AntleHope

Journey Into The Unknown, part 11

2012-02-18T19:45:00.000-07:00

In my last post I said that Cherry Creek PresbyterianChurch (CCPC) satisfies the five criteria listed in part 6 for what we aresearching for in a new church home. In almost every significant area there isvery little difference between Baptists and Presbyterians.

The one major difference is with baptism. I’ll explainthe Baptist position later as I outline my own journey (of another kind)regarding baptism.

Presbyterians, like a number of other denominations,baptize infants. This rite is seen as welcoming the child into the covenantrelationship of the church. It is compared to circumcision as the covenantalrite of inclusion in the Old Testament.

Since this baptism is not seen as a means of salvation,the focus is on the faith and commitment of the parents and the church to raisethe child in the knowledge of the Lord. Then later as the child grows, he orshe will hopefully profess a personal faith in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.

At CCPC I understand that sometimes by parental choice theinfant is not “baptized” but the rite is instead referred to as a “dedication”and is performed without water. In these cases also, the focus is on the faithof the parents and their desire to raise the child in the church so eventuallyhe or she will make an individual profession of faith in Christ. This“dedication” is no different from what is done in many Baptist churches.

This is where the churches affiliated with the Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC)helpfully clarify matters for Christians coming from other denominations. The beliefsshared by churches in the EPC focus on what they call “TheEssentials”. Built on the foundational belief that theBible is the Word of God, the seven Essentials are those core Christian beliefsthat the Church has taught for 2,000 years—the ones that are critical if one isto meet the traditional criteria for acceptance into the Christian Church.

Knowing that the various denominations within theworldwide Church differ on some matters, the EPC distinguishes the Essentialsfrom “non-essentials”. One of those “non-essentials” is baptism—how it isadministered (i.e. by immersion, pouring, or sprinkling) and when it isadministered (in infancy or later when the believer makes a personal professionof faith). The point there is that since baptism is not necessary forsalvation, good Christian people can differ about the particulars of baptismand still serve together as brothers and sisters in Christ.

I will outline my own personal journey of understandingabout baptism in the next post. For now, I can join a church like CCPC that isdefinitely not a Baptist church with respect to its practice of baptism(although a youth or adult who accepts Christ will be baptized and may requestbaptism by immersion) and be confident that I am not sacrificing an “essential”doctrine.

Journey Into The Unknown, part 10

2012-02-06T18:14:00.000-07:00

This journey hasbeen “into the unknown” because when we felt it necessary to leave our formerchurch home, we didn’t know where the Lord would lead us. Not being an activechurch member is not an option. So, we have sought the Lord’s leadership in findinga place where we could be at home and become involved.

Sunday’sexperience was a confirmation that the place we’ve been considering is where wewill join.

In part 6 of thisJourney blog, I outlined the 5 things I was looking for in a church. This onemeets all those criteria—it just doesn’t have the name Baptist attached to it.

The music wassuperb, and sitting close to the choir and singing the hymns in a sanctuary thathas great acoustics for music literally gave me goose bumps. It is definitelythe “TheLanguage of Music” that speaks to me.

Through thesermon, the Lord spoke to me about what He expects of me. I took notes, andnotice that someone in front of me was taking notes as well. I like exegeticalsermons. They provide a superb opportunity to dig into the scripture andunderstand what God said to His people then and to us now.

Then, in theSunday School hour, we attended the first of five in a series of their newmember classes. Looking over the material that will be covered, I am excited tobecome a member of a church where both the church’s doctrines and its opennessabout salvation by grace through faith are openly taught.

If someone whodoesn’t believe the core doctrines of Christianity and who has never had a timewhen they personally accepted Jesus as Savior and Lord goes through theseclasses, they will either have a conversion experience or they will decide thischurch is not for them.

One resource thatis used in the class is “Steps To Peace With God” from the Billy GrahamEvangelistic Association. The four steps outlined in this booklet are similarto “The 4 Spiritual Laws” that Campus Crusade for Christ uses. The first “law”or “step” is “God loves you and wants you to experience peace and life—abundantand eternal.” That is a critical placeto start sharing the Gospel, but it’s only one of four steps.

What frustratedme in another church was that they wanted to stop there—just tell people thatGod loves them—leaving out everything about the need for grace (because we aresinners) and God’s provision of grace (the sacrificial death and resurrectionof Jesus Christ), and the need to appropriate that grace (by personallyaccepting the gift God offers in Jesus).

Grace is free,but costly (just ask Bonhoeffer—oh sorry, you can’t ask him. He was martyredfor his faith.)

To tell peoplethat all that is needed is love and that to be a Christian is just to “followJesus” does people a disservice. They need to hear the truth of the gospel,including the parts where repentance, accepting Christ as Savior, andcommitting one’s life to Christ are required.

Cherry CreekPresbyterian Church meets the 5 requirements I posted in part 6 of this series.We’ll gladly worship and serve with them in the Lord’s Kingdom.

Journey Into The Unknown, part 9

2012-01-22T22:11:00.000-07:00

The “Unknown” is becoming known—at least it appears that wayunless the Lord intervenes and leads elsewhere. The service at Cherry Creek Presbyterian Church (CCPC) this morning was a confirmationthat we seem to be on the right path. You notice the tentative nature of thatstatement. This is, so far, not one of those instances in which the Lordplainly reveals His will for us. We'll start the church's series of new member classes on February 5th, and after that make the final decision.

Having had a very good conversation with the Senior Pastor,and getting our questions satisfactorily answered, the major impediment to ourjoining the church is that of denominational identity. I never imagined that Iwould be a member of anything but a Baptist church.

Maybe I’ll end up something like what one of my formerstudents said about herself. She grew upa Methodist. She was marrying a Baptist, and she joined his church and was baptizedaccording to the Baptist tradition. Afterwards she was firm in saying to me, “Ijust want you to know that I’m not a Baptist, I’m just a wet Methodist”. I may become a member of a Presbyterianchurch, but will I ever be anything but a Baptist at heart? That part of thejourney is yet to be revealed.

Still, I do appreciate what the Pastor said about thedifference between their “essential” and “non-essential” doctrines. I heartilyconcur with all of their “essentials”. I can live with some difference ofopinion on their “non-essentials”. Inpart 6 of this Journey, I mentioned five things I’m looking for in our nextchurch home. One of them was “a place where everyone knows your name”, that is,a Christian family. And in part 8, I said this is a place where we already havesome friends. That makes a big difference.

It’s hard to make new “old friends”, so to go to a churchwhere we already have some makes losing the weekly contact with the friends wemade at our previous church a little easier. We still want to keep the bonds offriendship strong with our friends at our previous church; but we are also not naïve.We know we will have to be intentional about keeping them alive. Thankfully,some of those friends are also reaching out to us to keep our relationshipsstrong.

In the end, though, all of the factors in post #6 will influence our decision on joining a church, not just friendships. If friendships were the only factor, we would not have started on this journey.

Interestingly, at least to me, as I look back at the factors listed in post #6, none of them were specific to a certain denomination. Much like many others I've come to know over the years, denominational labels are becoming less important to me. I've known genuine Christians from every Christian denomination over the years.

The core Christian doctrines are critical for me: what they call the "essentials" at CCPC. I've come to see that the place where some churches get off the track generally centers on what they teach about Jesus Christ.

If a church affirms the traditional doctrines about Jesus (as in the classic creeds of the church), other doctrines will usually fall in line. If a church denies certain core teachings about Jesus (such as His divinity or His bodily resurrection), other core doctrines fall apart as well.

Does that sound strange--that a "Christian" church will get off track concerning their teachings about Jesus? It sounded strange to me too when I experienced just that phenomenon. When talking about Jesus only as a teacher, a model for life, and as one we should "follow" and never talking about Him as "Savior" is the norm, one wonders what it is about that Jesus that one would worship.

It is clear from the Scriptures (see especially I Corinthians 15) that without a conviction that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead, one's faith is in vain. As both Lindsey and I have often said, "If Jesus didn't rise from the dead, we might as well just be a member of some club like Rotary that does good deeds but doesn't require much else of you. Or, why not just get a tee time on Sunday morning instead of wasting it in a meaningless church service.

But if Jesus' resurrection was real...well, that makes giving Him my life the most meaningful thing I can do. That is exactly what I have done. I've given my life to Jesus Christ, and He has become my Savior and my Lord. That is what has given my life purpose, whether as a sailor, a student, a pastor, a Campus Minister, or even as a Realtor.

So, one thing is sure--the church which we will join will have very clear, traditional, Christian teachings about the core doctrines, and especially those about Jesus Christ. More to come about this after we've taken the classes.

Journey Into The Unknown, part 8

2012-01-16T09:25:00.001-07:00

One never knows where a journey might take him, especially when the Lord is setting the itinerary. I still don't know whether the place we visited today will be an overnight stay, a short vacation, or a longer stop on the road to that unknown country.

It's now been four weeks since we started on this journey. Last week Lindsey and I met with the pastor of the church we likely will join--that longer stop mentioned above. It appears to meet the criteria I listed in post #6.

One of the positives of this church is that we already have friends there, and they have enthusiastically encouraged us to come and join them. That's one of the clues that a business, an organization, or a church is doing something right--do its customers or members talk about it in such a way that others start to think it might be the right place for them?

Before accepting someone as a member, this church requires attendance at a new members' class, agreement with the church's essential doctrines (while giving some latitude on "non-essential" doctrines: those that are important but not essential for salvation), and giving one's personal testimony to one of the elders of the church. Once we've been through the class and have made a decision, I'll post the name of the church.

Journey Into The Unknown part 7

2011-12-24T14:51:00.001-07:00

In my last post I wrote about what I'm looking for in a church. A pastor friend who saw it commented that my list would help anyone looking for a church. I hope so. That's why I write.

Another friend commented on his own journey--he and his family are also looking for a new church. Something I wrote him is also appropriate here: "...once having made the hardest part of the journey (deciding to leave a church) the rest of the journey is easy by comparison." It's still hard to find a church that fits. There are so many variables that to have them all fit together simultaneously is improbable. That's why it is important to not expect the "perfect church".

The hardest part, though, really is making the decision to leave. Others can't completely understand why their friend is leaving. Some relationships are broken. Some are strained. And some tend to just wither away without the regular weekly face-to-face contact. You know, "absence makes the heart grow fonder--of somebody else". Happily, though, some relationships endure. Typically they endure because the relationship is so important to both parties that they work at keeping it going.

Today we went to a new church. My experience there today was very encouraging. One thing I heard reminded me of something a member of the class I used to teach said when asking if I would be interested in teaching that class: "I want a teacher who knows more about the Bible than I do." (That was always a challenge because he is very knowledgeable about the Bible.)

In the pastor's sermon this morning, I heard something that I didn't know. He was talking about the passage in Matthew 22: 1-14 where the king invited guests to a wedding banquet for his son. One of the invited guests was rebuked and cast out because he didn't have on "wedding clothes". The new thing I learned (and that opened up a whole new meaning for the passage) is that in that culture, it would be the host's responsibility to supply "wedding clothes" for guests who didn't have them. [The pastor displayed a garment provided to him for a wedding in Africa that he had been invited to.]

The reason a guest would not have on the appropriate wedding clothes was because he chose not to wear what had been provided by the host. Everyone was invited ("both good and bad'). Whether because of pride or just the desire to come on his own terms, exclusion from the banquet was because he refused what was provided, not because of the host's ungraciousness.

The point: we are to invite everyone to participate in the kingdom, and welcome everyone to the church. If they refuse to change and meet the Lord's standards (and thus be voluntarily excluded), that's their choice. We will have done our part to be obedient, and the Lord will have done His part in making the way possible.

Its relevance for our journey? This appears to be a church that reaches out to everyone and welcomes all who come, but recognizes that some people won't come to Christ or His church because they don't want to change. And, to come to the Lord's wedding banquet, righteous wedding clothes are required.

Journey Into The Unknown part 6

2011-12-24T10:25:00.000-07:00

It's Christmas Eve. An early gift book that I started reading last night helps bring this whole journey thing into perspective. It is "The Triumph of Christianity, How the Jesus Movement Became the World's Largest Religion", by Rodney Stark.

Just having read a couple of chapters, I can't give a good review of the book yet. I can say, though, that the church that grew from Jesus' small band of disciples into a movement led by those who saw him alive after his crucifixion and resurrection (see I Corinthians 15: 3-8) has been a great force for good in the world, in spite of some black marks. (I can also see in the book that a lot of myths about some of those black marks need exposure to the light of truth).

In any event, the Church, while contributing much to the world, has not been perfect. Somehow, I think Jesus knew that a gathering of disciples that included a traitor, a tax collector, squabbling brothers, and a hot-headed fisherman as its leader would not be perfect.

Now that we are looking for a new local church home, we acknowledge that there is also no such thing as a perfect local church. If there were one, that perfection would cease as soon as I joined it. Still, when looking for a church home, people tend to look for a congregation and a ministry that is as close to perfect for them as possible. We look for something where we are a good fit, something which as much as possible is an ideal church for us.
What I'm looking for on this journey is:

A church whose focus is on a combination of the Great Commandment and the Great Commission. We are to love God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength and to love our neighbor as ourselves (Mark 12:29-31), and that love should also be great enough to help our neighbors become disciples of our resurrected Lord and Savior (Matthew 28: 18-20). In other words, whatever ministries a church has to help others should include the goal of leading them to find their own Savior and Lord in Jesus Christ.
A place where Lindsey and I can both exercise our spiritual gifts. (See I Corinthians 12 and Romans 12 for partial lists of how the Lord equips everyone with spiritual gifts for the benefit of the whole Body.) Both of us want to be full members of the church we belong to, and that involves more than just attending, listening, and giving.
A place where theologically we are in sync with the rest of the church. Swimming against the stream may make one stronger; but after a while it also makes one weary.
A place where we speak the same "language of music". For those our age, it's not that easy to find a place with music that "speaks to us"--that is, music that blends traditional hymns and more contemporary songs that will help us worship the Lord as we desire. For more about this concept of "The Language of Music", click on the link to see what I wrote about it more than 10 years ago. The short version is, we need to hear sermons in a spoken language we understand, and we also need to hear and sing music in a musical language that speaks to us personally.
As much as possible, a place "where everybody knows your name", to borrow a phrase from a song. And as the song implies and the TV show "Cheers" that had the song as its theme showed, "knowing everybody's name" means that it's a place where people care about each other. So, we're back to the first item on this list of what I'm looking for on this journey: love, true friendship, a Christian family.

Tomorrow we take our first step on this part of the journey--finding a new church. As always, the Lord who gave us the Great Commission said "I am with you always, to the very end of the age." Thanks be to God!

Journey Into The Unknown part 5

2011-12-22T11:48:00.000-07:00

In my second post of this series (on December 6, 2011) I mentioned the journey I began after the funding for my job was gone. That journey involved a change in careers, not just a change to a new job of the same kind. It was a difficult transition, as you might imagine, because much of one’s identity is bound up in answer to the question, “What do you do?”

We seek to get to know someone by asking about their family, but more often by asking about their work. For 19 years my answer to that question was “I am a minister”. Sometimes I was more specific, “Pastor, Campus Minister, etc. Suddenly I was thrust into a position where I was no longer in “full-time ministry”. That is, I wasn’t being paid to work for a church or denomination. Over time I would answer, “I am a Realtor”, but I still retained the expectation that at some future date the Lord would call me back into “the ministry”.

After several years, when I admitted that the Lord had put me in the work I was currently doing, and that He was probably not going to lead me back to work for a church, I borrowed a phrase from Caesar’s Gallic Wars which I remembered from high school Latin: “alea jacta est” (the die—singular for dice--is cast). When Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon River from Gaul (France) into Italy to return to Rome in defiance of orders to stay away, he knew there was no going back.

That’s how it was for me when I finally used that phrase to settle the fact that my future was in real estate (with voluntary or bi-vocational ministry to fulfill my calling) and not in full-time Christian ministerial positions. The dice had been cast. The decision had been made. Look to the future, not to the past.

I heard it years ago on TV, and I guess it’s a fairly common truism, “There’s no future in looking back”. That’s what I ultimately meant my adopting the phrase from Julius Caesar as my own motto. It helped me settle in and do the work I needed to do to be successful in real estate for the next 20 plus years.

It is applicable now, too. As we begin the search for a new church home, Lindsey and I are looking toward the future, not looking back. We still want to keep friendships strong, and in some ways the past always puts its stamp on future decisions; but our focus is on what we want our next church to be like.

That will come in the next post.

Journey Into The Unknown part 4

2011-12-15T22:35:00.000-07:00

As more people hear that I am leaving my current church, some of them have sent messsages encouraging me--most just encouraging me on my journey, a few encouraging me to reconsider my decision to leave. The latter would like to see me and other conservatives stay and try to change things from the inside.

A friend I had lunch with today shared some germane advice his father gave him years ago about staying in a place to make a change from the inside: "To make a change in the status quo, there has to already be a climate of change or you have to create one." The status quo in the church was just changed to something I don't agree with; and since the vote was so lopsided, there is not a climate to change it back to the status quo ante. And, it's not my place to try to create one.

I do appreciate those who have encouraged me to stay. I value their friendship and I respect their decision to stay and work from the inside.

I also appreciate those who have encouraged me as I go, wishing me well and understanding that each person's decision is personal. I know some of the reasons that others have who are staying even though they agree with me on the issues. There aren't any simple choices here. Each person's decision is personal.

Yesterday was my last time to meet with the adult Sunday School class I've been teaching. It was not easy to leave them. I pray they will find just the right teacher for that class. Whoever it is, I know the class will be supportive and will help the teacher to grow--they've done that for me, and I thank God for them all.

Journey into the Unknown, part 3

2011-12-11T22:49:00.001-07:00

This morning was my next-to-last time with the adult Sunday School class I’ve taught since September, 2010. They are a great class—inquisitive, affirming, and they like to participate in the discussion. I told the class this morning that next Sunday would be my last day with them.

It was serendipitous that the lesson for today was from Genesis 12 and 15 (God telling Abram to set out on a journey to “the land I will show you” and that he and Sarai, both beyond normal child-bearing age, would have a son). This lesson also followed a summer forum on faith in Hebrews 11 that I co-taught last August. I was able to connect the passages and say that when we step out in faith under God’s guidance, we can know that He will be with us on that journey.

Interestingly, Abram was a human being like you and me. He messed up badly by taking things into his own hands after God had promised to bless him. The fact that he obeyed God initially and set out on the journey, and that he “believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness” regarding the birth of a son, doesn’t negate his sin of not trusting that God would be with him along the journey.

