Words - are they important?

I am totally understanding the need to be careful in our language
with prospects, and even the general public. I do not agree with lying
about our intentions to evangelize, or deception to gain access to "closed areas".
However, I can see the wisdom of prudent language when living or
ministering in a hostile land.

Recently I was asked to teach a seminar to converted Muslims. I was instructed to not call Jesus the "Son of God" or to mention "Trinity". Furthermore I was told to call God "Allah" and use "Al Masheia" rather than "Jesus".

When we are dealing with converted Muslims I think it would be irresponsible
not to teach the whole counsel of Scripture and introduce our new brothers
to good theology. I know that Muslims have a problem with calling Jesus
the Son of God because they know it means that He is literally God's Son
and therefore divine. But, that is the point.

Some years ago I had a bad experience with the IMB's "expert" on Muslim
evangelization. He said that Muslim, Jews and Christians all worship the
same god. I asked, "But, doesn't Jesus say, 'I am the Way, the Truth and
the Life... no man comes to the Father except by me.'"? The teacher
rebuked me and said that I was only interested in arguing semantics. I
responded that I was not speaking of semantics at all, but the very words
of God. He had said that Jews and Muslims worship the God I worship, but they do not
know Jesus. SO, in what way can they come to the Father? How can they
worship a God that can only be approached through Christ Jesus? It was an argument over words, primarily the Word of God.

Recently I had a conversation with a Jehovah's Witness. In the past they
would have never said, "Jesus is LORD." However, they have recently
started saying, "Jesus is lord." Notice the difference? "LORD" =
God, Jehovah, the Word incarnate. "lord" = master, landowner, knight. When I
say "LORD" I proclaim that Jesus is God. When a JW says "lord" he is
saying "mister." Very subtle, and very dangerous. So it isn't just words I am
concerned about it is their meaning.

Allah is an Arabic word for the god of Mohammed. After thinking about it I might could use the term "allah" to refer to God, but not Allah. I think I would be compelled to clarify each time I said allah "notice the small 'a'." Or maybe "allah - I mean the triune God of the Universe". It would be difficult, but I think I could find some way to accommodate on this point.

Many languages have a word for god and another for God. I have heard Muslims in America use "God" when speaking of Allah.

Really this whole issue for me is resolved in the Trinity. The Nicene and
Apostle's creeds predate Islam by several hundred years, and I would think
that a converted Muslim would readily agree with these historically
orthodox statements. In fact, for several hundred years you would not be
considered Christian, nor be baptized if you did not profess a Trinitarian
creed. Christ's divinity is almost impossible to discuss without a
discussion of the Trinity.

If former Muslims had sound teaching in this area I think it
would give them a foundation that would be unshakable. Someone recently implied that the Trinity is too advanced for new believers, but I
would argue that a child could understand - indeed we must have the faith
of a child to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Maybe they would not be
able to explain, but I am confident that the Spirit (if indeed they have
the Spirit of Christ) would bear witness and they would shout "glory to
God" as the beauty of God's triune nature is proclaimed to them.

Often we make the mistake of not communicating deeper truth with new
converts. Somehow we think that a lack of formal education might mean
that they are too ignorant to grasp complex concepts. We think that
evangelism is too important to waste time on theology. However, we see
many examples in Scripture of men preparing for years (some for decades)
learning about God before serving Him.

Stephen Kennedy, Mission Coordinator for IOI, had a beautiful experience with a new evangelist. He came from the countryside and was very poorly educated. When he was joining IOI he had to sign a form that states that he agrees with the Apostle's
Creed. He did not know what it was, so Stephen read it to him. When he
heard what the creed contained he began to say, "Yes! Yes! Praise God!"
It was wonderful to see that the truth of this creed was readily accepted
by this dear brother. He was encouraged to find that this creed predated
his personal experience by over 1,700 years.

To contrast I heard a song tonight on Christian radio. The lyrics said
something like, "It isn't important that I understand some creed, or even
what I believe... I want to feel like I am falling in love." So, are we
saying that it does not really matter what we believe about God as long as
it feels right? Call Him Allah, or Baal, or Bob - Trinity, not trinity -
Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha - don't all roads lead to the same destination? -
words don't matter as long as it feels right, promotes peace and we keep
the numbers coming.

I cannot state emphatically enough how central the Trinity is to everything I might teach. I mean my name is PATRICK (as in Saint Patrick the Trinitarian theologian that won Ireland for Christ - and to this day symbols for the Trinity are plastered
everywhere in Ireland including on beer bottles) for goodness sakes!

Lying to tell the Truth - Evangelistic Deception

For years I have protested the modern evangelical Christian practice of Evangelistic Deception (lying about our intentions in doing mission work). How can we share the Truth by lying?

Today it is painfully evident that we have only deceived ourselves - the Taliban knows exactly what the IAM (International Assistance Mission) workers were doing - promoting Christianity. It seems that the only people who are unaware that this is what the team was doing are the US Secretary of State, news outlets and the director of IAM.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton condemned the attack and disputed the Taliban's assertion that the medical team was promoting Christianity.

"We also condemn the Taliban's transparent attempt to justify the unjustifiable by making false accusations about their activities in Afghanistan," Clinton said.

On the IAM website a statement was posted that reads, "Our faith motivates and inspires us - but we do not proselytize. We abide by the laws of Afghanistan. We are signatures of the Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs Disaster Response Programmes, in other words, that, 'aid will not be used to further a particular political or religious standpoint.' But more than that, our record speaks for itself." (Dirk R Frans)

What record is that? One of doing good in the name of Jesus the Christ and proclamation of the Gospel I would hope. For a true Christian your entire life is about the following of Christ which certainly does include "proselytizing."

It is a shame that this mass martydom is not being portrayed as exactly what it is. These people were killed because they were Christians ministering in the name of Jesus and hopeful that their witness might cause some to convert to Christ and proclaim Jesus as LORD. Instead the State department and even the ministry that sent the team is tying to convince the world that these people were "aid workers" and not "ministers."

It is time to stop fooling ourselves. If you go to another country in the name of Jesus you are a missionary! If you extend yourself on behalf of the poor for Jesus sake, and the Gospel - YOU ARE A MISSIONARY! You do not have to "preach," but I certainly am hopeful that many heard the Gospel through this team of missionaries. Certainly I do not propose that we wear little name plates that say "Missionary Bob," but we should never be ashamed of the fact that these people (at least one that I knew) were promoting Jesus!

