David Keuss' Blog

A Short Review: A Book You'll Actually Listen To.

2012-01-05T17:39:00.003-06:00

A Book You'll Actually Listen To is a doctrinal book on audio cd that can be found at local Mardel or Lifeway Christian Stores. It is made up of four books covering On the Old Testament, Who is God, On the New Testament, and Church Leadership. Some parts rehearse standard evidential apologetics like the Who Is God section. However, it is a good reminder of some of those standard modern arguments. The Old and New sections are challenging for one personally and doctrinally. You'll find surprising insights after being bored a minute, then there is a nugget of gold. Perfect for driving. The Church Leadership chapter is almost entirely worth its time spent listening to it. It is relevant to the American church situation and biblical. It is also a testimony from Mark's own experiences as a pastor in Seattle. Overall, I would recommend it as a refresher, as a support or apologetic for the Old and New Testaments, and as a reminder of standard arguments for God. The Church Leadership section is useful for both lay persons and pastors who want to follow the Bible rather than a Corporation structure or Roberts Rules of Order. In our day, so many of the nice outwardly looking structures and worship services in American neighborhoods ignore the Bible's own information on church structure and leadership. Yet this book on audio gets past that and also has practical insights on not giving way to evil person's who try to divide the congregation either painting themselves as the "nice" ones or as they might attack certain people they don't like. A strong church leadership is the best way to side step ever having that problem get very far, though in Pastor Mark's church, when it was a plant (new church), they apparently learned this by experience at first, rather than foresight.

Blessings,...

Good Perspective on Santa

2011-12-23T22:32:00.001-06:00

This is a short but good point on Santa in American culture. More could be said than the one recommendation given by the author of the following article. St. Nicholas is someone who can be explained knowing some of the history on him, say from a solid evangelical professor like James Parker III at Southern Seminary who wrote an article along the same lines.

http://pastormark.tv/2011/12/22/what-we-tell-our-kids-about-santa

Merry Christmas!

Church Planter Info

2011-12-22T09:15:00.003-06:00

Some church planters out there will be interested in this article:

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/21/5-things-we-now-know-about-suburbia/

The Brookings Institute researched movement trends in the US. It seems the suburbs are more diverse, which anyone in a metro area would already know, but this gives you numbers. It may help you to think through some outreach strategies that are going to reach the suburbs now.

Isaiah 7's "God with us" Immanuel

2011-12-08T13:58:00.004-06:00

It's interesting that several commentators on Isaiah 7, in major evangelical commentaries, go along with apologizing for Isaiah 7:16. Expositors, NAC. This verse in no way indicates that Isaiah had to have a child or Ahaz had to have a child. If anything it is vague enough to include a child later, even the Christ child. God has already rejected Ahaz, there is no reason that he has to prove something to him by having an immediate fulfillment of verse 16. While verse 16 is a part of the preceeding, it is best to take it as a later fulfillment, along with teacher John Oswalt, in his work on Isaiah 1-39.

What Do Pastors Actually Do?

2011-12-05T12:02:00.009-06:00

I'm actually a missionary right now, but a lot of people over the years have said to one another, what do pastors do with their time? To give you a rough idea, whoever you are asking, I can reflect on my pastor days and share what those men are doing typically:

BY WEEK OF YEAR--

1. Prayer for those who are sick in their congregation. (10 minutes to 5 hours)
2. Prayer for those who are wondering away from following Jesus in visible ways. (30 minutes to 5 hours)
3. Sermon passage and topic choosing (with more prayer and study). (0 minutes to 15 hours)
4. Sermon passages study, to make sure you know you're not off track. (5 to 15 hours)
5. Sermon writing. (10 to 25 hours depending on difficulty, knowledge, jokes, illustrations)
6. Sermon study and re-thinking it. (minimum 3 hours to 10 hours)
7. Administrating teams. (0 to 10 hours)
8. Evangelism or Evangelism Training or Special Events for Evangelism. (1 to 20 hours)
9. Administrating budget/economic planning. (0 to 16 hours)
10. Sunday School/Small Group/Men's Group/Women's Group leader training. (1 to 10 hours)
11. Checking up on what is happening in culture and their particular missions agencies they associate with. (30 minutes to 4 hours)
12. Materials checking/obtaining. (0 to 3 hours)
13. Other. Depends on size of church and needs. (0 to 10 hours)
14. Counseling. Depends on extensiveness of it and research. (0 to 10 hours)
15. Meeting people. (1 to 10 hours)
16. Mission Agencies Meetings. (0 to 5 hours)

Occassionaly, 17. Weddings and Funerals. (0 to 20 hours, normally more work than you get paid for it, as example if you do a good custom order of service and message it could take 20 hours, which is half of some people's work week, but people often give you 100-200 dollars, which no one could actually live on)

There you go, that week could be 40 hours or 70 hours. More than likely it is edging 50 to 60 hours per week....

Also, it should go without saying, but your work schedule is different than your congregants because you're working on their 'days off' or the 'day of rest.'

Culture Making -- a short review

2011-11-18T14:19:00.003-06:00

Andy Crouch in his book Culture Making offers a number of useful insights on the fact that we should view our American landscape as many "cultures" rather than a unified "culture." He also identifies the ability of typical persons to make or influence culture by personal insight, influence, family insight, family influence, and then other organizations or outlets. He has a 3 person, 120 person, and then crowd sized group commentary on what is possible at each level of culture. The book aims to be a distinctively Christian culture encouragement. He advocates new culture rather than recycling pop or secular cultural items/themes. He claims that is what made the church great in its heyday through centuries. Some parts of the book are a bit hard to keep reading in, and others provoke your imagination. I would recommend it as a resource on thinking through how cultures develop and bringing an awareness of what is and isn't possible in making culture. I'm not sure how some of the biblical illustration he uses match the author's original intent at points. But I appreciated his effort in looking around. He is candid in the book about his personal success and failure at making culture, that is apprecicated. Some parts of the book are very helpful to a pastor in sermon application. More could be said, but I'll just give it a general recommendation, not your first book to buy but definately one to buy at some point. Be cautious at some points, as though his theological awareness is well appreciated, yet at times I wonder if he has neo-orthodox tendencies.

Why Start Churches?

2011-11-09T11:37:00.001-06:00

This is an excellent article from a rising scholar on North American missions (including Texas), that engages that question.

http://northtexasbaptist.org/do-we-really-need-another-church-here

Blessings to you,

David

Lunch time thoughts on Consumer Income and Missions

2011-09-27T11:55:00.004-05:00

This article came out based on Labor Dept. statistics: here. The general idea is that 2011 like 2010 had lower consumer income and lower spending. Food out, entertainment, and giving to charity took the big hits while money was transferred to gasoline and increased food prices.

It makes one wonder. In our missions participation, our missions partner denomination says that national level giving has remained at a level that drops slowly the past few years. How is this impacting the Great Commission? If the trend remains as it often does in the American context, since things normally regress, how will it affect international missions 5-10 years out?

Worth exploring in more depth...

Boredom

2011-09-23T10:41:00.001-05:00

When it comes to that fog or lack of interest at work, apparently there is solace in community. It turns out that reputable poller Gallup reports 55% of workers are not engaged with their work. (mid 2005) in the USA. Interestingly, The Guardian paper reports 33% of UK'ers are bored at work most of the day. (early 2003)

Human resource and staffing experts reported at 45% of respondants that they had lost people who were bored at their work in one past survey.

What is boredom? This article explores the matter. The sense of boredom the article goes with includes a tedious or fatigue related attitude. So it isn't necessarily lack of something to do or being inactive per se.

It seems like part of this can be overcome with living for Christ in purpose. Philippians 1 addresses some of this challenge to a believer in Jesus. Paul was fatigued (he had plenty to do though) with his missions efforts, not because they were boring but because he knew something better awaited. He changed his perspective and refound his purpose when God convicted him and he felt it necessary to keep up his work efforts, so that others could benefit for his King's glory. Indeed, the above article says focusing on others can help overcome boredom. That sounds like a very decent Christian response, and exactly what helped Paul to have some earthly good later in life.

The Lost Generation - Why People in their 20's and early 30's have been humiliated by the recession

2011-09-23T10:30:00.003-05:00

As far as it goes with economics being largely social science with math brought in to track trends or remove false assumptions, there is an interesting piece that came out on how those who are in their 20's and 30's have been facing hard times in this economy. On my day off I've been pondering some of these trends.

It is here on this link. (May also be found here.) In essence, those who are graduates are not getting jobs in their fields and are instead entering service sector jobs that don't pay as well and every year drain down their level of expertise they had when they graduated. When things do eventually improve, it says, they are going to have to compete with those who are fresh out of training / school, who may have an advantage. That is why the article calls it the lost generation. It has been my experience that many of my friends in their 20's and early 30's are in the exact bind of this article. That's the only reason I posted this, is because I believe it is a real social phenomena in the consciences and angst among young adults after college, and occassionally after high school. There is also an article out today tracking a trend in one state, that 40% of new jobs in Texas (which seeminly broke the recession job killing...) were filled by legal immigrants, 40% by illegal immigrants; leaving only 20% of the impressive jobs number going to non-immigrants. Many legal immigrants are highly skilled or receiving status through a company that needs their abilities so they are helped through the process (tedious as it unfairly is). Still, it seems odd that is going on with so many talented university grads available as well. Regardless of what one thinks about such issues, the bottom line is that social effects are being felt by the 20's to 30's demographic as they are sidelined nationally, in every state, by businesses not hiring as much in general and by lack of experience holding them out of the few positions available.

Perhaps in the first article that explains why many graduates of high school and college are just living with mom and dad still there. In the Christian culture commentary area, this Census data and economic perspective creates an additional commentary on Al Mohler's ideas about this age demographic staying in "play time" mode (put off marriage, buy toys longer, etc). Even if Mohler's thesis is true (not saying I agree really) the current problem is even if people of that age want to move on, they are structurally unable to do so. I can't stand the victim mentality, but in truth these are literally victims of economic hardship decisions in businesses. If they aren't getting jobs, or at least jobs that pay well enough to support oneself with medical insurance, mortgage costs, car costs, hospital bills, utilities, college debt, and so on, then they're just trying to survive. You can hardly be hard on someone who is just trying to make it and who is continually dogged by unattractive long-term options in this climate.

This is some social phenomena that reveals an interesting perspective of what is going on in a generation seeking its place in a different USA. One economist from Harvard in the study said that generation will be 'scarred' by all of this. Sounds like he is right on, people are already getting burned by the situation with lasting production possibility frontiers decreasing.

1991

2011-09-20T15:31:00.004-05:00

In 1991 a NASA satelite that did Upper Atmosphere research was launched from the Space Shuttle. Now with the Shuttle retired and the satelite about to fall to somewhere on earth in the next three or four days, another milestone related to 1991 has hit. According to the USA Today reporter Cathy Lynn Grossman, American have changed their religious beliefs since WWII in a way that has had impact over the past twenty years in a noticeable dent. This long term result is that now she says we can sing "Gods bless America" rather than "God bless America" since "the folks who make up God as they go are side by side with self-proclaimed with believers who shed their ties to traditional beliefs and practices." George Barna underlines that unfortunate trend, stating that "310 million people with 310 million religions" is an appropriate description of the American landscape. In 1991, still 49% of US adults in a typical week attended a church service. Today it is 40%. In 1991, 24% of adults polled hadn't been to church in six plus months. Now it is 37% of adults 20 years later. A consequence Cathy says, quoting Barna is that: "for every subgroup of religion, race, gender, age, and region of the country, the important markers of religious connection are fracturing." She summarizes his research that has recently come out that argues 7% of those polled in 2011 can even agree with 7 essential doctrines of the historic Christian faith. If I remember Barna correctly, this is extremely basic teaching that is not receiving consensus; things like truth is not completely relative because of God's revelation the Bible, Jesus Christ is Savior, and the devil is an actual spiritual being not a fiction. To sum it up people now say they believe in God or are Christians, but then believe whatever they want. As an aside, even as in the Christian church there are leaders like Webber who want an ancient-future connection, bringing back historic teachings for worship, all of a sudden the culture is not interested. The only exception is if they are customizing their beliefs, and don't care about the guidance of those ancient sources. Cathy calls the phenomena "hopscotch spirituality." It is a "'designer' society. Other #s: 8% less people attend Sunday School, 5% read their Bible outside of church less, and 7% less define God as the all-knowing, all-powerful ruler; compared to 1991 versus today. This is an interesting trend. Surely it is a missiological challenge, especially also in how to make decisions in church planting/Christian philosophy.

Satisfaction with How Things are Going by Americans

2011-08-18T11:06:00.009-05:00

While I'm not 80 or even 90% sure how this affects every area of presenting the gospel and outreach yet, though I would love to read more, this steep decline in perception is very very relevant to church planting. The # now stands at 11% which has only happened a few times, and in recent history in late 2008. New results show:
Click here for Gallup poll.

It's worth thinking about practically. The top leaders of the downshift as expected in the current climate are 1. economy. 2. jobs. 3. federal deficit.

Army Suicides Rise

2011-08-12T15:06:00.004-05:00

Just a quick blog post on something that stood out related to ministers. It is too sad, but those defending the country from threats abroad face much stress. Being away from family, being shot at, having a restricted language barrier in foreign counties, and much more. Apparently there is a high point in July 2011 among Army suicides. The link is here. For chaplains, this means readiness and preparedness to assist other Army professionals to reach out to soldiers. It means seeing the tough combat perspective from God's encouragements in the Word. This will require wisdom and seeking deliberate application to lead them to serve God through the struggles. It is a tough ministry, but one well worth it.

Low Morale Politically - US citizens prerevolutionary

2011-08-08T21:04:00.012-05:00

An article appeared here from a major polling site. The article details a recent poll showing that 46% of US citizens polled think that Congress is corrupt. Another interesting fact is that only 6% of those polled ( a # that keeps coming up in different polls, so it likely very accurate ) approve of the job Congress is doing. Only 17% of US citizens think the government is operating with the consent of the governed. Is it any wonder then that only 29% of those polled thought members of Congress were not corrupt. The citizens are realizing that: not only are many or most Congressmen and women no better than their constituents in civility, morality, and virtue in general, but in fact they're worse. Sex scandals. Cheating on taxes. Lying under oath. We almost expect federal politicians to just tell you what people want to hear in order to get elected. Then nothing seems to be accomplished that everyone wants. If you were dating or courting someone like that as a potential spouse, you would call them disingenous and break up. Unfortunately we can't do that.

I honestly view it this way: God has called us to submit to the governing authorities. (Romans 13). So there is a real challenge to the Christian believer to support their government. There is a challenge because of our type of government, which I'll touch on. Interestingly, Paul writing Romans 13 lived under Nero the Emperor who was no friend of Christ followers. How do we see our situation as citizens and as Christ followers then?

Yet we are a government by the people and we should seek to change it in the ways we can do so. The problem of unhappines though is very complex and I don't have the answers to it.

The question then is "whose government?" If the government is of the citizenry, whose citizenry? Americans are deeply divided on many issues: Government of the people who get hand outs? Government of the rich businessman or woman? Government of the left leaning, pro abort another 30 million children in the womb? Government of the fiscal conservative who doesn't believe in carrying through the promise? Government of the laissez faire? It's no wonder that no one is happy or even content! If none of these groups get their way, they are going to be unhappy. Perhaps the fact that none of them do get their way is contributing to the unhappiness. Appealing to a vague virtue that everyone might agree with means little, because everyone now expects that the politicians in power's favored sub-culture will benefit financially and with getting an honest ear for several years. Perhaps we just live in a jaded America....

