ChosenStone

2011-12-01T10:48:00.001-08:00

I have a bone to pick with myself. I have a bone to pick with American culture. I am annoyed how I have let this aspect of American culture to influence my thinking.
I have developed within myself a belief that any worthwhile occupation will inevitably include a consistent high level of pressure. I use “occupation” in the broadest sense within which it is not limited to your job, but rather those things that occupy your time more definitively. I have found myself attributing the most value to professions and agendas that necessitate constant strain. I feel that this is a product of culture rather than a product of actually attaining a better understanding of how things really are. I have come to understand that this is a lie from hell that leads even the most devout pastors and Christian laymen to pursue achievement rather than God, put faith in efforts rather than the Spirit, imitate the culture rather than Christ, and to find sufficiency in personal accomplishment rather than Christ’s.
When we seek the Kingdom first the vanity of earthly achievement becomes far more apparent.
When we rely on the Spirit we recognize the vanity of our own naked efforts.
When we would rather imitate Christ than meet cultural expectations we find ourselves really living real life that is reflective of God’s glory and grace.
When we find our sufficiency in Christ’s accomplishment we become far less dependent on our own accomplishments.
I think that high-level stress lives quench the above three qualities. Not that no person is ever called to have these jobs or that God cannot protect us from this quenching and provide enablement to glorify him through the prolonged circumstances. My point is more that we should be careful not to follow the American culture in believing that demanding and pressure-filled occupations are more worthwhile than those that are not such. While these occupations generally come with more accomplishment, we must remember that no person has ever been defined by personal accomplishment. We are only defined by our association with the accomplishment of Christ.
There ought to be no division in our minds between a job that comes with massive responsibility, pressure, and 6 figures and a job that comes with free time, enjoyment, and 4 figures. There ought to be no division in our minds between the southern backwoods pastor of a church of 12 and the urban mega-church pastor of 25k. Neither of these men is accepted on behalf of any accomplishment of his own. In either case, we must be the person who is guided by the 4 above steps rather than guided by fleshly thinking that builds our lives into something that will only die. The 4 guiding principles above will lead any person live a life that lives and means something beyond the grave. Maybe you can’t pay your bills if you got a job that you feel would free you to get more involved in your family, church, and community, or to get a job within which you can really express your God-given abilities. So sell your house and get a cheaper one. Sell your SUV and get something with 4 cylinders and ride your bike to more places. Stop buying Starbucks every day. Regardless of what the flesh tells you, you don’t need those things to be happy. See success through God’s eyes. For me, I feel like being over-pressurized during the day drains me and leaves me empty when I get home where my family is. My family, my church, my community, and my God deserve more than the leftovers! And still, the leftovers are often spent on amusement. There are many ways you could define a failure. I think this is one of those definitions.
Take the example of Sabbath. This is proof that God is not ultimately concerned about our efficiency and having a full calendar all the time. Take the example of Christ who showed us that sometimes it’s far better to go to a mountain and pray or wander in the wilderness rather than engage the multitudes. Sometimes it’s better to not have a place to lay your head, but live with your heavenly residence in mind. Take the example of the still small voice that Elijah found God in, or the single, sincere, short prayer with which he called down fire from heaven, rather than imitating the ruckus of his desperate, idolatrous nation. In Christ we are not in such a desperate condition where we have to run around frantically until God does something.
The moral of this post is – we give ourselves far too much credit and give far too little to God. It is not enough to say “praise God” when success comes. We must be the kind of person who means it and does it whether he says it or not, and doesn’t just say something he was told to say since he was as a 2nd grader when he first played special music in Church! We really rely on ourselves far too much to make life work. We think life our little world is far bigger than it really is and it would all stop spinning if we don’t do this or that. Or that the things we are involved in will fail if we weren’t there. We need to live in God’s reality! Get to know it! Get to know Him! Give Him the first fruits of your being, not your occupation! When your occupation, even if it’s being a pastor, takes the first fruits away from God and restrains your ability to influence your family and community like you should, it’s time to reevaluate your situation.