Slowly by Slowly should go to press this week!

I'm excited! The book has finally gone to press and I should have a final copy within a month. Hopefully by August it will be available on Amazon and others.
So much work for 108 pages!

Against the doctrine of Drunkeness in the Spirit

Be very careful, then, how you live—not as unwise but as wise, making the most of every opportunity, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the Lord's will is. Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit. Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 5:15-20

It has been some time since I posted on this blog. But, today my heart is troubled and I simply must say something.

A friend recently gave me a web link thinking that I would enjoy the site because it featured self-proclaimed "modern mystics". When I think of mystics I generally am thinking about those throughout history who have had a deep love relationship with Christ, and that relationship is then manifest in the outworking of extreme love. In my opinion Mother Teresa would be an example. A modern mystic would be someone who, in their secret devotions, has a vision or dream that propels them to a deeper relationship with God that is worked out in tangible ministry to their fellow man.

Today I take a public stand against the "charisma" of "drunkenness". This foolishness is nothing new in the world of heresy, and it is demeaning to the holiness of God. Those who promote "Spirit Drunkenness" teach that being filled with the Holy Spirit means that you babble like an idiot, act like an animal and have ecstatic experiences like being "high". Scripture clearly teaches that we are not to be "drunk" with wine, but to be filled with the Holy Spirit. Someone who is truly "filled with the Holy Spirit" would then manifest the fruit of that Spirit which is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.

As I watched videos of "manifestations" on the "New Mystics" website I was literally sickened. I could not continue to watch as they used the Eucharist like it was pot, or crack. The sensuality of the videos was extreme - to explain to you in detail what they did with the elements would be a sin to even repeat. For those who would defend this behavior I ask you, can you see Jesus acting this way? Would Jesus act like an animal? Didn't Jesus actually cast demons out of people who acted like animals?

God is a god of order, not of chaos. Flee those who bring disorder and disunity over disputable matters! Run from those who preach the Gospel as a means of financial gain, or of self-promotion! Rebuke those who preach drunkenness in any form! Be sober minded for the days are evil!

Walking the line

It is so hard to walk a line that leads down the middle of the road. Walton Padelford says, "The only thing you find in the middle of the road is a dead skunk with yellow paint across its back."

IOI was recently refused an audience with a missions committee because we are "too inclusive" and therefore not "orthodox". The funny thing is that in this democratic church I was never allowed to speak to the committee, nor was I ever asked one question. The conclusion was based solely on the fact that we work with so many denominations in Ethiopia, and our support comes from so many different churches in the USA.

The fact is IOI is an orthodox Christian missionary organization. As far as our Statement of Faith we site the Apostle’s and Nicene Creed, and believe the Bible to be inspired of God without error in the original manuscripts. Furthermore the ministers supported through IOI should preach the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ clearly as explained in scriptures such as I Corinthians 15:1-6 and be expecting the physical bodily return of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is about as orthodox a statement as one could possibly make.

The real issue it seems is not theology rather it is methodology. We are not charismatic enough for the Charismatic, we are too inclusive for the Cessationists. It is not the issue of revelation that is a problem (IOI holds to the classical Protestant view that there is no "new" revelation about God - Sola Scriptura, while at the same time giving honor to tradition when it complies with Scripture), rather it is speaking in tongues that plagues us as the unity breaker.

To be honest, most of what I see that is called a "work of God" seems to be nothing more than flesh on parade. Yet, I cannot deny that God still does miracles and there are many gifts that God gives. Scripture is clear that we are not to forbid speaking in tongues, furthermore Scripture is clear in how tongues are (or not) to be used publicly. We teach Biblical exercise of all the gifts to the glory of God and the edification of the Church. If the Church is not edified then cease.

Rather than promotion of a denominational flavor IOI is committed to the teaching of sound doctrine and sound methodology according to Scripture. It may not be possible to walk this line, but our law is the Law of Love. We see our brothers and sisters in need and we are striving to have compassion them. We seek to aid them financially and practically, as well as theologically and methodologically.

May God grant us His grace as we seek to fulfill this labor of love in unity of the Holy Spirit.

The Mission of Compassion

"If you see your brother in need and have not compassion - the love of God does not live in you." (I John 3:17)

From what I understand there are Christians who are persecuted every day in this world. I personally know hundreds of believers in Ethiopia alone who need help. How is it that Christians in the most prosperous nation in the world and the richest congregations turn a blind eye to our suffering brethren? There should be a multitude of ministries that seek to help poor, imprisoned and naked Christians.

It often seems that if a mission is interested in the poor it is only to draw them in to their programs so that they can count heads. I don't doubt the sincerity of these organizations I only doubt their gospel and its mission. Feeding the poor becomes a "method of evangelizing" all the while we expect believers to "pull themselves up by their boot straps." It is wicked. For some it would seem to be better to stay a "seeker" and take advantage of "christian charity" rather than become a believer left to fend for yourself.

The good news is that many of these missions are actually preaching the death, burial and Resurrection of Jesus the Christ. I have witnessed churches who explode in numbers and zeal when they are first planted, and I see many who's lives are changed indeed. The problem is that in the years to come their zeal grows cold and soon they become much like the churches that planted them concerned with growing their programs rather than meeting the needs of those around them.

Conversely there are missions who have lost the Truth and have become nothing more than social aid agencies that help salve the conscience of wealth Westerners by feeding multitudes of poor. There are no requirements for aid or belonging, no Gospel message. Just "pure" charity with no strings attached.

What I am trying to say is that both of these views are extreme, and neither is truly bringing God's Kingdom to this earth.

I am growing increasingly confident that missions is something that must be done in community. I believe that Christ's Kingdom is being established on this planet, that His will is being done on Earth as it is in Heaven. This is happening as more and more congregations begin to truly care for each other and become known for their love rather than their buildings or programs. As believers are encouraged to work out their salvation through the practice of God given gifts the world sees the Light and tastes the Salt.

Who in America has not heard that "Jesus died for your sins"? But, how many in America see the Body of Christ (the Church) loving God by loving each other?

How many have heard the Gospel which is costly? How many have heard that it will cost them everything to follow Christ? The Gospel has become an event rather than total life transformation.