There are believe it or not practical considerations on this for a pastor. If morale is so low it can mean a number of things, both pro and con to preach on during such times. It can also affect how to do outreach substantially, such as themes. Much more could be said about these last two areas.

USA Credit Rating

2011-08-05T23:02:00.006-05:00

It turns out that S&P decided to lower our credit rating as a nation to AA+ from AAA. The article link shows that S&P made a mistake on the exact amount of debt, however, even so the burden of the debt in the long-term seems significant. Moody's and Fitch did not give the same low rating, yet that could change. It is reported that if those agencies agree with the S&P downgrade, then the cost of borrowing for the country and for mortgages and individuals (incl. corporations) would rise. This would slow business apart from other major factors. Interestingly, the weakness of the Eurozone created a situation where US debt was still in demand, as a safe haven asset. For the time being there appears to be a situation where we have a reputation of being better than the rest of the options for safe haven. Still, it cannot be passed by that if S&P is correct that debt would consume 88% equivalent of GDP by 2021, that we have major systemic problems ahead.

Consider: millions upon millions of baby boomers retire out of preference. Millions more are out of work and essentially retired. Those numbers go up. Millenials are too young to take up the slack. The gen inbetween is small. Who is going to prop up paying back the debt and who is going to pay the promises to the boomers that has been borrowed on by other government expenses? There is a dangerous imbalance of commitments against monies coming in. If the Boomers can contribute to a slowed housing market as they sell second homes, downsize, and prepare for retirement savings and days; by knocking small percentages off of what otherwise would be growth, they will also contribute (through no fault of their own per se...) to a stunted economy. This is not a good situation. Especially when they are drawing off their stocks from 401(k)'s and so on.

Why is this relevant to Christian faith? Well again missions funding (Mt 28) will take a hit as giving drops in some churches. Who will pick up the slack internationally? People will be hurting in situations so here and in Europe not much will likely increase (unlike book of Philippians response). Of course, in the foreseeable future, the government will be able to pay them, even if it is an amount less useful due to inflation or lack of adjustment to price increase. Longer term that is up for grabs. As far as ministry opportunities, they would exist from this. Then you have the malaise about us that is culturally pervasive to factor into everything from a sermon to a conversation to witnessing methods. A skeptical and jaded society may arise. Or one that is less reliant on material may arise. Maybe some of both. The kind of situation will certainly be humble, and not wished on anyone. Yet it will have cultural impressions effects.

There's a lot that could play out of this long-term.

Weather and Church Growth

2011-08-01T13:00:00.004-05:00

It is interesting to think about, but weather does play into church growth. In honor of the 109, 109, and 108 for Tues-Wed-Thurs in Dallas, Texas I'm using a couple minutes of my lunch break to just share some thoughts about this. It might be tempting to believe that in Canada and far Northern parts of the USA excluding the Northwest, evangelism in some forms outside of friendships is limited by cold weather. If there is ice covered by snow covered by ice then some more snow, and it remains below freezing, then you might not want to go 'door to door.' As obvious as this sounds, it might explain the trouble trying to reach people in colder climates in North America over 150-200 years. Not only might the French Quebequios be cold to evangelicals, but over time it could be a worse and worse reaction, since there aren't mediating influences. They can just hang onto traditions without much challenge. The internet changes some of this, as does global connectivity, but a personal challenge is harder to come by there.

In the South, with particular sights on Texas, this thought would not seem to hold. If from June to August many years (not all) you have temperatures in the 100's, people aren't going to use the plethora of outdoor outreach options as much. Yet there are still a large # of churches, many of which began before the advent of A/c in every house. Since then they've picked up people moving from around the US to Texas, and notably in Texas other places too causing rapid growth on top of that like Pakistan/India/Mexico, who at times trust Christ (or already know Him others) and join those long existing churches (if they are still viable, alive churches anyways). That kind of reactive receipt of people is a nice plus for those over time. Still what of intentional, proactive outreach? It has to be creative. Of course, the summer months are where people check out emotionally and mentally from church in the South. So perhaps 100+ is less of an issue for Texas, whereas in the nose to the grindstone months in Canada, the church is limited. This would explain some of their lack of engagement with other traditions, beliefs, and such; beyond reading about them or traveling elsewhere over centuries.

It would be interesting to see if anyone else has done research on this sociological aspect of the Great Commission.

What was Cornelius Van Til?

2011-07-22T09:58:00.003-05:00

I was reading some from C. Stephen Evans on Epistemology and the Ethics of Belief. He was speaking about the failure of Internalism. One of his comments was "internalism shares a failing with deontological conceptions of justification. Even if it should be the case that it is intuitively evident that a belief is justified, it does not follow logically that the belief is likely to be true." He goes on to say that "the appeal of internalism may lie in the confusion between being justified in holding a belief and being able to justify a belief, which we noted ..., must be clearly distinguished." (219). It is interesting though, that Evans does not show his assertion by any justification. Can he justify his belief? Not really.

If we appeal to externalism, such as Plantinga and Alston, then are we not just arguing over what constitutes a justified belief? How can we gain any real certainty from passing fads of what it takes to be justified? If we say a well functioning cognitive faculty as Evans quotes (from Plantinga I think), then will there not always be 'stupid' charges back and forth that the one who disagrees with the majority or the en vogue will certainly be not well functioning? Or is it to be obvious things, like they are well-behaved and have normal conversations which offers the warrant. And that they tend to be accurate over time? Is this not evidentialism just on steriods?

Hmm... Any thoughts....

James K.A. Smith Gets It Wrong

2011-07-13T11:35:00.004-05:00

In his useful work on postmodern thought, Who's Afraid of..., Smith reveals in several ways his thought that Protestant churches which fall into a "Primitivism" category reject creeds and catholic (little c) statements (129). There is simply a leap back to the 1st century practices and the work of the apostles, even the revelation of Christ, but no "traditions of men" are used. This seems a bit biased. After all, if Smith is acquainted with many new church starts in the Protestant vein he would know better. While he might be right about some seeker starts, he can't be right with all of them. Many of those simply do not care for creeds. But they aren't anti-creedal as he says. The half seeker or non-seeker starts, which mark the motion of the future of Christianity in the US, don't fall into that category. Many are highly creedal. I am thinking of several starts now that simply don't fit his mold.

Does Mormonism Matter for Presidential Candidate?

2011-07-13T11:24:00.004-05:00

An article posted here deals with this question.

North America as Mission Field

2011-07-08T13:27:00.002-05:00

It has become so critical in our time to see that new works need to be initiated in North America so that the good news about Jesus can get to people where they are living and working. As part of this effort, the North American Mission Board has some promotional videos about their work. They are actually very informative about this and also disaster relief work they do. Check them out there.

Especially of interest to genuine change in our time is the video on the barber from Norwich, Ct.

Blessings,

David

New York state becomes 6th state to approve of 'gay marriage'

2011-06-25T12:13:00.011-05:00

It came out today that New York state has decided to legalize 'gay marriage.' An article may be found here. Governor Andrew Cuomo put his signature to the bill before midnight Friday June 24th. This is a disappointing turn for a very populus and economic engine state. Perhaps the upshot to this, since we are considering this from a distinctively biblical perspective, not a merely cultural or political one, is that people will stop associating Nationalism in the US with Christian professing faith in what the Word says. Many will say that they are Christian and gay. Others will say they are Christians and they think being gay is just ok. Such statements typically can be boiled down to where that warrant comes from: it means little more than I'm at a theologically liberal church -or- I'm of a liberal/moderate theology persuasion -or- I'm a good person in my view and my friends view so I must be right (this last one more often applies to other things God's Word says to avoid including gossip, theft, hating your neighbor).
This type of position in its several forms takes parts of the Bible that feel / seem relevant to the individuals or small communities tastes and throws out the rest. Oftentimes the political or secular motive at the foundation, places the Bible into a PC shredder, and lumps all disagreeing parties into opponents by flatlining the debate saying they are the only ones who understand compassion aright. Everyone else needs to bow to their interpretive foundation (political, secular, self-worship, self-defining morality). Nothing could be further from true.

Christians who take the Bible (in its entirety with a responsible, believing it all stance) as true simply must show love (kindness and yet honest expectation that those they know will turn, or change) to those who are claiming to be gay, and do so letting God speak for Himself, verses in the storyline's context. The unfortunate thing is that genuine Christians holding to the Bible's full counsel for our time (obviously we're not under the Law still for instance)will be unfairly smeered, and slandered and libeled, by pro gay marriage folks in various print forms increasingly as states approve things like this. The individual or community groups that remain faithful to the entire Bible through churches or personal kindness, yet speaking truth in that profession (including Paul's statements) will be under fire. Remember, speaking the truth is not wrong, when the Bible is self-attesting because the Holy Spirit will speak the same, 'holy' conviction and truth to one's heart. We as the professing churches also must be loving, yet not by wrongly thinking that means holding our tongue from speaking the Bible in context, or cowering before loud slander and libel from pro gay marriage supporters.
What a magnificiantly hard line to walk! But you know, as the US looks a lot more like Sparta or Rome and a lot less like the US of A, perhaps it is refreshing to genuine, whole Bible Christians, who takes things in context, to seperate their thinking from the merger of nationalism or statism and instead begin more to conform themselves -as Paul said- in the renewing of the mind to Christ Jesus, the living Savior (Romans 12).

A friend of mine traveling to Morocco recently spoke with a Muslim cleric. His main reason to not become a Christian was because America he said is a Christian nation. And yet we celebrate smut, porn, sexual infidelity, hatred, and scantily clad bodies of men and women everywhere. He said if we hated God's ways that much why would he want to be a Christian? Pretty convicting. Of course, my friend said that's not Christianity in its true profession, that's American Christianity, a sort of fake religion for those who don't take the Bible seriously. The guy was at least then willing to hear him out about the wonderful plan to be saved from sin in Jesus Christ. But I suspect seperating our image as churches, from this kind of public statement before the world, is becoming increasingly necessary.

This obviously raises a lot of questions about models of doing church today. Seems that we must avoid the intolerant comments of those lacking love on the fringes of 'Christian' life, and love people. But we must also speak truth, in kindness, but firmness. How does the seeker model fit with this still? Maybe it does. Maybe not. What about the Reformed model? And what about the backwards hymns and suits only people who are having fewer and fewer children to grow their building sizes, the ones who say if you're not only into hymns you're probably going to hell type 'churches?' Obviously that is not widely effective, but they can muster some minimal influence or minimal example. Certainly membership in a genuine church that hasn't abandoned parts of the Bible in favor of a chopped up God (for example one that is only mercy and knows nothing of righting wrongs) is one way to hold the line. Most dying churches will find it hard to hold that line because they can't put in membership lines any longer or are desperate for attendance. How can we model church communities for love and yet truth in our time for growing churches, to be speaking to people where they are still yet not abandoning the whole Bible's principles taken together (i.e. God is not only love, but justice, holy, pure, merciful, all at once, not merely one attribute we 'feel' is important)?
I don't have all the answers on pragmatics for church outreach. Preaching the Word is our call though, that is clear, without any doubt. I know the context of Scripture on this issue of 'gay marriage' not being something the God of the Bible (the entire Bible) endorses at all. Obviously, homosexuality is not any more of a sin than adultery or hating one in your heart. But all sin must be called to be turned from, by faith, in hope of maturing in Jesus' view. You have to do absurd gymnastics to make the Bible neutered enough to fit our US culture anymore. I have no interest in it anymore from a conservative side of things (not political per se but theologically conservative). As far as liberals doing that, that's such a fake ploy that churches that do that neutering of parts of the Bible out, are dropping in membership numbers like lead ballons (see PCUSA, UMC, United Church of Christ [not to be confused with church of christ], and other further left types). As far as conservatives go, many of the most Bible believing churches that try to merge their Christ with the US nationalism are increasingly hard to take seriously. Culture just doesn't justify the comparison for liberal or conservative anymore. It's sad but true.

Let not your hearts be troubled authentic Christians, love is good, and superior to the libel and slander against you. Christ is with you. When Saul slandered Christians for their doctrines before he was converted to Christ, Jesus said: Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? You're not alone in your witness before many. When people attack you they are hammering Christ with blows and spitting in his face and flogging him with every insult and hatred of His Word and prophecies. God is not fooled by people mocking Him by mocking those he has merely sent as messengers of help and love and truth.

Thanks for reading, may God grant you insight and understanding if you trust His self-attesting Word. If you are willing to hear Him out, rather than read into His Word Victorian, or 20th century, or 21st century viewpoints, but rather read 'out' of it; He will bless you....

Cash Home Buyers at High Percentage Affects Planting Strategy

2011-06-22T10:31:00.006-05:00

The market before us:

Cash buying. Feb 2011.

Cash buying. June 2011.

This means people are anxious and worried whether they say so openly or not, when it comes to homeownership, retirement, paying for childrens future at college, private school, and so on.

This equates to uncertainty for those who are renting on whether they want to buy or are able to buy depending on job changes and risks of loss of job.

This equates to low level giving by some who have not learned to trust God thru it all and adjust spending.

This trend means that people are mobile in their metroplex. They may rent wherever it makes sense or is close to work rather than where they want to live long-term. People are shifting locations, or if they can't sell their home if they are underwater, they are looking to downsize if they can get out of it by chance/hope. This factors into how to minister to such persons or how to try or not try to catch up to them as they transition around.

This trend means that the economy is not as strong as these articles make it seem as if cash is propping things up. It is, but only from a risk perspective. These buyers are suggesting they'll make back their investment. However, the larger millenial generation isn't into buying right now only the smaller Gen x. They'll have to wait a while to make it back, except by rent. They will be extended on their own monies.

Much to consider even beyond this...

Why a 'Church' Might Not Grow

2011-06-21T16:11:00.002-05:00

Some churches don't grow because they are in areas that are evacuating. Some don't grow because they don't reach those who are newly arriving around them. Others don't grow because outreach is not favorable to them, but only keeping those who already know each other as the priority at all costs. But at the heart of some, they may not grow if they pray this prayer:

Our Father who is in heaven
Hallowed be our name
Our kingdom come, our will be done
On committees as it is in heaven
Give us this day our daily bread
And forgive us our errors (notice there is not a mention of turning from 'sin')
As we forgive others their errors
Lead us not into temptations our tradition (denom.) despises (but others are ok...)
Deliver us from evil (except our favorite sins such as gossip, slander, malice and backbitting)

Amen (let it be).

Hmmm...

Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting 2011

2011-06-16T13:57:00.009-05:00

The SBC 2011 was a meeting held in Phoenix, AZ the past few days, in order to continue international and national missions giving and planning. Other news discussed in that meeting include funding, upkeep, and progress reports from evangelical seminaries and a committee on ethics/religion.

A new first vice president was elected whom I hear is being positioned for a potential president of the SBC meeting in 2012. This individual apparently excites a number of the messengers to the SBC for a return to some historic Baptist principles in some areas, according to the 9 Marks breakout session Tuesday night at 9pm.

