Brotherly Love

  I read on article last night that disturbed me greatly.  The article was about a book called "TORN: Rescuing the Gospel from the Gays-vs.-Christians Debate".  The premise of the book is that you can be both a practicing homosexual and a practicing Christian.  In fact the article did help me to understand the exegetical position that seems to reconcile the lifestyles by focusing on Jesus' teaching about love over the commands for sexual purity.

  The author of the book goes into detail about how he realized he born gay.  He was at a Christian concert with a date (female) and he began to be "attracted" to a male he saw there.  He had been battling homosexual tendencies - even trying to date girls.  However, that one event seemed to solidify in his mind that he was indeed gay, and he began a journey to reconcile his Christianity with the desire to have sex with a man.  He goes on in the book to basically dismantle Scriptural teaching about homosexuality by focusing on "committed loving relationship".

  I never cease to be amazed at how people can take a clear teaching from the Bible and proclaim the very opposite using the Bible.  Jehovah's Witnesses, for example, "prove" that Jesus is not God using the very Bible that proclaims Christ's deity.  They simply avoid the many references to Jesus being equal with God and focus on a few verses that seem to back their proposition.  In this case the author of the book takes Romans 1 and "proves" his case that what God desires is committed loving relationships - gay or straight.  So clearly deception, and so clearly he has become one of the ones mentioned in Romans 1:32.

  If you do not believe Jesus is God why would you call yourself a Christian?  If you continue to have gay sex why do you still want to call yourself a committed Christian?

  If we took the example of other sexual perversion and applied the same standards we could justify adultery, bestiality and pedophilia.  It is absurd.

  My experience in Ethiopia has taught me alot about male relationships.  Homosexuality can be found in Ethiopia no doubt.  However, men are free to express physical affection toward each other without it being sexual.  From a very early age boys walk hand in hand and sit with their arms around each other.  We see this same behavior in very masculine situations such as the American football field, but only the most depraved would imply sexual connotations to these situations.

  In the West we are assailed with sexual imagery from birth, and even products such as bacon are sold with "sex appeal".  No wonder our thoughts about perversion and immorality are askew.

   At an early age I felt attraction to certain men.  I was drawn to men who were godly in their behavior.  I was drawn to men who were interested in the things I was interested in.  At the same time I was attracted to the opposite sex, but for wholly different reasons.  Eventually I was attracted to a godly young lady that was interested in many of the things I was interested in - she became my wife.  Many of the men I was attracted to became my mentors.  The godly influences won out over those who only sought to take advantage of me.

  I believe that men are "naturally" attracted to other men, but it is sin that twist this attraction until it developed into perverted sexual desire.  Indeed this is the clear teaching of Romans 1.  People who practice sin (which begins in our thought life) were given over to "uncleanness".  I don't believe young men are born desiring anal sex, I do believe boys are born with a desire for intimacy and relationships.  When this "natural" desire for intimacy is not found in healthy God honoring relationships a counterfeit can be found.

  Many young men that I have counseled who are struggling with same sex attraction began their struggle when their father did not give them the love and affection they desired.  The same is true for many young women who struggle sexually.  Not all who struggle with homosexuality have poor, bad or absent fathers - it just seems to be common.  Many of the ones I have counseled also had an older male who paid them attention and then took advantage of them.  The desire for a father's love and affection was counterfeited by sexual attention.

  Ultimately it is our desire for intimacy with God that is the driving force for many of our relationships in life.  If those relationships are lived out in obedience to Scripture and the commands of Christ we will find that they benefit us spiritually.  A godly marriage is sacramental and aids us in our relationship with God.  A bad marriage can hinder us, and draw our attentions away from God.  A good spiritual brother can sharpen me like iron sharpens iron.  A bad relationship can draw me away and hinder intimacy with God.  Any time we place someone or some desire before God we had become idol worshipers.  We fly in the face of God and proclaim that we know what is best and most fulfilling.

  Men can also have inordinate relationships of a wholly mental sort.  Our desire for intimacy with God can be given over to spiritual masters and gurus.  We can begin to follow people or personalities rather than develop intimacy with God.  It is easier to follow a great Bible teacher rather than to have an intimate relationship with the God who knows how many hairs I have on my head.  Hero worship may be more appealing than intimacy with the God that demands our full allegiance and obedience.