All too often our gospel is offensive, not because of Christ, but because it lacks Christ. Jesus died for you. Say this prayer, go to church, give your tithe (of course spend the rest on yourself), obey God and you will prosper! God just wants you to stop doing bad things. The only thing God requires is that you receive His free gift that He offers. "All you have to do is accept." -- It is a lie!

Jesus not only died for you He rose from the dead in a real body! He demands that we believe. He commands us to repent (a constant adjustment of our thoughts to conform with the will of God rather than doing what we want). What God requires is obedience!

The book of James (which many would remove from Scripture) states plainly that faith without works is dead. First John states clearly that we must "lay down our lives for the brethren". Jude warns of those who feasted with believers, yet only wanted gain for themselves. Acts tells of those who wanted to follow Christ in a effort to gain magical powers or miracles, only to find themselves being cut off. Colossians warns about false religion that is worked out in ascetic harshness, rather than overflowing love for the Church that comes from a relationship with the Triune God. Paul greeting the Thessalonians, who not only speak the Gospel, but their "faith goes out before them" -- even so in chapter 4 he says, "you have been taught by God to love one another." In Timothy we see command after command about humility and submission because of the great love of God -- the good "fight" is one of love, faith godliness, gentleness -- and a strict command from God for wealthy Christians to be "rich in good deeds, liberal in giving." These are not options they are commands!

Nowhere in Scripture are we commanded to build big buildings, provide sporting events or any of the plethora of activities that are associated with "church" (not that there is anything inherently wrong with these things). However, we are commanded repeatedly to be generous to poor believers. It is tragic that aiding believers is so low a priority that it is not even on the budget of many congregations.

(Not suggesting that we aid laziness or that we enable people to be leaches on the Church -- see following posts).

There simply is no way around it -- we will be judged according to our deeds! Without faith in Christ we are lost, and without works we have no faith. Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, "Only those who believe can obey, and only those who obey can believe."

It is not our message or our words that we are known by, it is our fruit. Our fruit should be love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. As unbelievers see the fruit they are amazed, as they hear the Gospel they are offended, and as God gives faith they are saved. Those who were outside are inside and become part of the Body of God's great love.

The Word of God

Many in the States would say that the Bible is the Word of God. Just one example of this belief about the Bible comes from a website of a Baptist fellowship.

"1. By "The Holy Bible" we mean that collection of sixty-six books, from Genesis to Revelation, which, as originally written does not only contain and convey the Word of God, but IS the very Word of God."

This organization is not alone in a statement like this -- it is very common among independent and fundamental Christians in America. In essence what they have accidental done with their words is to elevate the Bible to Deity - "The Bible IS the very Word of God."

One site I found (I believe it was God Tube.com) says, "The Bible is the living Word of God."

Now to be fair I do not believe that they actually mean what they say. I think what they are trying to say is that the Bible is more than a book, it is a perfect revelation of God to man in written form, and faithful for doctrine, etc. The scriptures are relevant to our lives today and God speaks through the pages into our lives. In other words they aren't liberals. The problem is that is not what they say exactly.

It is not only a belief among Baptist, but this belief can also be found among denominations such as the conservative Presbyterians. One Presbyterian pastor actual told me that the Bible is the Perfect which was to be revealed, and after its' coming would do away with knowledge, tongues, etc. Again, in essence this minister was saying (although I don't believe he means it this way) that the Bible is the second coming of Jesus. The Bible is the Word (God) incarnate (in flesh).

Now I want to be very clear that I do believe the Bible is the written record of God's words to us. The Bible is useful for doctrine, and all our beliefs and practice should be weighed against the whole counsel of scripture. However, Jesus is the Word of God that is revealed in the Bible. Jesus is the Sword of God that divides bone from marrow, and judges the hearts of man!

To say that the Bible IS the Word of God is like saying that the badge IS the policeman. Certainly the badge reveals to us that the person holding it is a policeman. The badge may tell us where the policeman comes from. It may tell us the limits of his authority (ie. federal or local). There are certain things implied for one who holds a badge, and certain things expected. The badge bears a certain amount of authority (a symbol that actually does/bears something). But, the badge is not the living policeman, nor is the badge the authority that it represents. The badge is only a symbol that communicates a great reality.

What fundamentalists are trying to do is to say that they believe the Bible is the final authority on every subject. They want you to know that they believe the Bible from "Genesis to Maps". They want you to know that they are REAL Christians. They want to convey that they try to live a holy life and obey the commands of God. They want you to know that they do not believe that God is still revealing information about Himself. Most of all they want you to know that they are not charismatic pentecostal and that there is not going to be any new prophets who make new revelations about God or His plan for mankind.

The problem is that most fundamentalist know very little of the Bible. There are many good Baptists who have memorized a plethora of proof texts and can argue them against the barrage of the best trained Jehovah's Witness proof texts. But, when it comes to a good understanding of the whole counsel of Scripture, or finding Christ revealed in the Old Testament, or even an elementary understanding of Church history the average fundamental evangelical Christian will have as poor an understanding of these things as the average Christian cultist.

An example of this poor understanding would be the belief that Jews are blessed and Arabs are cursed. This is a strong belief among fundamental evangelicals in America, and it is not found in Scripture. In fact the we find that God blessed Ishmael. We also see throughout the New Testament that "all of Israel is not Israel", and that Paul even desired the salvation of his fellow Jews so much that he was willing to die in their place -- however, it is "by faith that we (or anyone Jew or Gentile) are saved."

This same phenomenon is happening to the Gospel. Some ministers say that "it is all about the Gospel." In some sermons you might hear the word "Gospel" a dozen times, but you never actually hear the Gospel -- the death, burial and bodily Resurrection of the incarnate Word of God. In deed if you ask the average evangelical the question, "What is the Gospel?" You will get a strange variety of answers that includes, "The Bible. The Good News. It has to do with Jesus." Now, when you point them to I Corinthians 15:1-5 they will say, "Yeah, right the death, burial and Resurrection of Jesus."

If you watch much Christian television in America you will hear a lot about money, how to have a successful life, how God wants to bless you, the Crucifixion, the Gospel (although few explain what they are talking about with that phrase) and our need to pray the Sinner's Prayer. What you will not hear much of is public reading of Scripture (I don't think I have ever heard an entire chapter read on Christian radio or TV, much less an entire book of Scripture).