Kevin Ezell previously senior pastor of Highview Baptist Chuch in Louisville, KY and now the new president of the North American Mission Board presented a report/challenge for more church planting as a way that NAMB can impact our culture. He also brought in a solid line-up of testimonies of what giving to missions in Canada/the USA can do to help people come to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. This included a man who was being discipled by a church planter in Norwich, CT that is a barber. The barber in turn shares the gospel with some of those visiting his shop and one man who trusted Jesus as his Savior was present to share about that. This type of multiplying effect is one result of cooperative giving to the SBC. He also brought a number of missionaries along with him that were ready to reach their areas through loving others by sharing the good news of Jesus Christ.

Speaker Louie Giglio was present to challenge SBC'ers to preach about the Holy Spirit, who points us to Jesus Christ. Instead of relying on just calls to missions, we ought to rely on the power of the Holy Spirit in believer's lives in order to give the impetus and passion to share the gospel even more than at present. We don't have to go overboard talking about the Spirit's work, in order to spend necessary additional time on that person's work in salvation/the church. He also brought out that he is now pastoring, which is a major change from his parachurch ministry days including representing at Passion and One Day events around the USA.

Speaker Rick Warren did a solid job bringing out the role of a church in church planting. He used some of his field tested and approved research to pepper the message, giving people a good sense of the kind of work he recommends. This message offered insight into how God calls us to reach people with the good news of Jesus by the means of church planting. It was challenging and useful. He revealed how God has laid it on his heart to be involved with churches internationally and how Saddleback church is sponsoring members to go out and begin church planting work in CA and to the ends of the earth. Apparently, they have been undertaking a major project of reaching every nation with missionaries. This has gone well with a group helping him to carry out this good task which he mentioned from the stage. In my personal opinion, it was very refreshing to hear a man used of God to plant a church speaking about church planting being a priority.

Attenders seemed to include a good portion of laypersons, and then a significant chunk of Southern Seminary and Southwestern Seminary students/grads within the past five or so years.
Many of those attending were wearing suits and traditional outfits. Considering it was 108 Fahrenheit on one of the convention days this was quite a feat for them, going from building to building and restaurant to building! Others were dressed more casually. The largest group was probably pastors and families. There was not a tremendous proportion of parents there with children, presumably they were left with relatives at home. The Kidzone was packed out, especially the preschooler area which was full from the beginning.

Personal observations: there was a leaner, more slim lined convention process. This presumably is saving the convention money for missions work. Trade offs are in this though, as you might guess.
The gospel was preached. The convention seemed very gospel focused in a clear way. In addition, a letter from Billy Graham was red which encouraged attenders to keep sharing the gospel. Also, technology was highly in use in the form of blackberrys, ipads, and more. People were tweeting and facebooking the convention, and texting one another about topics.

Book-signings: there were a number of major authors there willing to talk and interact. Craig Blomberg is one I saw. David Platt also was there.

I found a lot of people were warm and willing to meet others and pray for / bless them. Even Rick Warren and David Allen and Frank Page and Tom James and Paige Patterson and Mark Dever were very warm, friendly. Others were encouraging such as Ezell.
Many of the pastors were also warm and very friendly to those around them. They seemed to bless others in small and big ways through encouragement and presence.
Danny Akin had a solid point during that breakout on the importance of affirming Scripture's claims about itself. I always appreciate that thoughtful reflection, which really is a reminder to us all to take all of God's Word as relevant, authentic and profitable (and massively powerful to move the church forward). He also was big on expository preaching along with other panel members. This was a good word. Certainly when a pastor holds out the Word of life it will do great things since that is where the power lies.

All in all, the SBC in general was informative. The convention itself accomplished a lot of work. Glad to be a part of a great missions sending convention like this one along with the many challenges by the SBC President, and other guests to press ahead with the work. There are a lot of people working diligently, and with perseverance to further the gospel, loving on people, and helping change the mentality that missions don't have to happen in North America. Certainly they do, and the statistics by population increasingly put us in one of the most unreached parts of the globe with the gospel. This might be hard to believe in some cities, but others which are less popular for planters or missions teams are without much of a gospel witness. Hopefully the church planting emphasis will pay off for the SBC as far as spiritual investing. It is necessary to help the convention to continue to exist well into the 21st century as populations shift demographically and entire cities change, while some churches don't know how or won't reach out to those changed areas. Thankfully many wise churches pastors and convention thinkers are looking to plant churches to reach those who for whatever reasons may not step foot into another place.

What was Jerusalem like in Jesus time?

2011-04-14T11:14:00.003-05:00

I found a very interesting article by Time magazine, which offers some perspective on this question. What was the temple like? What was the size and scope of the city? Click here.

Paying Off Debt

2011-04-04T21:04:00.004-05:00

This past week I had the opportunity to teach godly principles on paying off debt. This article records how at the national level the debt ceiling is quickly being reached. Click here. It is surprising that even Timothy Geithner believes we need to limit borrowing. This tells you the tremendous amount of money we owe on a regular basis as a country. Proverbs 22:7. We need to become stronger by eliminating debt and focusing on strategic budgetary cuts.

Thought Police

2011-03-23T14:06:00.003-05:00

It seems that Apple has tried to be the 'thought police' to a perfect American tolerant of all but Christians viewpoint again:

Click here for the article.

Exodus International is as far as I can tell a well-known national agency. It doesn't cure anyone of anything, but offers an alternative expression that happens to be in line with the Christian tradition for those interested in getting away from one way of living and stepping onto the selective way of Christ instead. Is there a reason that Apple is selective in its allowance of applications? This is one more example of why neutrality in culture, or tolerance, or business is a pure myth like a 'unicorn' existing. Apple is no more neutral than Exodus or than LGBT. Apple just has bent to the pressure of the side it is favorable to. You know, I have heard that there are some tablet alternatives coming out from Samsung and also Blackberry that are faster...

Spending Priorities as We Look Back on the Year

2011-03-15T09:11:00.004-05:00

According to Ken Hemphill, a former seminary President, and now professor; income for overseas missions work through six hundred agencies, inter and denominational, totaled 2.9 billion in 2002. What else received more money than seeking and saving the lost souls of humankind in 2002? Movie tickets received 9 billion. 38 billion was spent on various state lotteries. 23 billion was spent in domestic pet related stores. He then asks the question: if these are staggering insights, what will we do with them? A good question....

2011-02-27T21:53:00.007-06:00

One of the worst things about society in the US -- unspoken, assumed segregation in churches, by nearly every background. When I was in graduate school many of the professors pointed this error out, rightfully so, that the most segregated place in America is the church on Sunday morning (referring to churches across the USA). It's sad that the God who created all peoples can't be the focus of worship by all peoples together in specific local churches. Sure there are major exceptions, though sadly they are not all that common. The general rule is observed by churchmen and women, and thank the Lord for new believers who don't follow the same rule and are willing to be formed by Jesus Christ and the Father as the potter (Jeremiah 18).

What has happened is sad for a more important reason than many think too: Christians who have gifts from God by the Holy Spirit (encouragement, service, mercy, teaching, leading, administration, evangelism, etc.) tend to use them only with people like them. The whole church is in more poverty for it, spiritual and emotional poverty. Christ sent Paul the Apostle (and others) out to the Gentiles to bring in the nations, to bring in those who would trust Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior to the church. Together they build the church up, serving as the body of Christ (one in this role, one in another). The NT churches were from the beginning combined congregations of peoples. The gift of tongues back then was probably largely for proclaiming the gospel to make this merging happen and to translate in the congregations (for a limited time during the change in covenants it would appear).

There is hardly a "church" out there that will admit it is segregationist, but they are behind the closed doors when they make decisions, how they talk about the 'others' that are out there. IN Texas the impossibility of holding to that error and following Christ at the same time is being pressed to a point.

This link shows that Texas is no longer an Anglo state. For the vast majority of churches of various denominations, that means adopt Christ's call to bring in all nations to your church and/or denomination by fishing --or-- pretend you don't know how to fish - therefore - cease to exist by demographic predictions.

The solution seems simple. Follow Jesus' command to bring in all people who will trust Him from the nations and bring them into the fold. Will this happen? Not sure. It'll be great to see (with a holy zeal, and knowledge of Matthew 28:19-20) the Christ-rejecting social clubs in various inter and denominational church buildings who don't take Matthew 28 realistically sell their buildings to vibrant new churches that don't go by the wayside of history's blunders. It would be greater if they'd turn from their present disregard (accidental or deliberate) of other peoples, but ... unfortunately that is not likely for the majority of local congregations. So those non-profit 501(c)3 buildings are going to belong to Jesus' Great Commission in 2011/forward one way or another. Irony of ironies thanks to a good US rule on non-profit property.

Yep, the people they couldn't genuinely put in leadership or other positions because of their ethnic background are going to get the buildings that belonged to God and were taken from him anyways. Those are the ones who are going to buy out those structures and return the praises of God to being in their walls again, rather than merely tradition epithets void of Great Commission fire.

What will the Texas church look like in the future? The ones that still exist as congregations and the ones with buildings are going to be from various nations. God has a sense of humor, and it is worth smiling about.

Multiculturalism Thoughts of Continental Politicians

2011-02-05T22:27:00.004-06:00

There is an interesting trend in Europe. Major politicians are saying that the multiculturalism model has failed, especially in their respective countries. Check this trend out:

Click here on Cameron's remarks.

Click here on Sarkozy's remarks.

Apparently Merkel also made similar comments.

It raises some questions for the US. When will this paradigm shift get here too? Which way will the US swing as a result of the paradigm shift? How will that affect change business, family, chuch, and economics?

As an update to the above information, Foxnews reports 2-18-11 at 5:50pm cst, on this development in Europe. They had guests comment on it including the Weekly Standard, with the general impression that Europe differs from the US multicultural experience. Still their reasons weren't fully explained before moving onto another topic. It is interesting to see how many things predicted to not have effects elsewhere tend to, especially traveling from the Continent over to the Atlantic coast in cultural imports. Time will tell.

What Use is Freedom of Speech if you Can't Use it

2011-02-03T12:56:00.003-06:00

A major news outlet had an article touching on how a John 3:16 ad painted on a player's face was too offensive for Fox to show to the audience of the Super Bowl 45. See here. Perhaps they were trying to dodge other controversial ads that may try to ride the coat tails of one that isn't, but it raises a question. If the thought police at a network can block even advertising on television, or for that matter radio, what use is free speech? Is free speech now only available on sympathetic small radio stations or the non-viewed TBN health and wealth channel? Is free speech only available in public parks and door to door in a neighborhood? The medium of our time is internet. To this point it is largely free to sharing the gospel, but there have been times when large website companies have done the same type of thing with restricting Christian advertising (a la google on ads a few years back, which I think finally reversed itself). The second and third biggest mediums tv and radio seem to be free only to an extent. All of this is merely to raise the question: what value is freedom of speech unless it can be heard in major forums of the day?

On the same link above, there is a discussion on a Doritos commercial and Christians. It seems that in this situation the advertising cuts both ways. I don't know that that Doritos thing bothers me at all, in fact, pastors joke about that among themselves. Pastors wouldn't (in the vast majority of cases) take that Doritos commericial seriously. It seems that either ad, the John 3:16 , or the Doritos one, could be shown in a country such as ours. But... neither is allowed. This underlines the question again about what it means to say we are free to speak in a digital age, beyond talking to someone walking their dog in a local park, lol. :)

What was so important about Acts 15:20?

2011-01-20T10:33:00.004-06:00

At first thought, if you've read it before, it doesn't seem like it stands out. But there is a huge interpretive key in Acts 15:20. What should Gentile believers in Jesus do in relation to the Law of Moses? The early church council interpretive key was to hold them to pre-Law standards. While the 'strangled meat and from blood in meat' stopping comment by James seems random, it certainly is not. If you go to the book of Genesis, before the Law was given in chapter 9, you'll find that God made all meat available for man to eat, except not to eat it with its lifeblood still in it. That's not the main thing I want to weigh in on though, but the fact that they leap back previous to the giving of the actual Jewish Law, to the early days with Noah and his family. Just as Paul leaps pre-Law to say that Abraham the patriarch was justified by faith, faith allowed him to have God's righteousness simply credited to his account (chapter 15 Genesis). If you are wondering how to handle the Law as a Gentile Christian, you've got a strong indicator from the way the early church did as well in Acts 15:20. Just some thoughts on understanding your Bible...

Housing Markets

2011-01-19T11:12:00.004-06:00

I suspect that a link to Bloomberg news about housing starts being low is due to the fact that a huge generation is retiring or seeking to retire (thus saving and selling), and an interested but smaller following generation or two is not able to eat up the surplus. Why build which is expensive when you can buy one of the many lower priced homes? For a link to the news article click here. This is a socio-economic factor dealing with population, choices by age, and unemployment numbers still being higher than they should be.

Watching God's Provision Unfold

2011-01-13T22:20:00.003-06:00

It has been amazing the past six months watching how God provides and stretches faith. In my life, seeking to plant a new church for a growing area, it is a God-send and yet a challenge to see my faith have to grow. There are days when you have to apply seriously the day has enough of its own concerns, and trust Jesus to work out the needs being met with church provision. The bigger the challenge, even with some unanswered "how" to get there questions, have resulted in bigger returns on what God is able to do in my understanding. It would be easy to sit back and watch others grow in this way, in a comfortable pew somewhere that no real promptings have to be dealt with, but getting into the action has forced me in ways I could not predict to wrestle with assurance of God's interest in seeing us grow, and get confirmation in this assurance of God's working, of how God is good and brings things at the perfect timing showing His wisdom.

There has also been a great boost to my awareness of how God uses many advisors to strengthen a person's successful working in an area. The lone ranger pastor idea seems so far from relevant, almost absurb now. Not just any advisors will do though. Every Joe and Jane has an opinion and would love to give you advice. That's not what I'm talking about. I mean talking to people who have been there in the thick of action, who have grown in their walk with Jesus Christ through things that take increased faith for the kingdom, and can share wisdom with you that is still smoking because its so hot off the press. It's been amazing to see how much more there is to learn from competent coaches in areas I thought I knew something about, or was unaware of the need for more. SO being stretched is a good thing when it comes to this thrill ride known as church planting. I just pray that God is greatly blessed and His name is honored among people who are His and grow in their love for Him through the work, or who are just getting to know Him for the first time. May it be in great measure for kingdom benefit! Soli Deo Gloria.

Discipleship

2011-01-05T09:54:00.002-06:00

When it comes to Christianity, we can never lose touch with the fact that we are all to be disciples of Christ. We are discipled through relationships and we make disciples through relationships, focusing on the news of and reminder of the facts of the faith. These facts including assurance of salvation, the work of the Holy Spirit, and similar themes. An interesting blog, especially for those interested in the topic of discipleship is listed below:

Right here.