2011-11-02T09:18:00.000-07:00

I've noticed, both from my own involvement and from my perception of the involvement others have in philosophical arguments, that the deeper one gets into a certain philosophy the greater the tendency to lose one's peripheral. When you focus on only one detail of a picture you have a tendency to forget what part that detail plays in the whole picture. When you step back and take a look at the whole picture, sometimes you get a different perspective on why that detail is there, which you never would have had if you had just focused on the single detail. Opening yourself up to take in the big picture, understanding original intent, and getting to know the rest of the picture will help you gain a better understanding of the individual parts - both their purpose and other abstract implications.
I find this dilemma to be especially potent in the minds of young, aspiring ministers such as myself. Especially while I was in college. You probably already have a pretty vivit picture of the typical "college dorm debate." A few guys or girls sitting in the basement or someones dorm room debating something useless like whether or not the human being is made up of 2 or 3 parts, or if God's omniscience and omnipresence suggest that He exists in multiple dimensions. But sometimes these debates touch things that are not quite so useless. And any person who philosophizes, even famous intellectuals, can cause much damage by focusing so intently on a single point that their conclusions are obscured by their lack of peripheral. When studying the Scriptures, we call this peripheral "context."
I could say some more things on this but I want to move on to my point. I think that we all need to be carefull not to err in basing conclusions off of context-free discoveries...discoveries that are probably not discoveries at all. Just mislead conclusions - mislead by putting a philosophy into the context of our own understanding rather than in the context of the real authority. For example, I just read Hebrews 6:4-6, a passage imfamously harolded by those who believe you can lose your salvation. Years worth of debate has been spent philosophizing over the intricate details of this passage, and I know that whenever I've read over the passage in the past I would focus on that passage and do my own philosophizing in my head, completely forgetting to prayerfully acknowledge the surrounding context. This time, by the Spirit's enablement, I read it afresh and discovered verses 7-12, which do a phenominal job defining the elements of verses 4-6, erasing any influence of confusion I have ever had in the past. I encourage you to read this for yourself and I will therefore not speak of my conclusions here.
All this to say, do not depend so much on your ability to dig into deep philosophy based on minute elements. Sometimes the best way to make true discoveries is, by the enablement of the Spirit, to see surface level things as they correspond to other surface level things. Read like a hunter - who only takes focused aim through his scope once he has already found his target through constant use of his peripheral.

2011-09-27T09:22:00.001-07:00

As a typical evangelical Christian, you’ve always heard it preached “your faith will reveal itself through your works!” You’ve always wanted to be the kind of person who did more. You wish you were more unconventional and stuck your neck out in tough situations. You’ve been longing for more – more joy in your service, more motivation to initiate good works unto the Glory of God, and a greater sense of the bountiful harvest around you that is waiting to be reaped. You wish you cared more. But the hard fact is – you don’t. You aren’t the person you wish you were. When you do serve, there’s little fulfillment in it. It’s not very effective work, as it pretty much dies with the day, and the types of services that you participate in are pretty easy and require little initiative. It’s been a while since you’ve led a soul to Christ, and when you did your soul did not throw much of a party, and you never heard from that person again. You cannot say you really participated in the great commission as you never put forth effort to create a disciple. You just created a Christian, and who knows what that means anymore.
Now you have this acquaintance. Perhaps it’s an atheist, or a Muslim, or an agnostic, or a Mormon. You know they do not believe a Biblical Gospel. But it seems like their life looks more like a Gospel life than yours. They are always involved in other people’s lives. They are always there for their friends. They are the first ones to cry with someone who is hurt. They tend to the pain of others. They are the ones who are the most concerned when even you are experiencing trouble, and will willingly come to your aid and provide their version of genuinely supportive counsel. They seem to be fulfilled when they have an opportunity to make a difference in someone’s life.
Right now you are probably taking this a direction that would include motives, intentions, and goals. And this, though it may be true, is not the direction I wish to take this. It is important to understand this: that we are made in God’s image. While sin has severely marred this image, we are still capable of loving. But the fact that we CAN love is not the issue. The issue is, what value is that love? Is it a detriment to the Gospel to say that an unsaved person can genuinely love his neighbor as himself and treat him that way?
I answer this question with a “no.”
In fact, an unbeliever could actually live a more impressive life than a redeemed individual, even though the redeemed are the ones who alone receive the Spirit’s enablement for redeemed daily living. Does this imply a weak Holy Spirit? Again, “no.” It implies weak faith among the redeemed. It implies lives that do not capitalize on the Spirit’s enablement due to fear and a sense of weakness. This is due to lives lived according to a false Gospel wherein we possess all available power within our flesh and bones to accomplish eternal work. Though we hear different every Sunday and shout our Amen’s to the proclamation of God’s almighty power, when we get to the grind, we buckle under the pressure and abandon hope in the One who sustains us.
Which gets me to my point. How is it that an unbeliever’s works are seen as unworthy, but the works of the redeemed, though perhaps weak in faith and less potent, are considered worthy? What if you did the exact same works as the atheist or the Muslim? When you stood up before God side-by-side with that unbeliever, what compels Him to choose you rather than him?
One word: Association.
And this is what hurts pride. When God accepts you, He is accepting Christ. He is not accepting you because of you or anything you’ve done or said. He is accepting you because of your ASSOCIATION. You are guilt-free by association. It’s a liberating thought to know that it doesn’t matter what you do, you are never going to be a better person to God. You don’t have to try. You left to yourself are, and always will be, putrid. So claim your stench as a person. But claim God’s love in Christ. He loved you and chose you even though you are offensive. The only way we can truly be liberated from the pressure of having to make ourselves into something good is to admit that we will NEVER make ourselves into something good no matter how hard we try. We will never make up for or cover our own offensiveness. But with that, as we are in Christ, we will NEVER be rejected. We are now righteous because of Christ’s cleansing blood. Those who stand up against us and look better are still guilty because they are associated with only themselves and themselves alone, leaving them very alone. They stand before God with all their good deeds, but they mean nothing to God. They provide no atoning influence on God’s wrath. Christ was sent as the atonement, taking God’s wrath so we could be free from it. What more do you want?
So stop living a heresy. You are not making yourself a better person. It’s not going to happen! Suck it up, humble yourself, and find liberating rest in your ASSOCIATION rather than yourself. This will give you the drive to live an eternally successful life. Stop looking for inspiration in 140 characters or less, self help books, exciting preaching, or magazines to drive you to be a better person. People looking for employment hate this reality, but for eternity it’s actually a good thing: “It’s all about who you know, not your resume.” So don’t live like you have to bring your accomplishments to God. That hasn’t worked for anyone…ever. Let Christ bring you to God. And with that, read John 17. What better authority than the testimony of our Great High Priest?