  Romans 1 says that men exchanged worship of the Creator for worship and service of the creature.  Men served their own bodies and feed their lusts rather than submitting to God's "natural" design and purpose for humanity.  We were created for intimacy with God, not simply to serve the desires of our flesh.

  How I wish that I could roll back time to those pivotal moments in a young man's life when he first questions, "Am I gay?"  Young man - you are not gay if you do not feed those desires and give life to them, but rather put those desires to death!  You are not a drunk if you never get drunk!  Your are not an adulterer if you will stop lusting after those who are not your own!  Young man, what you need is a deep and committed relationship with your Creator!

  I am convinced that in many cases the godly attention of an older man could rescue the young questioner from a lifetime of sexual struggle and perversion.   Where are the godly older men who will become mentors to those wondering boys?  Where are the men who will not take advantage of the young, but rather build them up in godliness?  Where are the brothers who will love the young ones by commending them to godliness rather than feeding their flesh desires?

  May God help us to truly love him and each other by obeying His Word and being doers of it.

Should I get a tattoo?

I would like to begin by saying that I do not intend to offend, pass judgement or condemn anyone. My purpose is simply to look at the issue of Christians trying to decide on the issue of getting tattoos, and to help young believers think through the issues.

I have read a lot of opinion on the issue and the debates about Levitical law. Both sides seem to make many good arguments, but there is apparently no consensus on the Old Testament Biblical prohibition. Generally most people end up saying something like, "Christians are not 'under' the law..." and the response is generally, "well then is murder still wrong?" These type of arguments don't really get to the heart of the matter.

Indeed it is the heart where Christ's work is done and God's concern for the individual seems to be focused. The New Testament teaching on circumcision is clearly about God's concern for our heart. The Apostles agreed that Gentile believers be prohibited from eating blood and sexual immorality (both of which are Levitical laws, btw), and that Gentiles not be burdened with the extent of ceremonial law. The heart is God's concern, and a transformed heart will change behavior.

But, does the New Testament have anything to say about tattoos? The Apostle Paul goes to great lengths to command Gentile (and Jewish) believers that they should do everything within their power not to live "as the pagans do". Any behavior or meal that is associated with pagan behavior should be avoided. Christians should be know by the "Banner of Love". We should be "marked" with love. In other words, Pagans display their gods in carvings of stone, wood and skins -- Christians display our God through deeds of love and concern for our brothers. We should be known for our love.

This led me to investigate WHY many young Christians want tattoos. Obviously there are many reasons. One of the main reasons I hear is, "To witness Christ to others" or "so everyone will know I am a Christian". Kind of the Evangelical trump card - EVANGELISM.

One blogger said of his reasons for getting a tattoo, "To me it was the sense of taking control and doing what I want regardless of what anybody said or thought... Really what I think is it all boils down to is either you have the nerve to have ink carved into your body for life... That is why all of us with tattoos have a sense of brotherhood. Because each one of us knows the pain we went through for something we love (tattooing)."

So there we have it. "Taking control and doing what I want to do regardless of what anybody said or thought." As Christians we are to be intensely concerned with what others think, especially in regards to the perception of sinful behavior (real or imagined). Also, we are to be controlled by the Holy Spirit, not our fleshly desires.

While the Old Testament prohibition against tattoos might be up for debate I think it is clear that our society still views tattoos as "rebellious" and "to Hell with your opinion of me". A new term has evolved called "tattoo lifestyle" with magazines focusing on this evolving people group. (BTW, many Internet filters will block 'Tattoo Lifestyle' sights as "R rated"). I wonder how long it will be until people begin saying, concerning their desire to be tattooed, "I was born this way."

In conclusion I think the real issue concerns your heart. Why do you want a tattoo? Are you at all concerned about offending people for the sake of your freedom? Do you seriously want to do what pleases God, or what pleases you?

If you are truly concerned about lost souls or being identified with Christ then I would suggest a little soul searching. Is a tattoo glorifying to God? Will it offend others around you? Will it cause others to stumble?

The Apostle Paul put it this way, "So whatever you eat, drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God -- even as I try to please everybody in every way. For I am not seeking my own good, but the good of many, so that they may be saved." (I Corinthians 10:31-33)

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!

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.