Blessings,
David

Mormon America

2010-12-26T12:10:00.006-06:00

I've been doing a little light Christmas reading, so as part of this I picked up a book that reads quickly called Mormon America. The work is by authors Richard Ostling and Joan Ostling. Richard spent three decades with Time Magazine in various key roles and was working with the Associated Press as a religion writer according to the back cover. Joan was an editor and writer with the US Information Agency in Wash., DC and a reporter with Press Publications in Chicago. Their goal is to provide a nonpolemical overview of Mormonism as it grows rapidly around the world and to some extent in the US (though from the book one may assume not as quickly as overseas). The book covers everything from what a Celestial Room is in a Mormon temple (page 190) to the fact that Mitt Romney is a Mormon bishop who was invited to speak at Pat Robertson's school in a surprising situation. I have to admit coming from a Methodist-Baptist-Community church background that the book was fascinating. I've had friends in Mormon wards and of course talked to Mormons at length about some certain issues. But a large picture of their background, struggles, weaknesses, bragging points, and such was very useful for understanding. Theologically I don't see how they can put it all together. Mormonism appears to be wrought with convenience theology, given enough US government pressure or cultural pressure they change doctrine like the wind (one of many examples given in the book includes baptism for the dead which excluded people of certain races until the US Congress and NAACP threatened a lawsuit over use of Census records). But the LDS'ers are shown in the book to be WELL organized, interested in persistence like one would not believe, and very actively out seeking people to join their group in ways one would not suspect. They are planners and administrators like you would not believe (a compliment). So while I have no sympathy for the non-orthodox doctrine they hold, still I'm impressed by some of their 20th century organization. They have a large number of PR campaigns going on at any one time. This book is not pro Mormon or anti Mormon. It does point out that image is VERY important to them, and has been since at least the turn of the last century. Large amounts of effort go into their image in each area (stake/region) and even the wards (local). The book covers issues such as racism prior to 1978 against African Americans in Mormon theology and the question everyone immediately raises, the history of polygamy. The claims before Congress and the press that polygamy was no longer being offered as a church practice after 1890 are contrasted with then presidents like Joseph Smith (same name, different than original one) being fully aware of and encouraging them in secret (contra US law). The book handles these contrasts fairly (almost understatement at times). It also addresses their non-New Testament theology every so many pages, such as mentioning how the temple building is rooted in their own ideas outside of a NT church model (the book of Hebrews shows Christ is sufficient, we no longer need temples). The life of the original President of the LDS Joseph Smith, has the good the bad and the ugly covered off and on every so many pages. As far as I can tell, he was charismatic in personality which explains his ability to lead a large number of people. The book calls him 'creative' a lot. Clearly Smith was a leader, but from a Christian standpoint a heretic. He also claimed revelations were completely binding when he made them, yet they often contradicted what is revealed in the Bible. Though you get the distinct impression that he was somewhat likeable in his early years (except for his treasure hunting with seer stones). As time went on, he started adding controverstial doctines as he got more power. He started endorsing polygamy, against his first wife's wishes for decades (she later agreed to it, then changed her mind, then agreed again). Smith started making up at the end of his life a belief in a multiplicity of Gods in the heavens all with bodies. A lot of people ditched his weird teachings or ran afoul of him and were "excommunicated" for convenience of peace in their group identity. He had an interest in protecting those who were with him very much though. But he didn't tolerate any diversity of opinion too well. Smith tried to take care of people in Nauvoo, IL and Kirtland, OH. Out of his efforts though he got into troubles, including banking fraud. He ran afoul of the MO state government, and may have let his opinions known to people, who then tried to assasinate the MO governor back then. Of course,that didn't go over too well regardless of how that went down. They were driven out of MO to IL. Lack of knowledge of economic policy that works, and how money is created, drove several of these early settlements to near insolvency. This aspect is covered largely in the work. Early Utah under his successor Young had similar problems, but Young was a clever administrator who did better with the large group. Another interesting fact, many Mormons early on were recruited in Europe (like the UK) with the promise of free land, many flocks of animals, and easy peaceful lives. Droves came to the US for the express offer, and it is unclear to me from the book if this was the only reason they came or not. The traffic from Europe dried up when economic times over there improved the authors add though.

Some of the controversial things a Mormon "elder" would never tell you stood out. Mormons conducted some return fire against settlers on their way West, killing many basically innocent people. Though of course the persecution was against Mormons before this. But it is important to realize, in their early history, they were very militarized, having a militia, guns, and a willingness to shoot back or evade the US government at other times (leaving Salt Lake when fed troops came near to make a point, of protest). Also the strange view that the US Constitution is divinely inspired is mentioned in the book. It is even such an obsession of Mormon leadership that they have gone beyond the Constitution immediately and baptized post-humously US Presidents and Signers of the Declaration of Independence in their temples. This explains why many Mormon leaders are so zealous for USA political arguing around the consitution (a la Glenn Beck style). [It should go without saying, but an orthodox Christian, contrary to Mormonism, does not view anything as divinely inspired except the original 66 books of the Bible.] The reader also learns that the LDS thinks the term "Mormon" is acceptable, but not preferred by the LDS church. Even some unexpected issues, such as the behind the scenes problems and then impressive fix to the Salt Lake City Olympic games work is included in this research book. I won't try to cover any more, but leave the decision to read the book in more context up to you.

There's so much in this book that its hard to just blog about it. I'd recommend the book to mature Christians to learn more about who it is that is trying to convert them. Probably it's not the best work for a new Christian to try and take in so many conflicting use of religious terms (temple as already mentioned is redefined, whereas in biblical theology it was strictly fitted into the Old Testament background and context contra Mormonism). However, it is not written in a lofty way as such, but I enjoyed reading it with some categories to think things through with in the background.

Communicating for a Change

2010-12-20T21:35:00.004-06:00

Andy Stanley and Lane Jones have written a book with the above name, that compares preaching to truck driving, literally. The book is also written in a conversational format. Those two things alone may cause you to doubt its usefulness to you thinking through communication theory. Perhaps they went too basic. The redeeming quality though, because it is a great teaching book, is a series of gold nuggets throughout the long dialogues between an alleged pastor and the truck driving individual. If you can press ahead, you will find useful speaking tips and principles for the Christian communicator. The book really can only be appreciated by a veteran preacher in whatever area they happen to be of church life or speaking engagements. The backing for points about the one idea sermon depend upon this. In addition, one may get glazed eyes reading it if there was not a strong felt need of the speaking reader to communicate better than an informational session about a Bible passage. If you speak a lot, you'll be hooked though. There is a Me (who you are and what you're about), GOD where His truth is brought into a conversational style preaching, You (what are you going to do about a truth), We (a shared vision of the future of a person's life or the churches and the present feeling/thinking common ground). This is summarized by the authors as talking about application first, then what God thinks info wise, and then personal application for each person so that we can celebrate together. The whole thing hinges on one idea per message. The character's style is back and forth, but reinforces the points made in the work page by page. Based on what I've discovered so far, this book is recommended for anyone lay or on staff at a church or parachurch ministry seeking to communicate a message well.

Roger Nicole Passing

2010-12-11T20:54:00.004-06:00

I heard tonight that famous 20th century Christian theologian Roger Nicole has passed away at 95 years old. He was a past evangelical leader, being president of the Evangelical Theological Society, and having taught at Reformed Theological Seminary. He wrote over 100 articles, and contributed to 50 plus books, and helped set up the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (inerrancy generally meaning each word of Scripture is inspired of God). It is sad to hear about this figure passing as he has influenced so many of us in evangelical church life when it comes to theology. I know that I personally benefited from his work on inerrancy and how that influences the rest of theology. One person on twitter put it rightly, at least now he is beholding the face of Jesus Christ. As far as I can see, he ran the race, fought the fight, and persevered by faith. Well done.

For brief info about his life's work you may look at these links current when this blog was posted:
Here.
Here.

Foundation Repair as a Case Study

2010-11-19T23:14:00.006-06:00

I was at an apartment complex today where they had someone go around to all of the buildings to inspect their foundations. They were built in the late 1980's, so that the buildings could have been structurally sound still. However, they did not have initial piers attached to the concrete slab to prevent movement (which would have been relatively less expensive than adding them later). To make matters worse, the management (not sure who it was then) years and years ago, had a cheapo pier company come out and work around the buildings. The pier company told them nice things, but sold them an inadequate product. You can see these later concrete cut outs along the side and in other places. These cheapo piers are poured concrete and eventually shift easily.

Several of these apartment buildings are on a downward slope, which means the building moves over time. This little fix makes the problem worse, because the ineffective piers are in the places where an effective one should be. At that point, the working around the wrong fix doubles the cost of fixing the problem by working around those virtually faux piers.

A foundation placed on the wrong supports is like a Texas home placed upon clay like soil. When the summer and winter bring shifting, and the ground has a slope the pressure causes problems. These apartments are also near a major railway, where the set of engines with a long train shifts the ground of some of the buildings. The need for a solid foundation could not be more real.

In the same way, self-created religion as an attempt to reach right standing with the eternal and all powerful Lord God is an attempt to fix things. People resort to it in their soul, heart, and mind thinking what they'be built on themselves is enough for what will come. Still the problem remains ultimately unsolved with self-made solutions. Why? Over time the fault lines are revealed in lives, since the supports are highly limited apart from the work of the Sovereign God by the Holy Spirit changing our hearts and minds towards Christlikeness (i.e. with what we'll face before God it is not enough to make something up.).

Using cheapo piers as the foundation to your very house is like adding religion to your life to prop up something with a core root problem (such as a big, water stealing tree near your pad). Just put something in there that sounds good and see how it turns out. Sure enough, later on, the unapproved fix is going to be even more expensive to get out of. Ultimately, we needed Jesus to come as the Savior and Lord so as to restore us, by removing our false supports (man made religion) and installing sure piers (Himself as the rock of our life). Turning to Jesus is like setting your life on something immovable. When time passes, your faith will remain. The alternative structures made by people will pass away over time.

Ephesians 2:19-21 says in part: "you are... fellow citizens with God's people and also members of his own household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself being as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord." It is through Jesus Christ that we are right before God, and free to live today without shifting, massive cracks, and then a cave in....

Don't Tell Me Anymore

2010-11-10T21:49:00.014-06:00

If only people said that with gossip offers. But what I am interested in mentioning is different. Throughout evangelical churches you meet persons who don't mind hearing a sermon in a normal set-time on Sunday with a bit more theology or explanation. Outisde of Sunday morning sermons, it is often the case that persons refuse to hear details of where their money goes when they give to a certain church (pick any denomination).

This is very important information since we are dealing with stewardship of God's resources (time and money). The first thing that many should have been told by a pastor or Christian loved one they trust and know is where their church associates and gives. Big-picture context: every church is part of an association, even most non-denominational churches, associate with a group in order to do missions work/seminary education/childrens literature, etc.

When it comes time to join a church, they often have a membership class. This is a perfect time then, to ask yourself if your church associates with a denomination that is spending its money responsibly. Some denominations/assocations are continually funding administrators and professors who cast doubt on the reliability of the Bible (examples: Perkins School of Theology at SMU with the United Methodist denomination -or- in the Baptist General Convention of Texas - Baylor University's chapel and Bible related courses).

Many church people tend to not care saying something like "don't tell me anymore." Pastors in various denominations often have their hands tied so they don't mention these kinds of things. They are often scared to not 'rock the boat' where someone may leave. Where does this leave us? Does it take a teenage son or daughter doubting the faith at a 'Christian' university to change a parent's mind? I mention that because it did for Judge Paul Pressler of Houston. His children attended Baylor, were taught to view the Bible as an unreliable and doubtful book, and this sprung him to action decades ago in Baptist circles. He writes in a book that his goal became to change his denomination back to Bible affirming foundations again (see book: A Hill on Which to Die). The same shock with realizing false teaching underway occured with Bible affirming Presbyterian church persons and professors Dr. Cornelius Van Til and Dr. J. G. Machen with Princeton University. These godly men formed another denomination when it was evident Princeton (then funded by PCUSA) was taken over by theological liberalism in its seminary (though eventually Priceton U and the seminary there split ways). These men formed up Westminster Seminary, PA in another new denomination, because it was the only way to go with God's resources (J. Gresham Machen is a major Christian theologian of the 20th century, his works are a easy to read).

I wonder though about thousands upon thousands of Christian parents (today) who attend a local church in their denomination, or a prominent downtown First Baptist Church or First United Methodist Church, on autopilot. They love Jesus, and help people in Christ's love. Yet then as parents they unknowingly send their kids off to a college where they end up doubting God. They never do anything about where their membership and giving is going, which perpetuates the problem. These parents are funding the unbelief that is taught to their own kids...? Yes, amazing as it is, this happens to be the case. They haven't been informed or didn't want to listen, 'don't tell me anymore.' Lethargy on giving that goes to doubting God's principles and the whole of Scripture is perhaps a by-product of our busy lives today. Still, I plead with parents, if your church is stuck in the wrong association, make a change. It is not too late to make the change for your children's future wellfair. We can't ultimately decide for a child what they'll believe, but we can decide to make it not our fault through where we tithe.

Another concern is less common: 'a son or daughter's faith, who cares!' The newest and most prestigious pews are wonderful and comfortable. We see people we like there. But if this is what we have come to, what does that say about our brand of Chrsitianity as American evangelicals? The attention we have should go to more than the things we buy, and the route we drive to work, or the way to save one dollar. It is imperative to care about a person whom God has entrusted to your responsibility as a father or mother. If it does seem hard to care, I plead with you parent(s) to think of raising your children in the light of eternal rewards.

I would love to see many more hear about whether they are funding the Luke 17:2 man through their tithe to the church they attend. It's not enough to be a Presbyterian, Methodist, or Baptist church member, there is a distinction of belief and unbelief in those groups. The culture is only able to shift the wrong way because honest people don't hear or won't stand up for Bible affirming associations. Any help you offer your pastor, or any change of local church you make, should be done in love, not harshness, certainly not writing a letter. But the Lord help us in the American church from the spiritual loss that results from ignoring these important family matters. May God give you grace wherever you are led.

Fall Allergies and the Glory of God

2010-10-26T21:41:00.002-05:00

Have you ever wondered what the point of allergies is? They drag a lot of people into a fog in Texas during the Fall. Allergies would seem to fit into the category of Genesis 3:17-19. What do you think, are allergens part of the Genesis three curse? The affliction of allergies then would be a sign of God's glory in that His absence from keeping things smoothly running as well as they could because the Fall has effects in the present. However, the thorns and thistles idea in Genesis is very much tied to work. This is an interesting concept, since allergies affect more than those working. Perhaps then they are not involved with hardship in work as much as they are situated in the fallenness of the world, not working as it should, before the restoration of all things later in history.

Culture and Theology in Church Starting

2010-10-19T22:03:00.003-05:00

Ed Stetzer has an article challenging the focus on relevance to the exclusion of gospel theology. This is probably a good warning for many on the edge of planting. However, on the other hand, there are many who are not very relevant to the culture. In fact, if I had to guess most churches, and church starts, probably are far from relevant in either music style, music language, language of the sermons, and presentation (of gospel, order of service, etc). Still because the enemy works cleverly to deceive all of us, we must stick with the gospel's whole content (such as Jesus' substitionary death, in our place on the cross for our sins) in every planting effort around the country. We must as planters not forget to challenge persons to believe the gospel in a personal decision. Thank you for the good warning for all of us Stetzer.

Church Planting

2010-10-18T14:40:00.005-05:00

In a major book on church planting in evangelical life, there is this objection to forming churches in an area in the US: 'another church ... will impede the growth of our church.' This is simply false the authors say, as "when Jesus said "I will build my church," he was not referring to the numerical growth of a particular congregation." In other words, reproduction of congregations following Jesus is the way that the church universal leads more -individuals- "to spiritual maturation." In addition, new churches are not competition but rather instruments to extend the "rule and reign of God" among a people group or city. It is nearly impossible for one church or even several really good churches to reach a whole city, let alone a corridor (several cities). Simply put: people are not doing the same things, they are not in the same place at the same time. This means new churches have an opportunity to branch out into those arenas.