2011-09-26T09:48:00.001-07:00

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately on the matter of prayer. I know it is far more important than it has been in my life lately, and I feel continually challenged. Let me start at the beginning of my journey:
Making the Bible relevant to today’s culture has relatively little to do with the music we sing or the methods we use. Relevant Christianity is believing that the God who involved Himself with the Patriarchs is the same God who involves Himself in our lives today. The Jesus that called and worked in and through the lives of the 12 disciples is the same Jesus that calls and works in and through us today. The same Holy Spirit that made apostles out of common men is the same Holy Spirit that transforms common men into bold witnesses today. This is Biblical relevance: God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
Our application of this relevance is found in our prayers. Much of the work God did through both the patriarchs and the disciples was rather unreasonable. Many of the expectations God placed upon His people have been unreasonable. Take a series of miracles Jesus performed: fed the 5k, walked on water, calmed the water, fed the 4k, did many healings therein. But at the feeding of the 4k the disciples still didn’t get it. Jesus says “are you yet without understanding?” Our problem is, we want to understand according to human terms before having spiritual faith. We want some sort of reasonableness in our leap. We want to have a list of ways God could work it out. When the disciples doubted, it wasn’t that they were doubting Christ specifically. They were just thinking with natural minds which naturally doubt what they cannot see. And Christ rebuked them as though they were forsaking the obvious – and they were.
But we somehow justify the disciple-ness of our prayers…we neglect to be bold in asking for unreasonable things. Consider the syro-phonecian woman who asked Christ to heal her child. Christ said “no, the children need fed first. Why should I give to the dogs what is reserved for the children?” But even though the woman agreed that her request was unreasonable – Christ was the Jews’ Messiah. But she still asked, even though 1. Her request was unreasonable, and 2. Christ already said no. She had the boldness and humility to expect Christ to do something unreasonable, even after hearing “no.” This is a faithful prayer. This is a prayer coming from someone who knows far more of Christ than one who can only bring himself to request things that he finds to be reasonable.
Bringing it back to relevance, I’ve been continually challenged that even in my life, no matter how common I am, God is not limited. He still wants us to trust that He is the same God to us that did unreasonable things to those we sanctify in the Bible. They were all common men who would have no place in history if it were not for God’s work in their lives. And we would have no place in His future if it weren’t for His work in us, and because of who He is, we can be free to ask for what is unreasonable and know that He will fulfill it unto His glory. The only two reasons we have not is that 1. We don’t ask, or 2. We ask amiss – we ask stupidly and selfishly. I don’t think God is in the business of saying no all the time. We’re just faithless. We’d see a lot more yeses if we’d just ask and know that God is more desirous of His glory than we are, and more desirous to bring men to Christ than we are. More desirous to build His church than we are. More desirous to build up Christians (like us) than we are. More desirous to build up families than we are. You get the idea. The prayer of submission. Why can’t we even ask for those unreasonable things that we already know are his will? Like for our family to visibly grow in grace? For our local church to grow in grace?
Not to mention (funny…I’m mentioning it) that God rarely does things in a way that we had already mapped out ourselves. This often is a key point on which we lose faith. We didn’t see an answer, so obviously God must be silent, right? Or perhaps you’re not seeing the answer because you’re only looking down one hallway, when God worked it out down another hallway. Instead of listening for Him plainly, we listened for noise in the hallway that we thought He’d do His work in. Even if we hear noise somewhere else, we will not turn to look because of our self-imposed sovereignty. Therefore we never turned to look and see that God did the work somewhere and perhaps somehow differently than according to our prognosis. And sometimes God works in a hallway in a completely different building, so we will never see it. Just because that person didn’t get saved during your time of influence doesn’t mean they’ll never get saved. You just won’t see it happen. We too easily lose hope in what we can’t see. We too often lose hope because we impose our sense of complete comprehension upon a sovereign God.
And sometimes the answer is indeed “no” and will never see a “yes.” Does God not exist? Or does God hate us? No. Rather, though we do not understand why, these times are times in which we are to submit.
Too many people have left the faith or given up on prayer merely because they have prayed falsely. Many nominal Christians have turned atheist merely because God did not answer their impersonal, sacramental, check-list prayer that lacked faith anyway. At least now their claims match the level of faith they always had. Now they can really be reached. You cannot reach someone who thought they already had faith. You cannot redeem those who are already righteous in their own eyes. At least now they are reachable.
But simply, let God be God. You be you. You, as you, come to God through Christ our redeeming mediator, and let Him be God.