Quote of the Weak -- Islam

Egyptian sultan kills Christian who refuse to convert to Islam (Art.Com)

"I think it is interesting. After 9-11 your politicians, your news media and your scholars suddenly become experts on Islam. They say, 'Islam is peaceful religion.' I think this interesting because your politicians, your news media and your scholars obviously not read the Koran. But, somehow they are experts."

"Husen", a former Islamic teacher who converted to Christ and was severely tortured by Islamic religious police

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.

Why some hate the Reformation Movement

What, you don't know?

There is a "movement" among Baptists these days. I think the word movement should indicate that there is a potential error afoot. Most movements seem to unintentionally breed cultish behavior by focusing too much on a particular teaching or passage. Even what may be called "good movements" such as the Great Awakening promoted a pendulum swing in the other direction. Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons and every other Christian cult that I know of was the result of or a reaction to a "movement."

You will notice that I have avoided the word "revival." Revival carries with it too much baggage and the picture of a mad man in a three piece suit pounding a pulpit. Revival also implies a connection with our emotions. So, I believe most people prefer to call what is happening a movement. However, this term is not without its connotations as well.

The charismatic movement has birthed a great number of heretics as the emphasis has been on emotions, feelings, prophesy, manifestations and revelation. Not all charismatics are heretics, mind you. This movement affected Baptists in that many churches shifted to a more emotional worship style and preaching that was pointed at the perceived needs of the congregation (salvation and personal happiness) which is now termed "man-centered preaching." Evangelism focused less on the work of God and more on the "decision" of the man.

Today there is a growing minority among Baptists that are reacting to the emphasis on emotion by appealing to reformation theology. Reformation theology being the theology that resulted (or was recovered) in the reformation movements of the 1500s in Europe. Luther, Calvin and many others had restored the doctrines of the Church Fathers, and they focused heavily on the doctrines of grace, election, predestination and salvation. Today's reformist would claim that they are seeking "God-centered preaching."

Luther was a monk that never felt saved. He tried with all his might to be saved and it was not until he understood that the "just shall live by faith" that he was freed from the bondage of a works-based salvation. He was free indeed. His was not a passionless salvation, but rather one that was worked out in fear and trembling.

Calvin seems to have been much more intellectual and scholarly in his approach (Not that Luther was a dope, he did translate the entire Bible into German. He was just more "earthy.") Both men gloried in the doctrines of grace concerning salvation and the fact that God is the one who elects to save according to His will. It is God who gives faith and God who has predestined those who receive faith to be conformed to the image of Christ.

While many may think that it is election or predestination that causes fellow believers to hate the Reformation Movement, I would submit that it is neither. I have come to the conclusion that the movement is hated because it is imbalanced.

When I first read the passages (in a college Bible study) in Romans that concern God's election, I was offended. I had grown up with an imblanced view that I had saved myself. "I was sinking deep in sin far from the peaceful shore..." But, if the Apostle Paul was right I was not sinking -- I was "DEAD in sins and trespasses." I was not seeking God, but He was seeking me. The offense was replaced with joy and a sureness that I had never known concerning my own salvation. It was not my work, rather it was the work of God. It was not MY faith, nor my sincere prayer that saved me. It was faith that God gave me regardless of my emotion, sincerity or manifestations.

My zeal for good theology sent me gorging on words about God. The more I knew the more proud and arrogant I became. I began to hate the Church in America. I came to see most churches in America as fulfillments of the prophesy concerning Laodacea (although they were rich and had need of nothing they were poor, blind, miserable and naked). I gloried in the wrath of God that was being stored up for the sons of disobedience. I gloried that I was chosen before the foundations of the World. I hated the ignorant preachers who spent more time beating me up for not tithing or being a good person than speaking about Christ.

I was becoming full of good theology. I was so full that I could not eat another bite. The sweetness of God's love had become repulsive to me as I had feasted on His glory, wrath and election. Some years later, God brought me to a point of starvation.

The day that I was told that my daughter had brain damage all of my good theology flew right out the window. "God is without body, parts or passions." "God does everything for His own glory." Extra Biblical theological statements and maxims were useless to me. All I knew was the Gospel, and I wanted God to speak to me. I cried and moaned for hours. Quote Calvin to me, are you kidding me? God had deformed my child for His own egocentric glory?!? I didn't want to hear Calvin, Luther or Billy Graham for that matter. I had to hear from God Himself. I was not hungry; I was famished.