Another objection some raise to church planting is that it "costs too much." The authors of this work counter that there are many ways to finance a new church. It doesn't have to be one church giving all of the effort. Several possible connecting methods of churches are available to help new churches and thus to join up with Matthew 28:19-20 in individual's lives for their joy and God's glory.

One more objection that is heard among pastors at times: it will be more important to "keep daddy healthy." You should protect the status quo, so that the daddy church in an area has plenty of resources. Home churches do not have to look at it this way though. If they are a church with "reproductive DNA" there will be benefits of that which overflow into the home churches. They will have members more zealous about witnessing, it will bring about a kingdom focus rather than something else being the focus, and most church starting help does not "require an excessive expenditure" of resources, but a minor contribution from time to time from the overall blessings of God. One might add, God will also send along more workers to a group that has a heart to start new churches for His glory. This is along the same principle as trusting God with your finances, so that you honor Him and He blesses the obedience even more greatly. There are a hundred principles that could be drawn from this, but that's enough for now.

In short, church planting is not a burden to churches that work together to reach their society better. Especially when one considers the sheer size of suburbs and cities in the USA, there will need to be more than a few churches reaching each corridor for Christ.

1st Timothy 4:16

2010-10-12T08:18:00.004-05:00

Scripture tells followers of Jesus: Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers. (NIV).

I have heard more and more about the debate over Christianity and Yoga via Albert Mohler's comments, which were engaged with by the Associated Press.

One of Mohler's comments stands out above even the debate among people on Christian faith and Yoga's spiritual background. It is this: "Not one–not a single one–has addressed the theological and biblical issues. There is not even a single protest communication offering a theological argument." (Mohler, Oct. 7th) This is a clear indicator about the type of responses he got (now at 100 respones per hour via his email), no one offered a theological argument. People say "oh it's no big deal." I can think of years and years of being in various churches and hearing little response to engaging with things Christians dabble in. Most of the time in an evangelical type church you will hear persons talk about Jehovah's Witnesses or some such group. You rarely have people critically think through their own activities though. It is that personal watching of one's own doctrine that Mohler is to be commended for, and his detractors need to reevaluate what it means to be an informed follower of Jesus. If what we say is just correct, merely because we are saved, is that not arrogant? Mohler is correct in challenging Christians to think through things with a broad view of Scripture's teachings, rather than "I feel" or "It seems good to me." One always wants to ask in the back of the mind: "how does it seem to God?" Christianity is not merely a religion, just a great religion for suburban or inner ring suburban peoples in the US. It is a system of thought that helps us to serve God in a pure and worthwhile way. Thank you for the challenge to the status quo "religion" with a challenge by faith Dr. Mohler.

More about the debate if it interests you:
Here.
Here.
Here.

God's Guiding Action

2010-09-28T22:25:00.003-05:00

It is interesting how we fret and worry in light of how God has plans to work things out His way. In life we so easily forget the pointlessness of worry, since not even a sparrow falls apart from the Father's plan. We are far more valuable than that as humans carry the imago Dei, the image of God, through how He created us. How much more then, will things like changes in a job, moving from place to place, connections we all have changing, or the way finances turn out be used of God for good. The wonderful thing about how God works is it is subtle enough that it requires faith, but looking back at what He has done we can strengthen our faith for tomorrow.

Nehemiah was ridiculed, but God got him through it (Nehemiah 4). Joseph was cruely treated by those closest to him in a way meant for evil result (Genesis 45:5). Yet God had a plan in that.

Looking at this devotionally, there are so often hidden dangers we miss when looking at and planning our futures. Yet as Romans 8:38 says "For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to seperate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." There is no created power, no fallen into sin human, no persistently wicked person wearing sheeps clothing, no financial crisis, and no political scenario that can prevent God from accomplishing plans He has for the relationship we each need with Him to come about. Praise God for His infinite wisdom!

Florida "Dove World Outreach"'

2010-09-09T08:39:00.005-05:00

The situation in the news with "Dove World Outreach" (ironic name) has become a hot topic of conversation. It has been hyped up by the media that a pastor at that small (24 year old, nondenominational) church is doing a Qur'an burning. Apparently he says the bonfire they are going to build will go on this week as planned desipte attention drawing widespread criticism.

Now to the point here, it seems that one would be hard pressed to find any endorsement of the reaons that Terry Jones their pastor is doing this in the New Testament pages. It would take some non-existent example such as Paul burning a bunch of books on a Roman Caesar's life or Timothy burning copies of the Artmesian worship manual. No such example exists, and reading the reports that I've seen in several places (here and here and here) I don't see any clear biblical church reasoning for Jones' motivation. It seems that Terry Jones is following a political motive. This motive is to point out the potential danger of a pluralistic view towards other religions. In our present context, acceptance of anything anyone does is considered fashionable. (Except ironically not this guy [though I'm not a pluralist]). It is unclear since Jones fails to offer biblical reasoning why his church then would be the location of this burning. This seems dangerous to me. Perhaps if he is inclined to this, he should borrow someone's field, or go to some rented land, and use that instead if his motives are political commentary. He has the right to, even if it is not especially wise.
One of the things that strikes me is how he calls it "International Qur'an Burning Day." That is obviously meant to draw attention to his own personal message. It's clear he is not just trying to get a message to just his own area.
A thought that comes to mind as well is this: if Terry Jones is following the New Testament model, he should be seeking ways to reach out to Muslims with the gospel of reconciliation to the LORD God (Yahweh) through Jesus' atoning sacrifice on the cross. Instead the attention seems to be on his own goals for our time and place. I would not normally reference this writer, but Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard, made the comment that this action does not bode well for that kind of bridging relations for the purpose of outreach in the name of Christ. How then is his place an "outreach" center for Christ? It seems Barnes is correct on this one.
In the NT, there is an example of a book burning. However it is not done the way Jones is doing this. In fact, the burning is done with a significant amount of magic/divination books by those who converted out of the magic they had practiced. This was a way of saying we who have converted out put behind us our own --personal-- temptation to sin by using the magic books again. It was NOT a going out and buying magic books, or PR campaign, to drive home personal political views. It was a witnessing tool to say those books are false. If Terry Jones wants to have a Qur'an burning, it should NOT be him doing it. The New Testament church did have a book burning that eliminated personal idols. Therefore, if Jones struggles with some personal idol, perhaps it is addiction to too much television, let him burn up his own television so that he will not fall back into his own sin struggle. But since (to my knowledge) Jones never was a follower of Islam, he should not be burning Qur'ans. It simply doesn't accomplish the goals he is called to in his life and situation.
Nevertheless, I am wondering if any Christians out there have any thoughts on this person. It seems that Terry Jones has the right to do this as a freedom of speech issue, but what about as a Christian? If he is doing this, isn't it better that he do this as a way of expressing his own personal political views rather on some personal property rather than on a church property and as a pastor? What do you think the reprucussions may be with his doing this from a Christian perspective?

Christianity and Meditation

2010-08-24T05:42:00.003-05:00

Dr. David Powlinson of CCEF, a Christian Counseling association, speaks on the issue of what Christian meditation is in contrast to other forms of the world.

This is worth the time to watch, click here to watch: here.

Christian Theism as a Unit

2010-08-21T20:55:00.003-05:00

I was reading the unfortunate news about Clark Pinnock. He passed away recently having displayed the danger of shedding doctrines which are unpalatable to one's own liking. While Pinnock was a staunch defender of Christian theology, still he managed step by step to move in the direction of the world's influence (give up things that are "too" difficult for the ears of the age).
Click here to read more.

Pinnock did have a huge influence in Southern Baptist life years ago. His biography as a whole shows us that we all are to pursue Christ, including all of His teachings, rather than what is easy to defend.

Humility

2010-08-10T08:05:00.003-05:00

This week I was reading from the book called Humility by C.J. Mahaney (2005 Multnomah). One of the best statements from this book is an overlooked aspect of what Jesus teaches the disciples in Mark 10:42 and following. The disciples James and John are talking about what it means to be "great." They request to sit at Jesus' right and left in glory. Unfortunately, they were thinking from a worldly perspective. Then, as Mahaney points out, "the Person [of Christ Jesus who owns all things, Col. 1.] standing there" is "making this statement": "whoever would be first among you must be slave to all" (vv 43-44).

Mahaney mentions the word "must" in verse 44; that it implies a thing which is required/indispensable. Mahaney emphasizes there is nothing wrong with striving to be great. That is, so long as greatness comes from what pleases the eyes of the Son (rather than our own view of what great is). Jesus says "whoever would be great among you must be your servant...." The part that is missed: "Jesus does not categorically criticize or forbid the desire and ambition to be great." Instead it is radically changed so that greatness means something completely opposite to the world's view.

In light of this a few things can be drawn out for contemporary American church. These are not what Mahaney mentions to my knowledge. First of all, servant evangelism is extremely reasonable for kingdom greatness. Second, when it comes to denying self and making your church an attractive and comfortable place rather than a place to dump your leftover sofas and old tvs; service opportunities abound. Third, the church should engage an ambitious American culture with the greater ambition that Christ calls us to in pursuing His kingdom (this will connect). Fourth, removal of false humility among spiritual looking people in churches. Pretending to be ineffectual and ill planned as a Christian does not mean anything good. I've met so many Christians who act like they don't know how Christ would have us to live with a changed heart towards others. Rather make wise plans that humbly acknowledge good work and admit the effectiveness of what Christ calls us to. This allows you to challenge unbelief and unbelieving lifestyles by means of speaking up about what is really great, rather than cowering to the world's greatness like so many and say "I am just a Christian, what do I know about how the world ought to be." Fifth, showing people the glory of God is more important than showing them your glory. If you can deny self and pride by the Holy Spirit's power as a Christian, then you can melt or break through ice packs in people's hearts.

The Spirit at Work in Community Settings

2010-07-26T22:34:00.002-05:00

Recently, I had an opportunity to take a seminar under Dr. JD Payne at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky. He has a book out on Missional House Churches, which essentially studies what by one definition would be successful house church groups. On his blog, he recently posted a link to some major news articles on their movement. Here is a link. Here is another. The goal of Dr. Payne's book is to isolate a certain kind of church: house churches. Furthermore, he wants to find ones which are growing in a healthy way and see what they are doing right, and Scripturally. This in turn would benefit those in the house church movements with ways to improve their ministry. Payne provides some helpful advice for change in those movements, including better supports of missions and associational work. He endorses having pastors (whereas most house church people seem anti-pastor (though they would predictably deny this claim)). My main goal is not to endorse house churches here. Personally I am more of a regular (i.e. read 'weekly') both corporate and small group balance type of leader. The large and small settings go hand in hand to match the NT model. While some house churches come together or associate, many honestly do not. This is a weakness as the New Testament presents both elements, the large gathering and the small intimate one (Acts 2). Both represent church ministry.

What I do want to bring out is the element of community that is genuine, rather than sterile and boring like a classroom. The home setting / apartment setting that these gatherings offer is stellar, in that with less than 15 or so believers, much real ministry (real accountability more than a typical Sunday morning, 'how are you doing?') can take place. This is just how people are, they open up in a smaller setting, to encouragement, admonishment, helps, etc. Moreover, those who are reticient to join a larger group at first, or who would not open up in a larger group about a sin struggle; may do just that in a setting with people they know. This is a huge doorway for the church to evangelize and to see the gospel break into lives it would otherwise not meaningfully touch. When people speak truth into each other's lives at that level ( open up in a gathering of ideally 12 or less), they gain much more spiritual strength to fulfill OT models and wisdom, and NT commands to grow in just that manner. Iron sharpens iron. This does not only happen between individuals in a smaller setting (it could in theory happen in an impersonal larger setting off to the side or among friends after 'church'), but without a smaller setting it is a near certain fact that not much spiritual maturity will be added to Christian believers. In light of this, there is a lesson from that movement: smaller settings of 12 or less are also part of the church. Persons will grow in greater Christlikeness as they are related to in that way, bringing the Word of God to bear in each other's lives.

What Happened Back in the Garden?

2010-07-20T13:29:00.004-05:00

There is an interesting article on some of the nuance to Adam and Eve's sinning in the Garden of Eden. You might take a look for your own Bible knowledge to be sharpened:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/03/14/feedback-first-sin

Let me know what you think.

Dividing Wall of Hostility Down

2010-07-18T22:38:00.002-05:00

It is somewhat unexpected, but the spiritual truth is present about the dividing wall being broken down between Jew and Gentile in the gospel of Matthew, chapter 15. While it may not be as clear as the Apostle Paul later makes it, it is certainly at the least foreshadowed. Jesus in Matthew 15:22 begins to dialogue with a Gentile woman who requests Jesus to have mercy on her, because her daughter is cruely demon possessed. After clarifying her motives in a 1st century way (to make sure she knew the Messiah's mission), he agrees to set her daughter free because of the request asked in faith. Then after this, Jesus is healing people in a large crowd on a mountaintop that includes both large numbers of Jews and Gentiles. And after three days of being with these crowds, he provides for the 12000-16000 people there with a miracle of multiplying. In each of these cases, the gospel of Matthew which often traces Jewish audiences need to see things about Jesus, shows that Jesus is Lord even over the nations/peoples. This is a clear message of how the Lord Jesus broke down the dividing wall so that even Jews and Gentiles could eat together, when they were focused on Him. Even a Gentile could express great faith in Jesus as "Son of David," ie Jewish Messiah, and have deliverance for her daughter. Even great multitudes of Jews and Gentiles could go out to meet Jesus where He was working to see healing of the sick, blind, lame. What a great picture of the peace He restores through the power of the kingdom of God unfolding among men and women!

What is a Baptist Association?

2010-06-17T21:28:00.003-05:00

Criswell radio in the Dallas/Fort Worth area today had guest host Jeff Campbell, Pastor of Bethany Baptist Church. Jeff is a biblically minded leader, an evangelical. He brought up the issue of Christian associations among churches/ministers. In the area of evangelical life and Baptist life, an association offers the fellowship among pastors and the support of local missions every church should want to celebrate. Beyond this we might add that local Baptist associations or similar associations pool their resources into one, so as to rejuvinate ministries, help ministries and churches find land which they may not otherwise be able to do, provide a means to help the poor in more efficient ways, and a whole host of other things. One caller to that radio program on 90.9 FM said that he doesn't believe in associations and proceeded to call them a number of things that were inappropriate. Rightly, he was challenged on that by Jeff and by a local director of missions. Associations assist with churches working in the world to glorify the Son and thus the Father as a result. Associations in Baptist life are not over the church but augment and support it. They encourage pastors. The goal is to do more when we are together than we could do if we all stayed isolated. It facilitates children's camps, youth camps, and disaster relief efforts (especially in LA and TX in recent years). These are all made possible by believers working together to do something more efficiently or better with combined resources and gifts. Praise the Lord for the associational ministry we have in the fellowship (by willing partnership) among gospel teaching churches in the US.