His faith, like mine sometimes, was not always rock solid. Still, God blessed him when he obeyed, and granted him grace when he strayed. In saying that I am, like Abram, starting a journey into the unknown, I’m not claiming any special status or insight. I’m just doing what I believe the Lord is leading me to do at this time. May the Lord be gracious when I also blow it.

I had to tell my class why I was leaving. They knew that the vote to pass the “inclusion statement” last Sunday was connected; but I didn’t want them to think that I was leaving just because I was “unreasonably afraid of homosexuals” (the literal mean of “homophobic”—the pejorative term made up to demean those who disagree with the pro-gay agenda).

Again, the statement adopted by my church is “Calvary welcomes and affirms all people as children of God from every cultural and religious background, sexual orientation, family composition, physical and mental ability, economic means, race, age and gender."

As I have told several people, if the two words, “and affirms” were removed from the original statement (which also didn’t have the words “as children of God”), I could have voted yes and stayed. I believe we are to welcome and extend God's love to everyone. That doesn't mean to have to affirm them if that means we have to agree that their behavior is OK with us and we cannot say anything about that behavior.

Contrary to what has been taught at the church lately, I do believe the Bible classifies homosexual behavior as sin. At the very least, there is no place in the Bible where homosexual activity is praised, spoken of positively, or “affirmed”.

So, if I am accused of being intolerant or unloving because I believe the traditional interpretation of the Bible is God’s word on the matter, then I’ll admit my mea culpa. I do wonder though, why those who would thus judge me as unloving and judgmental don’t see that their own judgment of me is unloving and judgmental.

I stated that I told my class why I was leaving the church. Here are the primary reasons:

(1) I cannot “affirm” behavior the Bible classifies as sin. My remaining there after the church voted to affirm that behavior would be a tacit endorsement of the statement.

(2) I cannot endorse or accept what I see as revisionist interpretations of Scripture—interpretations based more on P.C. reactions to cultural changes than on solid hermeneutics.

(3) Since I started as their teacher, my goal has been three-fold: to teach the Bible; to teach how to study and interpret the Bible (hermeneutics); and to seek to apply the Bible’s teachings to life today. That’s why I can’t stand by silently when faced with interpretations that “pull us from the future” and in the process throw overboard “the faith that was once for all entrusted to…(us)”.

(4) I have been swimming against the stream too long. I am conservative and traditional (small "o” orthodox) in my theology. The direction of the church’s flow is not one I want to struggle against anymore, and I can’t just go with the flow.

(5) And, there are some other reasons that I’ll have to get to later. For now, it was important for the class to know that although the homosexual agenda issue is there, much more than that is involved.

Journey Into The Unknown, part 2

2011-12-06T08:14:00.001-07:00

In my last post I said that I'm starting on a journey into the unknown. It's not quite like Star Trek. It's not a place where I really haven't gone before. A number of times in my life, I've made a decision that led to changes I hadn't anticipated.

A few times the decisions have been made by others, and I've just had to respond to the situation as best I could. In 1985 I was the Director of Metro Baptist Campus Ministries in Denver. Then the organization that employed me ran out of money and eliminated my job, along with several others. I hadn't expected that. I was unprepared for a job hunt. I just said to the Lord, I don't know what you have in store for me, so I'll just have to let the search for a job be the way You reveal Your will to me.

It didn't turn out anything like I even imagined. Instead of leading me to another full-time ministry position, the Lord closed all those doors that I thought were open and He led me into real estate sales. It has turned out to be a way to support my family and to use the ministry gifts He gave me as well.

I am, in effect, practicing what I preached to college students from 1970 to 1985: "the Lord doesn't care where you get your check, every one of us is supposed to be a minister." I've been able to preach, teach, counsel, and be involved in a variety of ministries for which I haven't been paid. I often tell folks who ask about my background that Paul was a tentmaker to support his missionary work. I don't make tents, I just sell them (or houses, at least).

The situation which has put me on this journey is another of those times when I’ve had to respond to a decision made by others. This time it is related to my church, not my job. The church I’ve been a member of for the past 8 years voted last Sunday on a “statement of inclusion” (see below*). At a later point in this series I’ll address that statement in more detail. For now, I just want to say this:

(1) On the surface, who could object to a statement which is designed to show that the church “welcomes and affirms all people as children of God…” and then goes on to name 10 different groups which are to be included? It almost sounds churlish to object to that. Yet I do object to the statement.

(2) But my objection is not just with the statement. It’s also not just with the fact that the only reason for initiating the statement was to show how welcoming and affirming the church is to one specific group (the “LGBTQ Community”).

(3) I do have problems with the statement. But even more, I have problems with the interpretations of Scripture that were given to support the statement—interpretations that differ considerably from what Christians have taught for two millennia. I am, for better or worse, more conservative and traditional than the majority of the church.

(4) When the church voted by a 74% to 26% margin to adopt the statement, I could only conclude that I am not a good fit there. As part of the 26% minority, I seriously disagree with the direction the church is going. And, since my continued presence would not change that direction, it is better that I leave.

I don’t know where I will go. It is indeed a journey into the unknown. I do know that I need to step out in faith like Abraham.

“By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going.” Hebrews 11:8 (NIV)

What will come of it, only God knows. I do expect that just as in 1985, the Lord will open a door and enable me to use the ministry gifts He gave me. I just need to be obedient to what I understand to be the Lord’s will for my life.

* "Calvary welcomes and affirms all people as children of God from every cultural and religious background, sexual orientation, family composition, physical and mental ability, economic means, race, age and gender."

Journey Into The Unknown

2011-12-04T21:52:00.001-07:00

Next week in the adult Sunday School class I've been teaching we will look at Genesis 12 in which God said to Abram (later called Abraham) "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you."

We don't see all the dialogue that went on between God and Abram, and we don't see what went on in Abram's mind. We just see that at 75 years old he obeyed God and left for that unknown land.

I find myself in a situation similar to that which Abram faced. I am being led away from one place where I've been for over 8 years, and I don't yet know where this journey will take me. I only know that the Lord will not just tell me where to go; He will be with me on this journey into the unknown.

This space will once more provide a way for me to chronicle what I experience en route. Perhaps it will inspire some others to take a step of faith in their own life journeys.

In the next post--what prompted this new adventure.

“Portraits of Faith” Forum Series

2011-07-21T09:32:00.000-06:00

A couple of months ago I was asked if I would be interested in leading a “Summer Forum” study on Hebrews 11 with a fellow member, David Beaty. The tentative title was “Portraits of Faith”. It turned out to be a 5-week study, so it expanded a bit over what I had originally thought it would be.

Dave and I started meeting weekly, and over the past 10 weeks we have had a blast getting to know each other and discussing what we would do in the forums.

The study, and my relationship with Dave Beaty, has taken me to places I haven’t visited in a while. The concept of faith as trust, obedience, believing something, being trustworthy and faithful, and holding onto “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 1:3 NIV) challenges me to examine and reaffirm my own faith.

It’s not enough to study about faith and to teach about faith. The teacher, as well as his students, must have faith himself. Hebrews 11:6 says it clearly, “And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.”

The basic meaning of “Faith” is trust—a sense of confidence in another that allows a relationship between the two parties to exist and to continue. It’s what keeps a marriage together, what develops a sense of unity to develop in an army unit or sports team, what enables those in a society to live with each other in harmony, and what keeps order in a democracy—the trust that citizens have in their leaders. It’s opposite, distrust, is of course what causes anarchy, wars, a breakdown of unit cohesiveness, and divorce.

Our faith in God, then, is more than just believing that He exists. It is a relationship with God in which we trust His promises, rely on His presence, and have confidence that He will lead us and enable us to carry out what He asks us to do—be His witnesses and ambassadors in the world to bring others into His kingdom. For Christians, “…faith is primarily the relationship we have with God through what Jesus accomplished in His death and resurrection.” (William L. Self, Holman Bible Dictionary).

It is that relationship I hope to foster in myself and the students through this study.

Good News for My Treatment

2010-10-29T10:12:00.000-06:00

My previous post had good news (as good as it can be with a diagnosis of cancer): the cancer is limited to my prostate. It hadn't spread.

I had to wait until yesterday to meet the radiation oncologist and get his recommendation regarding treatment. That too was good news.

I first watched a video that explained the three primary treatments that are used in low to moderate prostate cancer: hormonal therapy, radiation seeds, and external beam radiation.

In the clearly moderate risk category (where there is some evidence of cancer outside the prostate but not affecting lymph nodes or bone) they might employ all three treatments.

In the borderline low to moderate risk category they often use hormonal therapy and the radiation seeds.

Even though mine is considered low to moderate risk, all the factors together led the radiation oncologist to say he thinks we should treat it as low risk rather than moderate risk. That means no hormonal therapy. Just the radiation seeds should suffice. Yea!!

The procedure itself is a one-time insertion of 70-80 or more seeds, performed in an outpatient surgical center. A day or two of limited activity and I should be able to get on with life and work. That's good news to me. If I have to have a cancer diagnosis, I'm blessed to have one that is curable with the least amount of trauma and side effects.

As I watched the video, I realized that the 45-minute or so procedure is only part of the process, though. There will be a couple of things done prior to the procedure and multiple visits for the next few years to follow up. That was new information, and it surprised me a bit. But that would be so with any of the other procedures. I'm thankful that I'll be getting a one-time radiation treatment instead of 8 weeks or so of radiation 5 days a week.

Thanks again to all who have been praying and those who have called or sent notes of support. I appreciate all of you and thank the Lord for you.

My Prostate Cancer

2010-10-22T12:18:00.000-06:00

I appreciate the concern expressed by so many concerning my recently diagnosed prostate cancer. Some has come personally, some by phone call, email or cards, and some on Facebook. Many have prayed for me. Thank you. This email is to honor that concern by keeping you apprised of my situation.

When my urologist called to tell me the results of the biopsy, he said it looked like we caught it early (Stage 2) and that it should be completely curable. He wanted me to get an MRI and a bone scan to confirm that it likely was limited to the prostate and hadn’t spread.

Monday I had those two tests. I had an appointment set for today for Lindsey and me to see the radiation oncologist. At this appointment we were to learn the results of the two tests and hear what kind of treatment would be recommended for my condition.

Yesterday I got a call saying we needed to postpone the appointment until next Thursday because the doctor had a meeting scheduled that he needed to attend. We didn’t want to wait until next week to get the results of the tests, so I asked for a copy of the test results to be sent to me.

It was good news—the cancer appears to be contained within the prostate. The tests didn’t show evidence of extension outside the capsule of the prostate (nothing shows in the lymph nodes, other tissue, or bone).
Lindsey and I were able to relax some. We still have to wait until next Thursday to determine what treatment will be used, but at least we know the treatment will be limited to the prostate. Whatever the treatment, it will not start until December (so the prostate can recover from the biopsy first).

Thank you again for your concern and your prayers.

Update: The urologist's nurse just called to confirm that what I saw in the report was true. It is localized to the prostate.

Update: Solving The Illegal Immigration Puzzle

2010-08-24T22:21:00.001-06:00

[Update: this was originally posted April 5, 2006, and Update 2 was added 8/24/10]

So much has been in the news about the illegal immigration issue, and with so many different voices, I can’t sort it all out without writing it out. So here goes.

Everyone I hear speak on the issue, whether from the anti- or pro- side, focuses on one or two factors in this very complicated issue. That’s probably because they know that on television or the radio what matters is easily digestible sound bites. If they try to cover it in all its complexity they will be ignored at best, or their position distorted at worst.

How complex is it? In just a few minutes I jotted down 15 factors related to the illegal immigration issue. There are more, I’m sure, but let’s just deal with those. Think of them as 15 pieces of a puzzle. Leave out a piece and it soon becomes evident that something important is missing. Try to argue your position using only one or two pieces, and you’ll soon be exposed as either shallow or deliberately misleading.

I’ll list the 15 factors and only briefly cover each one.

1. Security. We are less than five years after 9/11 and there are still people who want to kill us and eventually impose their ideology on us. Some them have come across our borders without a visa and some have overstayed their visa and disappeared into the shadows.

2. Border Integrity. The lines don’t show up on a satellite photo, but they are on a map for a reason. A nation (or state or city or school district) that doesn’t keep its borders well defined will eventually lose its identity. Even simpler, as a Realtor®, I am constantly trying to make sure my clients’ property lines are well-established and that there are no encroachments. A survey will show whether the fence the neighbor put up is on the boundary line or a foot into my client’s property.

3. Current Illegal Alien Population. It’s not politically correct to use the term “illegal alien” but for the sake of clarity, let’s call it what it is. The first definition of “alien” as a noun on www.dictionary.com is “An unnaturalized foreign resident of a country. Also called noncitizen.” And, if that noncitizen or alien entered or remained in the country contrary to the law’s requirements, they are an illegal alien.

All sorts of numbers are used for this population. I’ve heard anywhere from 10 million to 20 million. Most of the time the numbers of 10 to 12 million are used. Let’s just say “X Million” and know that it’s a lot.

The major point to be made in quoting X Million illegal aliens here is that it is impossible to conceive that all X Million will be rounded up and sent back to the country where they are citizens.

4. Burdensome Costs On Infrastructure. Citizens, by paying taxes and paying for health insurance, support schools, government services, hospitals, and medical care. Illegal aliens who also pay taxes and have health insurance also support those services; but it’s no secret that many illegal aliens aren’t paid legally and therefore don’t pay taxes (and many don’t have health insurance either). The services they use (sometimes mandated by federal or state laws) become a burdensome cost on the institutions and/or the citizens who do pay for them.

5. Impact On Wages. A complaint of unions is that the workers who will gladly take a job at low wages (because it’s better than they would get at home and because the employer knows they can’t complain) drive down wages for citizens.

6. Enforcement Of Laws. Reasonable laws must be enforced or the population will scoff at the law as a whole, and citizens will lose respect for all authority. Unreasonable laws should either be repealed or changed to protect the integrity of the legal system. [2010 Update: see the absurdity in the Obama administration's lawsuit against Arizona for that state trying to enforce federal law, while the federal government continues to ignore cities and states who have a "sanctuary" policy that thwarts federal law. Are we a country of laws, or of political whim?]

7. Businesses Who Want Workers. Some businesses say they need whatever workers come here because they have jobs which American workers shun. Or there just aren’t enough workers to fill the need.

8. Businesses Who Exploit Workers. Those who can’t complain without risking deportation are sometimes taken advantage of. Low wages, horrible living conditions, taxes withheld but not sent in to the IRS or state, long hours without overtime pay, and on and on. There are many ways to exploit the helpless.

9. Businesses Who Must Do Government’s Job. The current law requires employers to document their employees’ legal status. Employers can be fined if they don’t comply; and the mandated documentation is itself an unreimbursed cost to the employer.

10. Secure Documentation. False documents are widespread, so a business is at risk regardless of how diligent it is. It doesn’t seem difficult to get a false driver’s license, social security card, or whatever document is needed.

11. “Guest Worker” Programs. One proposed solution to the problem of filling the existing jobs with willing and legal workers. However the solution itself has its critics from many directions.

12. Unsettled Source Countries. Whether it’s a matter of poverty, corruption, dictators, or other problems, there are millions of potential illegal aliens in this hemisphere and millions more in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, etc.

13. Effect On Applicants For Legal Immigration. This is the “crowding in at the head of the line” problem. Two individuals want to come to the United States. One plays by the rules and spends years waiting to be admitted. The other just walks across the border. Is this justice?

14. Effect Of “Amnesty” On Others. Grant amnesty (or anything close to it) now, and it becomes an incentive for others to arrive illegally. They know that all they have to do is make it here, and eventually they too will be granted amnesty.

Right now there are X Million illegal aliens in the United States. Most of them have jobs, we’re told. The economy is growing, and they can find work. What will happen though when the economy takes a downturn or there are 2X Million or 10X Million illegal aliens here? If it’s a matter of justice and compassion to treat the X Million illegal aliens well, admit them to citizenship, and give them all the services they require, why not do the same thing for 100X Million? Surely there must be a line beyond which one must say, “No more”.

15. Compassion And Justice. As a Christian, I too want to befriend the “stranger” in our midst. I know that those in poverty and oppression will do what they think must be done to feed and protect themselves and their families. I don’t feel right about turning anyone away.

Well, there are my fifteen pieces of the puzzle. Coming up with more won’t change the nature of the problem much, so let’s go on from here.

The next question is how to prioritize them. We hear the call for a “comprehensive approach”. Some insist that we try to solve everything at the same time so there is no one-sidedness to our approach.

Sometimes, though, there are not enough resources to tackle the issue with a comprehensive approach. Reality demands that we take the steps one at a time. When that is so, responsible leaders must guide the country to avoid simplistic solutions and approach the problem rationally. Yes, that in itself is utopian and unrealistic thinking, especially when all we see are vote-seeking “leaders” being led by those with the loudest voices or harshest emotional appeals.

A good analogy is the complexity of the scene of a major disaster or accident. Emergency personnel know to set up a triage process to determine who can best benefit from their limited care resources. And when treating one injured individual, the common wisdom is to follow the ABC’s (Airway, Breathing, and Circulation). Some things must be done first to save the patient’s life.

With all these puzzle pieces, where do we start? It’s not unlike putting a jigsaw puzzle together. First you start with the border to provide a frame. From all I hear, and my own logic suggests, I believe the first step in dealing with the illegal alien problem is to stop the flow.

To stop the flow, some of the puzzle pieces will have to be put into place almost at one time to provide the border of the puzzle (border security, enforce current laws or revise them so they become enforceable, provide secure documentation, and cut off employment to those without the proper secure documentation).

Once the flow of illegal aliens has been stopped or abated, then it will be imperative to deal compassionately with those already here, and even realistically provide a way for them to eventually earn the right to full citizenship if they desire it (with all its responsibilities as well as its rights) and if they renounce their citizenship to their country of origin.

16. I hate to bring up what could be a 16th piece of the puzzle, but it is necessary to at least say that what has made American immigration work (and European immigration start to fail) is assimilation. We can’t allow the cancer of unassimilated millions gathered in cultural ghettos to grow as we’ve seen recently in Paris. The goal of immigration has to be to produce assimilated Americans, not hyphenated Americans.

UPDATE: The recent inability of the Senate to come to agreement on a proposed law, and the demonstrations in the streets by thousands who want some kind of "acceptable revision of the immigration law" has led many (including Jay Leno on The Tonight Show) to wonder how a new law will be respected any more than the current one has been. It seems to me that as a country we first have to demonstrate that we can and will enforce the laws we have and secure our borders. Only then will the word get out that America welcomes immigrants who come legally and is serious about its future.

UPDATE 2: So much has happened since 2006, yet so much is the same. Given the divisiveness of the illegal immigration issue and its return to the scene with the Obama administration suing Arizona over that state's new law, some additional pieces of the puzzle have surfaced. I'm adding four to the 15+1 in the original post.