2011-09-21T07:10:00.000-07:00

My coworker received a "bible promise book" this past weekend and decided to bring it to work. Every once in a while he will bust it out, read a random verse, and ask me where it is in the Bible. This is pretty fun and allows for some sporadic Gospel conversations in the office, which i must say I enjoy very much. Even though I don't know most of the references, it's still nice to get a little Bible action in the office.
Just today he read 1 John 1:9, which says "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." While I've heard this verse a million and a half times over my lifetime, it struck me differently today. Since I've heard it so many times it has become somewhat of a cliche verse that I just normally interpret it to mean "yes, God saves us and cleanses our sin." The focus is on me and the Father. But when I take a closer look, the verse is actually all about Christ.
What struck me was the mentioning of God's faithfulness and justice being fulfilled in FORGIVING me. The reason this struck me was that, due to my sin, God is faithful and just to CONDEMN me, not forgive me. So I was smitten with great confusion, which lead me to read the context.
Just two verses before, John says "the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin." This verse does not just imply that there is a way to be cleansed. It doesn't just reveal the love of God toward us. It reveals God's passionate hatred against sin. In order for us to be cleansed, someone truly had to bare our judgment, and that was Christ. It is only because Christ took our judgment that we can be made pure. God truly is faithful and just to forgive us of our sins. He does not push aside sin just because He loves us. No, He remained faithful to Himself and His demands for purity. He remained just, as our sin received an appropriate punishment. But we do not have to be the ones baring that punishment! We are cleansed from ALL unrighteousness because of Christ's substitutionary atonement.
It is a mockery to the face of God to value our own works even the slightest bit. It is a blasphemous mockery to believe that there is yet some sin that needs to be purged during or after life. God is faithful to His demands. He is just in His judgments toward us. If we rely on ourselves or any purging work outside of Christ's sacrifice, we will receive the burning judgment of His faithfulness and justice. If we rely on Christ alone, we will receive the total cleansing of the Spirit. Christ completed the work! Don't waste His love toward you.