Church as Community

2010-05-21T07:59:00.005-05:00

Christianity Today came out with an article on the value of a true community in a church. It points out how in American culture, the danger of a "me-centered" individual works against the dignity of the whole. As a working thesis, the author holds that the New Testament and Old Testament lay out a model of church that involves community. In the Old Testament, the family unit was so important that you deferred to their needs. (He doesn't go into depth, but there are many OT texts that say just this kind of self-denial in the Law of Moses). In the New Testament, a Mediterranean family model is emphasized (brother, sister, Father, child, inheritance). Culture has hijacked Christ today so that he is a divine therapist aiding --the individual-- Christian to seek their own spiritual quest. This is evident in church hoping, when an individual Christian never stays at a church very long in our day. Persons who are involved in one church for long enough will see this. After a year or months, the church hopper is gone off to the next church for a year or months. That is because the faith is all about them says the writer of the article. It is about self-fullfilment rather than what a strong group of Christians needs. The article gives some evidence in addition to the Bible that there was more of a family connection (not easily broken then) in the OT and NT. Josephus is quoted regarding the Jewish Temple situation, where worshippers were interested in the "welfare of the community" and "are born for fellowship." He also quotes a church father, Cyprian, who says the "Master of unity did not wish prayer to be offered individually" in the Lord's Prayer. "Our prayer is public and common, and when we pray, we pray not for one but for the whole people, because we, the whole people, are one." Interesting truths. I think the article overall is very solid. There are a few weak points in it. There must always be an emphasis upon the individual response to Christ (which should not be left out or minimized either), but the community of Christ is what one joins not just a bunch of people standing in the same place with no real connections once a week. [Joseph Hellerman was the article author, Professor of NT at Talbot Sch. of Theol. He has published with B&H Academic.]

Matthew 13

2010-05-15T19:04:00.002-05:00

The Lord Jesus teaches people who hear the Word of God have one of several outcomes. The first is they are led to forget the Word of God. The second is people receive the Word of God with joy, but then when persecutions come they turn away from it. The third possibility he lists is a falling away when concerns of the world choke out the Word of God. The fourth response is the Word takes root in the heart via understanding --and-- a return comes out of the change.

It is always an encouragement when doing outreach to understand that spiritual warfare is real. We must pray for those we are trying to reach with the gospel. Further, as much as is possible, we should make those who profess Jesus aware that persecutions do come, and that Jesus was not a millionaire while he was on earth. If possible, this encounter through the Word with a more accurate view of Jesus may save them from destruction as they are spiritually changed in the heart. The last option is the most encouraging. When evangelizing, be aware that people will believe and make the effort worth it. We must never forget this truth as Christians.

Antony Flew Passes

2010-04-16T14:01:00.002-05:00

The philosopher Antony Flew died on April 8th, 2010. He had been a lifelong atheist, but recently decided arguments for God's existence were compelling. He adopted something like a deistic creator view of God as a result. He had dialogues with persons such as NT Wright over the resurrection, but to my knowledge Flew did not become a Christ follower in any meaningful sense. This is a sad thing. It is a reminder to us all that we must make sure of our salvation and our calling today. There is never a promise of how long we have and our life must be one that is not fearful, but certain that we know a great Savior Jesus Christ.
An article on his death is here:

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-antony-flew15-2010apr15,0,4059881.story

Speaking and Writing

2010-04-03T12:23:00.006-05:00

For academic researchers in US and Canadian circles or those heralding the gospel in the same, there are two great resources for quality writing. One of the works is called Elements of Style by Strunk and the other is Style by Joseph Williams. These two books are short, to the point, and offer significant checks on our writing style. They are equally relevant to the goal of speaking in a clear way with an English audience. Elements of Style could be read in one afternoon. Style is something you could read in three settings (if you made a good effort of it). The work by Williams takes into account cultural trends in the USA as far as assumptions people hold when writing and reading. The way that a sentence is heard is also explored by Williams. Neither book will break your bank account and will be rewarding for clarity in reviews, essays, research papers, sermons, and newsletters.

Conference

2010-03-10T12:38:00.002-06:00

I was able to attend a preaching conference held in Fort Worth, Texas this week. Jerry Vines, Steve Gaines and David Platt headed up the main list. The overall feel of the conference was to urge pastor-preachers on to faithful handling of God's Word. There were lists of tips for various aspects of ministry peppered in as well. Generally speaking the conference seemed interested in addressing contemporary issues in preaching. It also took a firm stand on expository methods of preaching the Bible. However, it became clear that the guest speakers were into sermon series. So expository to those who don't know, would then have to be confined to expositing a text(s) for a topic of the series. The history of preaching and narrative style sermon break-off sessions were well-worth attending. They gave some of the recent background the past 150 years or so; to how we have arrived where we are and then the styles that are prevalent today. One of the positives of the conference is the international representation, there were Indian preachers, African, American, etc. It was also big enough to be exciting, but small enough to interact with major preachers who atteneded or led.

Antony Flew's There Is A God

2010-02-19T21:36:00.005-06:00

Antony Flew was a self-admitted leading atheist in the West for decades. His article (done early in his career) on 'theology and falsification' was one of the most sought after articles in the 2nd half of the 20th century. He rejected cosmological arguments for God's existence. Yes, and, at one time he found David Hume's arguments convincing for a closed universe system. Even while growing up as a teenage, he admits feeling in his heart uncomfortable with the Problem of Evil in the world. This was compounded by his childhood teachers and peers having no thoughtful explanations for such a situation (should be a clarion call to the church to answer this question). However, through reading various philosophers later in life, Flew came to believe there were powerful arguments for God's existence and for explaining the so-called 'Problem of Evil.' In the book, Flew provides examples of such argument as the work of Terrence Penelhum that critiques assumptions Hume made which were unproven. As one point states, a "purely Humean story" would not offer meanings of 'cause' and 'law of nature' fitting the picture of reality we deal with ourselves day-to-day. Furthermore, the challenge of genetic messaging in DNA and the additional step of how complex the replicating process is served as a new empirical broadside to his former atheism. Flew asks the question based on a legitimate concern: 'can the origins of a system of coded chemistry be explained in a way that makes no appeal whatever to the kinds of facts that we otherwise invoke to explain codes and languages, systems of communication, the impress of ordinary words on the world of matter?' The existence of such coding is a conundrum as to why the 'mechanism of translation is what it is.' The origins of life are questions as to the origin of such a code and a translation system intact. Processing this knowledge/information in a machine like way with a highly 'precise recipe' raises questions about mindless molecules being able to form such a code and small scale complex factory. Even the symbol processing in the code is a mixture of chemicals that is far from explanable in a random fashion. Flew in his previous days also used to base his "Presumption of Atheism" on the existence of a universe. It is said to be with its laws the 'ultimate' point. But all such systems talk has 'some fundamentals [of assummed truths] that are not themselves explained.' (It is interesting he admits this, which so many people hide or don't realize.) Since the 1980's he says he had doubts about the universe just existing, due to contemporary cosmological consensus. It seems that the big bang theory provided a demanded conclusion: there was a beginning. And others saw the same matter of a beginning as a threat to their secularism or atheism; so that the result was they postulated a 'multiverse, numerous universes generated by endless vacuum fluctuation events, and Stephen Hawking's notion of a self-contained universe.' Their solution was to keep God out. This however creates a problem, contra Ockham, which is that a multiverse goes from a previously simple and better explanation over to a more complex one. And this for no evidential reason, except theoretical disagreement. Even Hawking acknowledges according to Flew that his system does not rule out God. Most cosmologists acknowledge they can't rule out God. But those who posit multiverses often by assumption rule God out. Flew says this secularist or atheist multiverse solution is like a schoolboy whose teacher doesn't believe a dog ate his homework, and as a result he posits the first version with a story that a pack of dogs---too many to count--ate his homework.' Richard Swinburne also argues against an eternal or non-beginning universe, by pointing out that appealing to 'empty space,' a something that is already there, essentially would never have an explanation. It would be 'inexplicable' forever. David Conway adds, per Flew, that a good example is a software virus 'capable of replicating itself on computers connected by a network. The fact that a million computers have been infected by the virus does not itself explain the existence of the self-replicating virus.'

More of the book could be mentioned, but I am more or less wanting to review it here. I highly recommend the book to see what is out there if you are curious as far as other philosophers working against eternal matter conceptions of reality. There are also references to good authorial works on the origin of life. Flew's account is personal and engaging at times and makes one think about how interactions we have with those who aren't theists or Christian theists may have personal doubts they don't mention. Those persons want to hear an answer that is thought out, so we should be prepared to answer in that sense too. Flew in the end rejects the Christian theist view (saving faith in Jesus Christ) due to his not wanting to settle on a certain brand of theism at this point. He entertains an argument for the resurrection by NT Wright and acknowledges that an omnipotent God like he now accepts must be out there, could definatley reveal Himself in the world if He wanted to. However, Flew is non-commital. This goes to show that one can only go so far in worldview without accepting Jesus Christ as Lord, over truth and reality, and Savior, of self admitting humbly our sin and need for His work. A theist is not a born again Christian. While we can be glad for Flew's realizing atheism isn't intellectually satisfying for him, yet we still must admit that he isn't serving Christ as Lord. Many believing Christians make this mistake of confusing theism with Christian theism. There is a difference, and it is whether one personally knows Jesus. However, as far as argumentation goes in thinking through our world and how we might talk about it, Flew's work is useful and interesting reading. It is highly endorsed by a number of relatively solid scholars from around the world as well. Flew does show that he has thought seriously about the position of theism and joined it. One may hope that he will be inclined to accept the Christ who redeems all things too.

While it is not addressed to my memory in the book, the chemical side of DNA and RNA bears more mention. The byproducts of some amino acids being formed into an order is often tar, which destroys productive adaptation. The sea is made of salt, which hampers such positive development of a primitive cell. There are also concerns of the right temperature and pressure for ideal conditions for a cell to form. Having the right and having pure chemicals (like what we get in a clean lab) are required to get even the needed situation. The open nature situation does not give production of a cell for many reasons. A lab is not exactly a fair comparison for the right chemicals being in one place. On top of this, the coding requires information added to the picture on long long lengths of manufacturing in the cell. These are at some point irreducibly complex, where they can't get any more simple without failure or lacking a key part. Thus life could not form on its own. It is not only improbably, but also the environments we see are simply not prone to that situation. And nature doesn't give information. Especially in the limited time the universe and the earth have been around. Yet in the end, this is an issue where a hardened heart will not accept evidence against its view, but will tell a story, a narrative, to explain away a God who convicts people about sin, so that they might see and repent. Something we may add, that most people don't want to do.

Moral Darwinism by Wiker

2010-02-06T14:02:00.002-06:00

I thought I would share some of this very useful book. Wiker brings out how Christians unknowingly accepted from some who claimed to be Christians an Epicurean worldview in the 1600's and 1700's. Instead of keeping the discoveries of science as part of a Christian rooted worldview or outlook, and just accepting this as evidence for it; some came along persuading the culture to accept beliefs like this: that matter has always existed and the universe is infinite in size. (Both of which are claims that are highly dubious as far as evidence 'fit' and not accepted by many varied stripes of cosmologists. Apparently even 'father' Epicurus of the materialist worldview admitted a need for a Creator/Starter against his hope otherwise). The resulting idea of chance, infinite worlds, possible worlds, and matter with no limits ended up creating a sort of comfort for some to abandon a unique Incarnation of Christ. One creature, one planet. Wiker's argument (in an un-fairly broad summary I admit) in the book is that the moral chaos in the West is the result of thinking all is chance and no one is right about morality for others. The thinking of Epicurus was such that it wasn't based on research of the world/worlds/mathematical infinity, but rather it was based on his moral desire to be able to sin without any fear of judgment; something he essentially admits at points. We should probably be suspicious of claims of never ending chances for life to form from someone: why? When the detail of that evolutionary and materialist world happening pro life forming as we know it, is considered there exists a sheer complexity of cosmology. This complexity is accepted by serious scholars in that field, as well as the obvious view that there was a beginning to it all which is accepted. This looked less like Epicurus and 17th century so-called science had wanted, and hence less like Darwin's view and less like public school biology mythos. Biological research has shown a like picture of extreme complexity at the cell level and in the formation of systems that would die apart from a full function up front. The result is that evolution as Darwin saw it is not possible (some have obviously attempted adjustments, but the problems glare on when planning and intelligence is required to order such systems (they are systems at that level, highly complex)). You can see how theories of men and women in our day are given god-like attitudes/authority, even contrary to findings about cosmology and biology in this book. There is an effort, not unlike the scandal of climate researcher emails, to try and manipulate the evidence to fit an evolutionary scheme for the sake of having moral freedom to sin without judgment ever coming from God. In our day, evolution is a prop used to keep a sort of secular so called neutrality, which really has its own religious opinions (ie is a religion itself while playing 'neutrality'). Maybe more on this later, just some early thoughts...

Thomas Morris - The Logic of God Incarnate

2010-02-04T21:34:00.001-06:00

I came across this book lately which attempts to defend an orthodox understanding of Jesus as having two natures, but also the unity of his person. The author was a professor at Notre Dame for fifteen years in philosophy, and now is involved in practical ethics in workplaces it seems, if I understand correctly. And he delves into removing the charge against Christian theists that the incarnation is not coherent (divine and human). Some important distinctions are made on Jesus as God (being God), but not God 'simpliciter,' according to Chalcedonian historic orthodoxy. What does that mean? That is to say I am guessing from this, that when you talk of God, we also mean the Father, and Holy Spirit as well. So God is not exhausted by only one person of the Trinity, but all three persons are God. One God, three persons; though he doesn't spell this out. He also explores the use of the 'indiscernability principle' to talk of how to distinguish divine and human properties of a nature. There are good answers on how to discuss such a topic, though I didn't follow his argument entirely or agree entirely at points with how he approaches this (heavy philosophy can at times make you want to stick closer to Scripture than men's 'solutions' lol). However, Morris profitably eliminates a series of mistakes that have been made in church history by those who didn't understand the Trinity very well, including the mistakes of a one nature Son (made by Leigh in Morris' view who argues that there is a plausible new one nature). Then he deals with mistakes made by those who see problems with Jesus having said to have existed before Herod's day. Morris considers and rejects process theology (thankfully), but also considers that the Anselmian arguments for God's existence are useful for pointing out a way to explain the Doctrine of how the Incarnation of the Son could take place. This book was a serious read, and includes use of logic. I'm not sure if everyone reading would enjoy such a book or want to navigate its waters. However, it is a good thought experiment and helped me to be a more aware reader when it comes to issues related to current discussion on the Incarnation in contemporary challenges of our culture. He seems to also like/support a social Trinity view, but holds that one need not be a social Trinity committed person to agree with points he makes in defending orthodoxy. I agree that the book does that well at times, but then other times, I wondered if he capitulates too much to worldly philsophical or cultural assumptions. It must be remembered that the church need not bow down to the world's philosophical ideas that are 'popular' in one day or another. One more minor thought in passing, if its of use to anyone who might happen to read such a book as this, I personally found his discussion of psychological explanations for epistemic (how we know what we know) possibility of Jesus being tempted weren't all that helpful or certain. It seemed like uncharted territory, so that I would be hestitant to agree with some statements. However, at other times he is clearer that historic views on Jesus are the way to go. And that is true, philosophy can only get us so far on such an issue where we must stick close to Scripture. And one final thought, I wouldn't recommend the book to the average reader. The biggest issue I had with it was his multiple incarnation talk related to possible worlds (a popular idea in philosophy, but not my view at all). He doesn't say they exist, but leaves the door open, seemingly because science has shown that man isn't the center of God's creation in his opinion. But that is hardly an argument against one Incarnation, as the earth could be anywhere God wants it in the universe and still God's crowning creation is humankind. To delve into discussions of possible worlds beyond seemed too sci fi for my tastes. Not to mention that Colossians 1 seems to indicate clearly there is one Christ over all creation, and verse 19 there refers to one cross. Hence as I heard someone say recently, we serve a Christ who is over the cosmos (he used the phrase 'cosmic' Christ, i.e. not just for us, but over all the universe). But still, I am glad I'm more aware of what I might encounter out there in discussions on the street, especially with avid readers, college, graduate students or professors.