17."Anchor Babies": The 14th Amendment, enacted to justifiable grant citizenship to newly-freed slaves (who were brought to this country by force and against their will), has been expanded by practice to include anyone born on United States soil, regardless of the citizenship of the parents. This has led to rich people from across the oceans paying thousands of dollars for a package deal to get the pregnant mother to the U.S. just in time for her to deliver her baby here; and it's led to thousands of women coming over the southern border to get free medical care, delivery in a U.S. hospital, financial aid while here, and the bonus of citizenship for the baby born here. The baby then becomes the "anchor" for the family to eventually come to the U.S.

18. The draw of a welfare state: In a reductio ad absurdum argument, if there are no national boundaries (as some would have it) and no restraints on people moving from one area to another, then a "community" (with no national boundaries we can't call it a "country") that offers free medical care, free retirement benefits, free welfare for those who can't or won't work will attract everyone who can get there. Soon, that "community" will exhaust its ability to help its own needy people, much less those who keep coming in.

19. Identity theft: To some, it may seem like a petty misdemeanor for an illegal alien to use someone else's Social Security number to get work. But this kind of identity theft doesn't stop there. They also use the false I.D. to get credit cards and other loans, and the person whose identity was stolen has their own credit wrecked; and thousands of dollars and hours of time are required to get their life back. A lender told me of one homebuyer who got upset because as her credit was being checked, the lender discovered the Social Security number didn't match her life. When told the number was not good, the "buyer" (an illegal alien) said, "Of course it is good. I paid $500 for it."

20. What "amnesty" of millions of immigrants, many of whom have incomes that would qualify them for the "Earned Income Tax Credit", would do: there would eventually be social upheaval when there are more people who don't pay income tax than there are who do pay income tax. One can always get the vote from John to tax Paul and then redistribute the money back to John. But then what does that do to the society as a whole when the "Pauls" of the country lose incentive to work?

Again, there are probably more pieces of the puzzle. It's enough for now to see that those who only focus on "Christian compassion" or others who only focus on "border security" have a too simplistic perspective to help move the issue to resolution. It's even worse when those with simplistic perspectives claim the moral high ground over others without the same perspective.

The issue is complex. What is needed is leadership, not political tricks to win votes. The security and the future of the United States is at stake. If this country fails, where can those seeking freedom and prosperity go?

Abraham Lincoln on the role of the State in Economic Development

2010-08-02T09:06:00.001-06:00

In reading “Team of Rivals” by Doris Kearns Goodwin, I’m impressed by Abraham Lincoln’s view of the government’s role in supporting economic development.

Economic development provided the basis, … that would allow every American “an unfettered start, and a fair chance, in the race of life.” In Lincoln’s mind, the fundamental test of a democracy was its capacity to “elevate the condition of men, to lift artificial weights from all shoulders, to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all.” A real democracy would be a meritocracy where those born in the lower ranks could rise as far as their natural talents and discipline might take them. (p. 90, 91)

For Lincoln, infrastructure improvements (schools, roads, railroads, waterways, etc.) were essential for a state or nation to flourish because, as Goodwin says, they “would enable thousands of farming families to emerge from the kind of poverty in which the Lincoln family had been trapped.” (p.90)

Economic development results when the state provides the path (literally and figuratively) for individuals and private companies to get their goods to market without unnecessary barriers and burdens. The goal is to enable the state (or town or nation) to grow by liberating people from what traps them in the station in life into which they were born. This is best done by freeing individuals to pursue their dreams with their own energy and industry (so they can “receive a full, good, and ever increasing reward for their labors”) (p.90), not by removing incentives to escape from poverty.

Lincoln knew about poverty from his personal experience. When obtaining an elected position, he didn’t argue that the state should distribute money to the poor. Rather, the state’s role was to remove barriers that kept the poor in poverty. His remedies were designed to help people learn to contribute and businesses better able to grow so jobs would be available.

Plug The Right Hole

2010-06-12T07:57:00.002-06:00

Obama just had the wrong hole in mide when he uttered his infamous phrase.

From PowerlineBlog.com: “Let Your Voice Be Heard”

2009-11-02T13:46:00.002-07:00

The following excerpt is from PowerlineBlog.com

With the House of Representatives scheduled to vote on Nancy Pelosi's health care takeover bill, a watershed moment in American history is fast approaching. In this video, Congressman Mike Pence puts the battle over health care in the context of freedom and of the relationship between the individual and the state: [watch video]
Only massive public opposition has a chance to stop the federal usurpation that the Democrats are planning.

The House Republican Conference, meanwhile, has gone to the Herculean effort of tabulating the new federal boards, bureaucracies, commissions, and programs that would be established by the House bill--all in the name of cutting costs, of course! They add up to 111: [see list]

After viewing the list, how would you answer these questions:
1. Where can I find the specific cost allocated to each of these items?
2. How many new Government employees will be needed to administer these items?
3. How many of these items are necessary in order to achieve the goal of reducing health costs or health insurance premiums?
4. How many of these items, if they were necessary, could be handled by existing bureaucracies instead of starting new ones?
5. Which makes more sense, 111 new programs, bureaucracies, and boards that amount to a takeover of 16% of the American economy as seen here , OR the much less radical approach described by Republican Leader John Boehner: “There is a better way. Republicans have offered solutions to lower health care costs and expand access at a cost our nation can afford. You can read about them at www.healthcare.gop.gov."

RE: "Decline is A Choice"

2009-10-12T09:41:00.003-06:00

I often like the comments I hear from Charles Krauthammer and read his online posts whenever I can. This one in The Weekly Standard entitled "Decline Is A Choice" shows his gift of stepping back and getting a perspective that is generally missed by others. Two quotes give a window into his insights and make me think about what I must do to help America make the right choice:

"For America today, decline is not a condition. Decline is a choice. Two decades into the unipolar world that came about with the fall of the Soviet Union, America is in the position of deciding whether to abdicate or retain its dominance. Decline--or continued ascendancy--is in our hands."

and,

"And there's the rub. For the Europeans there really is a peace dividend, because we provide the peace. They can afford social democracy without the capacity to defend themselves because they can always depend on the United States.
So why not us as well? Because what for Europe is decadence--decline, in both comfort and relative safety--is for us mere denial. Europe can eat, drink, and be merry for America protects her. But for America it's different. If we choose the life of ease, who stands guard for us?"

All of the questions now being debated in Washington (and in real America outside the beltway): Health Care, Afganistan, Iran, Iraq, Stimulus, Energy, The Economy, Jobs, Cap and Trade (or "Cap and Tax"), Education, Immigration, Marriage, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and more--they are just double-sided pieces of a puzzle in which the picture only is revealed toward the end when we see the accumulated pattern of the individual choices made on each separate question.

What can I do? Work to elect those who will stand up and decide not to decline.

What can you do? Read "Decline Is A Choice" and make your own decision.

The beauty of Federalism in the health care debate

2009-09-22T17:16:00.002-06:00

Instead of a centralized power, our Founders established the Federal system they called the United States of America. The Federal government didn’t grant authority to the states. Rather, the individual states, being closer to the people, had the authority over everything not specifically granted to the federal government.

This setup is perfect for trying out various schemes to improve society in different states, and then importing to other states those ideas that actually work. For health care reform, one could go to Massachusetts or Minnesota to see what they have implemented—what are the benefits, what do they need to change?

James Q. Wilson, writing in the Wall Street Journal Online, (A Life in the Public Interest )talked about what happens when the Federal concept is ignored and the process is top-down instead of bottom-up. He mentioned the law of unintended consequences:

“Launch a big project and you will almost surely discover that you have created many things you did not intend to create.

This is not an argument for doing nothing, but it is one, in my view, for doing things experimentally. Try your idea out in one place and see what happens before you inflict it on the whole country.”

The bills currently being developed in Congress don’t seem to have learned from the smaller experiments in separate states; and they certainly don’t project future experiments to try out reforms in smaller markets, and then to promote those reforms for other states. Instead they are attempts to jam down unproven reforms on everyone everywhere in the country.

Being Christian In A Political Debate

2009-09-19T11:06:00.004-06:00

I have written previously here and elsewhere about the health care (or health insurance) reform issue. I learned firsthand that stating an opinion in public can encourage debate, but it can also bring out the worst in people.

In a recent ScriptoriumDaily.com post, “7 Suggestions for Christians in the Public Square” John Mark Reynolds wrote “It is hard to talk to someone when you have nothing in common.”

Sometimes it is even hard, but not impossible, to talk with someone when you share some common values because of “how we prioritize values when good come into conflict.” We may “agree on the values”, but prioritize and apply them differently.

A few years back I encountered some faithful Christians with some doctrines that were radically different from mine. I was startled to conclude that they actually believe these things they are saying, but I respected them personally and I realized I needed to continue to relate to them as fellow believers. Sadly, some of them did not reach the same conclusion.

The same thing can happen with the health care debate. That brings us to one of Reynold’s suggestions: "Attacking ideas is different than attacking people". In response to one email about health care I sent which went viral, one person (who admitted that she didn’t know me) named me personally as a “Deather”. She was referring to those who seek disclosure of Barak Obama’s birth certificate and are called “Birthers” (but she didn’t refer to the “Truthers” –9/11 Conspiracy Theorists). Instead of debating the ideas presented, she attacked me.

Reynolds is right though in his 2nd suggestion: “Strong opinions encourage authentic dialogue.” It is only as people with strong convictions speak up and engage in civil debate with others of strong convictions that authentic dialogue takes place. If you strongly disagree with a policy or an idea but say nothing when others present their opinions, there is no dialogue. The recent town hall meetings may have been boisterous (and some participants may have gone over the line at times), but they had the desired effect of getting both sides of the issue before the public and their elected officials.

I encourage you to read the entire article 7 Suggestions for Christians in the Public Square.

In a previous post, John Mark Reynolds quoted Jim Wallis’ comment that health care is a “deeply theological issue, a Biblical issue and a moral issue”, and then replied that “Health care is such a deeply theological, Biblical, and moral issue that it cannot be trusted to the government.

Increasing government control over health care increases the number of ethical issues where government authority will have to be on one side or the other of these disputes.

Sometimes increasing state power is necessary, but it should also be done with care. When religious leaders like Jim Wallis pretend that it is obvious that government should increase its involvement in health care, they have confused the goal (universal basic care) with the means (government programs).”

Again, I encourage you to read the entire article: Too Great a Good for Caesar: Health Care Reform .

There are some health care issues that involve ethical decisions that cannot be entrusted to politicians or bureaucrats whose decisions are politically, not morally, based.

Christians have a responsibility to speak up about moral and ethical issues and not abdicate that responsibility to others. However, we must also be Christian in the manner in which we debate. I applaud John Mark Reynolds for his helpful suggestions as to how that debate can be Christian in tone and manner.

Health Care Reform

2009-07-25T08:01:00.003-06:00

I've been reluctant to jump into most political issues on this page. But periodically one comes along that demands a stance. The proposed health care "reform" is one of them.
Everyone says we need reform (regardless of the President's claim that some are standing in the way of reform because they are satisfied with the status quo). There are just competing ideas of what kind of reform is needed.
One kind of reform is akin to updating or remodeling an existing home that has many desirable features and some obsolete ones. The other kind of reform reminds me of the videos of a building being demolished by explosives so a brand new one can be constructed on the site.
National Review Online today has an editorial which succinctly expresses the unbelievable claims that the architect of the new building wants us to buy. Here are the first two paragraphs:
Snake Oil “President Obama’s press conference Wednesday night offered an ideal encapsulation of the Democrats’ case for their health-care-reform proposals: outlandish promises about benefits and patently dishonest denials of the costs. He said essentially all of the uninsured would be covered, the insured could keep their existing coverage and would be guaranteed to keep it if they lost or changed jobs, the quality of care would rise, waste and fraud would be slashed, the deficit would decline, and no one would have to pay a price for all this except a few millionaires. Oh, and by the way, the plan would also “keep government out of health-care decisions.”
If the president can persuade the American public of all that, then maybe we don’t even need medical care — we can just have him tell us all we’re perfectly healthy and we’ll go on our way.”
I have many issues with the proposed demolition of our health care system--too many to list here--and the greatest one is that I fear the loss of freedom that will come with the new system. Returning to my metaphor of a building being demolished, it appears to me that what is being proposed is that we tear down our hospital and replace it with a prison, and bureaucrats will be the guards who restrict our access to needed health care. More later.

Where Is Our Hope?

2009-04-08T14:04:00.003-06:00

It's one thing to have hope when looking back after the Resurrection, and another to have hope when it's just after the crucifixion and burial. What went on in the minds of the Apostles?

WHERE IS OUR HOPE?

It’s over now.
We tried to say
There was something
Wrong with the way
He was doing things.

Now he is dead—
Crucified for some crime,
Some trumped-up charge
Which no one believed
He could ever do.

But what’s the use?
Who cares anymore?
We were fools to think
That he, or anyone for that matter,
Could really change the way it is—
And has been—and always will be.
Why fight it anyway?

Oh God, how we hoped
That he was really sent from You.
We just knew that You really cared
And that through him you were at last
Bringing salvation to those who trust in You.

Bah! What’s the use of talking like this?
Maybe even You died a long time ago.
Maybe You were never there at all—
Our fathers just said you were real
Because they could not explain life
Any other way.

Why don’t you answer me?
Why don’t You take away the ache
And give that mysterious peace I was promised?
If you are real, why don’t You reveal Yourself?

No. I have no right to criticize.
I am sure You have a purpose in his death.
I just can’t see it now.

Perhaps…If only it were possible…
He said he would rise again on the third day.
Then, oh then I could begin to hope again.
And what I seek is real, genuine HOPE.

Rudy J. Antle
April 3, 1974
© 2009

The So-called "Stimulus" Bill

2009-02-07T21:52:00.003-07:00

I just thought you might like to know where your money will go if the "Stimulus bill" is passed. A simplified printout in spreadsheet format has been published.

As a Realtor who has seen firsthand the devastating effect of the subprime mortgages, foreclosures, and short sales on the housing market (which was the primary reason we got into this mess) I am obviously concerned about what will be done to help shore up housing. See if you can find help for housing in this bill.

John Updike: Seven Stanzas At Easter

2009-01-29T07:57:00.003-07:00

I came across this poem for the first time when reading about the death of John Updike in Christianity Today. The poem is referenced at the end of that article: “Kendall Harmon at TitusOneNine posted "Seven Stanzas at Easter," Updike's well-known poem on the Resurrection, last March.”

I like the way Updike creatively addresses classic arguments against the Resurrection and their manifestations in today’s theological debates with allusions to today’s scientific awareness.

Enjoy,

Seven Stanzas at Easter

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Make no mistake: if He rose at all
it was as His body;
if the cells' dissolution did not reverse, the molecules
reknit, the amino acids rekindle,
the Church will fall.

It was not as the flowers,
each soft Spring recurrent;
it was not as His Spirit in the mouths and fuddled
eyes of the eleven apostles;
it was as His Flesh: ours.

The same hinged thumbs and toes,
the same valved heart that — pierced — died, withered, paused, and then
regathered out of enduring Might
new strength to enclose.

Let us not mock God with metaphor,
analogy, sidestepping transcendence;
making of the event a parable, a sign painted in the
faded credulity of earlier ages:
let us walk through the door.

The stone is rolled back, not papier-mache,
not a stone in a story,
but the vast rock of materiality that in the slow
grinding of time will eclipse for each of us
the wide light of day.

And if we will have an angel at the tomb,
make it a real angel,
weighty with Max Planck's quanta, vivid with hair,
opaque in the dawn light, robed in real linen
spun on a definite loom.

Let us not seek to make it less monstrous,
for our own convenience, our own sense of beauty,
lest, awakened in one unthinkable hour, we are
embarrassed by the miracle,
and crushed by remonstrance.

--John Updike (1932- 2009)

Challenging Myself

2009-01-04T18:07:00.004-07:00

Like many others I put 2008 behind me as the annus horribilis I want to forget. Looking to 2009 in hope for a better year in many ways, I set a goal to read at least one book a month ("and none of them with pictures" as I wrote on my Facebook page).

An article in The Wall Street Journal Online about the books President Bush reads challenged me to read more and watch TV less. So far my list of books to read in 2009 is up to 18. Notice I said, "to read" not "have read".

I've finished 2 so far, and one of them--The Blessing of Christmas, by Pope Benedict XVI--does have pictures. They are beautiful reproductions of classic paintings of Advent. It was a Christmas gift along with three others that are on my list: Jesus of Nazareth, by Pope Benedict XVI; Truman, by David McCullough, and The Reason for God, by Timothy Keller.

I'll leave the one with pictures on the list as a balance to some of the others that are much longer and heavier (literally--Truman is hard to hold as I read it).

There are lots of other challenges ahead in 2009. I'm grateful to have one that I have set for myself and that I have some control over its outcome.

May your challenges in 2009 be ones you can have some control over, too. Happy New Year!

Christmas Eve 2008 and 40 Years Ago

2008-12-28T06:47:00.002-07:00

In my 20’s in 1968, I heard the live broadcast of the Apollo 8 astronauts reading from Genesis 1 as they rounded the back side of the moon and saw the “earthrise” for the first time. A short time later, I bought some of the new postage stamps (6 cents at that time) with a photo of that earthrise and the words “In the beginning God …” and “Apollo 8”. To memorialize that event, I pasted one of those stamps in my Bible at the start of Genesis 1.

It was a fitting reminder after a horrible year: see The Voice Heard Round the Earth (and the Moon) for the setting. It’s subtitle is “In a year wracked by violence, America’s astronauts sent a biblical message of peace.”

Here is a selection from that article by John S. Gardner in National Review Online. You’ll want to read the whole thing.

As the astronauts flew above the lunar surface on their scientific mission, they gave a live Christmas Eve broadcast to the people of Earth, showing pictures of the Earth and Moon. Then, to conclude the broadcast, Anders said: “We are now approaching lunar sunrise and, for all the people back on Earth, the crew of Apollo 8 has a message that we would like to send to you.” He began reading from the first chapter of Genesis:
. . . Lovell and Borman continued with the passage until Borman reached verse 10:

And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

Borman then ended with this: “And from the crew of Apollo 8, we close with good night, good luck, a Merry Christmas — and God bless all of you, all of you on the good Earth.”

What is really sad is that this Christmas Eve, on the 40th anniversary of that first manned trip around the moon and that broadcast, I heard nothing about it.

The Rocky Mountain News had this one sentence buried in an article about children’s books: “Space fans will love Moon Landing (Candlewick Press, $29.99, ages 8 up), written by Richard Platt and David Hawcock, a celebration of Apollo 11's 40th anniversary.”