I believe we are perishing for lack of knowledge. Although we firmly believe the Bible is the word of God, we don't know it. Although we believe the Gospel, we cannot articulate it. Although we believe the worship of God is our most important duty, we cannot really tell you what it means to worship God. We have protested the Catholic system and all her creeds, only to replace them with inferior copies. At least the Nicene Creed does not elevate the Bible to being the fourth person of the Trinity, and the ancient creeds speak more of hope of the bodily Resurrection than some kind of secret evaporation of the faithful. There is no doubt that the Church in America is already left behind, we have exchanged our inheritance for a bowl of porridge. Rather than using the Bible to know about God we have practically elevated it to a god, and use it to divide and conquer.

Jesus says, "If any will come after me let them take up their cross and follow me." "You must eat my body and drink my blood."

In America we come to a table of empty calories - cute sayings, proof texts, guilt, prosperity, "Jesus will fix all your problems." No wonder so many leave the table hungry!

This is only partly the reason for why you see so many young people in America who are hungry for the ancient things of our faith. The modern methods depend of theological maxims and meeting of perceived needs. All the while what we desire is to know and be known by God. We desire the Man of salvation, not the plan of salvation. We want to see and know that He is God. Truly it is by hearing that we receive faith, but we must hear Christ not just proof texts. The Bible reveals Christ, and to quote a common phrase among fundamentalists, "It (salvation) is a relationship." As we hear about Christ revealed in Scripture and walk with Him in the community of His Bride (the Church) we should be moved to obedience to Him. If He is God then what does that mean to me, and how should I then live?

It was in the secret meetings in homes, the reading of books of Scripture, the breaking of bread and the giving of life that the early Church was formed and conformed to the image of Christ. It was their life and death together. It is the same today -- we long to be in community, we want to know Christ now in flesh and blood. We long to worship God in spirit and truth, not simply meet once a week for a presentation of a "worship experience." The ancient traditions involve our bodies - we sing, we pray, we stand, we listen, we smell, we eat, we drink, we kneel, we bow, we hold out our hands, we repeat, and then we go back out into the world and live a life of worship.

People Groups or People?

I am evangelical, but I think the emphesis on "church planting movements" and "people groups" focus is fairly anti-Christ. The IMB has a very short-sighted approach to missions that is driven by bad theology (or more precisely bad eschatology - ie. Jesus can't come back until the last people group has been "reached").

In my opinion the focus on people groups rather than people has been a detrimental approach that has caused us to look at the Church in America as a "resource" and the people in other countries as a "product". We don't have time to focus on an individual and his needs -- we are trying to open the door for Jesus to return. We have a "heart for the Oromo people", but we don't actually care about the well being of Tesguy and his family. I was actually told once in a IMB training session, "We can't waste time hunting birds -- we want the elephant."

The focus on evangelism rather than Christ has produced an emasculated Gospel that has reduced a holy God to a pathetic creator who has lost control and is now begging people to convert. Discipleship has been reduced to "evangelism" for the sake of more evangelism. Christ's demands on us have been reduced to "just receive the free gift."

No doubt some good work is being done by the IMB. There are missionaries, many who are known as disobedient, who are doing good works. But, as you can tell, I have very little impathy with their denominational approach and strategy. I hate secret agent missions (lying and decet to tell the "truth"), the "culturally sensitive gospel" (removing Christ - the stumbling block), the "western gospel" (Jesus needs you - you need to be like us - just believe and God will fix all your problems), and any other gospel than Christ crucified.

Christ has commanded us to repent, believe, and to take up our cross and follow Him. Many American mission agencies seem to have forgotten that the free grace we preach has come, and continues to come, at a very high price.

Giving

Notice the cell phone? Can't afford a Laundromat, but he has unlimited text messaging?

The leaves have fallen, so it is time to blog again. Chris has some awesome thoughts (to put it mildly) concerning worship on St Ambrose, Craig continues to explore art that glorifies God on StCelebart and the blog master Brian (aka Brain) makes me belly laugh on Emasculating Nickname. I am afraid that my blog continues to be the soapbox of a very opinionated man.

The church has waves of beggars and vagabonds that come and go. I actually found myself getting angry one Sunday at a beggar who endured the worship service in hopes of getting some cash for God knows what. We generally do give to all those who ask, but I am not so sure that giving to vagabonds is a right use of "God's money".

Now before you get all up in arms about my thoughts on the subject you must realize that I work full time in a ministry that exists to extend ourselves on behalf of our poor brothers and sisters in Ethiopia. You could say that my vocation is giving, or "redistribution of wealth." We support Christians in Ethiopia who are working for the Gospel. We support orphans and widows who have no other source of income. We support those who cannot support themselves.

When it comes to able bodied young men on the streets of America -- do we really owe them five bucks just because they have a sign that reads "Will work for food"?

Some young Christians will immediately throw a proof text my way and proclaim that Jesus clearly commands us to give. I agree. Jesus most certainly commands us to give, and even to be generous in giving. The problem is that Scripture also teaches that if a man does not work he should not eat. And there was that strange day when Jesus said to the multitude, "If you are hungry eat my body and drink my blood."

When Jesus perceived that most in the crowd wanted to see a miracle and get their bellies filled He rebuked them and basically chased them away. The Apostles were amazed and more than a bit concerned. Jesus turns to the disciples and asks if they are going to leave as well, and the response was, "You have the words of life, where shall we go?"

Many who knock on the doors of the Church are like those that Jesus chased away. The Church of God does not owe every lazy man his daily bread. But, the Church does have a debt -- we owe it to the wise man and the fool.

In Romans chapter one Paul speaks of the Gospel and the life changing power of Christ. He says that he is a debtor to both those who know the Gospel (to share in their faith) and to those who do not know the Gospel (that they might hear).

Certainly there are those who truly need financial help or a bag of groceries, but God forbid that we send away the needy with only some cash or bread! I fear that all too often young Christians relieve their guilt by giving cash to a beggar, but missing the opportunity to be a prophet. Maybe the beggar needed something more than money. God may send a lazy man to the doors of a church for the sole purpose of having someone speak into the man's life and rebuke his laziness. When a beggar comes to our door God may have sent him to have a radical life changing transformation. As believers we owe it to those who come to the Church looking for help. We owe them the Gospel!

Dependency

I have copied the article in its entirety and only added a few comments which are in red. I wanted to include the entire article to be fair.

