more important than you may think. The reason statements in the media and verses in the Bible are so easily taken out of context and misunderstood is because people do not discipline themselves in their communication to discover true and genuine meaning. All statements have what philosophers call a ‘truth value’. A statement is either true or false, but unless people look into the sense, referent, and assertion of a phrase upon hearing or reading it, a person will be inclined to believe anything that sounds good or tickles the ear, which is something the Scripture strictly warns us about (1 Tim 4:3).

Many philosophers agree that it is not just understanding a proposition that is crucial for the individual, but relaying them is important as well. Imagine if I were to approach you and tell you that God is good. Even if you understand the sense of the word ‘God’ and you know what the word ‘good’ means, and even if you know that I claim to be a follower of Jesus and that he is the God that I am referring to, you have to look at my life and behavior to determine what I mean by the phrase, which would be seeking out the assertion of the proposition. If I drink too much, ignore my children, sleep around with multiple women, and only attend church once or twice a month, what are you going to think I mean when I say that God is good? You might think I mean that I like God and think he is good because he lets me get away with living like an idiot. Then you may think that this is what all Christians mean when they say that God is good, and if that’s the only picture you have of the goodness of the God of the Bible, you have an incorrect picture.

What’s the point of all of this? Meaning matters. If you are lazy in searching for the real meaning and truth value of things you read and hear, you will be led away from truth more often than you realize. If you do not live consistent with what you claim to believe, no one will properly grasp anything you are attempting to communicate. God deserves more from us than our laziness, don’t you agree?

Its been a while

2008-06-01T20:02:00.000-07:00

Hello readers,

It has been nearly two months since my last post. Part of this was because I was re-evaluating my approach to writting, and I wanted to make sure that I was going to be able to write engaging things that would provoke thought and challenge people. I didnt want to write for the sake of writing.

The other part had to do with a crazy season for me where I felt like there were no spare minutes in a day - blogging was the thing that had to give.

Im back with a considerable amount of things to discuss, and I imagine I will be posting multiple times a week from this point forward, so please check back. I will be taking a break from June 7th - 14th because I am speaking at Grace Church's high school camp all week, but aside from this there will really be no more interuptions.

Please post responses to what you read, I would love to hear your thoughts.

Book Recommendations

2008-04-09T12:30:00.000-07:00

In light of my last post I have been asked to recommend some things to read. Here are a few things that I’ve read recently and been deeply effected by…

Humility by Andrew Murray
Love Your God with All Your Mind by J.P. Moreland
Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life by Donald S. Whitney
This Beautiful Mess by Rick McKinley
The Word of God and the Mind of Man by Ronald Nash
The Universe Next Door by James W. Sire

The second, fifth, and sixth books on this list are fairly tough reads, but the others are light reading with major impact. If you’re looking for a good read in the fiction genre I strongly recommend a novel called The Kite Runner.

Leaders and Readers

2008-04-04T13:26:00.000-07:00

I once heard it said that “leaders and readers are usually the same people.” I have to say, I couldn’t agree more.

I struggle quite a bit when I hear people in leadership, or aspiring leaders say things like, “I’m just not a big reader.” Reading isn’t about personality, talent, gifting, or some genetic makeup set aside for a select group. Reading is a discipline. Especially in Christianity, most of the people I run into at conferences throughout the country who are doing big things in the Kingdom of God say they spend a lot of time reading the Bible and many, many other things.

Disciplines aren’t meant to be easy. It’s difficult to find time to read and if we aren’t naturally inclined to read then getting good at reading takes practice. What people usually fail to realize is that with practice reading is just like anything else—you improve over time. The things you read become more understandable and you can move onto more difficult reading; usually, people pick up speed the more often they read as well.

Most of the leaders at Living Stones are required to read. This isn’t us being legalistic (at least we don’t think so), this is us training leaders. Most of the growth I’ve gone through in my walk with God was a result of being changed and effected by something I read. People who ignore great Christian writing are ignoring a great chance to be sanctified by God through some timeless truth told in a new or impactful way.

Remember—leaders and readers are usually the same people.

Faith and the Founding Fathers part 3

2008-03-25T13:30:00.000-07:00

If you haven’t read parts 1 and 2 scroll below and read those first.

Part 3….

Although many of the key founders focused on many things that drew them away from Jesus, the question must be asked – Is there anything we can learn from the founders about how to be a better Christian? What should our focus be rather than trying to Christianize America?