This Christmas Eve, 2008, we could have used that reminder.

Christmas, Funerals, and Relationships as Signs

2008-12-24T09:22:00.002-07:00

Yesterday I conducted a funeral for Aimee, the granddaughter of an old friend. Preparing for it, I remembered one of the three "echoes of a voice" from N. T. Wright's book, Simply Christian: Relationships. So, I stated this in the funeral message.

God’s love & grace are seen most clearly in human relationships. Each of us here today is connected to everyone else, if in no other way than through knowing Aimee or her mother or father. Our presence is a sign, a living representation of the relationship between God & us—those He created in His image.

This idea of human relationships being a signpost to point us to the relationship God wants with each of us is shown in a couple of familiar Christmas carols: "Hark, The Herald Angels Sing" and "O Little Town Of Bethlehem". Both speak of Jesus our Savior as our "Emmanuel"--God with us. In Jesus, God comes to dwell with us, abide with us, so we may forever abide with Him.

May your human relationships today reflect that perfect Relationship--the love of God within you and going out from you.

Merry Christmas to all.

Is It Any Different Now?

2008-12-24T07:39:00.002-07:00

This 1949 editorial from the Wall Street Journal speaks to us again.

In Hoc Anno Domini When Saul of Tarsus set out on his journey to Damascus the whole of the known world lay in bondage.

There may be civil order and stability when the government has complete control. There may be a sense of security when government promises bailouts to keep anything from failing; but something important is missing when that happens.

Follow Me?

2008-12-20T08:55:00.003-07:00

With the new layout of my blog, it is now possible for you to subscribe to it and get updates whenever I post a new entry. Or, if you have a blog of your own, you can sign up to follow me on your blog.

Check out the "subscribe" and "follow me" functions on the right column. Then as you make comments, we can have a virtual dialogue. Thanks for joining in.

The Irony of Elastic Theology and Inclusiveness

2008-10-19T05:36:00.002-06:00

In "The Upper Crust of Progressive Episcopalians", by George Will is this key insight:

“The Episcopal Church once was America's upper crust at prayer. Today it is "progressive" politics cloaked -- very thinly -- in piety. Episcopalians' discontents tell a cautionary tale for political as well as religious associations. As the church's doctrines have become more elastic, the church has contracted. It celebrates an "inclusiveness" that includes fewer and fewer members.”

It seems people want to belong to a church or organization that actually stands for something rather than for the acceptance of "whatever". When there is no distinction between the church and the culture, what appeal does the church have? Why bother to attend church? Or, as in George Will's column, why bother to stay connected to that church when you can become part of one that helps you become better than the culture?

A Word from our Catholic Brothers and Sisters

2008-09-23T18:21:00.002-06:00

An amazing video from CatholicVote.com--Powerful!

Surprised by Hope-- N.T. Wright on The Colbert Report

2008-08-01T20:34:00.006-06:00

I've started reading N.T. Wright's new book, "Surprised By Hope, Rethinking Heaven, The Resurrection, and the Mission of the Church". There, Bishop Wright explains what he has come to see as "life after life after death"--the classic Christian doctrine of heaven and what it means for us, rather than the sentimentalized version prominant in popular culture (and even in some parts of Christian culture) today.

To see a brief video introduction of the concept, check out this interview of N.T. Wright by Stephen Colbert. Surprised by Hope: N.T. Wright on The Colbert Report.

Having been to four funerals within the past two months, the topic is relevant. I'll post more afer I finish.

Obama's Trip--The Times Online comment and The Washington Post editorial: One hilarious and one serious

2008-07-25T07:15:00.002-06:00

I don't usually write about political matters, but it is of primary interest this year. Thanks to the Powerline blog for the following. Here are two “must-read” selections from major newspapers (one a commentary and one an editorial). Both are enlightening.

(1) From The Times Online (The Times of London, that is). The title and first paragraph:

"He ventured forth to bring light to the world. The anointed one's pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a miracle in action - and a blessing to all his faithful followers
Gerard Baker

And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness."

You’ll want to read it all. Hilarious!
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4392846.ece

(2) From The Washington Post. The title and first and last paragraphs:

"Mr. Obama in Iraq
Did he really find support for his withdrawal plan?
Wednesday, July 23, 2008; Page A14
THE INITIAL MEDIA coverage of Barack Obama's visit to Iraq suggested that the Democratic candidate found agreement with his plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces on a 16-month timetable. So it seems worthwhile to point out that, by Mr. Obama's own account, neither U.S. commanders nor Iraq's principal political leaders actually support his strategy.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Yet Mr. Obama's account of his strategic vision remains eccentric. He insists that Afghanistan is "the central front" for the United States, along with the border areas of Pakistan. But there are no known al-Qaeda bases in Afghanistan, and any additional U.S. forces sent there would not be able to operate in the Pakistani territories where Osama bin Laden is headquartered. While the United States has an interest in preventing the resurgence of the Afghan Taliban, the country's strategic importance pales beside that of Iraq, which lies at the geopolitical center of the Middle East and contains some of the world's largest oil reserves. If Mr. Obama's antiwar stance has blinded him to those realities, that could prove far more debilitating to him as president than any particular timetable."

Again, you will want to read it all: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/22/AR2008072202462.html

Thank You Tony Snow

2008-07-12T09:36:00.002-06:00

By now everyone has heard that Tony Snow went to meet the Lord today at age 53. I didn't know him personally, but I got to know and love his personality.

Tony Snow and Tim Russert (who died last month) both were deeply mourned by members of the media and their audiences. It is encouraging to hear a common theme in the eulogies for both--they had their priorities straight. Family, faith, friends, community, country, and, of course, fairness in their journalism.

I liked Tony Snow because I always felt uplifted when I watched his show or saw him as Press Secretary for the President. He knew how to gracefully deal with the super-sized egos of those he interviewed or who asked questions of him at press conferences. His smile and positive attitude were contagious. I could learn from him--and I always hoped to learn more. Thanks Tony, you inspired us.

Comedy meets post-modernism

2008-05-13T10:38:00.002-06:00

Comedy meets post-modernism
This is a great answer to the culture’s bias against any statement being Truth.
The Anchoress: This guy is like so right, you know?

The Relationship Between Culture and Government

2008-04-01T09:07:00.004-06:00

Read the following and then click on the link to see its author and the entire article from which this is selected.

The Founding Fathers Knew: Good Government Requires Good Culture

One of the amazing things about the generation that founded America was that they knew we as a people would eventually drift into a crisis of bad culture and bad government. And they had no doubt which came first. They knew that bad culture leads to bad government -- and good government requires good culture.
Consider just a few quotes from our Founders:

"...there is no truth more thoroughly established, than that there exists in the economy and course of nature, an indissoluble union between virtue and happiness; between duty and advantage; between the genuine maxims of an honest and magnanimous policy, and the solid rewards of public prosperity and felicity; since we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained..." -- President George Washington's First Inaugural Address

"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." -- George Washington's Farewell Address

"Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams

"Religion and good morals are the only solid foundation of public liberty and happiness." -- Samuel Adams

"Reading, reflection, and time have convinced me that the interests of society require the observation of those moral precepts ... in which all religions agree." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Religion is the only solid Base of morals and Morals are the only possible support of free governments" -- Gouverneur Morris

"The only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments." -- Benjamin Rush

Read the rest of this article to see what happens to a society when “bad culture [is] reinforced by bad government”.

Is It Christianity When . . .

2008-03-27T19:58:00.001-06:00

All sorts of positions can be taken within a range of what can reasonably be called “Christianity”. Is it Christianity, though, when a pastor wants to discard the “theological detritus—her words—of the past two millennia…and build on its ashes a new spiritual movement…”

To illustrate, the article Taking Christ Out Of Christianity (from the Toronto Globe and Mail), says:

“She wants salvation redefined to mean new life through removing the causes of suffering in the world. She wants the church to define resurrection as “starting over,” “new chances.” She wants an end to the image of God as an intervening all-powerful authority who must be appeased to avoid divine wrath; rather she would have congregations work together as communities to define God – or god – according to their own worked-out definitions of what is holy and sacred. She wants the eucharist – the symbolic eating and drinking of Jesus's body and blood to make the congregation part of Jesus's body – to be instead a symbolic experience of community love.”

I came upon this article via this post Deconstructing Christianity, Itself from The Anchoress (who got it via Deacon Greg’s blog.

To see more of what Rev. Gretta Vosper of Toronto’s West Hill United church (referenced in the article above) teaches, here is a selection from her message to the Canadian Centre For Progressive Christianity

“In many communities of faith, the guiding light has been some form of church authority, based on literal or metaphorical Scripture, accepted traditional formulas, or official pronouncements. May we now look to the only light that can guide us into the freedom of faith and the privilege of responsibility - the truth revealed to us in the light of love. May we see and know that spirit within us, may it shine forth in us, and from us.”

Charitably, I have to applaud Rev. Vosper for her (partial) honesty. She admits that she no longer believes what the Church has traditionally taught. She no longer is putting on a mask of traditional Christianity while underneath knowing that she is living a lie. By her honesty she challenges those who hear her or read her books to examine what they truly believe.

Of course, I don’t agree with her beliefs or her approach. I think the truly honest approach would be to say, “I’m no longer a Christian.” Then she could join whatever group with which she feels most comfortable; and she could promote her own brand of spirituality freely.

Almost all you need to know about being a Personal Representative

2008-03-27T13:48:00.000-06:00

So, you think you might want to be a Personal Representative (P.R.) of an estate? Or maybe you don’t want it but you find you have become one by default or request. You might know this role under the older title of “executor” of an estate.

Now what do you do? I recently sold a home that was in the estate of the mother of the Personal Representative. It seemed to me to be an overwhelming task—and a thankless one at that. My most recent real estate blog post will help you clarify your general duties, specific responsibilities, and possible liabilities.

Christian Compassion In Action

2008-03-04T08:11:00.005-07:00

Inside a campaign video, an amazing story of faith and the presence of God in trials. You've got to see a video on Hugh Hewitt's Townhall blog in which a prison guard shows genuine Christian compassion in action.

The War Against Jihadism is a Theological Battle

2008-01-13T14:45:00.000-07:00

In my last post I referred to an interview I heard with George Weigel. Since then I read his new book “Faith, Reason, and The War Against Jihadism-A Call to Action” (see link in left panel).

The book has 15 lessons about “things we cannot not know”. These lessons are grouped under three headings: “Understanding the Enemy, Rethinking Realism, and Deserving Victory”. I found it particularly satisfying to see someone write plainly and openly about the enemy that declared war on us. Abandoning political correctness while still retaining civility and fairness is rare. Weigel seems to pull it off in this concise and critical work.

Weigel correctly identifies the struggle not as a “war against terrorism” (a method), but a “war against jihadism” (an ideology which has no qualms about using terrorism to further its ends). He also correctly identifies that ideology as religious, as seen in his first “Lesson”: “The great human questions, including the great questions of public life, are ultimately theological”.

Ideas have consequences. Faith, and that which is the object of one’s faith, matters. Thus we are engaged in a war, though not of our choosing, which we will only win if we recognize and identify as a war of ideas as well as a physical war. Faith has to be considered along with reason in this battle.

It will involve “[c]hallenging the assumption in the American foreign policy establishment that the only answer to global jihadism is to convert 1.2 billion Muslims into good secular liberals…”. If it is a theological battle, not a secular disagreement, then our approach must be to begin to understand the theology that drives a jihadist to blow up those whom we (in our sense of logic and justice) consider “the innocent”. All 15 lessons are valuable and instructive. We might like to ignore or reject his last lesson that we cannot not learn (“There is no escape from U.S. leadership”), but this lesson and all before it derive from looking at the world situation realistically.

Get the book. Read it. And then ask your favorite candidate who is running for office this year what approach they have to winning this “war against jihadism”. Their answer will tell you whether they are serious enough to deserve victory.

Respect For Differences

2008-01-04T07:30:00.000-07:00

I heard an interview where Catholic author George Weigel discussed what is needed for inter-faith dialogue between Christians and Muslims. See the transcript here. Weigel said:

The prerequisite for serious inter-religious dialogue is a frank acknowledgement of differences. Tolerance does not mean ignoring differences, as if differences don’t make a difference. Tolerance means engaging difference with civility and respect, but with a clear understanding of your own moral values as applied to politics, and why they’re worth defending.

This has relevance in other situations as well: political discussions between Republican and Democrat friends; theology differences between different Christian denominations; policy issues within religions denominations; or in disagreements within a church.

You find “politics’ in every organization, even a church. Good people disagree on deeply held issues. To often, though, we avoid discussing issues where we know there are strong disagreements. We don’t want conflict, and we end up shrinking from true dialogue.

Using Weigel’s formula for serious dialogue above, here are some suggestions for engaging in true dialogue with respect for each other.

· Frankly acknowledge that differences exist. Ignoring them is like trying to cap a volcano.
· Know that differences matter. If you strongly believe something, you don’t want to just be told that it’s OK to disagree and let’s move on. That is effectively saying your beliefs don’t really matter. They matter to you.
· If your beliefs and values matter, you want to defend them--respectfully. In Weigel’s interview he links this defense to reason, not emotion. Reasonable dialogue involves civility and respect; and it seeks to find common values that enable us to live and work together in harmony.
· Respectful and reasonable dialogue means discussing issues, not people. Another author I’ve heard recently said that “refuting” an argument “doesn’t mean reject strongly or angrily. It means to argue successfully against. . . . It involves rational discourse.”

We may differ on various issues, but if we can agree on certain values we can still live together in peace. You may not be able to find peace with everyone (you may want it, but they may not). Even then, Paul’s advice in Romans 12:18 applies, “ If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.” Respect for differences and for each other makes it work.

Setting Goals-a bizarre way to start

2008-01-02T17:11:00.000-07:00

This is a bizarre way to start a column on setting goals, but it’s very effective. Read the entire column (it’s short) at http://www.scriptoriumdaily.com/2008/01/02/setting-goals-for-the-new-year/. It’s called “Setting Goals For The New Year”, by JP Moreland at ScriptoriumDaily.com.

“It’s the time of year when we set New Year’s resolutions. However, before you do, I offer you something to ponder. Suppose I invited you over to play a game of Monopoly. When you arrive I announce that the game is going to be a bit different. Before us is the Monopoly board, a set of jacks, a coin, the television remote and a refrigerator. I grant you the first turn, and puzzlingly, inform you that you may do anything you want: fill the board with hotels, toss the coin in the air, grab a few jacks, fix a sandwich, or turn on the television. You respond by putting hotels all over the board and smugly sit back as I take my turn. I respond by dumping the board upside down and tossing the coin in the air. Somewhat annoyed, you right the board and replenish it with hotels. I turn on the television and dump the board over again.”

Freedom and Opportunity

2007-12-21T15:37:00.000-07:00

“The Anchoress” blog has a wonderful story about her experience talking with some immigrants to the USA:

Same old America: Freedom and Opportunity
“Can I ask, why here? Why did you come to America?”
As it turned out, the fellow helping me did not speak much English. He turned to his cousin, the receptionist, for translation, and I asked again.
“More freedom,” she said immediately, without first translating. “America has freedom.”
“Opportunity,” said the girl at the next workspace. “We can have small business and grow it and make bigger business. We can be anything.”
By then the receptionist had translated to her cousin and he had responded. He smiled hugely at me while she told me what he had said.
“America is a great country where we can use all our energy, all our knowledge, all our creativity. There is freedom.”
“Opportunity,” the other girl repeated. “Anyone can be anything, do anything in America.”
“Yes,” said the receptionist, who is pregnant. “My son can be president, if he wants.”

My 2007 Book Recommendations

2007-12-14T19:46:00.000-07:00

It’s that time of year when lists of recommended books come out. I’ve gone over several of those lists, and see some of the books I’ve read on some of them.

For whatever it’s worth, here is a list of some books I’ve read this year, and my comments on each.

1776, by David McCullough: A captivating narrative history of the critical year in American history. It shows how difficult it is in reality to gain freedom, and then to keep it once gained. Excellent read.

A Mormon in the White House?, by Hugh Hewitt: With a subtitle of 10 Things Every American Should Know About Mitt Romney, it is a friendly look into the character and qualifications of one candidate for President. And of course, it deals with “the Mormon question”. Worth reading, especially as Romney is leading in several states.

America, The Last Best Hope, Vols. I & II, by William Bennett: An excellent narrative history of the United States. It is essential reading for those who have read nothing in American History since high school or those who would like to read something positive about the United States, but still see how we really are, warts and all.

Christianity For The Rest Of Us, by Diana Butler Bass: This could be a beautiful read about “Christian practices” that have been helpful to many and are signposts of some healthy and growing “mainline Christian” churches. I say it “could be” because to get to the beautiful parts you have to endure a lot of negative, polemical, bigoted, and condescending comments about those groups Bass doesn’t like: evangelicals, fundamentalists, the “religious right”, and others she ironically deems narrow-minded. If you fit into one of those categories, skip this book. If you like polemical writing, you may like this one.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, by J.K. Rowling: The last book of a series that is great fun. I loved them all.

My Grandfather’s Son, by Clarence Thomas: This is a truly inspiring story about one of the Supreme Court’s most controversial justices. His rise from a poverty and prejudiced culture that is unbelievable to all except those who have seen it firsthand is a challenge to all of us who complain about whatever roadblocks we may have had to success. I loved it.

Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference, by Philip Yancey: Our Sunday School class did a study of this book early in 2007. You can see some of the weekly lesson guides online here AntleHope.blogspot Prayer Study. It is a most important book on prayer, with no false promises but with a lot of excellent information and advice. A great study!

Simply Christian, by N.T. Wright: This is N.T. Wright’s approach to what some have called an update of C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity”. It’s an attempt to present the Christian faith in a manner that will appeal to 21st Century non-Christians and Christians alike. It may be a bit hard to get into for those who don’t understand metaphors. I like it very much, since I’m trying to adapt my approach to “evangelism” to reach those who aren’t steeped in the evangelical Christian culture I grew up in.

The Forgotten Man, by Amity Schlaes: I knew very little about the Great Depression and the FDR administration, even though it’s effect on my parents affected me greatly. I learned how much that era continues to dominate the political landscape and arguments about the role of the Federal government (in Social Security, taxes, health care, etc.). It is a lively readable book that throws light on a lot of people whose names I only vaguely knew. This narrative history of the 30’s is one of the most important books that can be read by those who will vote in 2008—if you believe that “the past is the prologue to the future”.

The Last Word, by N.T. Wright: This book, along with the last one on my list by N.T. Wright, gave me the framework for an extensive study of the Bible that my Sunday School class is doing now (God Speaks To/Through His People, the story of the Bible as a Drama in Five Acts—see more about that here. It is an important smaller work whose value is seen in its sub-title” “Beyond the Bible Wars to a New Understanding of the Authority of Scripture”.