B.B. Warfield on how heresy happens

2010-01-15T08:53:00.001-06:00

I was reading BB Warfield researching another topic. I came across a very good chapter that touches on apologetic method that is called "Heresy and Concession." (672, Selected Shorter) It describes how the world comes at us very confident, never admitting its views are "opinion" or asking us to use the "touchstone" of the Word of God for input. Rather it calls its views scholarship, prestige, and right. But we must always be confident upon the Word of God. We must realize the definition of heresy that Warfield, that classic preacher and teacher, said: "the very essence of 'heresy' is that the modes of thought and tenets originating elsewhere than in the Scriptures of God are given decisive weight when they clash with the teachings of God's Word, and those are followed to the neglect or modification or rejection of these." (677, Selected Shorter) He says that apologetics (defense of the faith) often takes the attitude that we "suppose that the minimum is all, or all that is worth defending, or all that is capable of defense. Yet it is undeniable that some recent apologetics has left on the minds of men some such impression." (677) Warfield gives several reasons why that won't work. One of them is that the person who defends the minimum will undervalue the undefended maximum. How true. Let us all learn to take God's revelation to mankind in the Bible as our touchstone, rather than shifting sand as such. Tomorrow present opinion will change, God's Word will stand.

DA Carson's Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church

2010-01-09T15:27:00.001-06:00

Well, I have pressed ahead through Carson's Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church. It is a worthwhile read. I highly recommend it. Basically what Carson does is bring biblical considerations to bear, biblical themes, that don't fit in the framework of the major "hard postmodernists" books or articles. If we are to take Scripture as our authority, then there has to be a change, we need to go with what God has revealed rather than culture. Carson is right. He approaches two authors, one major US postmodern-emergent author and one from the United Kingdom. And then examines their beliefs so as to show that they don't match major biblical themes. He then has sections of Scripture where he lists things like knowing and certainty from the Bible, and shows how overwhelming these ideas are. Scripture portrays us with the ability to know for certain on doctrines of Christian truth. Whereas some (some, not all!) authors in the emerging church tend to abandon absolute truth or fully certain truth knowing.

Now in fairness, there are times that Carson uses and acknowledges the heard work of studying a text, by what preaching/hermeneutics professors call a hermeneutical spiral towards the text. He is using a qualification on our ability. That is to say, as we read the Bible more, and ask ourselves questions about what God is saying, and as we study that second, third, fourth time more, we get the intention more clearly from it. This means we may increase in our knowledge or certainty of things God has revealed. Carson gives the example of the deity of Christ as something that as he has studied it (rightly) he has come to certain knowledge on. And this qualification is good so as to avoid a trap he may fall into of claiming that he just knows without appeal to Scripture. We are all, admittedly, pursuing Christ daily, to know Him more fully. However, we can indeed know, certainly, things that have been revealed and we have been able to see these from Scripture. A doctrine of the Bible is that it is itself clear. Indeed, God's Word promises to us that the Spirit will illumine us so that we may know with certainty actual truth of God and the world. What we are not promised is that the Spirit will absolutize our experience. One of the emerging churches great insights is that many churches have adopted cultural (American, French, UK, etc, etc) traditions and claimed they were biblical; when in fact, they were nothing of the sort. Many local church traditions have nothing to do with the Bible, but with the social click that meets there. This is the healthy insight in my view from the emerging church movement. There are also as Carson points out, healthy emergent's, who in fact hold to absolute truth ability on Christian doctrine. This is good. So I can appreciate the heavy lifting Carson has done to show how the Bible and emergent tenets may or may not mesh up. It at least has given me a broader and deeper perspective on the whole picture. Carson is very careful and backs up his references very well. He also gets into some interesting side issues on church polity for a page or two at times. These actually just made me want to read some of his other articles more, however, and they were interesting.

I think the strength of the book is that it doesn't let a major contemporary church movement go uncritiqued. Carson aims to be faithful to good reading of the Scripture. The weakness of the book is that it is often modernistically limited. At times you sense that to take what he says as true you would have to go backwards and sort of agree with past modernistic theologians. It could be more powerful if it was more often said that there should be new theologians who will press ahead in the future, but will not become postmodern as far as truth claims on Christian doctrine. By that I mean, there are times that Carson sounds like a complaining modernist more than just a biblical Christian acknowledging the future will come. I would suspect that we all have our weaknesses though, and I was able to keep reading without much problem, as there ought to be good theologians from every age we appreciate and learn from in our lives as believers. One minor thing that just troubled me that he had some of his own 'tradition' church views against younger people (18-40 presumably) here and there. But they are lightly peppered and hardly affect much of the book at all. In these ways, I just wonder if Carson wants to hold on to old ways of doing the outward forms of church at the expense of an otherwise good critique work which he has written. But again, no one is perfect. And Carson has strength when it comes to talking about how missions has taught us to recognize that the gospel which never changes can take and use culture forms such as music so as to convey Truth, absolute truth. (He doesn't say it in exactly those words.)

I think Carson is very charitable towards the emerging church for the most part. I'll have to read more to know for sure, but he seemed even handed in a build up sort of way.

This book really pointed out to me Brian McLaren's pluralism (there are many ways to heaven). I was saddened to find out that McLaren is a pluralist. Ironically, I have met some people in various seminaries who think Brian McLaren is just great all around. That's a scary thought given he has already sold the whole house spiritually. I don't believe that Scripture allows for us to worship another god in any way, nor to reverence other gods. That is idolatry, and if a person never repents of idolatry they will be judged for it.

And I agree with Carson that there is a distinction between the idolatry involved in people's sins such as coveting versus idolatry straight up as defined in Scripture. Why mention this? Apparently some emergent persons (not by any means all) say if people in churches commit an attitude of coveting things, then that is just as bad. But the truth is, there is no grace (unmerited favor of God to salvation) apart from knowing Christ alone as Savior and Lord. It is impossible to also never repent of coveting, but celebrate it as correct, and be blessed of God. Sure. But here's the difference: God will -make sure- that those who truly believe on and trust Him, and aren't idolaters, will repent of things like coveting and even when they fall, repent and pursue the right God again. The Holy Spirit and the Word read or heard guarantee true believers will continue on believing. But if you start with the wrong God to begin with, then there is no way to get help to overcome coveting. This is true inside a visible church or in some foreign land. Coveting obviously is not right, but without the Right God First there is no hope of repenting of coveting. There are some differences. Now of course, there are professing Christian people to fall into all kinds of sins, including doubt which might rival idolatry. But they turn from it, because they have trusted a God who is jealous to see His Word bring changes in them. So this is the difference. I wonder if Carson could have brought this out more, but he choose not to for whatever reason.

In the end, the book is recommended. It does discuss epistemology which I wanted to delve into, but I don't plan on tackling that so much at this moment. That is for a graduate paper and in more depth, later. Perhaps I'll share some thoughts on that later in 2010.

2009-12-31T10:18:00.000-06:00

Family Research Council was founded in 1983 according to their bio, in order to promote marriage, family, and the sanctity of life. Another godly man, Dr. Richard Land, of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (SBC) according to a Family Research Council report, referred to pornography metaphorially as one of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse destroying America. If you watch the habits of parents enough, they do little to filter their home computers and check on cell phone use by their teens. Those habits can be destructive to some in their families, setting patterns of sinful lifestyle for their children. A recent study done by a Family Research Council staffer, Dr. Patrick Fagan, found some of these results reflecting our culture today:
-About 25% of those accessing the internet do so for sexual purposes.
-Up to 90% of youth aged 15-17 report coming across pornography online. One quarter said this happens somewhat often.
-The more adolescents are exposed to this, the more uncertain they are about themselves.
-Adults who regularly consume pornographic material are three times more likely to be unfaithful to their spouses.
-In one study, 56% of divorce cases involved extensive pornographic addiction to websites, and 33% in chat rooms of related content.
-Exposure to such things causes a person to be more likely to participate in 'recreational sex.'
-There is a link between pornographic viewing and wrongful aggression in this area.

You can get more information on this by signing up for the Family Research Council newsletters and by following this link here on their site.

There are also suggestions at the bottom of that page link with how to counter such struggles among those around you. Ultimately, for those who struggle with this it will take a commitment for them to understand their fellowship with God is hindered by love of sin, Philippians 4:8. Their salvation is secure if they have trusted in Christ as Savior, but God is a jealous God and will work over time to make a believer uncomfortable with other loyalties to lusts that compete with God's desire for you to have holiness. And being fed up with that lust (-if- God is working on them over a period of time), they will renew their thoughts instead with verses like Matthew 5:8 "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." 2nd Timothy 2:22 "Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord with a pure heart." 1 John 3:3 "And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure." God is very gracious to us, and merciful in giving us the Spirit who jealously desires God, and not other altars of worship in our time and devotion. There are people who come to me and say they struggle with these things at time, and the most important thing is to know God's heart and to install blocks. Jesus talks about the idea of radical amputation. This means that a person prone to this weakness in struggles, will want to following God's wisdom, avoid the streets where temptation is by changing routes to work, avoiding unblocked internet connections by accountability with friends, setting up filters they cannot undo and more. Pursuit of God, bottom line, must be loved more than making ways to sin; otherwise there is no change.

D.A. Carson on the Emergent Church -2-

2009-12-30T21:49:00.001-06:00

Well I've made some more progress in the Carson book, he displays some significantly worthwhile insights into the outlook of leading writer Brian McLaren especially. One of Carson's points, without giving too much away, is that the emergent church employs a 'flat' critique of modernism. But it does so without normally acknowledging the benefits of modernism. While Carson doesn't go quite this far, what I liked too coming off of that and the Carson long quotes of others is the realization that no culture is itself holy. Pre-modernism, modernism, postmodernism; all have/will be full of good aspects and not so good aspects. This balance is worth taking into account no matter where one comes down on it. At times Carson seems a bit modern, I'll admit, but at other times he seems somewhat postmodern. Especially when he recoils to the useful (although typical) missions influence on us and our healthy self-critique idea. He mentions that one a couple of times as a positive of looking beyond our own culture. Perhaps this is a strength of Carson, he is open to more than just what he holds culturally.
One thing that Carson hasn't used, but I suspect would be useful is the obvious use of absolute principles of postmodern church ideals to wield against non-postmodern churches. That is to say, postmoderns get on a high bench to look down upon the poor moderns, but not only in attitude but judging in principle. These principles are taken as established fact (something that Carson mentions in vague passing, but rightly mentions at least). While some of the emergent/postmodern critiques are valid I agree (though not all of them), this at least doesn't fit well with McLaren's core points on avoiding absolutism. McLaren said one concern was absolutism has caused all of these bad old things in history, so it must be wrong. But cleverly, Carson comes along at this point to offer pre-modern bad old things in history. Ironically, it is a lot of the pre-modern church structure/image/thinking that post moderns want to rehabilitate Carson says. And this is combined with the positives of modernism, like medical care today, etc. Interesting stuff. I'll definitely have to read other viewpoints to see how this all fits, but I am more or less writing out of excitement that the Carson book has really started to engage after the first few chapters. I suspect it will get better as I continue reading.

D.A. Carson on the Emergent Church

2009-12-29T20:07:00.001-06:00

I don't have much time invested in my past honestly with reading on the 'Emergent Church.' I know of the leaders in that movement and have heard some of their messages online. I've been to churches that have elements which are really similar in substantial ways, but which still hold to truth being something we can know absolutely (yes, they were thriving even though they believed in absolute truth, they were very blessed of the Lord; I do by the way also believe in absolute truth). But I'm trying to get more familiar over the break with the whole discussion in general. D.A. Carson has a book on 'Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church.' I understand emergent churches aren't all the same, and Carson states that flatly about 20 or 30 times in the first few chapters. I feel like he overstates this fact a couple times too many. I understand why he does some repetition, people are so prone to misunderstanding one another at times that it takes restatement to avoid claiming errors. It'll be interesting to see what all the rest of the work has in store. I'll refrain from sharing much more now until I'm done with this book. Just thought I'd share about some holiday reading. I'm interested for the moment in how Carson talks about epistemology. I'm open to suggested reading besides the obvious like Carson and McLaren, on the topic.

Culture Shift

2009-12-23T17:39:00.000-06:00

One of the more interesting shifts in baby names is away from using so called 'Christian' names. One website even offers a prediction of names in 2019. It is at this link here:
http://www.babynamewizard.com/archives/2009/9/the-top-baby-names-of-2019

They don't look like they have much Bible influence in 10 years if the guesses there are correct. This is probably fairly accurate in general, something of a trend is here. It is of course possible that our culture has just grown tired of using biblical names, but that seems too complex as a main explanation of why the trend has come about. And this ignores the fact that many names in the Bible are barely used in recent history, but could be if people were interested in the material.

The simplest explanation is normally best. And the most straightforward explanation is people don't read their Bibles, even if they do go to church, and don't turn to it likewise to name their child. And most people don't even go to church, they stay at home and watch television. Therefore, to use a cultural phrase: Out of sight out of mind.

There is another possible reason even among 'church goers.' As messages grow less Bible oriented, even those in the church probably don't come across many texts, or aren't encouraged to do so (some incidental evidence of this would be the surveys in 2007-2009 that megachurches are doing, where they find few people actually read the Bible in their ranks). Therefore they don't come across many options on Bible names, even if they profess the Bible is the main influence on their life. We might imagine on a typical week a message with ways to improve your workout or how to have a happier workplace may not touch on many biblical names beyond the obvious (Paul, John, Jesus, James, Peter, Mary, Anna, Hannah, Rebecca). And probably such messages will reuse predictable 'go to' texts once per year. The result might be that people listening also go to reuseable texts, and if there is anything to growing tired of typical Bible names, then people will look elsewhere.

The truth is I'm not sure of all the reasons why biblical names aren't used as much. But I thought I'd share some speculation, based on broader cultural trends.

Health Bill

2009-12-21T21:38:00.001-06:00

While it is not my interest to go into politics that much with this blog, and I plan on avoiding political opinion on such matters for the most part, still I felt compelled to share an opinion based on God's Word. On December 19th, 2009 this was published:

http://republicanleader.house.gov/blog/?p=725

My main concern is why such a thing would be allowed. There is a later article saying that Ben Nelson worked a compromise of a sort:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/21/AR2009122102585_pf.html

This would limit funding in a narrow way where states decide on funding abortion or not. If I understand this properly, and I'm trying to, that would still be morally culpable. Many of us in the country do not want to pay for abortions, not even the support system for abortions, nor do we want any state allowing the murder of a small person. This will be met by some who say it is only my view. If that were the case perhaps we could say it is all relative. Unfortunately, God's Word clearly says in many places which can be found by someone who really wants to investigate it, that God is involved in giving human life the imageo Dei and constructing a baby even in the womb. This special emphasis in Scripture, along with God's hatred of those who did abortions of that time (Menahem) show a dislike morally for abortion. We must oppose efforts to include abortion options or abortion funding. It is sad that we are morally adrift in a convenience culture. The small baby is seen by most people as an incovienent life. Dead-beat dads don't step up and provide for women they have gotten pregnant. They are worse than unbelievers the Bible says about such a man who won't provide for his own family. Then some moms just don't 'feel' ready or are interested in a career that may be hampered by the nuisance of a child. Such views will be judged for what they are, putting the self up in the place of 'god,' worshipping self, the creature, rather than the Creator; who is blessed forever. Shame on us as a people, we must speak of abortion as a moral evil, for God's Word to mankind does just that.