I think the “disinterest” of the founders discussed in part 2 is a great place to start. Because the founders cared so deeply for the success of the nation, they found a way to put all biases aside and they evaluated all things according to the greater good. What is the greater good of our church and our faith? How often do we ask ourselves this question as opposed to reacting without reflection to the things happening around us in our churches and in our country? When we don’t like the way the church approaches music, or evangelism, or church discipline, we often grow bitter and frustrated – approaching the church with a critical spirit – rather than evaluating things not based on our preferences but rather on the effectiveness that certain approaches have for others involved. We need to learn to remove our own interests and see how things affect the rest of our community. My belief is that very few of us in our church do this well.

The same goes for our approach to our country. We get all worked up because prayer is not in schools; how much time have we spent evaluating whether or not prayer in schools changes hearts and leads people to Christ? People often correlate prayer in schools with the trends in the nation’s crime rate, but I don’t think Jesus is as interested in the crime rate as he is in regenerated souls. When it comes to genuine faith, numbers show that prayer in schools did little to lead people to the savior but did a great job of alienating people from the truth that was forced down their throats rather than communicated to them with love and grace. It also contributed to a Christian sub-culture in many parts of the country that rose up many uninterested, luke-warm moralists and not many sold out followers of Jesus.

I think the next thing we have to do is deal with the source of our identity. The reason we want to Christianize everything is because we are looking for a security that was secured at the Cross of Jesus. This isn’t a Christian country – deal with it – neither is China and thousands of people experience regeneration there every day. Our identity isn’t in our nation, it’s in our God. I’m not anti-patriotic, I love my country. But I’ve learned to love my country for what it is rather than trying to pretend that it’s something its not. Colossians says that we have been delivered from the domain of darkness and transferred into the Kingdom of the living God. Our ultimate citizenship lies with him—lets be satisfied in that.

Two guys you should know

2008-03-14T17:36:00.000-07:00

Part three of Faith and the Founding Fathers is still coming, but I wanted to take a minute to bring something else to everyone’s attention.

In life, God always raises up a few great leaders for every generation to look to for wisdom, insight, profound biblical teaching, and honest perspective. Two of these great leaders of our time that I feel you all should know about and respect are D.A. Carson and John Piper. If you aren’t familiar with these two, you should become so; if you are familiar but only in part, I encourage you to seek their wisdom to a greater degree.

D.A. Carson is a biblical scholar. I heard one scholar say that he was sort of like the “scholar to other scholars”, a first among equals. I heard another great Bible teacher once say that Carson was the only living scholar that was on par with the scholars of the enlightenment. I have read many of Carson’s books and I would recommend them all. He’s not Jesus or anything, but he knows his stuff.

John Piper is a pastor in Minnesota. He has written dozens of books and each of them have had a profound influence on the leadership of Living Stones. I once heard a great preacher say that Piper was basically the “pastor to other pastors” around the world. His biblical insight and passionate words in his books, as well as his sermons (which can be downloaded online) have helped to shape the way that many pastors here at our church see God and life. His website is www.desiringgod.org.

If you don’t know these guys, get to know them. They have been used by God to change my life.

Faith and the Founding Fathers part 2

2008-03-12T16:51:00.000-07:00

If you have not read part one of Faith and the Founding Fathers, scroll down to read that before reading this one.

Part 2….

Ultimately, true Christianity is not about Christian structure and government, it’s not about prayer in schools or monuments of the 10 commandments in court houses, and it’s not even about morality or church attendance. True Christianity is about abiding in Christ and centering him as the substance of all that a person does. Forcing kids to pray in school or forcing biblical morality on someone isn’t going to save their soul, and in many cases it will only serve to push them away.

The founders may have used the Bible to write the laws of our country, and it’s even true that there were founders who were Christians and that even the non-Christian founders admitted to having a deeply rooted respect for the Word of God; but as was stated in part 1, most of the key players didn’t know God at all. For them, the Bible presented a guideline for laws that seemed to work, and that’s the extent many of the founders went in their interaction with Christ. In fact, the standard for life and relationship set by the founders was anything but Christian. Rather than basing their relationships on love and grace, they based their relationships on status. They weren’t concerned with monetary status or hereditary nobility like the British; the founders were, however, deeply concerned with talent, education, and charisma. Even among the elite there was an elite, there were the leaders and then there were the firsts among equals. There were leaders and then there were what the founders called “gentlemen”.