DEPENDENCY ISSUES AND EXTENDING GOD’S KINGDOM
South America Region, International Mission Board, SBC

The concept of dependence is an important and vital part of the Christian life. We are taught in Scripture to be completely and totally dependent on God. Therefore, to foster a dependence on other things, even as they relate to Kingdom Extension, runs contrary to good missiological approaches and sound Scriptural principles. (Strange, no mention of the Church being like a body, which would imply interdependence on each other).

We are called, committed and accountable to go and to make disciples of the nations, even to the uttermost ends of the earth. Thankfully, many Southern Baptists and others have been and continue to be involved in that Kingdom task. The purpose of this position paper is to help avoid practices that are paternalistic (Application of the ideas that follow are not only "paternalistic" they are supremest, ie. "because we are greater...") and those that create dependency because such practices hinder Kingdom growth.

Some Relevant Scripture
We Baptists hold a strong belief that every individual is directly accountable to Almighty God to obey, worship and serve Him and that the Lord directs and empowers each individual to accomplish that which He has purposed. His church leadership is instructed "to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ." (Eph. 4:12&13) (I think it strange to divorce the individual from the "body of Christ," and apply a scripture that clearly is addressing "you all" and interpret the passage to be to the individual. Aren't Baptists supposed to be the ones who believe in the literal translation of Scripture?)

Jesus sent out the disciples to the lost sheep of Israel with authority and strong words of encouragement to preach the gospel, heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, and to drive out demons because they were to freely give of what they had freely received. The disciples were instructed not to take along any gold, or silver, or copper money and no luggage, because "the worker is worth his keep," (obviously meant to apply to the little dark skinned people, but not to SBC missionaries who live in fine homes, drive new SUVs and have servants) (Matt. 10:1-10) which idea is expressed in today’s mission phraseology as "the resources are in the harvest." (ie. "why should we use our money to help the poor?" HOW RIDICULOUS! Can you imagine Jesus saying, "heal thyself" or "I have come that you might find the life that you already have"?) Matthew 10:11-20 indicates that the disciples were not expected to have an altogether easy entrance into their mission world. Instead of ease, they were instructed to expect hardships of rejection, betrayal, arrests and trials (Unlike SBC missionaries to the Middle East who are taught to lie about their presence in the country and do everything possible to avoid any rejection). Jesus sent them out "like sheep among wolves." Jesus also gave similar instructions to the 72 whom he sent out later. (Luke 10:1-12) Later, in Luke 22:35-36, even when Jesus gave further instructions indicating the need for provisions of a money belt, a bag and a sword, these provisions were the simplest ones that allowed the worker to be sent out for ministry.
The Apostle Paul traveled throughout most of the known world of the Roman Empire, working, teaching, writing, preaching, suffering various trials and hardships, and witnessing, with almost no mention made of any financial or material aid for those receiving the witness. He did, of course, collect an offering for the faithful in Jerusalem who were suffering a lack of necessities, probably as a result of persecution. (So admittedly the Apostle Paul collected money for the poor in another country. Just a reminder - that is the thing that this article is preaching against.) Paul even worked to earn his own livelihood when the circumstances indicated. (Acts 18:3) The Apostle Paul in 1st Corinthians 11:16-33 describes in his own words what he suffered in order that others would hear the good news of salvation in Christ.

God was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world to himself, but, even though it was God the Father who was taking the initiative; it was Christ the Son who was required to pay the price of obedience that was set before him by God, the Father. (2 Cor. 5:18-21) (Any theologians have a problem with this statement, or is it just me?)

It is quite evident from the Biblical texts cited, and many others, that some of the principal ingredients for reaching the lost world were personal testimony of faith, sharing the gospel message, challenging the lost to believe, and paying the price of obedience along with some cautions about the role material resources would play. (Oh yes, quite evident in deed. Ahem. Now all you little people without Bible degrees take a seat and get ready for this great exposition).

Missionary Leadership Insight
The following insights were shared by Dr. Jerry Rankin in the September 1997 issue of The Commission magazine, a Southern Baptist International Mission Board publication, and they are echoed by many leaders in missions (who mostly live in really nice homes in America and jobs depend on American money given by American Christians; but are real experts on the sufferings of the developing world).

North Americans often see poverty and economic disparity overseas and, out of a compassionate desire to help, they wish to share of their own abundant resources. However, they are often less than fully aware of the dangers of a valid spiritual ministry (I think that is an interesting phrase, "valid spiritual ministry") degenerating into material assistance (assistance - that 's bad, right? Sounds too much like welfare. Sounds liberal or Communist or something wholly unAmerican), and how creating dependency can be detrimental to the health and growth of Kingdom efforts (Clearly the IMB are not Calvinists - at least we can be thankful for something. I mean we scoff at global warming because Man cannot destroy God's planet, but apparently individual men can harm God's Kingdom).

The International Mission Board is firmly committed to indigenous principles of missions in the work of evangelism and church planting overseas ("yes, yes firmly committed with words, lots of words, and programs, and Veggie Tales - but not money that might hurt somebody). The churches that result must have members who are growing to maturity in Christ, reaching the lost around them with the gospel, and seeing new congregations resulting from their efforts. "It is a mistake to try to accelerate growth by an infusion of financial aid to build churches and support pastors…Well intended financial assistance too often creates dependence and handicaps the initiative and faith essential for spontaneous growth (I don't know -- seems like it works in America. Funny how the Home Mission Board supports pastors, builds buildings, etc. here in the good ole USA, but when it comes to the darkies in Africa...)." When "Americans subsidize the work of churches and pastors on the mission field (Oh, I see the "mission field") potential growth is stalled because of a mind-set that it can‘t be done unless an overseas benefactor provides the funds." In such a case, the local congregation stops assuming responsibility before the Lord for the work and begins to rely more on the human benefactors to take care of them (I suppose that is why we pay our pastors here in America, because we want them to be dependant on us?). "People are deprived of growing in faith, learning to depend on God and discovering that He is sufficient for all their needs."

"Subsidy propagates a Western model of a church that sees a building and a paid pastor as essential rather than encouraging a reproducible biblical model of the church as gathered believers responsible to and for their own leadership and facilities." (Again a statement of "fact" that has no reference in reality. I personally know of churches that have been helped greatly by "western $" and they don't look or act "western". Furthermore, isn't this actually condemning the very churches that support the IMB? Don't all SBC churches in America see a building and a paid pastor as essential?)
Dr. Rankin concludes that the "Explosive growth ….around the world would never have occurred if a pattern of subsidy and dependence had been created. Unfortunately, well-intentioned help on many fields has handicapped long-term potential growth." (Hasn't most of the growth in the past 150 years been subsidized by the West? I don't get it. Has the Church grown or not? And if it has doesn't it disprove what Dr. Rankin is saying?)