"Do you hate your daughter?"

"No, God. Maybe I am angry with you, but how could I hate her?"

"Then why do you hate my Church? You say you love me, but you hate my Bride. Therefore, my love does not live in you."

That word was so bitter, but God's bitter word was sweet to a starving man.

Scripture does not teach us that God so desired to glorify Himself that He sent Jesus. On the contrary His word teaches us that "God so LOVED the world that He gave His only begotten Son." God's nature is love. He is LOVE. Of course His love brings Him glory; everything He does is glorious. But God is a God of passion and love. This passionate God loved us so much that He took on flesh, humbled Himself and became a man. He disrobed His glory and manifest His very nature of Love by submitting to death on a cross. His love and power resurrected the dead body of Christ, and it is by His love that He gives faith and His Spirit to men, and conforms them to His image. It is because of His great love that He has done this. It is because of His great love that He has maimed my daughter's body and afflicted us with trials. He is working all things together for the good of them that love Him and are called according to His good purposes.

I fear God. I mean shaking in my shoes terrified. I fear Him because of His great love. He is the Lion of Judah that tears us to pieces. He is also the Lamb of God that loves us with a jealous and divine passion. He loves us so much that we share in the sufferings of Christ so that we might be more than converted -- we might be made new creatures and conformed to His glorious image.

We have been commanded to make disciples. We have been commanded to teach and reprove. But the greatest commandment is to love God and our neighbor as ourselves. If love is our motivation (as I believe it is God's), then everything that we do will be to the glory of God.

Why do some people hate the reformation movement? While it is full of zeal for good theology, it is often void of God's love, the love He has for Christ's body (His bride, the Church) and His passion that is all consuming.

We will empower no leaders before their time.

Why is it that we never hear of a Christian church or school that has as its motto, "Training the Followers of Tomorrow!" Where are all the followers going to come from for all the leaders we are training?

Jesus never said, "Follow me and I will make you leaders of men." His command was to "follow me" and the promise was that He would make the followers to be "fishers of men." Furthermore, in the Church the leaders are called "apostles," "shepherds," "elders" and "overseers" instead of "lords," "bosses" and "tyrants." Authority is vastly different than our concept of leadership. To be an authority in the Church is to be a "servant to all." The authorities in the Church are commanded to watch over, love, care for, teach, reprove and instruct. The only instruction that seems to indicate leadership is by example and lifestyle.

Spiritual authority is voluntarily exercised and voluntarily received. We have spiritual authorities for our good and our protection. When our authorities fail, we suffer; when we fail to follow, we suffer.

What is seen as a "silly rule" or "stupid paperwork" is actually a blessing from God. The fact that the IRS has authority over me to make me report the expenses of the ministry makes me a better bookkeeper and hopefully, a better spender of the funds entrusted to me.

As a young Christian I was zealous and put into leadership as a teenager. I entered college with a plan to continue being the leader and continued to be a minister on church staff. It took me a decade to have the pride beaten out of me that was the result of too much authority too fast. There are few realms in the world where a young inexperienced man, whose philosophy has not been proven, can become the leader. Can you imagine graduating college and immediately becoming the president of a bank? I don't care how much "knowledge" you have, you have not proven it. You have not "earned" it. And you have not gained the experience that transforms knowledge into wisdom.

I have been guilty of promoting younger brothers to positions of power (all be it small) before their time. This can lead to pride and actually harm my brother that I am trying to help. Walton says, "help is from Hell." What we need is a radical (paradigm if you will) shift in our thinking. We are not "helped" by God; we are saved by God. What He has done is a radical new creation. He has turned the world upside down and established the things that were not. We were DEAD in an ocean of sin (not swimming just fine, thank you very much).

There is a strong temptation in the missions world to send as many young Christians overseas as we can possibly facilitate. Why do we continue to think that God thinks the way we think? Why do we think that God has such a sense of urgency that He would negate His own Word (not to put a novice in authority, lest he become conceited and fall into the snare of the devil) and lead us to put a novice in authority? If Jesus Christ Himself was not ready for public ministry until He was about 30, then who are we to think that we are ready at 21?

Like a fine wine that is perfected through patience, we should empower no leaders before their time.