In the late 18th century being a gentleman wasn’t what it is today. When we think of a gentleman, we think of a nice guy, maybe someone who stands when a lady walks in the room or opens doors for people. For the founders, being a gentleman was what separated you from everyone else, and the qualifications needed for earning such a title in the social structure of that day were extensive. “Gentility”, as they called it, included politeness but certainly wasn’t limited to it. Being a gentleman was a holistic approach to being the best kind of man—the model founder, so to speak—and they lived by this with all the zeal that they could muster. Gentility included things like education, virtue, tolerance, reasonableness, wit, and the ability to be frank, candid, outspoken, opinionated, and sincere without ever crossing the line of being obnoxious. Gentility also included honesty and integrity which was the standard for what made you socially trustworthy and acceptable. Meekness was not admirable, rather than seeing such a thing as humble as many do today, they saw this as a weakness rooted in pride, the sort of pride that would cause a person to hold back from social engagement out of fear rather than better motives.

The standards for gentility in the late 18th century were so strict and elusive that many historians believe that no more than 5% of the colonies’ population at that time was considered to be gentlemanly. Many had the virtue and personality, but not the education, an obstacle only a man as great as the very uneducated George Washington was able to overcome. Men like Aaron Burr had the education but lacked the character. In most cases, the entire package was required. Gentility for the founders was a discipline that they spent their entire lives trying to perfect. They wasted no days; each knew morning brought an opportunity for them to perfect the craft of being better than everyone else.

Surprisingly, the key virtue of gentility in the late 18th century was none of the things listed above; it was actually a characteristic that few today would even recognize because it has been relatively flushed out of our society. The characteristic most cherished by the founders was something that they called “disinterest”. Let’s not confuse disinterest with uninterest. To be uninterested in something is to essentially have no interest, which the founders would frown upon. They believed that all men should be educated and interested in all areas. Disinterest is different; it is the ability to be incredibly interested in all things, but to set aside your own interests for the good of all others. Essentially, disinterest was the founder’s discipline of removing bias for the good of the new nation that they were seeking to create, despite ones feelings and passions, and despite the pain it might cause a gentleman to do so. This played itself out mostly in politics. For a politician in the founder’s day to be successful, he must first retire from all private vocations and pursuits so as not to be biased towards business in his politics. Decisions needed to be made for the good of the people as a whole, not for the good of the voting politicians private inquiries.

You might be sitting there, reading all of this and wondering, “What’s the point?” “Why pose all of these questions?” “What does all of this have to do with me besides trying to convince me that we aren’t a Christian country?” “What about the questions he posed at the end of part one to this post that haven’t been answered?” I’m sorry to do this to you, but wait a couple of days for part three and all of your dreams will come true and your questions will be answered.

Faith and the Founding Fathers

2008-02-22T12:42:00.000-08:00

Human beings are born with an inherent desire to know who they are. We have a desire for an identity, and most people search for theirs with such zeal that if they can’t find their identity it often drives them into depression and low self esteem. This is why people build family trees, research their national origins, and ask the oldest members of their family about their own deceased parents and grandparents. Often, connecting to the past is a way for us to find out more about who we are. I, for example, became far more infatuated with beer when I found out how German I was, and I became far more infatuated with green grass, Irish literature and film, and potatoes when I found out how Irish I was. Did I love these things before I engaged in the knowledge of my family’s roots, yes to a degree, but my passion for these things accelerated dramatically when I felt connected to a history of people who embraced these things as a culture. This is really an odd thing—why should my habits change based on a loose connection to old dead people from countries I’ve never been to? How do I even know if my distant relatives from these lands ever engaged in these prototypical cultural dinstinctives? It’s possible that I could be starting a tradition rather than continuing one.

Because I enjoy literature—and because Ireland has produced some of the greatest literature the world has ever known—I like to picture some Irish relative sitting next to a fire, staying out of the rain, eating a potato cake, pounding a beer, and reading a classic novel. If my relatives didn’t engage in such activities I might be disappointed. I have created a revisionist history of my family in my own mind to accommodate my search for identity.

Today is one of my heroes’ birthday. I am an admirer of George Washington, I’ve studied his life and leadership, as well as his thought, and I have spent some time this week meditating on his contributions to our country. Thinking through this habit that most of us have of identifying with our past to define the present, and meditating on the significance of what today is, I felt it appropriate to discuss the American tendency of revising history to feel connected to something bigger than ourselves, to find an identity. I feel strongly that of all of the societies of America, Christians are guiltier of these revisions than any.