The Looming Tower, by Lawrence Wright: This is THE classic (true) story of the rise of Al Qaeda and the road to 9/11. Anyone who claims to have the answer to ending the war that Al Qaeda declared on the United States and has not read this book is only fooling themselves. A MUST READ!

The New Testament and the People of God, by N.T. Wright: This is the more extensive study from which “The Last Word” derives its framework. It’s a big (476 pages), detailed, scholarly book by a pre-eminent New Testament scholar who is also the (Anglican) Bishop of Durham, England. The first of a trilogy, it’s not a book for those with little biblical background; but it is still a great book that I would recommend to anyone who is interested in Christian theology and today’s culture.

Christmas with a capital C

2007-11-26T08:06:00.000-07:00

I love these songs and this group “Go Fish”.

Turn sound on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAckfn8yiAQ

It’s About The Cross http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyR0lwO-nXc

God Speaks Session 3: The Human Condition

2007-09-29T10:08:00.000-06:00

This is for session 3 of a study on "God Speaks To/Through His People, the story of the Bible as a drama in five acts" for the Koinonia Class at Calvary Baptist Church, Denver, CO. Session 3 is Act I, Scenes 2 & 3 (Genesis 3-11)

Earlier (in the Prologue, Part 1) I called our experience of living in a world of ultimate questions, problems, evil, sin, and eventually death as “The Human Condition”. The subject is not original—many have written on it; and every religion treats it in one way or another.

My use of this term situates chapters 3 through 11 of Genesis as Act II in the 5-Act Drama of the story of the Bible. Act I is creation—of the world and finally of humans as those who are created “in the image of God”. Act II shows what happens when the actors don’t follow the Director’s directions.

In Genesis 3 Eve is tempted by the personification of evil to disobey God. She ate the forbidden fruit and then tempted Adam to join her. He did, and life has not been the same since.

Apparently, being created “in the image of God” included having the ability to choose and to be responsible for one’s choices. Free Will it is sometimes called. It’s not just that we are free to choose whatever we desire. Choices result in actions. Actions bring (sometimes unforeseen) consequences. Having the ability to choose also means being responsible for the consequences.
In biblical terms, Adam and Eve sinned against God. They chose to put themselves and their will ahead of their Creator and his will. In essence they said, “I want to be in charge of my life. I want to be a god myself.” The consequence was that God let them have their wish.

The paradise in which God had placed them was now off limits to them. They wanted to be their own god and create their own paradise. We know how successful they and all their descendants have been. The consequence of their sin (and ours) can be seen in the news every day.

Fortunately, the play does not end at Act II. God may have let us have our own way, but He has not left us alone. God’s desire for a loving fellowship with His creatures did not change. Act II, Scene 2 introduces the subplot of a covenant which continues throughout the rest of the drama. Even in the worst of times there is good news. We are not alone—God loves us and wants to reconcile us to Himself. Moreover, God provides the means for that reconciliation.

More about covenants next week.

God Speaks Session 2: Purpose in Life

2007-09-18T22:25:00.000-06:00

This is for session 2 of a study on "God Speaks To/Through His People, the story of the Bible as a drama in five acts" for the Koinonia Class at Calvary Baptist Church, Denver, CO.

Recently I’ve seen several things which bring to mind the complexity and miraculous nature of Creation: NASA photos taken with the Hubble Telescope—sights so beautiful, awesome, and inspiring that it’s difficult to believe they are really of galaxies so many light-years away; a program about how the Rocky Mountains were formed by some tectonic plates subducting under others and pushing up the mantle of the earth; and another program about archeological discoveries giving evidence of people over 15,000 years ago inhabiting what is now America.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote in the Prologue, Part 1 of this Bible study entitled “God Speaks To/Through His People” that we seek answers to the questions Who am I? Where did I come from? Where am I going when this life is over? Why am I here? What is the purpose of life? Why is there evil? Why do I do things which I know are evil? Is there any hope for forgiveness and for a happy future? Is there a solution for this human condition that I myself am in?

This week we are looking at two of those questions—the one that asks Where did I come from? and another one, Why am I here? From astronomy we might get an answer that tells us something about all matter on Earth having come from exploding stars. Even that fact is predated by the formation of the stars from the Big Bang billions of years ago. Biology might say we are here because of our ancestors having evolved over millennia to produce the species homo sapiens.

A number of the sciences might together be able to piece together a partial explanation of how we physically got here. It can only be a partial explanation, though, because none of them can get prior to the theoretical Big Bang. That, they say, is for metaphysics (or religion) to propose. One theologian/philosopher, Thomas Aquinas, offered five “proofs” for the existence of God, one of which (expanding Aristotle’s concept of an “unmoved mover” is that since there is motion, there had to be a prime mover (that is, something or some being that started it all in motion), and he said that the One we call God was that prime mover.

None of these arguments answers the “why” question though. That answer we can find in the Bible. Genesis, chapters 1 and 2, tells us that God created all that is, including us; and that He created us for fellowship with Himself. Being created “in the image of God”, we find our ultimate happiness and purpose relating to and working in partnership with God.

If you’ve been wondering why you are here, perhaps a re-reading of Scripture can give some clues—especially if you ask God to show you what He wants of you. God didn’t create us in His image without a reason for doing so.

Prologue, Part 2: The Story of the Bible in Five Acts

2007-09-09T06:36:00.000-06:00

In the Prologue, Part 1, I wrote, “To get to specific answers to particular questions, it helps to get the big picture first—to see the overall theme in the Bible. There is a grand story or plot that will keep us on track as we look at the smaller sections.

Simply put, the theme of the Bible is that the same God who created us loves us, and keeps reaching out to us even though we rebel against Him. Having reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ (see II Cor. 5:18-21), God makes us partners in extending His love to others and in helping to make right what is wrong in the world.”

Today we start to see the details of how we will look at that theme. There are 66 books in the two major sections of the Bible, the Old and New Testaments. More than 50 different writers, inspired by God, wrote these books that cover a timeline from Creation to around 100 A.D. It helps to use some kind of mental device to pull all these diverse works together and see the thread that runs through all of them. We will borrow the device of a play, developed by N.T. Wright as seen below.

In his masterful work The New Testament and the People of God,[i] N. T. Wright details his concept of seeing the Bible as the foundational story of Judaism, and therefore of the early church. Here he expands on what he just outlined in his much smaller book, The Last Word: Scripture and the Authority of God--Getting Beyond the Bible Wars [ii], the big picture of the Bible can be seen if the Bible is presented as a five-act drama.[iii]

Those five acts are Creation, the Fall, Israel, Jesus, and The Church. As we get into our study, it might seem strange for the first Act to encompass only two chapters of Genesis and the second Act covering only nine chapters of Genesis while the third act encompasses the rest of the Old Testament. The drama is not balanced in length.

The power of the storyline in this drama is not dependent upon the number of scenes in each act, however. Without Act I, Act II doesn’t make sense. And without Acts I and II, the rest of the drama would be incomprehensible. In fact, without the foundation given in Acts I and II, we would have no way to understand the life we live or the universe we live in.
Those are bold claims, but they start to ring true when we see how Wright presents his concept of the story of the Bible as a drama.

Seen from the perspective of a first-century Jew…the basic story concerned the creator god and the world, and focused upon Israel’s place as the covenant people of the former placed in the midst of the latter.

Thus, the call of the patriarchs was set against the backcloth of creation and fall. Abraham was seen as the divine answer to the problem of Adam. The descent into Egypt and the dramatic rescue under the leadership of Moses formed the initial climax of the story, setting the theme of liberation as one of the major motifs for the whole, and posing a puzzle which later Jews would reflect on in new ways: if Israel was liberated from Egypt, and placed in her own land, why is everything not now perfect? (page 216, emphasis mine)

Here we see the key insight of the drama: the “backcloth” (Wright is British; we would say “backdrop”) of creation and fall set the scene for all that follows. Behind every scene in the drama is the Bible’s depiction of the human condition. We experience suffering, hatred, war, greed, death, and all the other problems of life because of rebellion against our Creator. However, in spite of our rebellion, that Creator loves us and wants to have a personal relationship with us. The Creator (the LORD or God, a single god who revealed himself to Moses and said his name is Yahweh) chose one faithful man (Abraham) to be the other party in a covenant so God could bless and restore the rest of His creation to Himself.

The rest of the drama, then, is the story of how God reaches out to restore His fallen world to a loving relationship with Himself. A covenant with Abraham and his descendants, and a new covenant later with the community of faith Jesus established as His “church”, would be the means by which God would effect that reconciliation.

What we will try to do over the next 30 weeks or so is to firmly grasp the storyline of the drama (get the big picture) so we can understand the smaller stories or subplots that give the Bible its richness and depth as the Word of God. The subplots are comprehensible when we look at them in the context of the overall story.

Our approach to getting the overall view will be to expand on N.T. Wright’s theme of the Bible as a drama in five acts. We will see the five acts as:

Act I Creation, and Made In God’s Image
Act II The Fall, and Fallout From The Fall
Act III Abraham And Israel—Chosen To Keep And Proclaim God’s Covenant
Act IV Jesus—The Word Incarnate Institutes A New Covenant
Act V The Church of Jesus Christ Spreads The Word

There is a lot more in each of these Acts than can be grasped in one week, of course; so we will further divide the longer Acts into several Scenes, one for each of the Sundays from September 16, 2007 through May 2008.

One more thing. God is the author, playwright, producer, director, and even takes roles on stage periodically—especially in the starring role.

We get to play a role of our own today. We will have opportunities to improvise that role; however our best performances are when we follow the script.
_________________________________
[i] “The New Testament and the People of God”, by N. T. Wright, (Fortress Press, Minneapolis, 1992)
[ii] “The Last Word: Scripture and the Authority of God--Getting Beyond the Bible Wars”, by N.T. Wright (HarperSanFrancisco, New York, 2005)
[iii] For a lecture that briefly summarizes what's in his book, go to http://www.ntwrightpage.com/Wright_Bible_Authoritative.htm

Prologue: The Story of the Bible as a Drama in Five Acts, Part 1.

2007-09-01T21:48:00.000-06:00

From where I sit every morning I can look out and see my wife’s flower garden and the tops of some mountains. I’m reminded daily of the beauty in this world. Life is good.

I’m also reminded of something else every morning—my body is not as fit and flexible as it was. The warranty on this body seems to have expired, and one by one its parts are wearing out. Some day it will need to be turned in for an upgraded version.

It’s not only my body that seems to be falling apart. I see or hear the news and note that most of it is bad. Local television news operates on the principle of “if it bleeds, it leads”. National and world news focuses on war, weather, political fights, and scandals.

Since I’ve read some history, I know that it’s the same “news” that has been recycled in every generation. Every now and then, though, we read or hear of heroic and inspiring actions. Blessedly, some good news is included or we would despair.

Good and bad. Beauty and ugliness. Inspiring truths and depressing “news”. What’s going on? Is there any way to make sense of all this?

This is The Human Condition. We experience what every generation has experienced. We seek answers to the same questions everyone else asks: Who am I? Where did I come from? Where am I going when this life is over? Why am I here? What is the purpose of life? Why is there evil? Why do I do things which I know are evil? Is there any hope for forgiveness and for a happy future? Is there a solution for this human condition that I myself am in?

Fortunately, there is a solution. And, there is a source to which we can go for answers to all of these “ultimate questions”.[i] The source which has provided answers for millennia is the Bible. The answers we seek are there. Sometimes they are explicitly stated. Sometimes they are imbedded in stories, and we have to discern them as we read and re-read those stories at different stages of life. Sometimes the answers are hidden from plain sight, and can only be found with careful study and reflection.

To get to specific answers to particular questions, it helps to get the big picture first—to see the overall theme in the Bible. There is a grand story or plot that will keep us on track as we look at the smaller sections.

Simply put, the theme of the Bible is that the same God who created us loves us, and keeps reaching out to us even though we rebel against Him. Having reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ (see II Cor. 5:18-21), God makes us partners in extending His love to others and in helping to make right what is wrong in the world.

This theme has been communicated in many different ways over the centuries. We will borrow a device from a modern scholar, N.T. Wright, and look at the Bible as if it is a play—a drama in five acts.
----------------------------
[i] They are “ultimate questions” because they are the questions everyone ultimately asks. They are the foundational questions for our philosophy of life, our “worldview”, or more simply, “How we look at life.”

"E Pluribus Unum"

2007-08-25T22:21:00.000-06:00

Last night I wrote a piece I called “E Pluribus Unum”, and planned to post it this morning. Prior to posting it, though, I saw a blog article by Chuck Colson on Townhall with the same title. In his "E Pluribus Unum", Colson makes the same point I’ve made, and points to another author (Robert Putnam) with the same concept in an article entitled “Bowling Alone”. Here is my treatise on the glorification of “Diversity” to add to what they have said.

In our church we often hear, “We celebrate diversity”. We come from many denominations in addition to Baptist—and we even come from a variety of Baptist backgrounds. Our recent survey showed that only about 60% of the respondents grew up in Baptist churches.

In the Sunday School class my wife and I teach the results were even more dramatic. One Sunday I took an informal poll. Out of 21 present that day, two grew up in American Baptist churches, four in Southern Baptist, and one Independent Baptist. The other two-thirds of the class were from Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran, Catholic , and various other backgrounds.

We are diverse in age as well, although in recent years skewing more toward an older demographic. With almost half of the respondents in that survey claiming membership for twenty years or more, it is inevitable that the membership would be ageing.

Theologically we see a lot of diversity. That is understandable given the wide range of religious backgrounds of our members. Although the majority is moderate to conservative in its beliefs about Jesus, the Bible, and salvation, a sizeable minority is fairly liberal. For example only 74% said they believe the resurrection was an actual event.

I could cite other areas of diversity, but the point is clear—we are a diverse congregation. That seems to be the major factor in establishing our corporate identity for some. In a presentation by our Pulpit committee, a tentative theme mentioned unity in Christ, but emphasized and elaborated on our diversity and the latitude we extend to others to pursue their own spiritual journey.

The tentative theme has some appropriate elements, but a shift of emphasis would make it more biblical. Going back to the “We celebrate diversity” statement, a more biblical approach would be, “We welcome diversity. We celebrate unity in Christ.”

We have diversity. That’s a given. The more we emphasize our differences, though, the more difficult it will be to come together to both call a new pastor and move forward towards a unified mission goal.

After all, in John 17 Jesus did not say, “I pray that they may all be diverse”. He said, “I pray that they may all be one…even as you and I are one.” (from John 17: 21,22).

If we are truly disciples, or followers, of Jesus Christ, let’s work toward the answer to His prayer. We do that, not by emphasizing diversity, but by focusing on what unifies us. From many different and very diverse backgrounds comes one unity in Christ.

The Abduction of Churches?

2007-08-20T09:25:00.000-06:00

In the Summer 2007 issue of City Journal Heather Mac Donald writes about The Abduction of Opera. (Read the whole article, but be warned, the language explicitly describes the vile and base extent to which European, and some American, opera directors have taken classical opera.) The vivid description of what some have done to Verdi, Puccini, Mozart, Strauss, and others is necessary to show how low some will go to elevate their opinion above that of the genius of a former era.

Mac Donald’s last three sentences in the article are especially worth noting, “But Gelb should remember that he is the guardian of a tradition that generations have built. That tradition approaches the magnificent works of the past with love and humility, recognizing our debt to them. The Met will remain a vital New York and world institution for another century if it allows those works to speak for themselves.”

In addition, the article shows the end result of Postmodernism on popular culture. All the past is irrelevant; only my own experience today matters. What someone in the Enlightenment (i.e. “modern”) period thought or intended when they wrote music, or an opera, or a play takes second place to what we think today. We must transform the message as well as the medium in order to appeal to today’s audience.

This is exactly the problem churches face today. Churches have to decide whether to appeal to this generation by using different technology (such as PowerPoint projections on a screen above the pulpit); by changing the worship experience through more contemporary music; and by changing the message of the Gospel to one that is more in line with multiculturalism, moral equivalency, religious pluralism, and diversity politics; or to use whatever technology and methods of presentation are helpful in communicating the one Gospel that has transformed lives and cultures for centuries.

I’ll paraphrase Heather MacDonald’s last three sentences above. But churches should remember that they are the guardian of a tradition that generations have built. That tradition approaches the magnificent gospel message of the past with love and humility, recognizing our debt to it. Churches will remain a vital American and world institution for the future if they allow that message to speak for itself.

There is a reason that certain Christian denominations in the U.S. have been on a steady decline for the past two or three decades while others are growing. Trends and political themes come and go. The traditional message appeals to the felt needs of people, regardless of to which generational group they belong. Changing the message may be trendy in some circles, but changing the core of the Gospel message leaves it hollow, shallow, and ineffective. Churches today that do well follow Paul’s example in saying, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.” (Romans 1:16 NIV)

Moral Equivalency at CNN

2007-08-19T20:43:00.000-06:00

Check out this example of what is called "moral equivalency". Is it really true that some people think that there is no difference between Christian "fundamentalists" and Islamist "fundamentalists"?

The article is a post on PowerlineBlog "Fundamentally Flawed"

"On Tuesday evening, CNN will debut a three-part series called God's Warriors. The series, devoted to an examination of "religious fundamentalism," is created and hosted by Christiane Amanpour; the first segment, to be aired Tuesday, is called "Jewish Warriors;" Wednesday's show is "Muslim Warriors," followed by "Christian Warriors" on Thursday.
While these three topics are treated as though they were on a par, there are some obvious distinctions. Like, the Christian "warriors" are home-schooling their children, while the Muslim "warriors" are blowing people up. If this Associated Press account is accurate, CNN's series is devoted to obfuscating such obvious differences rather than elucidating them."

Critique of "god Is Not Great"

2007-06-18T17:50:00.001-06:00

Christopher Hitchens has a top-selling book called “god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything”. It’s a book you may want to know about, but probably won’t want to buy it. For an analysis, read this at http://www.markdroberts.com/htmfiles/resources/godisnotgreat.htm (it’s a series about the debate between Hitchens and Mark D. Roberts on the Hugh Hewitt show and then Roberts’ critique of Hitchens’ book).

The Mission of the Church

2007-05-22T12:37:00.000-06:00

Mark D. Roberts has started a new series on the mission of God in the world, and how we can be involved in it. I have enjoyed and appreciated several of his prior series (DaVinci Code, Can We Trust the Gospels, etc), so I'm looking forward to this one.
I like his concept of laying out the broad biblical context for mission--it is something I've also picked up in N.T. Wright's The Last Word. In this new book Wright placed today's church in Act V of a drama through which God uses His Word to effect His will.
To check out Roberts' series, click on The Mission of God and the Missional Church.