2011-09-19T12:47:00.000-07:00

This blog is dedicated to me walking myself through an area of my life that I know needs a great amount of improvement.
I was listening to a Leadership Coaching video by Mark Driscoll, and he was discussing 4 different stages of ministry. I will discuss these in relation to church ministry first, but then make application to marriage. Please note that these stages are not all necessary.
1. Creative/Vision stage
In this stage, one sees a need, developes a goal, and attempts to make a way provide for that need through formulating methods, processes, and strategies. This stage is foundational to any growth to be had for a ministry.
2. Management stage
In this stage, the need has been recognized, the goal developed, and the means of provision have been established. Now it's time to make it happen in real life. Theory has become reality. All of those preconceived methods now have to be managed.
3. Defensive Stage
In this stage, something has gone wrong in the vision and/or management stages. But instead of managing through the mishap you decide to focus on blame. Generally you direct your focus onto someone other than yourself. This redirection (often referred to as "blame-shifting") is done by most, if now all An increasing sense of animosity arises and people become discouraged. Carrying out the original plan is now about doing a good job and avoiding mistakes rather than providing for the need. Focus has turned from an outward expression of grace to an inward preservation of self-worth. This stage is certainly not necessary.
4. Death Stage
In this stage, the vision has been abandoned. No further vision is being promoted. There is no goal in the mind of the leader or the people. There is no passion for or focus on fulfilling any real need. Perhaps previous animosity has been unrepentedly set aside in hopes it will be forgotten. Everything seems to be OK, but there is no movement. There is little life that would serve as a monument of grace. This stage is also not necessary.
Though Driscoll meant for these stages to refer to a pastor managing his church, I also apply it to marriage, specifically from the point of view of the husband. See below:
1. Creative/Vision Stage
In this stage, the husband sees the need for a need in his family. Instead of letting life take its course, he acts proactively and begins to think of ways that he can lead his family in order to fulfill this need. He takes initiative to promote spiritual, physical, financial, relational, and social health in his home. He seeks for ways to make the Gospel beautiful to his family. He plans out family devotions and initiates personal conversations with his wife and kids. He reads books on personal finance and seeks wisdom from those who have wisdom in this area. He deliberately studies and romances his wife (and plans for it ahead of time!). He makes it a habit to observe his home in order to prevent disasters and to fix things ASAP before the wife is burdened with the need to write an extensive honey-do list.
2. Management Stage
Some men are extremely good at analyzing their personal context, envisioning necessary changes and goals, and putting plans and theories down on paper. But those like me (not saying I am amazing at the above) are terrible at initiating processes and carrying them through to the end. I'd rather pass the buck at this stage. If you're like me, it's because you are afraid of making an even bigger mess. You're afraid of failure. But the lack of initiation and family management on the part of the husband causes even bigger messes in the long run. And these messes are often messes that result in misery, loneliness, unfaithfulness, and divorce. But when divorce happens, people blame the wife because she is the apparent problem because she's the one divorcing her husband. While this may be true, the husband is ultimately responsible because he wasn't a real man for her. He may have been smart and charming at first, but he had no idea how to be a well-rounded, responsible manager in real life. And those of you who are married know that women are far better at recognizing reality than men are! So it should be our continual pursuit to deal with things that are a part of real life now. Not the theoretical, sportscenter, video-gamer, news paper, internet, reality show life that we often grow content and stagnant in. Wake up. That is not "living for the future." That is living for yourself and doing only those things that you are comfortable with and reap enjoyment from with low risk of failure. Take a risk. Do some things wrong. But get involved in the real life that everyone seems to be living in except you. Wake up to the real, though perhaps accepted, burden that your wife is baring. Take it from her and lead your household. Take the finances from her. Stink at it? Me too. But learn it. It's not unreasonable to take time to study things outside of the Bible. Especially when it helps you be a Biblical man.
3. Defensive Stage
All too often couples are miserable because, when something goes wrong or someone gets hurt, noone is willing to repent. Noone is willing to take blame. The husband wants to be respected. How can I have her respect me if I am asking for her forgiveness? Then I am vulnerable. We all know vulnerable people don't ever get respect! We all know she's supposed to be the vulnerable one. So she should be the one just accepting it and getting over it. While this makes sense with the eyes of flesh, when one muses on reality he discovers he's a conceited jerk. Repent to God and your wife. It takes a real man to repent to his wife. It takes a real man to recognize how vulnerable all men are, especially since we're usually the thoughtless ones who hurt our wives. Claim it! Is your wife the more dominant and active figure in the family and therefore more susceptible to failure? That's your fault. You're the head of the family. Often when she fails, it's probably your fault because she should have never been in that situation to begin with. So stop blaming her. Claim it and treat her like the woman she is. Repent to her when it's your fault. Repent to her when she fails at something that should have been your responsibility to begin with, and then take responsibility in the future.
4. Death Stage
In this stage, your family does not enjoy each other. Nobody really sees anyone else as significant - especially not as significant as themselves. No one serves each other except in order to "keep the peace." The husband spends most of his time disconnected from his wife and kids. They may live in the same house, but they aren't really living together. They certainly find more fulfillment and acceptance with those outside their home. Their "real life" happens mostly without the other person. When they are asked to think of something positive, if they can muster a thought, their first 5 answers are things that are completely unrelated to their spouse. Neither spouse pursues the other. The question "How was your day?" is nothing but routine. You don't really care. If a number of these illustrations are true, chances are you are living in the death stage. If these were blown up and applied to a church body, that church would be as warm and exciting to attend as a funeral. How ironic. There is not much to look forward to here. And nothing will get better until you, husband, shape up your act. Nothing will get better until you personally renew your vows with God and then with your wife, and then become the responsible Christian and family man you were created to be. Until you get right with God, you will never be able to affectively return to stage 1 and 2. Who cares if you go to church as a family, or are even in the ministry! You're apparently not a very good church member/person. If you can't nail it with your family, you'll never nail it at church. And nailing it with your family is not all about nailing it at church! Get over yourself and your dreams and your vision of who you want to be. Be a husband. Be a dad. Be a person consumed by grace. let God handle the rest.