Also, Dr. David Garrison has intensely studied church planting movements around the world and concludes that the use of outside resources to construct church buildings and to pay pastors’ salaries actually creates barriers to the realization of a church planting movement, because it saps local initiative. He goes on to state that these actions may produce some impressive short-term results, but they will also produce a long-term dead end. (I sorry I have no idea who this guy is, but I am willing to call him on the carpet here and ask for some statistics. Again we have a great learned man who states a "fact" based on his "intense study" and we are expected to believe him with no verification of what he says. Again, I can show you churches that are thriving and growing, and have actually been encouraged to give more when they learn that churches in America are willing to help them. How I wish there was a missions version of Snopes.com).
In his book, Church Planting Movements: How God Is Redeeming a Lost World, Garrison lists some serious obstacles to the blossoming of a church planting movement; in fact, he designates them as seven deadly sins (Oh, God forbid that we give to the poor! What a sin! -- WOE TO THOSE WHO CALL GOOD EVIL!) which create barriers against a church planting movement. Two of them are especially pertinent for the issue being treated here.

One he names the "The Devil’s Candy." "The Devil’s Candy is deceptive, because it refers to good things that have real value" but they can hinder reaching the lost with the gospel. In the mission setting, it is the use of outside money for paying pastors and church building construction. Garrison writes that when outside (Outside? That would be "para" like "para-church"? Like a mission organization? COME ON! It is ONE Church Dr. Garrison, there is NO "outside"!) funds are used to hire pastors and construct church buildings, there may be some quick results but sustainable growth will not be realized.

A second barrier for a church planting movement is what Garrison calls "Alien Abduction (Who’s in charge here?) He continues, "There are at least three ways that Church Planting Movements can succumb to alien abduction: 1) by forcing new believers to exchange their cultural forms for alien ones, 2) by creating a welfare state (there are those liberals again!) of foreign dependency, and 3) by injecting foreign elements into the life of the church that cannot be locally reproduced."

So, when is it "help that helps" and when is it "help that hurts?" That is the question that requires much prayer, study and application of the admonition of Jesus to the twelve and the seventy when he sent them out. "Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." (Matt. 10:16 KJV) How can one be wise in Kingdom service in a mission setting? By praying relevant questions through to constructive answers. (I know lets read I John 3. No, why don't we just pray and ask God to enlighten us.)

The following are some relevant prayer topics for anyone or a group committing to ministry on a mission field and who wishes to wisely invest time and resources.

Are we truly partners in Christ with local believers with commensurate responsibilities in this mission effort? (Well if your the IMB I don't know if you are a partner, but you surely are the boss).
Do our ministry and resources enhance discipleship growth and commitment? (Maybe you could have Dr Garrison do intensive study on the subject?)
Will our ministry result in disciples absolutely committed to reaching others? (Would it be a bad thing if our disciples were "absolutely committed" to worship of God?)
What would be the signs that dependency is being fostered? (Maybe no one having the intestinal fortitude to tell you and all your "resources" to take a hike?)
Who is really making the decisions about ministry here? (Some dude in Richmond, of course.)
Would the ministry continue if the outside, or foreign, resources were suddenly withdrawn? (If it is from God, and He wants it to continue).
Are we seeking the Lord’s leadership in praying alongside our national partners? (While I am sure that it must happen -- of all the mission sponsored prayer meetings I attended while an SBC missionary I can't remember one prayer meeting that involved nationals - that would have been far too risky.)
Do our ministry and resources foster more dependence upon the Lord or more dependence upon us?

Here are some additional questions that can be used volunteers:
Are we fostering a welfare state? (Again that liberal question. Is welfare that evil? My handicapped daughter gets "welfare" and thank God for it! I have no idea how she would get the medical care she needed if it weren't for "welfare". But, I'm white and work so obviously they don't mean me.)
Are we funding something that they can’t fund for themselves? (If they could fund it themselves why would we give money to pay for it??? Are you suggesting that we only give to those who have and not to those who do not have?)
If they can’t fund it themselves, is there a way it can be done that would be affordable to them/within their cultural and economic means?
If they can’t fund it themselves, are we leaving them with a financial burden to maintain it after we’re gone? So many Latino Baptists say they can’t afford to do missions because their funds are tied up in maintaining buildings, campgrounds, seminaries, and other American-spawned institutions. (Oh the poor Latinos who don't have enough good sense to sell their liabilities and turn them into assets.)

Conclusion (I'm tired of stating the obvious - I will leave you to come to your own conclusions).
The South America Region leadership, after study and prayer, has sensed a responsibility to lead missionaries and volunteers to seek ministries that have been proven to facilitate church planting movements and that avoid, as much as possible, the potential for creating dependency.
In light of the information presented in this position paper, missionaries and volunteers serving in the South America Region of the International Mission Board are strongly urged to study and pray through the issue of dependency in missions and what it means for ministry involvement. This is especially important as it relates to the construction of church buildings and subsidy, such as paying salaries of either national pastors or national missionaries, as well as purchasing or providing other material resources that are not available locally for starting churches. Because of the importance of these issues, we also ask for your understanding as we implement a guideline in the region, beginning in 2006, of no longer approving volunteer projects that involve the construction of church buildings, as well as no longer transferring funds through our offices that have as their designation the construction of church buildings, the paying of national pastor’s or national missionary’s salaries, or other financial support that creates dependency.
What are some construction alternatives for those volunteers who desire to do construction and/or provide other material resources, and, at the same time, avoid creating dependency? There are many ways that volunteers can be involved in construction projects that do not create dependency but rather impact lostness among communities and families with whom we are working. Examples of such projects are: Community Projects (School repair and renovation, Handicapped access, Stairs and Sidewalk installation, Clean water projects, Irrigation Systems, Public Bathrooms, Bus Stop Shelters, Playgrounds and Parks, Landscaping Projects) Single Family Dwellings (Painting, Roofing and repair, Cabinet building, Bathroom installation and repairs, Plumbing, Window installation and repairs, Electrical installation and repairs) Human Needs and Disaster Relief Projects. Such projects express the love of God and open doors and hearts to the gospel message.