The Fine Line

2007-04-20T21:53:00.001-06:00

There is a fine line of distinction between cynicism and submission in adding the phrase “Thy will be done” to our prayers. As our class was studying the chapter on “Prayer and Physical Healing” in Philip Yancey’s book “Prayer: Does It Make Any Difference” some in the class expressed their cynicism. The chapter was disappointing to them because it essentially said, “Answers to prayer for healing are so random and unpredictable that we can’t prove that prayer has any effect upon the sick.

On one side of the line is cynicism and skepticism—prayer is ineffective and unnecessary, even irrelevant. It has no discernable effect in curing the illness, so the phrase “Thy will be done” is a cop-out. It’s something to say as an escape clause one can use to excuse or explain away God’s inaction.

On the other side of the line is faith and submission—prayer is essential and invited, even though in the end God, who sees the big picture, my not grant the request as prayed. God may answer differently from what we desire, but we accept the fact that he knows best, and we acquiesce to His will.

This line of distinction is important. If we know there is a line, we can discern on which side of it we stand—and on which side we want to stand. We then have a choice.

If we don’t know the line exists, we may think that where we stand is the way life always must be. So the cynic must remain cynical. The person of faith must never become cynical.

But to believe is a choice. To ask in prayer is a step of faith and of humility. We ask. We don’t demand or presume. “We walk by faith, not by sight.” (II Cor. 5:7)

In the end, then, “Thy will be done” is either a cop-out or an act of submission. The end of the journey depends on where it begins and which direction one takes. On which side of the line do we stand when we say it? And do we move toward faith or away from it?

Hope for the future is the destination of those on the side of faith. Despair is the destination for those on the side of cynicism. The fine line is important—for our future.

Prayer Study-Session 12 (4/1/07)

2007-03-30T07:29:00.001-06:00

Study Guide for Chapter 19: “What To Pray For” in Philip Yancey’s book, “Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?”

When you are at a loss about what to pray for, remember these suggestions. For this week, write out a sentence prayer for each of the sections of Chapter 19.

A. A verse to memorize: Romans 8:26-27 (NIV)

In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express. And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.

B. Book/Bible Study

Heart’s Desire: “God invites us to ask plainly for what we need”. It’s OK to pray for what you really want, instead of just praying for what you think you should want. What do you want to ask of God today?
Lament: There is a time to grieve and weep.
Confession: Self explanatory.
Peace: John 15 suggests we can only produce spiritual fruit when we rest (abide) in Christ, not when we go it alone apart from the vine. What burden are you carrying?
God’s Presence: Don’t pray for God to be with you. Pray thankfully that He is with you and trust that He is.
Compassion: Pray that God will enlarge your heart and expand your circle of His love as you pray for others.
Gratitude: What are you grateful for today?
Faith: Ask for faith (fidelity), not just “bold childlike faith” that some desired change will occur. Ephesians 2:8,9 says even faith is a gift from God.
Grace: In this sense, ask for God’s gift of strength to live victoriously in whatever situation you find yourself.
Preparations: Are you ready for death? Pray for help in living life in preparation for your inevitable death.

Prayer Study-Session Ten (3/18/07)

2007-03-15T05:14:00.001-06:00

Study Guide for Chapter 16: “Unanswered Prayer-Whose Fault?” and Chapter 17: “Unanswered Prayer-Living With The Mystery”. (in Prayer—Does It Make Any Difference?, by Philip Yancey)

These two chapters start a new section on “Prayer Dilemmas”. One dictionary defines “dilemma” as a “situation with unsatisfactory choices” or “a situation in which somebody must choose one of two or more unsatisfactory alternatives”.

We are thus forewarned that this will be a difficult section. We are not likely to finish it with the one thing we want—a clear, convincing, settled, and satisfactory doctrine of prayer.

Nevertheless, just as preparing a delicious meal also involves the chores of clearing the table and washing the dishes, there are some things we have to expect to do in order to complete the entire task. To get the whole picture, we can’t ignore this section.

Chapter 14: “Unanswered Prayer-Whose Fault?”

A verse to memorize: Mark 11:24 (NIV) Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. and James 4:3 (NIV) When you ask, you do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, that you may spend what you get on your pleasures.

Book/Bible Study

1. It appears that for Yancey and others there is a problem with both unanswered prayers and with the inconsistency of how God answers prayers. Which is more troublesome to you?

2. What are some of the factors in unanswered prayers that may be “our fault”?

3. We’ve all heard “Be careful what you pray for, you may get it.” What can be some blessings of unanswered prayer?

4. Respond to the last paragraph on page 231.

Chapter 17: “Unanswered Prayer-Living With The Mystery”

1. List some aspects of your life today that make you predisposed to be less patient and less tolerant of having to wait.

2. In Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 (made into a song by Pete Seeger and recorded by numerous artists in the 60’s and later) is this truth, “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven”. How does this truth fit in with the concept of waiting?

3. Why might God answer our prayers differently from what we desire?

4. Look at Yancey’s conclusion on unanswered prayer in the last paragraph on page 247. Could this be a satisfactory answer for you?

C. Class Discussion

How do you deal with the dilemma posed by a loving God inconsistently answering prayer?
Your questions and comments

Extra: From a blogger who calls herself "The Anchoress" comes a link to this delightful piece on faith and prayer in the midst of pain.

Prayer Study-Session Eight (3/4/07)

2007-03-02T09:23:00.001-07:00

Study Guide for Chapter 12: “Yearning for Fluency” and Chapter 13: “Prayer Grammar”.

This week we enter Part Three of “Prayer—Does it make any difference?”, by Philip Yancey. Coming after Part One, “Keeping Company With God” and Part Two, “Unraveling The Mysteries”, this section, “The Language of Prayer” brings us back to earth. Less theological and more practical, it offers some insights that can help us develop a more consistent and satisfying prayer life.

Because they don’t answer our most immediate questions about prayer, we could be tempted to slide over these four chapters and get to the “good stuff” in the next part , “Prayer Dilemmas”. I’m reminded of the brief time I took piano lessons (as an adult). I wanted to understand the theory behind chords and harmony; and I got bored with the routine of practicing every day.

Much like learning to play an instrument involves practice, Yancey treats learning to pray like learning a foreign language. It takes practice, a routine, and eventually submersion into a world where that language is spoken. Still, as one who has a learned a “second language”, I know that what is “second” to me is native to someone else. Without moving to a French-speaking country, I could never be able to converse fluently with someone for whom French is their native language.

The two chapters for this week help us start to develop fluency in prayer with the One for whom it is the native language.

Chapter 12: “Yearning for Fluency”

A. A verse to memorize: Romans 12:2 (NIV)

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing
of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is--his good, pleasing and perfect will.

B. Book/Bible Study

1. Write out the Henri Nouwen quotation at the head of the chapter and respond to it.

2. What expectations might one have about prayer that are unrealistic and need to be adjusted?

3. Distinguish prayer (as Yancey describes it in the last sentence on page 166) from the secular meditation technique of emptying the mind.

Chapter 13: “Prayer Grammar”

A. A memorized verse: Matthew 6:9-13 (KJV) After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.

B. Book/Bible Study

Yancey talks about the prayers of the Bible as templates for prayers. How could you use them as templates for your prayers?
Have you ever used any of these other templates to aid you in prayer? [hymns, poems, formulas for prayer like “A.C.T.S.” [Adoration, Confession, Thanksgiving, and Supplication]? If so, how did they help?

C. Class Discussion

Explain the title of this chapter as Yancey describes it.
Your questions and comments

Prayer Study-Session Seven (2/24/07)

2007-02-21T21:31:00.000-07:00

Study Guide for Chapter 10: “Does Prayer Change God?” and Chapter 11: “Ask, Seek, Knock”.

Chapter 10: “Does Prayer Change God?”

A. A verse to memorize: Matthew 7:7-8 (NIV)
"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. "

B. Book/Bible Study

After setting up the argument with come contrasting verses and giving some history of the debate about whether prayer changes God, Yancey gives “the Bible’s view”. What is it?
Explain the concept of life being like a play that is in the process of being created and describe how it relates to prayer.
Explain the quotation from Charles Finney on page 134; “If you ask why he ever answers prayer at all, the answer must be, Because he is unchangeable.”

C. Class Discussion

In what way does the last paragraph on page 144 give you an answer to the question in the title of this chapter?
Your questions and comments.

Chapter 11: “Ask, Seek, Knock”

B. Book/Bible Study

The theme of this chapter can be stated in one word: _________________
“God hears all, but doesn’t grant all.” Last week Lindsey referred to a movie which dramatically shows why God doesn’t grant all prayers. What was the movie and how does it explain the issue?

C. Class Discussion

The last section of chapter 11, “Winning By Losing” is paradoxical. How would you explain the paradox to someone else?
Your questions and comments

I also want to make sure you know about a movie coming out this Friday (the 23^rd). It’s called “Amazing Grace”—the story of how William Wilberforce and John Newton (the author of the song) were instrumental in abolishing the slave trade in the 19^th century. See more about the movie and some actions that can be done today to abolish the slave trade going on in the 21^st century.

Most importantly, go see the movie this weekend. Go to http://www.amazinggracemovie.com/ and enter your zip code in the box on the right side where you can find a theater near you. Theaters and movie distributors are influenced by the first weekend’s box office; and whether the movie sticks around for more than a week will be determined by how many see it the first weekend.

Prayer Study-Session Six (2/18/2007)

2007-02-18T21:42:00.000-07:00

Chapter 9: “What Difference Does It Make?”

Why do you think bad things happen, and what is our role when they happen?
Yancey makes one major point in this chapter. Describe it in your own words.
Your questions and comments.

C. Class Discussion

After reading these chapters, describe why prayer makes a difference.
Read Rev. 8:1-5 in light of Yancey’s explanation on page 130. Does his explanation make sense to you?

Prayer Study-Session Five (2/11/2007)

2007-02-06T22:15:00.001-07:00

Study Guide for Chapters 8 & 9: “Partnership” and “What Difference Does It Make?”

Both of these chapters bring together the dual partnerships of God & us and prayer & action. God chooses to do His work by partnering with us. We cannot do God’s work without partnering with Him by prayer. Prayer is the weapon of choice in the fight against evil. We must pray to fight; and we must fight sustained by prayer.

A. A verse to memorize: Prayer & action
James 2:14-17 (NIV)
¹⁴What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? ¹⁵Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. ¹⁶If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? ¹⁷In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

B. Book / Bible Study

Chapter 8: “Partnership”

God working with & through us is an unbalanced partnership. What makes it work?
From reading pages 101-106, fill in the blanks: God’s pattern of partnering with us is not as a ___________________, but as a ____________________.
List Yancey’s “three stages of prayer”. Do you think they are accurate? Where would you place yourself?
Your questions and comments.

C. Class Discussion

After reading these chapters, describe why prayer makes a difference.

Slavery, Sojourner Truth, and Us Today

2007-01-29T21:31:00.000-07:00

In chapter 7, "Wrestling Match", Philip Yancey quotes Sojourner Truth. Her prayer was haunting, so I had to see if it was online. Here is a part of her prayer as she was trying to retrieve her son (who was sold to an out-of-state slaveowner).

'Oh, God, you know how much I am distressed, for I have told you again and again. Now, God, help me get my son. If you were in trouble, as I am, and I could help you, as you can me, think I would n't do it? Yes, God, you know I would do it.'

You can find the quote of her prayer in this chapter of her online biography: http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/truth/1850/1850-19.html.
I read the entire biography, located at The Narrative of Sojourner Truth website, trying to locate the quotation. It was so intriguing that I couldn’t stop. Then, when I read in Christianity Today about the movie "Amazing Grace" that’s coming out February 23rd, I decided to get more involved. Click on "The Amazing Change," here or in the linked article to find out about it. Slavery is evil and it is here today. Let’s see what we can do about it.

Prayer Study-Session Four (for 2/4/07)

2007-01-29T21:14:00.001-07:00

[See "Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?" icon in the left panel.]

Study Guide for Chapters 6 & 7: “Why Pray” and “Wrestling Match”

In chapters 6 & 7 Philip Yancey raises some of the most common questions about prayer: What should I pray for? How many times? Will one person praying have as much effect as many praying together? Do I just need more faith? What about unanswered prayers? Does prayer really matter? What if I gripe at God?

Fortunately, here and in the rest of the book, he addresses those questions honestly. The study guide for this week helps probe chapters 6 & 7 and helps us formulate our own answers to these perennial questions.

A. A verse to memorize: Prayers by Jesus

Luke 22:31-32 (NIV)
"Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."

B. Book/Bible Study

Chapter 6: “Why Pray?”

Yancey’s primary answer to the title question is, “Because Jesus prayed.” List at least three things you can learn about prayer from reading about Jesus’ prayer life.

The last paragraph on page 79 lists “three rather large assumptions”. What are they, and how do they influence your attitude toward prayer?

Your questions and comments:

Chapter 7: Wrestling Match”

With which of the “God-wrestlers” mentioned in this chapter do you identify?
“The opposite of love is ________________”, Yancey says. Do you agree with him on this? Why or why not?
Your questions and comments

C. Class Discussion

How does the “key principle” stated on page 82 fit with your concept of prayer?
Your comments

Prayer Study-Session Three (for 1/28/07)

2007-01-22T06:18:00.001-07:00

Study Guide for Chapters 4 & 5: “The God Who Is” & “Coming Together”

This is our third session studying “Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?”, by Philip Yancey. These two chapters explore two related questions: Who is God, and how can we connect with Him in a personal relationship? You can get a copy and study with us by clicking on the book’s icon in the left panel.

A. A verse to memorize: Prayer and the Holy Spirit—Romans 8:26 (NIV)

“In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.”

B. Book/Bible Study

While prayer is universal, concepts of God vary widely. How does one’s practice of prayer reveal his/her concept of God (including what Yancey calls “afterimages”)?
What kind of being is the One we call “God”? How do we know?
If God is everywhere, unlimited by time and space, how can we detect His presence?
According to Yancey, why did Jesus pray?
Compare other personal relationships you know of with Yancey’s description of how we can have a personal relationship with God.
Explain “My feelings of God’s presence—or God’s absence—are not the presence or the absence.

C. Class Discussion

Select one of the 6 questions above that you would like to hear someone else answer.
Your questions and comments

Prayer Study-Session Two (1/21/07)

2007-01-15T08:58:00.001-07:00

Study Guide for Chapter 3: “Just As We Are”

(If you are new to the study and do not have a book, you can order one by clicking on the icon in the left panel.)

With twenty-two chapters and only thirteen weeks in our study, we will look at two chapters most weeks. This week we will study only one chapter. It is packed with information and challenges. [Correction: last week’s verse to memorize was Mark 9:24, not Luke 9:24.]

A. A verse to memorize: John 15:5 "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.”

B. Book/Bible Study

Yancey describes us “Just As We Are” with six terms. Only two of these are positive virtues. Is this a good way to describe us? Why not use more positive terms?
Which of the six terms (the section headings) comes closest to describing your most common state of mind as you pray?
If God knows us at our core and loves us anyway, why spend so much time on our sin and confession?
Notice the quotation (page 35) from a character in an 1884 novel by Henry Adams: “Why must the church always appeal to my weakness and never to my strength!”

Is the church any different now than it was seen in 1884 by that character?
How do you respond to this complaint?
What would be the result if the church always appealed to our strength and never to our weakness?
What do you think of Yancey’s answer to this complaint?

C. Class Discussion

This chapter suggests we come to God in prayer “just as we are”. Recall “Just As I Am” the “invitation hymn” sung at every Billy Graham Crusade. Compare the text of that hymn with the various selections for the “Hymn of Invitation” sung at worship services you’ve attended over the past weeks or months. What is the “invitation” presented in each hymn?
Compare these four items in Chapter 3: (1) the F. Buechner footnote on page 32; (2) “Bearing Secrets” on pages 34-35; (3) the Rilke poem on pages 38-39; and (4) the footnote on page 43 on Milton’s “Paradise Lost”. What do they all have in common? Which speaks best to you?
Your questions and comments.

Prayer Study-Session One

2007-01-10T10:17:00.001-07:00

This is the first week of our study of “Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?” by Phillip Yancey. If you still don’t have a copy of the book, you can order one by clicking on the icon on the left panel.

Last week we introduced this study and distributed the books that were ordered. This coming Sunday we will discuss the first two chapters. As noted previously, we will follow an ABC pattern to try to get at the heart of each chapter in our preparation for discussion.

Chapter 1: Our Deepest Longing

A. A verse to memorize (or meditate on): Luke 9:24

B. Book & Bible Study (Outline or summarize the chapter and ponder these questions)

Did this chapter whet your appetite for the rest of the book or leave you less interested?
What is your response to the last paragraph of the chapter (on page 17)?
“If prayer stands as the place where God and human beings meet, then I must learn about prayer. Most of my struggles in the Christian life circle around the same two themes: why doesn’t God act the way we want God to, and why don’t I act the way God wants me to. Prayer is the precise point where those themes converge.”
One of the best features of Yancey’s book is his honesty. He admits that his consistency in prayer and his level of satisfaction both fall short. How would you describe your own experience with prayer?
Your Questions and Comments:

Chapter 2: View From Above
A. A verse to memorize: Psalm 46:10

B. Book & Bible Study: We saw in chapter one that “prayer stands as the place where God and human beings meet”. This chapter shows the different perspectives of the two parties who are meeting.

Recall your own experience on a mountain (or a tall building). How did you feel looking up from below versus looking down from above?
Picture rivulets of melting snow joining together to form a rushing stream . How can this help you see the flow of God’s love and grace?
If you want water, how does the “view from above” help you find it?
Meditate on Psalm 46:10. Describe in your own words the two parts of that sentence that are separated by the word “and”.

Your Questions and Comments:

Why Learn About Sharia?

2007-01-09T16:25:00.001-07:00

Yesterday I posted “Islam—Definitions” with a link to an article about radical Islam. One of the terms to be defined is “sharia”. This link to Sharia In Action shows why it is imperative that we know what Sharia involves; and that we are prepared to stand against those whose goal is to impose Sharia in every country in the world. It’s hard to believe this from PowerLine:

“Nazanin Mahabad Fatehi is an Iranian teenager who was sentenced to be hanged for murder by an Iranian court. I had been unaware of her case until I read about it in the Power Line Forum last night. According to her account, Nazanin was with her sixteen-year-old niece and their two boyfriends when they were approached by three men who tried to rape them. The boyfriends fled, and Nazanin defended herself with a knife she carried in her purse. She stabbed one of the men, who later died. So far, at least, I haven't seen any version of the facts that differs materially from Nazanin's account.