2011-09-14T07:50:00.000-07:00

In a recent post by John Piper, which can be found here, he writes:
"Jesus did not say, 'True religion is converting orphans.' He did not say, 'True religion is making orphans mature and successful adults.' He said, 'True religion is visiting orphans.' Results are God’s business. Obedience is ours."
I wrote on this in a previous blog, but thought I'd resurface it since this is a very Gospel-packed passage. This surely sparked some thoughts in my chasm, or should I say, my mind.
It seems as though Piper interprets this passage to say that Christ is commanding that we visit orphans (and widows, if you read the passage). I think that taking this merely at face value will leave someone with a very dangerous outlook on religion that could lead one to forsake the Gospel altogether, though unknowingly.
The question comes down to this in my mind: Is James suggesting that true religion is performance-driven? Or is true religion performance that is Gospel-driven?
Just before this James charges the 12 tribes with the following: "for you know that the testing of your faith produces steadfastness. And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing."
How do we reveal a perfect and complete faith through trials? By being steadfast. What does steadfastness look like? Look at Daniel. He knew there was a command to cease praying to any god besides the King. He knew there was a penalty for not ceasing. He didn't care. His faith in God gave him steadfastness in his LIFE. He continued praying. We see steadfastness worked out for Daniel in how he lived. And how we live is seen by what we do. So perfect steadfastness, which is a product of true faith in Christ, reveals itself in works. What is James' famous saying? "Faith without works is dead." Not that works are faith, but that faith produces works.
Just after our subject passage, James says "show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ." This is a command based on faith in Jesus Christ. It is no mistake that this issue of partiality comes directly after a charge to visit widows and orphans! Just after this he says, "If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself,' you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors." What is the law? To love ones neighbor. Contrary to popular opinion, love is not essentially an action. God is love. God is not an action. But God ACTS. So love, when it is true, acts.
So back to the original question: "Is James suggesting that true religion is performance-driven? Or is true religion performance that is Gospel-driven?"
Do we have true religion when we visit orphans? Or does visitin orphans REVEAL that one has true religion? I believe it is the latter. We do not control our religion through works! Rather, we reveal our faith in Christ through our works. True religion is not essentially works. True religion is a life so consumed with the Gospel that it cannot help but to work itself out. And that, for the most needy of people - a people that can in no way recompense the service given to them. True religion is revealed when we work with no thought of self in mind. When we forsake our fleshly impulse to only do those things that we will in some way be rewarded for. We can be rewarded for our service to a church, well-off family, institution, community, and wife or husband. Not to say that true faith doesn't work for them as well. But those who are unwilling to visit orphans and widows no nothing about the Gospel. Their life is consumed by EARNING. Their life is consumed by give-and-take. Work-and-wage. This is not Gospel. Gospel living is love-and-give. It does more than just attempt to meet needs that can be preached. It cannot help but to LIVE for others. That is giving of LIFE, not just conversation. That, not as a command so as the earn grace. But as a result of realizing God's grace given abundantly to you.
Countless people sit back and read about the people in need in the newspaper or hear about them from some other source. We say "Wow, I really hope someone comes to their aid. I really hope and pray that God blesses them." But feeling this is pointless unless you live a life wherein those feelings act themselves out. Sometimes that means going to a dirty part of town, sitting on a dirty curb in front of a smoke-house, and giving a dirty, smelly guy a hug and a meal offering your aid and your Christ. Does this seem outrageous or unnecessary? Does this seem revolutionary, enlightening, or inspirting? Then you have not been consumed by the Gospel. If you had been, you'd already be doing such things. So this is the test. If this is truly more than just an elightening tale, you will go out and act. If it's nothing more than amusement, you will return to your life of anti-religion and excuses. For people wanting to go into ministry, if you're waiting until you start up your urban dream-church before you do these things, you have not yet been consumed. Being consumed affects today, not just tomorrow. I say these things partially because I'm trying to make these things real to myself. I'm not a risky guy. I'm not one to do things out-of-the-ordinary. So how about we all make a new definition for ordinary?