Bibliography and Notes
Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are from the New International Version of the Bible.
Garrison, David. Church Planting Movements, booklet, also online at www.imb.org/CPM.
Garrison, David. Church Planting Movements: How God Is Redeeming a Lost World. Midlothian, VA: WIGTake Resources, 2004, pages 240-257 especially. See www.churchplantingmovements.com.
International Centre for Excellence in Leadership. Strategic Engagement of Volunteers, pages 76-96. Richmond: International Mission Board, SBC, 2000.
McQuilkin, Robertson. "Avoiding Dependency" in Mission Frontiers magazine, August 1999, p. 38.
Rankin, Jerry. "Help That Hurts" in The Commission magazine, September 1997.

Are you washed in the Blood?

"I saw the filthiness of sin and I also saw the efficacy of the Lord’s precious blood cleansing me and making me white as snow." --Wacthman Nee

There are over 250 references to "blood" in the Bible. Blood plays a significant role in the Christian faith. Animal blood provided a symbol and a true "covering" for sins. But, it is not animal blood that cleanses us or takes away our sins. "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins." (Hebrews 10:4)

According to Scripture the Blood of Christ accomplishes many things -- redemption, cleansing, covering, sanctification and more.

In Revelation 7:14 we see that our "robes" are washed in the Blood of the Lamb and made "white as snow." How strange it is to think that blood can make robes white. Yet, it is a spiritual message.

Our works are our "robes," and even the very best of man is all together vanity. Our works are tainted by the flesh and sin. Our righteousness is filthy. But, the Blood of Christ washes us as we participate in His sacrifice. Our hands have His blood on them.

He washes our works and makes them white as snow. He has redeemed not only our souls, but our very existence. He did not simply wash our hearts, He has given us new hearts. He has given us His Spirit to live within us. He has taken a dead thing and given it life. He has made those who only knew darkness and decay to be the light and salt.

By the scheduling of His precious Blood Christ accomplished our salvation. The blood of Christ is an offense to some, and a stumbling block to many. The Blood of Christ is central to the Gospel. For those who believe it is the display and action of the power of God unto salvation. Praise God for the Blood of Christ!

"Woman's hand washed in blood" (Art.com)

Quote of the Weak - Proselytize

"Every attempt to impose the gospel by force, to run after people and proselytize them, to use our own resources to arrange the salvation of other people, is both futile and dangerous."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship

Taken out of context one might accuse Bonhoeffer of being "unevangelical." This would be a huge mistake.

Bonhoeffer saw clearly that modern methods of evangelism were dangerous because they cheapen the gospel, and present a god that is incapable of accomplishing His will. The begging, powerless and effeminate Jesus wants to save you, if you will only ask him to...
Bonhoeffer knew the all powerful, sovereign Creator of the Universe that commands all men everywhere to believe and repent. He boldly proclaimed the Gospel and knew that God was the only faith giver. He knew that men cannot believe unless God performs a miracle at the hearing of the Word. He knew too that there must be a preacher to proclaim the Gospel. With his very life Bonhoeffer paid the cost of his discipleship (he died in a Nazi concentration camp). At the end of his life it was said of him by a fellow non-Christian prisoner, "I never knew a man who's God was so real to him."

The Word of God

He That is of God Hears God's Words
by James Tissot (Art.com)

Never one to shy away from controversy -- my question today is what (or who) is the Word of God?

My brothers at the largest Baptist church in Memphis have erected a 20' statue of the Bible in the foyer of the church. These same brothers would rightly proclaim that a statue of Mary in the church at Fatima, Portugal is an idol. However, just like the faithful Portuguese Catholic that erected the statue of Mary they too are blind to the fact that they have made an idol of the Bible. It is Bibliolotry.

Growing up Baptist I was taught that the Bible is the Word of God. Many proof texts support this claim (and for regular readers of the Bishop's Beard you know how I loath proof texts). However, a reading of many of these proof texts in their context prove that this proclamation is not correct. Hebrews 4:12 was a memory verse in VBS (Vacation Bible School) and a favorite verse to find at Bible "Sword" Drills. "For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edge sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, as is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." Sounds like the Bible is a powerful sword, unless you read this same verse in its context and see that the entire passage is about Christ, not the Bible. Because Jesus is the Word of God He is also the Great High Priest that discerns the thoughts and intents of the heart. Romans 8 proclaims that the Spirit of God is the One who searches hearts and makes intercession for us.

After preaching at a Presbyterian church I was gently rebuked for preaching the hope of seeing Christ "face to face" as though it was a future event. I had made reference to I Corinthians 13 where our hope of Resurrection ("...when that which is perfect has come...") is hope for a physical event where we will know Christ as intimately as He now knows us. I was told that the "Perfect" in this passage is the Bible, which has already come so that we can know Christ through His word. Knowledge, tongues and prophesy have all been done away with because we now have the Bible. The problem that I have with this interpretation (other than the fact that it is wrong) is that the Bible does not contain every word of Christ (John 21:25), and I don't know how many hairs He has on His head, much less can I see His face or look into His eyes. The Christian hope is that we will be physically resurrected and we will know God like He knows us.

I understand what the fundamentalist is trying to do when he says that the Bible is the word of God and the final authority for life and faith. He is trying to distance himself from the charismatic chaos of modern times and the "Christian" cults who have extra Biblical "scripture" and anti-Christ "revelation". The problem is that interpretation of Scripture can vary greatly, so how then is the Bible the "Final Authority?"

I am always looking for balance. I think the balance in this issue is simply that we must look to the whole counsel of Scripture, which contains the written revelation of the Word of God, for instruction in life and faith. Certainly the Bible is the bench mark by which all revelation, prophesy and tongues should be judged. The Bible is a way to know about God. The Apostles gave us timeless instruction in how we should live. The prophets foretold Christ, and Christ revealed the Father to us. Ultimately it is by faith that we know Him, and His Spirit lives within us aiding us as we struggle to know, understand and comprehend the depth, width and height of His love.

There is no doubt that the Bible contains the words of God. But, Jesus IS the Word of God.

Do Symbols Matter?

I love the scene in Indiana Jones and the last Crusade where the "cup of Christ" is revealed as a plain simple common goblet. While the magic that is attached to the goblet is the fantasy of Hollywood the image of simplicity makes up for it.

In one sense symbols are nothing. Bread is nothing, wine is nothing and water is nothing. These are simple elements of life. However, in the right setting and with the right words these elements are transformed into symbols of something much greater.