Nazanin was prosecuted for murder and sentenced to hang. The verdict was apparently set aside by an ayatollah, and she is due to be retried tomorrow, January 10.”

Islam--Definitions

2007-01-08T18:08:00.001-07:00

A wise professor of mine once said that definitions are the key to mastering any subject. If you can accurately define these terms, you have a very good handle on Islam and who it is that attacked the U.S. on 9/11 (and whom we will be fighting for years to come). If you can’t define more than 25% of these terms, you need to read this article

The War Against Global Jihadism, which is a brief introduction to Islam (and especially to the radical elements of Islam that have declared war against us). [Hat Tip to Hugh Hewitt] Hint: go to the article, and for each term you don’t know, hold down the control key and type F to bring up the “Find” window. Then find each term as it is mentioned in the article. If you still have trouble defining the term, go to http://www.wikipedia.com/ or check our some of the sources listed at the bottom of the article.

1	Islam
2	Muslim
3	Jihad
4	Jihadism
5	Jihadi, jihadist
6	Shia, Shiites
7	Sunni, Sunnites
8	Wahhabism
9	Twelvers
10	Imam
11	Ali
12	Koran, Qur’an
13	Caliph, Caliphate
14	Mahdi
15	Khomeini
16	Sharia, Shariah
17	Golden Age
18	Ottoman Empire
19	Andalusia
20	Sayyid Qutb

Mere Mission and Simply Christian

2007-01-06T11:12:00.000-07:00

Mere Mission

N.T. Wright talks about how to present the gospel in a postmodern world.

Interview by Tim Stafford posted 1/05/2007 04:00PM

N.T. Wright is a world-renowned New Testament scholar—author of Jesus and the Victory of God, The Resurrection of the Son of God—and bishop of Durham in the Church of England. He is also a keen observer of culture.

Christianity Today senior writer Tim Stafford caught up with Wright as he drove from meetings at Windsor Castle to his diocese in Durham. They talked about communicating the gospel in a post-Christian society.

Prayer Study-Session One

2007-01-04T08:23:00.001-07:00

The Koinonia Class at Calvary Baptist Church in Denver starts its study of “Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?” this Sunday, January 7, 2007. [If you haven’t already ordered a book, you can get one from Amazon.com by clicking on the book’s icon in the left panel.] Those of you who are not in the class, or cannot be present, can still participate by following the study guides I post here and by entering your comments online [by clicking on the word “comments” at the end of each post].

Each week we will follow this basic ABC outline: A verse to memorize (or meditate on if you don’t want to memorize it); Book study (taking either one or two chapters a week); and Class discussion). This week’s guide will serve as a pattern for what is to come.

A. A verse to memorize.

Topic: Prayer and Faith. Luke 9:24 “Immediately the boy’s father exclaimed, ‘I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief.’” (Luke 9:24 NIV)
To memorize it, break it into pieces and then add pieces one at a time until you can quote the entire verse verbatim. With the verse itself, memorize the topic and the verse reference (quoted before and after the verse to make the reference stick in your mind as well as the verse itself). I typically use the New International Version (NIV). Use whatever translation that you have and like. I recommend using only one translation so you don’t get confused.

B. Book Study.

Take a moment to reflect on what you expect out of this study. Do you expect to learn something new, get some questions answered, change your prayer patterns, or . .?
Scan the table of contents. Which of the five parts appeals to you most? Why?
Before you start with the book, jot down any verse about prayer that you know. Don’t be concerned here about verbatim accuracy. Just write down what you remember.
When you think about your own prayer life, what about it is satisfying? What would you like to change?

C. Class discussion. Bring your own insights and questions to class. Since we won’t have time for all the questions this study elicits, if you have a particularly burning question or insight, post a comment below.

Good News for a "Post-Secular" Culture

2006-12-30T23:49:00.001-07:00

I saw this headline that intrigued me in the online collection of news I get from a news and opinion aggregator called Real Clear Politics. The headline was “Holland's Post-Secular Future”. “Post-secular”, I thought—that must mean the article is about a growth of religious influence in Holland; and from other articles I’ve read about what’s going on in Europe, I guessed that the growing religious influence would be Islam.

There are millions of Muslim immigrants in Europe. And, since “demography is destiny” as some have said, I figured that the higher birth rate of Muslims would figure into the religious surge in Holland. I was pleasantly surprised to see that the article was about a resurgence of Christianity.

When I clicked on the headline’s link and actually saw the article, I was even more intrigued. The title is “Holland’s Post-Secular Future”, and the sub-title is “Christianity is dead. Long live Christianity.”

I encourage you to read the entire article. This clip is a clue to the sub-title:

"The idea that secularization is the irreversible wave of the future is still the conventional wisdom in intellectual circles here. They would be bemused, to say the least, at a Dutch relapse into religiosity. But as the authors of a recently published study called De Toekomst van God (The Future of God) point out, organized prayer in the workplace is just one among several pieces of evidence suggesting that Holland is on the threshold of a new era--one we might call the age of "post-secularization." In their book, Adjiedj Bakas, a professional trend-watcher, and Minne Buwalda, a journalist, argue that Holland is experiencing a fundamental shift in religious orientation: 'Throughout Western Europe, and also in Holland, liberal Protestantism is in its death throes. It will be replaced by a new orthodoxy.'"

The clue is in the last two sentences, and like a treasure hunt, it leads us to search for the next piece of the puzzle. What is the “new orthodoxy”? It is a return to the orthodoxy of traditional Christianity which has been rejected by the mainstream Protestant churches in Europe, but which has been embraced by “a growing group, most of them young people, who are genuinely interested, for whom this is all completely new." It’s strange to think that traditional, orthodox, Christianity is new to the youth of Europe. After all, it’s 2000 years old. But it’s new because the established churches seem to have replaced traditional views for something they thought would be more relevant. The result, though, is relegating the established churches to irrelevancy.

“There's statistical evidence to back up the "new orthodoxy" hypothesis. First of all, there's the undeniable fact of the continued decline and fall of the old liberal religious order. Worst hit are the mainstream Protestant churches, whose membership declined from 23 percent of the population in the late 1950s to 6 percent today. According to government estimates, by 2020 this figure will have dwindled to a mere 2 percent. The decline of liberal Protestantism has been matched by that of liberal Catholicism. The once-powerful Catholic Eighth of May group--a liberation theology movement born out of a mass meeting on May 8, 1985, to protest against Pope John Paul II's visit to the Netherlands--was disbanded in November 2003 because of lack of interest among its rapidly declining membership. More broadly, aging Catholic congregations mean that Roman Catholicism, too, will likely face another decade or so of declining membership. From 42 percent of the population in 1958 and 17 percent today, membership could fall to as low as 10 percent before leveling off around 2020.”

The real clue to the “post-secular” phrase is best seen in this quote: "It's evidence of a growing spiritual hunger in society. People are really searching for truth."

I saw some of this spiritual hunger myself this week. In talking with a couple of younger men about an upcoming study on prayer that my Sunday School class will start soon, the subject of guilt, repentance, and subsequent return to the same sin (behaviors, thoughts, and attitudes) came up. How can I expect God to forgive me and accept me when I keep doing the things I’ve just repented of?

I’m not sure how much it helped, but I was able to point out that all of us have the same problem, as even Saint Paul exclaimed in Romans 7:18-19: “I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing.”

The answer to Paul’s dilemma, and to ours, is grace. God did something for us that we could not do for ourselves. God gave us something we do not deserve. “You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:6-8 NIV)

This is the message that people want to hear. No one has to tell us that there is something wrong inside us. We know it all too well. What we want to hear is that there is a remedy, that there is hope that we can change (or rather that we can be changed).

With all the self-help tricks we can find we try to change ourselves. But in this inner core of our being we know it’s not a matter of just changing a habit, or going on a diet, or all the other resolutions we make, especially at this time of year. We want to change, but we cannot erase what we have done in the past, and we struggle to become the kind of person we want to be for the future.

As sincere as it is, the attempt by liberal Protestant Christianity (whether in Europe or here in the United States) to replace the fully God and fully human Jesus of traditional, orthodox, Christianity who “died for our sins” with the spiritual but only human Jesus who serves as a model for us to follow does just not have any appeal.

When a person is wrestling with the sinful nature that they know is at the core of their being, they don’t want a model. They want a Savior. Jesus is that Savior. That’s the “new orthodoxy” that is appealing to the young Christians in Holland. That’s the same message that has appealed to believers for 2000 years.

My church has the word “Calvary” in its name. We are now celebrating our 125^th anniversary. What was it in the mind of the founders of that church 125 years ago that led them to use that word? Calvary is the place where Jesus was crucified. “Calvary” reminds us of the cross that towers above our church building. “Calvary” brings to mind the message bound up in the death-burial-resurrection event we anticipate at Christmas and celebrate at Easter—God, in the person of Jesus Christ, dying for us and becoming our Savior.

My prayer for my church and for others is that this time-tested message will never be replaced with the message that has proven to be ineffective in changing lives—the message that Jesus is only our teacher or model. We need a teacher. We need a model. But we need more: we need a Savior. Thank God, we have one in Jesus.

Anticipation

2006-12-21T23:18:00.001-07:00

I just finished reading Philip Yancey’s book, “Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?” for the first time. Wow!

As I’ve been reading the book, I’ve also started on some ideas for the study guide for the Koinonia class’s study that will start January 7. Our class will condense the book’s 22 chapters into a 13 week study, so it will be a quick trip through a book that will take multiple readings and a much longer time to digest.

One concept about prayer I gleaned from the book also applies to the study: realize that no one method of prayer works for everyone, or for anyone all the time. Do what works for you. In the same way, no one method of study works for everyone, or for anyone all the time. Since we’ll be looking at the book through different eyes, we’ll be trying different methods of study so each of us can find what works best in our own lives.

For those who are not in the Koinonia class, but who want to participate in the study along with us, I’ll be posting the study guide on this blog. You can participate by entering your own comments. I ordered enough copies of the book for all in the class. If others want a copy of the book, you can click on the photo of the book in the left panel and order one through Amazon.com at a discount. By the way, Koinonia members, the books have been shipped. They would have been here on the 22^nd, but they have been held up in Salina, Kansas due to the closing of I-70 by the blizzard. They probably won’t be here until after Christmas, but I’ll get them to you as soon as they arrive.

I eagerly anticipate the first 13 weeks of 2007 because, having read the book, I know that everyone who participates in the study will see themselves, God, and prayer in a new light. As you anticipate the study, whether eagerly or with some skepticism, try this: take a moment to reflect on what you expect out of the study of “Prayer, Does It Make Any Difference?”. Do you expect to learn something new? Get some questions answered? Change your pattern of prayer? Develop a closer relationship with God? Or something else—something known only to you and to God.

The act of reflection, and of saying what you hope to receive from this study will itself be a prayer. See, it’s not so hard. You’ve started already.

Merry Christmas

2006-12-18T15:09:00.001-07:00

I much prefer the phrase “Merry Christmas” to any substitute. I was in the grocery store and stopped by one of the tables where a sample of some product was offered. As I started to leave, the very cheerful lady who had offered me a sample said, “Happy Holidays”. My response was to ask, “And which holiday are we talking about?” Her answer was, “Anyone you want to celebrate.”

Well, the one I celebrate this time of year is Christmas. I appreciate someone recognizing my holiday and not being afraid to speak the word “Christmas”. With the vast majority of Americans relating to Christmas more than to other holidays, I’ll say Merry Christmas unless I know they are of a different faith. If I know the person I’m addressing is Jewish, I’ll make it a point to mention Hanukah. I would not think it polite to ignore a friend’s religion and just say “Happy Holidays”. Neither would I say “Happy Holidays” to someone in my family or a friend. So, to all of you, “Merry Christmas” and a Happy New Year.

New Study On Prayer

2006-12-18T09:34:00.000-07:00

The Koinonia class at Calvary Baptist Church in Denver will start a new study January 8, 2007. To guide our study of what the Bible says about prayer, we will study the book "Prayer--Does It Make Any Difference", by Philip Yancey.

Along with the book, which you can purchase through Amazon.com via the link on the left panel, I'll prepare a study guide with some questions, activities, and suggestions for discussion. The class will consist mostly of discussion. For those not able to make it to the class, feel free to post your comments here.

If you haven't ordered your book already, contact me or simply click on the photo of the book on the left panel now.

Someone asked about an audiobook version of this book. Yes, you can also get an Audio CD for $19.49 or an Audio Download for $15.74. To get to either, click on the photo of the book on the left panel, and at the Amazon site see the box which says "Also available in: "

Blessings,

Rudy Antle

Seeing Clearly Indeed

2006-12-07T21:44:00.000-07:00

One of the surprises in my life as I get older is my openness to sources that I never would have considered in my young adulthood. I grew up before Vatican II and in a culture where most Catholics didn’t believe Baptists were true Christians, and most Baptists thought Catholics could not be saved. But a lot has changed in Catholic/Protestant relations and in my own spiritual growth.

I am pleased to point you to Catholic writings with which I fully agree. A great example is the following speech given by Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput at the Orange County Prayer Breakfast in Garden Grove California today (December 7, 2006). It is entitled “Seeing Clearly”.

You should read the entire speech: Seeing Clearly by Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput, and to entice you to do so, here is a sample.

“I began by talking about Christmas. Who owns it? Why are we supposed to be happy? What are we really celebrating?

Good will, joy, peace, harmony, the giving of gifts – these are beautiful and holy things deeply linked to Christmas. But not to Santa Claus. And especially not to a politically correct, secular Santa Claus. Joy is not generic. Good will needs a reason. We don’t suddenly become generous because the radio plays Jingle Bells.

Christmas is about the birth of Jesus Christ. We believe that Jesus is the messiah of Israel, the only Son of God, the Word of God made flesh. We believe that He was born in poverty in Bethlehem in order to grow and preach God’s kingdom, and suffer, die and rise from the dead – all for the sake of our redemption, because God loves us. Christmas is a feast of love, but it’s God’s love first that makes it possible. Christmas begins our deliverance from sin and death. That’s why St. Leo the Great called it the “birthday of joy.” What begins in the stable ends in our salvation. That’s why we celebrate Christmas, and it’s the best and only reason the human heart needs.”

(hat tip to Hugh Hewitt)

My "Red Kettle"

2006-12-05T10:19:00.000-07:00

Please join me in supporting one of the most worthy of charitable organizations--The Salvation Army.

I have joined with The Salvation Army this Christmas to help their year-round work with people in need. They made it easy to have my own "Red Kettle" through my web site (without having to stand in the cold and ring a bell).

Instead of a bell, I'm using emails to call attention to the need and an easy and secure method of contributing. All you need to do is click on this link Salvation Army Red Kettle and follow the instructions on that page.

[Note the address starts with https://, indicating it is a secure link.]

Thank you for participating. May God bless you and your family this Christmas season.

Merry Christmas,

Rudy Antle

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 20)

2006-09-10T21:36:00.000-06:00

Welcome to the Summer 2006 study for the Koinonia Class of Calvary Baptist Church, Denver, Colorado. We’re looking at the issue of Jesus and Salvation, using the book “Is Jesus The Only Savior” [James R. Edwards, Is Jesus The Only Savior? (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: 2005)]. We encourage each person to buy a copy and follow along.

The Mystery of the Incarnation

In this, the last chapter of Edwards’ book, it is fitting that he discusses the ultimate revelation of God—the “incarnation of God in Jesus Christ. Since most Christians have heard Jesus called the Son of God, and probably have even heard the word “incarnation” a number of times, you might be surprised to read that “No other religion—ancient, or modern, local or universal—makes anything approximating the claim that God, without sacrificing his divine nature, has become a full and complete human being.”

This, then, is the mystery—God became human, a specific man named Jesus of Nazareth. The word mystery means more than what we generally think. It includes the idea of mystery being something that is now revealed after having been hidden. In the incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth, God’s plan of salvation which had been hidden was now made plain. Over the centuries God gave various clues to His existence and His plan, but the overall plan remained a mystery because the final clue had not yet been given. In Jesus it was given, and God’s plan became plain to all who were open to the message God was sending in Jesus.

Edwards speaks of the incarnation in terms of a code, a puzzle, and a parable. In deciphering a code one needs the key. Whether that code is a numerical code (such as is used in sending secure messages over the internet) or the kind of biological code that Doctors Watson and Crick discovered in 1953 as they began to unravel DNA, one can look at thousands, even millions, of clues without comprehending the message. Then once the key is found, everything else falls into place. Jesus is the key to understanding the “fingerprints” God scattered around His creation and the code that leads to understanding God’s plan for His creation.

Jesus can also be compared to both the key piece and the box top of a jigsaw puzzle. The box top has a picture of what the puzzle should look like once all the pieces are put together. Imagine that you found a puzzle in an attic, and the pieces are in a paper bag. The original box is not available, and you are not sure all the pieces are there. It may even be possible that there are some extra pieces from another puzzle, but you won’t know that until you put them together.

Later you start to work on the puzzle, starting with the border pieces. As more are added, it starts to look familiar. A long table, some men seated behind it, clothing like that in biblical scenes, but the scene doesn’t start to fall together until the central pieces are put in. Then you realize it is a puzzle of a picture of Michelangelo’s “The Last Supper”. Jesus is the central piece of the puzzle.

How does this relate to how we think about other religions? We recognize that other religions may have some pieces of the puzzle. Some of them have pieces that don’t belong to this puzzle at all. We give credit were it is due, and honor the true pieces of the puzzle that we see in other religions: love, benevolence, knowing of self, humanity, a sense of justice, etc. Yet, we must be true to our own faith and continue to proclaim the uniqueness of Jesus. He is the piece of the puzzle that allows us to put the picture together.

Finally, Edwards compares the incarnation, and our responsibility to tell others about it, to a parable of two brothers whose father had died several years previously. The older brother feels a need to tell his younger brother about their father, because the father died before the younger son was born. The older brother was not better because he could talk about his father. He simply was the one who knew his father.

Likewise Christians have a responsibility to tell others what they know of God, not because we are better, but because we know God by knowing Jesus.

Next Edwards describes what he calls “The scandal of particularity”. Because we say God came to us in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, in a particular country, at a particular point in time, that seems for some people to argue against the universality of the Gospel. What about the people who lived before then, or even those who have lived since then, but have not had access to that one point in time and place? In Edwards’ hypothetical, “the particularity of the Christ event in time and space seems to hinder its universality”.

However, as he goes on to point out, the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ reveals God better than any timeless, universal idea would. God is now more accessible: “God can now be know as never before. In the incarnation a religious longing becomes a historical fact.” This makes it better than just an idea about God. There are many ideas about God, all of which could claim to be true; and therefore none of which could claim exclusivity.