I can’t tell you how many paintings I have seen in Christian bookstores of George Washington reading a Bible or standing next to a horse with a Scripture verse under the scene. I can’t tell you how many books I have seen on Christian bookstore shelves around the 4th of July that point out that our country was founded by Bible-believing Christians. Worst of all, I can’t tell you how many Christians I have heard call this country a Christian one, or say that “all of the founders were Christians”, or say specifically that George Washington was a believer. In reality, none of these things are true. In fact, of all of the men commonly regarded as our key founding fathers—Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, Burr, Monroe, Paine, and Madison— none of them were followers of Jesus in the Spiritual sense, save Hamilton; and he did not come to Christ until he was on his death bed. Washington was a deist and a mason and believed that the Bible was a simple moral guideline for building legislation and bringing peace, he did not see it as a book that brought forth the words of life. A few of the men listed above were atheist, and one was even hostile towards all religion … especially Christians.

So why are we as Christians so guilty of revising history and creating tall tales of a Christian past that doesn’t exist? I think that this is partly because our country was indeed founded on the principles of the Bible, but being founded on the Bible and being founded on Jesus is not always the same thing. I think the other major reason is because we are searching for an identity. We as Christians want to identify with our founders as deeply as possible so that we can build an identity that involves our dual citizenship, our citizenship in heaven and our citizenship on earth. Because all of America is infatuated with wanting to know what the founding fathers thought of any issue in current debate, if Christians can claim a powerful Christian past then we can attempt to claim a powerful Christian future as well. The problem is that in the process we are putting ideas in the minds of the founders that were never there while they were alive. We are claiming people for the cause of Christianity who themselves never claimed Jesus for the cause of saving their souls. Ultimately the question must be asked, why do we do this to begin with? Is it necessary?

The answer is no—it’s not. China is communist today and has no Christian background, yet they are far more influenced by true Christianity than we are. Why is that? Where should we find our identity? Stay tuned for part two.

The whole Jesus - He's not what you think.

2008-02-08T11:44:00.000-08:00

Christians are in love with the idea that Jesus is their Savior. We cherish the concept—we tell stories about his saving work including our own testimonies of the day we "got saved", we plead with people to come to Christ as they are and receive Jesus as their "personal Lord and Savior". Too often this recognition of Jesus as Savior remains simply cognitive. For this saving concept to transcend the conceptual and become efficacious in a believers life, Jesus needs to be viewed with a more holistic approach.

Jesus did not simply come to earth in a human suit to be your Savior; he came to be your King and to issue a fuller form of the Kingdom of God than what was in place under the old covenant. Numbers 23:21 declares Yahweh to be the King of his people, which at this point was directed solely at Israel. In the book of 1 Samuel, Israel rejects God’s reign over them and demands a human king. Samuel warns the Israelites that this is a bad idea; why would anyone reject a perfect and good King to take on a fallen and finite one?

Since Israel’s rejection of Yahweh—really since the fall of man in the Garden—human history has been about one thing. American Christians are often arrogant enough to think that it’s about us. Silly us. Human history is about Jesus, not only redeeming the debt of his people because of sin, but restoring the Kingdom to the King. For the Kingdom to be restored the same sin that led Israel to reject the king in the first place had to be dealt with, thus the need for Jesus’ sacrificial death on the Cross.

While on earth, Jesus said things like, “The Kingdom is at hand”, and that the Kingdom was “the purpose for which I have come.” Jesus arrived on earth to reveal a progressive nature and fuller consummation of the Kingdom so that people would not only seek salvation to save their own tails, but so that they would realize that there is a King who deserves to be worshiped, obeyed, and engaged in relationship. Jesus isn’t saving people to pack churches full of hypocrites—he’s saving people to advance a Kingdom that he already reigns over as King.

Would any of you walk through an American mall sporting a shaved head and wearing burlap and sandals? Of course not, because you’re not a post war Japanese monk, such attire would be normal for them but freakish for us. Why is it so easy for us to obey the customs of our American culture, but when it comes time to obey the King in his own Kingdom we either ignore him or symbolically spit in his face by showing no regard for his commands? Jesus’ Kingdom is of another world (John 18), but it also includes this world. The Scriptures say many things about God ruling from sea to sea and owning all things, including humans. Do we want to be guilty of rejecting the King like the Israelites in 1 Samuel? If you think they were foolish, look in the mirror.