A red light in a window can symbolize a house of ill repute. A red light in a traffic signal is a symbol that says "stop", and bears the full weight of the law if it is disobeyed. Both are just red lights. One advertises a message and identifies a place, the other bears authority and commands respect as it stands in the place of the reality.

How we deal with symbols in the church is important. Imagine a traffic light with three green globes, or one with red on the bottom and green on the top. If it matters how lights are handled it certainly matters how we handle symbols in the church.

Using grape flavored drink and yeast bread in communion may not be sinful, but it does hinder the symbol. Showering a baby may be true baptism, but the picture is blurred. An abusive husband may indeed be a husband, but he is a false example of Christ.

I am becoming convinced that the churches that present the purest symbols are the churches that present the truest picture of Christ. I am not advocating finery or pomp. I am advocating simple obedience.

In this Christmas season let us review our symbols and strive for a true presentation of Christ.

Photo from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

The Spititual Rapist

With his six guns ablaze the revivalist crushes all in his wake.

I am angry today, but I think it might be righteous anger.

I have a friend whose son was the victim of spiritual abuse. This child believes the Gospel and has born fruit of that faith as only a child can do.

Like so many others the child has been faced with questions, the revivalist might call "doubt." Surely the boy has become aware of sin and questions how it is that a child of God can be so bad. So the spiritual rapist aims for the "kill" and tries to force the child to "nail it down!"

The questions pour forth from the pulpit and guilt is heaped upon guilt. "Are you sure that you are sure? Did you say that prayer with your whole heart? Do you remember the date and time? Have you been truly converted? Do you FEEL saved?" And the final blow, "If you died tonight, do you know where you would go? Heaven or HELL?!!"

The answer, according to the spiritual rapist, is a rapturous moment in time that a decision is made from the heart and the child "asks Jesus into his heart" and "makes" him Lord and Savior.

How far from Biblical salvation we have fallen.

How sad it is that we allow men to come into our evangelical churches and abuse our children and the weak. How sad it is that we have come to the place in the history of the Church that we think that preying on souls is considered true spirituality.

If you just believe enough. If you just get the formula correct. If you "place your faith" in Jesus. If you say it the right way, or have the correct experience. Nothing more than existential neo-gnosticism.

The invitation of Christ is not to walk an aisle and make a bunch of promises. His invitation is not to "true conversion" or being "born-again." How can a man decide to be born at all?

Is salvation an event? The historic Christian faith has been understood as more a picture of a journey or race rather than an event. We begin by faith and walk by faith; in the end we are saved if we continue in the faith.

The command of Christ is to believe and repent. The invitation of Christ is simply, "Come and follow me." It is not possible that man could believe without the gift of faith from God. It is not possible that my heart and mind could be changed or that I could be born again unless God creates a new creature. Our salvation is the work of God. We hear and believe, and it is by hearing that faith comes.

When our children or weak ones doubt, we should edify them by encouragement to continue to believe and obey Christ. As Bonhoeffer said, "Only those who believe can obey, and only those who obey can believe." Those who are truly spiritual should feed the hungry ones, and warn the ones in danger.

Enough of the spiritual abuse of our weak ones! May the shepherds of Christ's Church be good shepherds -- feed and guard the sheep.

What Americans believe about God

By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published November 12, 2006

The vast majority of Americans believe in God. But in the land of the free, ideas about the more personal nature of God can be subject to some interpretation. (In this survey traditional Protestants have been distinguished from Evangelical "Born-Again" Christians).

Only 1 percent of Americans overall, for example, think God is female, according to a wide-ranging Harris poll of 2,010 adults. Among men, Protestant and Born-Again Christian respondents, the number was 0 percent; among women and Catholics it was 1 percent; among Jews, 7 percent.

More than a third -- 36 percent -- said God was male. More women than men thought God was male, 39 percent to 34 percent, respectively (interesting that more American women than men consider Biblical language such as "Father" accurate). More than half of Born-Again Christians agreed, along with about 47 percent of the Protestants and Catholics. Other responses were mixed. Overall, 37 percent said God was neither male nor female. Ten percent said God was both male and female, while 17 percent were not entirely sure what they believed.

Does God look like Michelangelo's vision on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel? Maybe. The survey showed that 9 percent said God appeared "like a human with a face, body, arms, legs, eyes," though the percentage was slightly higher -- 13 percent -- among Protestants, but just 1 percent among Jews.

More people -- 41 percent-- were comfortable with the idea that God is a "spirit or power that can take on human form, but is not inherently human." The sentiment was highest among Born-Again Christians, with 60 percent agreeing with the statement (What happened to the doctrine - Fully God and Fully Man?). More than a quarter of Americans overall say God is "a spirit or power that does not take human form," a belief shared by 49 percent of Jewish respondents.

Beliefs about God's involvement in events on Earth also varies. Twenty-seven percent of Catholics said God "controls what happens on Earth," compared with 41 percent among Protestants and 57 percent among Born-Agains. Forty-four percent said God "observes but does not control" what happens here. That figure rises to 58 percent among Catholics, but falls to 37 percent among Born-Agains.

A slim majority of Americans -- 51 percent -- believe Christians, Jews and Muslims "worship the same God," the poll found. That idea is shared by 63 percent of Catholics, about 48 percent of Protestants and Jews and 34 percent of Born-Agains. Almost a third overall said the three faiths do not worship the same God, and 16 percent were unsure. (Jesus said about Himself, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man comes to the Father except through me." John 14:6)

Intensity of belief also varies among faiths and political parties. Overall, 73 percent of Americans believe in God; the numbers are 97 percent among Born-Agains, 90 percent among Protestants, 84 percent among Catholics, 64 percent among Jews, 83 percent among Republicans and 72 percent among Democrats.

Are Americans "absolutely certain" there is a God? Born-Agains are the most adamant, with 93 percent agreeing with the statement (and how did that 7% become "born-again" and not believe in God???), followed by 76 percent of Protestants, 64 percent of Catholics and 30 percent of Jews. Overall, 6 percent are "absolutely certain" there is no God.

Almost half of Americans overall -- 46 percent -- attend church a few times a year, 35 percent go once a month and a quarter go every week or more often.

The survey was conducted Oct. 4-10 and has a margin of error of two percentage points.

Creation of Adam (Detail) Michelangelo - Art.com