2011-07-22T08:05:00.000-07:00

I read a quote on Twitter today by Dave Harvey that resonated in me. It said, "Forgive sinners, forgive sin." Short, simple, and straight forward. But I think it touches something that I, and perhaps many others, fail to realize in every day circumstances.
When I am wronged, I tend to overlook what happened, push it out of the way so that I no longer think about it, and call that forgiveness. I focus on the act and how it made me feel. But true forgiveness does not focus on the act and the resulting feelings. True forgiveness focuses on the PERSON who did the wrong, and justifies the PERSON - not their action. When God forgave us, He did not push the seriousness of our sin to the side. Rather He revealed His wrath upon sin by putting that wrath on His Son. He did not justify our deeds. He justified US. He did not reason away His anger concerning our sin so that He would not feel the need to hold animosity against us. No, He justified US in spite of our sin. He is the justifier of ungodly men, not of ungodly deeds.
When we are hurt by someone, we ought to take God's example of forgiveness. My tendency is to try to justify what has been done to me - to reason it away as not a big deal. But the fact is, when we are sinned against, it IS a big deal, but that person (and our relationship with that person) is a bigger deal. But we do not forgive based on redirecting our judgment of that person to something or someone else. We do not justify them by taking judgment on our pillow or our dog. We do not justify them by punishing them in our thoughts, putting them down and puffing ourselves up. In these cases, we acknowledge the seriousness of their wrong, but we belittle the seriousness of their humanity, their accountability to God, and our relationship with them. When we reason away the seriousness of their sin, we belittle the justice of God and the sacrifice of His Son. We forgive sins in the sense that we don't hold them against the one who committed them.
Colossians 3:13 says "as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive." So we see the forgiveness of God is our basis for our forgiveness of others. Ephesians 4:32 says "Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you." There is an unfortunate chapter break here, but I will continue the passage with the beginning of chapter 5: "Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God." So our firgiveness of others is an imitation of God forgiving us. Not that we did not deserve punishment, but that punishment was fulfilled in Christ's offering. It all comes back to the cross. It all comes back to the Gospel.
When we attempt to forgive based off of earthly means as was described in the beginning of this post, we forsake the Gospel and turn forgiveness, even that of our own sins before God, into an issue of scales. In one way or another, the hurt committed against us still has an offering remaining to be made for restitution to occur. Forgiveness one person to another is a much bigger deal than is often understood! Our perception and imitation of the Gospel is at stake every time we are involved in a situation that calls for forgiveness. Do our relationships suffer due to hurt and lack of forgiveness? Then the Gospel has not been enriched in our hearts. We would do well to meditate on nothing but the Gospel. There is no more sacrifice to be made for sins! Not ours and not theirs. We are accountable to God. We are forgiven by God. We ourselves are partakers of the same forgiveness because we ourselves were partakers in the same sin. We of all people have no right to hold anything to anyone's account because of the great forgiveness that we have experienced from God. Have we even claimed the fact that we ourselves are grievous sinners? Even better, have we claimed the fact that Christ is the glorious Savior, and not just to us? That God was sinned against in a far more serious way than we have? Yet God forgives. Let His testimony of grace speak to us in our dealings with others. Let us be imitators of God in matters of forgiveness and base our forgiveness not in the need for restitution (no matter how abstract) but in the restitution that we have already found in the finished work of Christ.