Miles McPherson's Do Something!: Make Your Life Count

2009-12-16T08:37:00.000-06:00

Do Something! is an interesting read. I wanted to review it online here, sharing my own opinion. I read this book for my work, so as to be an encouraged leader of our local church. The book sports endorsements by popular level writers or personalities. I once heard a teacher say you can tell a book by its endorsements. That's not a bad thing, just a statement of fact. When you see Lee Strobel as the lead recommender, you know it's not going to be very deep. But I wasn't looking for a super deep read. I just want to give my perspective going into this.

The book is very useful in my view, as an encouragement to get into the community or be at church in a serving way. That is the main thrust as you would expect. There are great application points at the end of each chapter, which vary between personal application at home, in your closet in prayer, to public community action. The book is not political as such, but more along the lines of social action for Christ.

Miles uses stories drawn from a variety of places, from people's health struggles (probably the most common prayer request in any Christian church, including his Rock Church in San Diego) on to military experiences. Generally, the stories are the kind that make you sad or concerned. Drug addiction, pornography addictions, people with cancer, people fighting and dying in foreign countries in an army. So it isn't a 'pick me up' except that in each case the author uses Scripture passages, sermonettes, to offer how God can get a person's perspective back on Him. I really enjoyed this. They aren't too long, most of them are bringing a passage to bear on real life. They break up the stories in the chapters. The whole book is organized around a plan of points, beginning with "P" words. I won't reveal them, since that is the author's perogative, and you can read it. Suffice it to say, that while I focused on them up front, I didn't notice them throughout helping me to organize what I read. But maybe it did for others.

I do believe anyone who reads this book will be challenged to a deeper quiet time / spiritual focus on God; beyong 30 second tidbits. And for a book to be used of God to convict greater times with God is a very good thing. In that sense I recommend the book very much.

My concerns however, are with the level of the theology. I feel like this book would be good evangelistically, don't get me wrong, that isn't bad. But I mean with the evangelistic presentation; there are some doctrinal question marks or errors I noticed. Most were not persistent, but a few were. Beyond these few I really liked the book, but I'll point them out so you may be made aware spiritually if you are a reader.

It's generally better to withhold judgment on theological points until you are well into a book and can see how terms are being used, picking up on the author's language.

1. He seems to hold to a belief that if you pray to recieve Jesus Christ (in his case from some hippies in a dollar store type place, ex page 149), then you can not live it after and still be genuine in that profession. In his case, he accepts Jesus allegedly then goes and does hard core drugs. Not to mention other life dominating issues, like pride. But then he rightly and properly later on in the book says he knows there must be fruit for a profession to be real. It seems that the time he really was saved was later in his life, as he lays out on page 149, when he realized that drug use wasn't the best way to go; Christ should be Lord instead. It seems like a clear cut salvation experience. While no one is sinless in this life, it is not clear to me that an outward praying of a prayer early in life means much if the heart and mind are not changed to obey God in repentance. Romans 6:1-2 says are we to continue in sin, knowing grace will abound? Paul says no way, not possible. How would it even be possible Paul says by the Spirit, for someone who is dead to sin to still live in it? (Lifestyle of sin). He goes on to talk about our newness of life, and walking in it. So Miles is holding to a popular Christian culture belief that someone can pray a prayer when they are young, live like hell for years on end, and still be saved. I don't think he holds this strongly, because he sort of soft peddles away from it later in the book by saying deeds must be there if a profession is genuine. But the whole 'both / and' thing left me confused. It seems that Miles is saved, and that it was this second realization when he got saved.

2. Patripassionism? I'm not sure exactly if that is what I'm reading on page 187. There is a prayer to God, saying He suffered on the cross. Of course, in Christian theology both the Father and Son and Spirit are God. But usually in the New Testament useage, God refers to the Father when it is alone by itself without clarification (most cases). Miles' prayer is on this page that God suffered on the cross, which is the point of confusion itself. I just found myself wanting clarification, is it the Father he is addresssing (Miles) when he gives this prayer (as we are commanded to normally pray to the Father, Matthew 6:9-13 is the reference). If it is the Father Miles meant, then he slipped into the doctrinal error of Patripassionism briefly when he said that God walked into the pain of the cross. I didn't see this error a lot in the book, so I'll stop here. But we affirm as Christians that rather the Son suffered on the cross, that is correct doctrine.

3. There are several places in the book where Miles thinks that God has appeared to him personally, like in his bedroom. While I'm not one who is opposed to thinking that God could appear to someone today, it would not be a theology I would want to endorse in the exact way that Miles says it. For there is again Trinitarian confusion; and this one keeps popping up in the book. What he says is that the Holy Spirit is an Invisible Man. Like a human figure whose face he cannot see who appeared. He then is urging people in the book to ask the Invisible Man, the Holy Spirit for His help. My problem with this is that the Holy Spirit to my knowledge does not appear anywhere in the Bible as a man or human figure. In fact, the Spirit appears in the form of a dove. But never as a human. And the title invisible man is never used of the Spirit in the Bible. It just caught me as strange, that Miles would not refer instead to the Son who did appear bodily or in a human form in the Old and New Testaments.... And so I just have doubts about the tightness of the view of the Trinity at his church and in his book, given the play loose with image thing. The book the Shack is notorious for this on a far worse scale than Miles ever gets to. But one has to be careful about playing too lose with biblical metaphors. There are a lot of wrong metaphors for instance that more liberal Presbyterians and Baptists use to insert worldly philosophy into churches through this back door method. I don't think Miles is doing this in any sophisticated way, but it makes me wonder about who he reads to get his Trinitarian theology and why they are ascribing metaphors God never uses for Himself in the Bible to God. I would just want to be far more cautious than Miles feels he needs to be. This is a gentle rebuke. And it is also a gentle rebuke of Baker Books, the publisher, that they didn't recommend an edit or refuse to publish it without more clarity.

4. This next one keeps popping up in churches, and I suspect it is because Christians are often guilty of reading through the Law of Moses at 100 mph, with the exception of a study in Genesis, or perhaps Exodus from time to time. It is the mistaken notion that God only wanted blood sacrifices. It is true, and hear me, that without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins; per what the Bible says clearly in Hebrew 9:22. This is fulfilled in what Christ Jesus did voluntarily going to the cross and dying for our sins, per His Father's will. However, blanket statements about God only accepting sacrifices if they were blood ones is mistaken. It is true that Cain was rejected with his fruit of the ground. And Abel's was accepted, and it happened to be a blood sacrifice. However, no where does it say Cain was rejected because specifically it was not a blood sacrifice. It only says God was not pleased. We ought to assume that Cain brought sort of the leftovers or easy to obtain things, which showed his heart really wasn't into God that much. This was the problem, and it is why Cain so easily turns into a massive sinner by murdering his brother. He wasn't far from that to begin with spiritually. Abel's sacrifice was of the firstlings it says in the Bible, which means Abel brought the best. It is the fact that Cain brought leftovers that was not acceptable to God. Much like today people come to worship God in church if it is convenient, if it isn't too costly to worship God; God is offended at their arrogance, just like Cain's. Miles wrongly interprets this on page 196. I am not trying to be too hard on him, though, as I hear this mistake all the time among pastors; who ought to read more carefully. God clearly, since His Word is timeless, accepted non blood sacrifice for sins in the Mossaic Law, Leviticus 5:11 being one example enough to blow away Miles' point. The non blood sacrifice was for those who could not afford to (not because of laziness or greed but income level) bring a large animal or even two pigeons. They brought flour instead as an offering, that is to say grain. But it was fine flour, not the last fruits of produce, but the best. That is what Miles and many pastors in Baptist, non-denominationl denominations miss out on. Of course, the Law never actually could permanently remove sins. But neither could Cain or Abel's sacrifices. Nor does God killing an animal to make fur clothes for Adam and Eve prove that God would only take animal sacrifices or preferred them. In fact, the Son of God is the only One who could come take away our sins. It is virtually meaningless then to go on a long speal in a book, Sunday School, or the pulpit about Cain having brought only vegetables. The point of the text is that he brought low quality, grade D, vegetables, rather than something fine; rather than the first fruits.

That's enough now, it's time to get on with other things. May this profit someone who is thinking over their reading.

Homeless Ministry

2009-12-08T11:05:00.001-06:00

Over the past few years our church family has come across a number of persons who are struggling with transitions. They are near homelessness or homeless often before they seek help in a normal case. Perhaps pride or lack of knowledge of options lets things dwindle and dwindle until there 'seem' to be no options left. By God's mercy, we have been able to help arrange places to stay, or see a solution for that time to make the situation rendered fixed, or refer to a place that may help. Like most evangelical churches, we seek to provide various options to meet needs between shelter/clothing/food/financial support. These are always necessary for church family members. For those who aren't part of the church family, decisions are made based on benevolence support *beyond* the previous commitment.
In my opinion, some of the most challenging persons to minister to are those who struggle with drug addiction. This is difficult because everything serves the addiction, if cash is given, the person will always be tempted to use that to trade in for drugs. What has happened in their life to get them to the point, as they respond wrongly, continues: lies, using people (whoever, even their own children as sympthathy to get drug money), and lack of clear thinking about a holistic view of their life, plague someone who is not consumed with Christ Jesus as first and foremost, but rather with their own thing. They have to find comfort in that drug of choice, so they think. Rather a lasting solution and hope would be in the living Savior Jesus. He is the only person who can change someone needing to seek help from drugs so as to escape homelessness. I have heard of a number of people in and out of drug rehab facilities in the county or state, and not much ever seems to change; they are 'clean' for months, and then they are back in the addiciton. In my opinion, these are the saddest instances, when you can help someone only physically for a time, but they refuse to turn to the One who can through His personal presence in their lives make real changes that affect the situation permanently.

Homelessness is a real challenge in our area, and I am exploring the issue in more depth. With the economic downturn, a lot of 'services sector' people have been showing up for help. Particularly, construction people. I don't expect this to change as the building / construction area is facing a lot of Baby Boomers retiring who do not need an even more expensive house, or an even larger garage, or a excesses like vacation homes. Less construction work means there is going to be a lot of transitioning going on, and some homelessness as a result for set times; sad to say.

Scripture commands us to look out for those who are of faith. We must do this or our message is no message at all. There is also the witness in the world aspect of caring for those who are hurting in society at large. This too is important.

Institute for Creation Research

2009-11-23T13:15:00.000-06:00

My wife and I had a chance to visit the local conference put on by First Dallas and the Institute for Creation Research. It was a very informative short conference. The first and last 'lecture' were worldview matters by Henry Morris, III. And in between those were 'lectures/talks' on the complexity of life. That was apparently the last conference of its type called "Demand the Evidence" for 2009. However, for anyone curious about such issues, or willing to explore the matter of God's creation and His fingerprints on it; you can sign for the ones they will no doubt have in 2010. I would recommend brining some money for their bookstore, as there are good ICR and also Answers in Genesis authored books. I also understand they will ship them back to you if you don't want to carry them around the conference. The main message of this one seemed to be: the evidence is interpreted by God's Word, here are solid explanations of how these things cannot be explained by the contemporary evolutionary explanations, and so boldly speak out about the facts among those you know and in your family. Well worth how much we paid to attend for the quality of speakers and the information countering the prevailing winds of popularity.

Intelligent Design Conference

2009-11-09T20:40:00.000-06:00

There is a great opportunity to learn more about the Intelligent Design movement with Institute for Creation Research associated persons coming up this weekend. First Baptist Dallas has the conference hosted there. Students get a discount. At the least, it will be an opportunity to deepen the dialogue on the important matter of creation theology....

Systematic Theology - Providence

2009-11-06T13:35:00.000-06:00

When it comes to theology, after the doctrine of God, Scripture and the Trinity; there is a place to raise the question of how do we define (as Christians) the doctrine of Divine Providence? There are varied definitions in place in denominations and churches, but orthdox Christians must affirm at least: that God is actively involved with His creation. We do not serve a deistic 'god' who has left things alone; no longer interacting with the universe. We serve a personal God who has revealed in history His plan and person and work. There is also the question of does God continually create (as I understand at least now J Edwards America's famed preacher held and another figure I believe by the name Keim today in Europe's theology scene)? Or is He preserving what He has already created, preserving what was and the processes that arrange properties and forms (currently popular Baptist / Bible church theologian favorite W. Grudem, or recently popular Baptist author / theologian M. Erickson)? Does anyone want to comment on their view of Providence within the evangelical Christian world? I have in the past held the continual creation view, however, at present it seems to me at least the biblical evidence is with preservation. But I would love to talk to some at church in our 'training union' of sorts what you think or online as well. Colossians 1:17.

Question for Readers on Simon the Sorcerer in Luke's Book of Acts

2009-10-30T10:32:00.001-05:00

This week I was studying, for another reason, the issue of Simon's response in the Book of Acts chapter 8. It struck me that Simon the Sorcerer, after seemingly following the 'Way,' then makes a crazy offer to Peter to buy the gift of the Holy Spirit; when he saw this was given by laying on of hands at that juncture. Now here's the question part:

There is a theological position some hold that is called 'theonomy.' A theonomist generally holds that the Old Testament Law is applicable to Civil Law today. They don't think we are Israel or anything like that, as I understand them (and I'm open to correction on this). But they do want the examples of the penalities to have fair informative roles in decisions today. So if Simon is a sorcerer, and he seems to believe, and then offers this thing that sounds blasphemous, to buy the Holy Spirit gift; would a theonomist argue that Simon would have rightly been condemned under a death penalty of some sort equivalent to, but different than stoning per Leviticus 20:26-27 (Cf also Rev 21:8 future tense, not in our age)? Or can we see Simon as yet an example of how the OT Civil Law should not apply in the post-temple age we live in as New Covenant believers? (Though admittedly they were in a transition time) Any thoughts on this unusual theological question?

The Self-Attesting Christ of Scripture--Worthy of Worship

2009-10-16T21:25:00.000-05:00

When it comes to the world, it is not comfortable to be a person lacking a relationship with Jesus Christ. Sure there are things that bring joy or sadness to anyone. But lasting joy and abundant life here and hereafter are in Christ Jesus alone. It is the God who has spoken to us in His Son that Scripture reveals; and that changes us. Christ Jesus changes us as we learn that He loves sinners who are willing to heed His call. Christ Jesus changes us when we know that He has deep compassion for the hurting, the downcast, the sin strapped and the guilt ridden conscience to be set free. It is my sincere hope that anyone reading this will take a challenge, read the Gospel of Matthew or the Gospel of John; get acquainted with the Son of God who so willingly came and laid down His life so that we might live; along with Him, as we unite our trust to Him alone.