Consider the importance of this sentence: “Historical particularity has an advantage over a universal idea.” Edwards then relates this to the longing for a cure for a dreaded disease. When I was young, polio was a serious threat. Everyone longed for a cure for this crippling killer. Then, after Jonas Salk developed a vaccine for polio in 1955, the news was joyfully spread worldwide. Polio was eventually eradicated. Although the vaccine was developed in a particular place (the University of Pittsburgh Medical School) in a particular year, its effect is universal. Protection from polio is no longer just a hope, it is a reality. Joyful news indeed!

Christians can joyfully share the good news of the Gospel as well. It’s not a bothersome activity “like telephone solicitations or children selling candy for a school fund-raiser. True Christian witness is making known to non-Christian neighbors that they are also created by God, made in God’s very image, and that by faith in Christ they too may become God’s children”.

Edwards’ final statement is worth repeating. “The God who sent the Son into the world to die for the sins of the world now sends believers in the Son into the world. They bear the good news that the God who is the world’s only creator is also its only redeemer in Jesus Christ.”

In coming to know God through our Savior, Jesus Christ, we have been given the happy responsibility of sharing that knowledge with others. We have been saved: reconciled to God through no merit of our own—it is fully by grace. We agree with Paul that one died for all in order “that those who live should no longer live for themselves, but for him who died for them, and was raised again.” (II Cor. 5:14-15)

We have examined the question, “Is Jesus the only Savior?” Not surprisingly, the answer Edwards gives is the same one the Bible gives—Yes!

This is not an answer we can keep to ourselves for any reason: whether from fear of being rejected or of offending others, or from a desire to make Christianity seem more acceptable. Like children, we all want to fit in, to belong to the group. We also want Christianity to fit in with other religions—to not be seen as exclusivist, nor rejected by others. But we have the cure for that crippling killer called Sin. We must share the truth in love with all the world.

I’ll close this series with the marvelous passage in II Cor. 5:17-21.

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 19-B)

2006-09-08T09:40:00.000-06:00

Welcome to the Summer 2006 study for the Koinonia Class of Calvary Baptist Church, Denver, Colorado. We’re looking at the issue of Jesus and Salvation, using the book “Is Jesus The Only Savior” [James R. Edwards, Is Jesus The Only Savior? (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: 2005)]. We encourage each person to buy a copy and follow along.

Christianity and Other Religions (continued)

Having learned that the claim that “all religions are the same” can only be made by someone who is either ill-informed or deliberately trying to down-play the differences, where do Christians go from here. How are we to think about other religions?

Here Edwards does something I’ve not seen anywhere else. He asks, “What does the Bible say about other religions?” This is a different question from what the Bible says about people who have never heard of Jesus or those who reject Jesus as Savior. The destiny of individuals is, of course, in the hands of God, and He hasn’t given us a clear message on what He will do. The question as Edwards asks it points us to a biblical model we can use as we speak about other religions, not their adherents.

Edwards summarizes almost eight pages with this paragraph (all eight of which you should read to fully understand the summary). Note that there are three different approaches the Bible takes, depending on the particulars of the situation.

“We may summarize our survey of the Bible’s attitudes toward other religions by saying that judgments vary from case to case. Cults that resulted in moral depravity and idolatry were wholly rejected as evil. Other cults were judged as falsifications of true worship, sometimes ridiculous and pernicious falsifications. Their adherents, nevertheless, were not condemned, and certainly not annihilated, but persuaded to abandon their folly and embrace the true God. Finally, some religions are seen as playing a foreshadowing role for the gospel of Jesus Christ. The primary example of a foreshadowing religion is Judaism…”.

Remember, this is not what anthropologists say, nor sociologists, nor teachers of world religions, and not even what pastors or seminary professors say. The Bible’s own approach to other religions is to either (1) reject some as totally evil, (2) judge some as ridiculous, and (3) see some as good, but incomplete—and then to see those as leading to the full revelation of God in the sending of His Son, Jesus. Edwards says, “Paul portrays salvation as a historical process leading from infancy to adulthood.” See Gal. 4:1-7 as an example.

Speaking specifically about the Jews, the idea of “two covenants”, one for the Jews and one for Christians, is rejected. God does seem to have a plan for the Jews, but we are not made fully aware of it. As with other non-Christians, we should share the Gospel with Jews, just as the early Christians did. “If Jesus is the good news of salvation for the world, no people, Jews included, should be excluded.” As Romans 1:16 says, “…it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.” Such witness must, of course, be in the spirit of Christ and His love, but why should we refuse to share good news with anyone whom Jesus loves as much as He loves us.

Now we get to the question of whether people can be saved without having heard the Gospel.

Before getting to Edwards’ position, I’ll refer you to another book which presents a variety of approaches from diverse Christian points of view. Obviously, a secularist or humanist will either dismiss all religions or diminish their differences. And, someone from another religion may not even use the word “salvation” at all. This book, though, shows Four Views On Salvation In A Pluralistic World from four different, but Christian (Protestant), perspectives. I don’t have space to cover all that’s covered in a 270 page book, but here is a summary of the four views (taken from the back cover of the book):

Pluralism—all ethical religions lead to God
Inclusivism—salvation is universally available, but is established by and leads to Christ
Salvation in Christ—agnosticism regarding those who haven’t heard the gospel
Salvation in Christ alone—explicit faith in Jesus Christ is a necessary condition for salvation

In addition to these Protestant perspectives (and whatever variations or combinations of them are out there), we find in The Documents of Vatican II (1963-1965, Book II, Chapter 16) this Catholic approach, “Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.” You would have to read more commentary from Catholic scholars to know whether the meaning of “may” in that last phrase is “might, with conditions” or “have a possibility of”, or is “will be (or have been) given the desired privilege”.

In other words, to which of these familiar situations does “may achieve eternal salvation” relate: (1) Yes, you may go to the movies with your friends, once you have cleaned your room; or (2) Yes, you may go to the movies with your friends.

I included all of these to essentially say that there is no universally accepted answer to the question of what will happen with those who have never heard the Gospel. Edwards (and I) would fit most nearly in the “Salvation in Christ” approach above; yet we would both agree that we could be wrong.

The main point is not what my opinion (or yours, or anyone’s) is on this question. The point is that “The church has never been briefed on a Plan B of salvation.” (page 226)

My answer has to be, “I don’t know the answer to that question. I have to leave it to God. What I do know is that Jesus has given me (us) a mission to go to all people, share the good news of salvation with them, and “make disciples”. I can’t let a lack of an answer to a hypothetical question keep me from obeying a direct order from my Lord.

If we do our job of sharing the Gospel message, and let God do His job of convincing people of its truth and their need to accept it, then in the end we’ve done what our Lord told us to do. All the rest is up to Him. Anything more is needless speculation.

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 19-A)

2006-09-04T10:42:00.000-06:00

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 18-B)

2006-08-27T08:15:00.000-06:00

the “peace” Jesus created is not what the world thinks peace is (the absence of conflict or a state of tolerance)
this peace is created by Jesus; it is not something humans make
this peace is not a personal mental state or attitude—it’s corporate rather than individual
peace refers to the reconciliation between God and His creation, and
it refers to the corporate peace Jesus creates within His Body

In one long sentence Edwards summarizes all of this: “The peace that attends the proclamation of the gospel is thus the announcement of a condition produced and delivered by God, not by human effort; it is a condition effected by the work of Jesus and declared in his name; and finally, it is communal rather than private or primarily emotional, affecting in material ways the relations of Christians with the world.” (page 200)

Since the point cannot be made too often, Edwards repeats the concept (on page 202): “The peace announced in the gospel is not achieved by an imposition of power on others but by the self-sacrifice of Jesus…The Gospel does not destabilize and threaten the world. It reconciles the world.”

In spite of this truth, we are often reluctant to talk about the gospel, the self-sacrifice of Jesus, and the salvation He offers to the world. Because we personally now encounter people from other religions, we would like to focus on the Great Commandment (to love God and each other) and forget about the Great Commission (to go and make disciples of all peoples). We don’t want to disturb the peace. If only all paths did lead to the same place, all would be well. So in the next post we will move on to the next chapter, “How should Christians think about other religions”.

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 18A)

2006-08-22T11:48:00.000-06:00

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 17)

2006-08-19T21:36:00.000-06:00

Welcome to the Summer 2006 study for the Koinonia Class of Calvary Baptist Church, Denver, Colorado. We’re looking at the issue of Jesus and Salvation, using the book “Is Jesus The Only Savior” [James R. Edwards, Is Jesus The Only Savior? (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: 2005)]. We encourage each person to buy a copy and follow along.

Choosing One Way Instead Of Many

“There are many paths to God, and all of them are equally valid.” “I don’t think that just Christians will be saved.” Both of these statements reflect a philosophy that dominates 21st Century American culture. It’s got a name most people have never heard of; and those who have heard of it have trouble defining it. Yet everyone recognizes the concepts inherent in this philosophy, and we are confronted by them every day.

In Chapter 9 of “Is Jesus The Only Savior?” Edwards takes on this cultural bias, which goes by the name “Postmodernism”, and contrasts it with the gospel of Jesus. It’s a fairly long and complex chapter which I will attempt to cover briefly and simply (and hopefully not simplistically).

Postmodernism obviously refers to something that came after “modernism”. When we think about “modernism” in terms of Rationalism or the Enlightenment, with their emphases on logical or scientific answers to every question, we get a clue to its meaning. Postmodernism, which is something of a rebellion against the certainty of previous eras, says there are no answers, only opinions; no facts, only interpretations; no standards of right and wrong, only what’s right for me and what’s right for you; no objective Truth, only individual truths; no universal values, only moral and cultural relativism.

It’s easy to see, then, why the Gospel sounds harsh and arrogant to many, and why the two statements at the beginning of this post are heard today, even in Christian churches. This is why some have changed the unique Gospel message to one gospel among many. It’s seen clearly in this quotation from Marcus Borg in “Meeting Jesus Again For The First Time” (on page 37):

“Imaging Jesus as a particular instance of a type of religious personality known cross-culturally undermines a widespread Christian belief that Jesus is unique, which most commonly is linked to the notion that Christianity is exclusively true and that Jesus is ‘the only way’. The image I have sketched [of Jesus as a “spirit person” who knew God but was not God] views Jesus differently: rather than being the exclusive revelation of God, he is one of many mediators of the sacred.”

For Postmodernism, not only is Jesus not the only savior, there is a question of whether a savior is needed at all. If there are no universal values, then whatever is acceptable within a particular society is OK, even if it would not be acceptable within another society. If values and morals are relative to various cultures, it’s not a big leap to say that there is no such thing as sin which needs to be forgiven by some unseen “God”. In addition, it is totally unacceptable to say that God did something unique in sending Jesus to provide forgiveness and salvation through his vicarious sacrifice.

Yet that is our message: “The story of the Bible is the story of an unfolding drama in which God intervened from time to time by sending special actors on stage” and the focal point of this drama was that “in Jesus, the Son of God, God spoke the last word” (Edwards, page 174 & 175).

The title of Chapter 9, “The Gospel and Postmodernism” shows the conflict. The two concepts are polar opposites. The Gospel claims that Jesus is the unique revelation of God and the redeemer sent by God. Postmodernism claims that there can be no one Truth for all and that there can be many paths to many different “gods”. In other words, it would say that Jesus may be the savior for us, but we can’t claim Jesus as the savior for the world.

In contrast, when we preach the Gospel as it is presented in the Scriptures, we have to say “ Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12 NIV)
So, today there is the Gospel of Christ and the “gospel” of Postmodernism, and the two claims are irreconcilable. One who says “all paths to God are equally valid” is preaching Postmodernism, not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Both “gospels” cannot be “equally valid”? Galatians 1:6,7 applies today just as it did when first written: “I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.”

The perversion of the Gospel infiltrating the churches in Galatia that Paul was concerned about was the notion that the crucifixion of Jesus Christ was of no use by itself to those who were gentiles. They wouldn’t be real Christians unless they also submitted to the Old Testament law and became a Jew.

The perversion of the Gospel infiltrating churches today is that the crucifixion of Jesus Christ in of no use to us because we cannot be saved through the sacrificial death of someone else, especially someone who was in reality not God, but just a “spirit person” who knew God in a more profound way than others. We won’t be real Christians, they say, except by patterning our lives after Jesus who was our model.

These are, in the end, the same perversion—salvation by works instead of by grace through faith in the saving work of Jesus. Chapter 9 is a difficult chapter to read because for most of us it introduces a confusing philosophy; but it needs to be read in its entirety. The Letter to the Galatians is also a difficult book to read because it confronts some false prophets who weren’t named directly in the book (the Judaizers—those who thought all Christians should also be Jews). It also needs to be read in its entirety.

If you do read all of Galatians, you’ll see that it sounds incredibly harsh, especially Galatians 1:8-9. It probably sounded harsh in Paul’s day, too. The term “Postmodernism” wasn’t around then, but an attempt to change the Gospel to something that negated the cross was. In Galatians 6:12 Paul said, “Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised [i.e., to become a Jew]. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ “

As today, the Gospel first went out into a multi-cultural society where there were many competing religions and philosophies, including the one that tried to re-enslave Christians to a religion of works. It was important then to preach the Gospel as it had been received; and it is just as important today.

Today it’s possible to buy “knock-off” goods that appear to be the real thing. Do you want a “Rolex” watch, “Levis” jeans, or “Ping” golf clubs? No need to pay full price. You can get a pirated version that looks like the real thing for a fraction of the price. I heard a story this week of someone who bought a whole set of “Ping” golf clubs including the bag in China for less than $150. One real Ping club would cost that much in the U.S. Some people take the risk of less-than-perfect goods just to fit in with a certain crowd. So what if the watch doesn’t function quite like a Rolex, or the golf clubs aren’t exactly the same as the real Ping clubs. It doesn’t hurt anyone, does it?

It’s also possible to accept a “knock-off” version of the message of salvation. But do we want to bet our destiny on it? The real Gospel says Jesus is the only Savior. The “knock-off” version says Jesus may be a good model for us to follow, but each person can choose the model that fits them best in their own culture. One path or many? A Savior or just a model? Our choice.

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 16C)

2006-08-13T08:34:00.000-06:00

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 16B)

2006-08-09T22:42:00.000-06:00

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 16 A)

2006-08-01T23:07:00.000-06:00

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 15)

2006-07-30T21:57:00.000-06:00

Jesus and Salvation Series (Part 14)

2006-07-27T16:07:00.000-06:00

Welcome to the Summer 2006 study for the Koinonia Class of Calvary Baptist Church, Denver, Colorado. We’re looking at the issue of Jesus and Salvation, using the book “Is Jesus The Only Savior” [James R. Edwards, Is Jesus The Only Savior? (Grand Rapids/Cambridge: 2005)]. We encourage each person to buy a copy and follow along.

Two Worlds, One Gospel

The seventh chapter of Edwards’ book is entitled “Can the Gospel Compete in a Pluralistic World?”. The answer is, “Yes. It already did.”

The gospel not only competed, it succeeded in being widely accepted; and it therefore changed the world.

This chapter is a wake-up call to our arrogance and historical ignorance. We act as if our situation is unique—that for the first time the gospel is too offensive to others in our pluralistic world, so it must be “updated” in order to compete for acceptance.

This is said to be “a multiethnic, multicultural, multifaith world in which is seems simply untenable and perhaps even immoral to believe in one absolute truth against which everything else is to be measured and judged.” (Edwards, page 116)

There is no question that the message (“I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6) is offensive to lots of people. Those whose creed says there are “many paths” and “many truths” are put off by such statements. They feel that the gospel, as traditionally preached, is too offensive to be accepted today.

I was in a church meeting when one member took offense at a reading from John 17, about the unity of the believers with Christ. That member said, “That reading troubles me because I believe that more than just Christians will be saved.”

The gospel is offensive to many today; and it was when it was first spoken. Our world and that world are not that much different.

On the West entrance to Norlin Library at the University of Colorado in Boulder is an inscription suggested by the former president of the University and professor of Greek, Dr. George Norlin. It reads, “Who knows only his own generation remains always a child.” The phrase is original with Dr. Norlin, but it is similar to something he quotes from Cicero. "To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child."

Those who might think that the gospel cannot compete today (because the world is smaller, communication is quicker, and we are more sophisticated now) are simply ignorant of the world into which the gospel first spread. There are reasons why some of the early Christians were martyred. That world was not friendly to the messengers of such an “exclusive” message.

What kind of world did the gospel first enter? It was a world which was dominated by one superpower; where roads and ships made travel easier and quicker than in previous generations; where there was one major language of commerce known by almost everyone; a world where old religions were passing and new religions and philosophies were vying for attention and adherents. It was also a dangerous world where human life was not highly valued; and a corrupt world where “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life” were rampant. Sound familiar?

Into that kind of world Christians took the gospel and won converts in spite of the competition it faced. Edwards elaborates on that competition as it took three major forms: Torah, the Emperor Cult, and Mystery Religions.

For the Jews, Torah provided the law necessary for a moral society.

The Caesars promoted a civil religion centered in themselves. This Emperor Cult was a growing phenomenon, starting with just veneration of the Emperor and reaching its apex when Domitian (the emperor from 81-98 AD) mandated that everyone worship him as “Master and God”.

A multitude of “mystery religions” were encountered as the gospel penetrated Greek and Roman societies. These groups were attractive for their “secret” knowledge, their emphasis on spiritual and emotional experience, and the status of being accepted into a unique group.

All three of the major competitors to the gospel had something attractive to offer. However, the Torah couldn’t save from sins, the civil religion of the Emperor cult offered no transcendent deity or hope for the future, and the experience offered by the mystery religions was shallow and transitory.

Can a gospel that is accused of being “exclusivist” compete in a pluralistic world? Yes. How? By offering substance instead of just form. Christians preached about a crucified Jesus Christ who vicariously died for our sins (so forgiveness was possible), who rose from the dead (so life after death was now a possibility), and who, though gone to be with the Father, was present in the person of the Holy Spirit (so daily comfort, guidance, and power for living were possible). See I Corinthians 15:1-5 for a summary of the kerygma (the message that was preached), and I Corinthians 15:58 for the reason the early Christians kept preaching that gospel in spite of hardship and persecution.

When people in the pluralistic 1st Century world who lived shallow, fearful, and guilt-ridden lives compared the options available in religions and philosophies of the day, many chose to accept Jesus Christ as their own savior—and they joined a body of believers who were on the way to changing the world.

The Good News of salvation in Jesus Christ is still attractive, even in our pluralistic 21st Century world. When those who live shallow, fearful, and guilt-ridden lives compare the options available in religions and philosophies of our day, many still chose to accept Jesus Christ as their own savior. The gospel still competes, and succeeds.