2011-07-19T09:51:00.000-07:00

Over the past couple of years I remember hearing people talk about popular pastors in quite a negative way. And one argument I have heard raised against them is this: "They may seem powerful face to face or have a powerful tone, but if you were to turn their messages into a manuscript you'd see just how powerless their words actually are. The bare words are shallow and meaningless, just like their ministry."
I could take this quote and spend time discussing a number of different topics, and I will make an application of this concerning music later on, but I want to focus this portion of this blog on the topic of "presentation matters." I heard a quote once, I do not remember by whom, that said something to the effect of "People don't retain what you say. They retain what you are passionate about." Context really does matter. And many people think of context only as if it applies to the context of the Scripture passages. However, context within a message, whether formal or informal, does not end with the historical/grammatical framework. It broadens to encompass not just the message, but also the messenger.
Let's say you are approached by a friend. He comes to you as though he is on a relaxing stroll through the park. His hands fill his pockets and his eyes are half shut as though he just woke up from a nap. After yawning he quietly states that he has something important to tell you that will change your life. Would you find him to be serious? Would you be prone to hang on to the gravity of his message from beginning to end?
Now lets say the same friend approaches you like you were the finish line in a marathon. Sweat is dripping off of the end of his nose, and he is speaking in a rushed and voluminous manner, saying he has something important to tell you that will change your life. Would you listen intently to his message from beginning to end?
In either case, we are prone to mirror the passion of the messenger. The presentation of the message is not just a sham or a theatrical production. It is the picture of what the Gospel has done to that messenger. If the preacher hasn't gotten much from the Gospel, then the people will not get much from the preacher. That preacher who is expressive, excited, and loud because of Christ may not say anything more profound than a 9 year old, but his presentation of the Gospel reveals a profound work on his life that is worth more to him and his congregation than literary profundities wrapped in a stiff, starchy suit. PRESENTATION MATTERS.
This is not to say we can only muster a passion for the Gospel if those around us are passionate about the Gospel. But this includes a discussion of how we read our bibles. Do we read it as a stale, starchy documentation of historical events and antique ethics that is to somehow have an impact on our lives today? Do we treat it as a daily devotional book that is supposed to leave us a nugget each day? Do we treat it as "basic instructions before leaving earth" - that it gives us a means of making life work until we die? All of these responses to the Bible focus on US. But the Bible is something that is focused on Christ and His finished work. It not only establishes the knowledge of a Theos and some specific facts about Him, but it goes on to show how He relates to us and how we relate to Him - both through Jesus Christ. Do we see the great Messenger in the message? Do we get His point? Or do we just try to take away something that is supposed to make our life come together and make us feel better about ourselves and our spiritual life? If so, we miss the Messenger, His passion, and His Gospel. Finding the passionate Messenger in our personal scripture reading comes much down to how we read. He is there, but most of the time we miss Him because we avoid Him altogether in the process of seeking a better self-image.
Concerning music, I tie this together with the above in response to another quote I heard a while back from a popular name in his equally popular discipleship series. He said something to the effect of, "They may have impressive poetic form and an artistic use of words, maybe even rich theological content, but the song is not Spirit led because of the wordly compromise of the music." In my opinion, this is a perfect example of pharisaical judgmentalism. But that is off subject. My point is, poetry, artistry, theology, and good music should make their way into every song we sing because PRESENTATION MATTERS. Much of our music is like the stiff, starchy preaching that we've all seen in the pulpit. Zero passion is downloaded from the song to our lives. Many hymns, though theologically rich, are probably the products of writers who have not been energized by the Spirit. Not because they are not theologically accurate, but because they do not imitate the passion of the Gospel in their presentation of the message. I cannot judge specifically, just like I cannot look at a preacher and say for sure whether or not he is filled with the Spirit. But my point is, music can do just as much justice or injustice to the message of the Gospel as a preacher can do with his presentation. Pastors need to be careful to preach with passion just as much as congregations need to sing with passion as well as pick songs that have presentations that agree with the passion of the message. And we cannot confuse a contemporary style with the influence of the world. It may just be something that is more passionate and artisitic than we are used to. And we should get used to it. Be careful not to judge the heart of the song-writer on either end of the stylistic spectrum, but be careful to choose music that actually PRESENTS the Gospel, rather than just saying it with words, because PRESENTATION MATTERS.

2011-07-19T07:54:00.000-07:00

Tenth Avenue North puts it well in their song below:

"Healing Begins"
So you thought you had to keep this up
All the work that you do
So we think that you're good
And you can't believe it's not enough
All the walls you built up
Are just glass on the outside

So let 'em fall down
There's freedom waiting in the sound
When you let your walls fall to the ground
We're here now

This is where the healing begins
This is where the healing starts
When you come to where you're broken within
The light meets the dark
The light meets the dark

Afraid to let your secrets out
Everything that you hide
Can come crashing through the door now
But too scared to face all your fear
So you hide but you find
That the shame won't disappear

So let it fall down
There's freedom waiting in the sound
When you let your walls fall to the ground
We're here now
We're here now

This is where the healing begins
This is where the healing starts
When you come to where you're broken within
The light meets the dark
The light meets the dark

Sparks will fly as grace collides
With the dark inside of us
So please don't fight
This coming light
Let this blood come cover us
His blood can cover us

This is where the healing begins
This is where the healing starts
When you come to where you're broken within
The light meets the dark
The light meets the dark

2011-07-01T13:58:00.000-07:00

Is there place for patriotism in the church?
I've read some articles condemning the act of churches celebrating their country around national holidays. But is this unbiblical or merely a person's personal conviction?
I am prone to believe the latter. If there is a specific bible passage that I am missing, let me know and I will retract this post. But personally, I really think that we should be gracious in this area. Is there a better and worse way to celebrate a nation? Sure. But is it necessarily wrong to dedicate one or two services a year to praying for our nation and thanking God for our freedoms? What if we didn't have these freedoms? Would it be wrong to thank God with a church service for the lack of national freedoms that produce faith? I highly doubt it. So why would it be wrong to celebrate certain freedoms as the joined covenant community of God on one or two Sundays a year?
A focus on our nation can produce the following for a church:
1. A hightened appreciation for the grace of God as He sheds it upon the righteous and the wicked alike.
2. Humility as we reflect on the comforts that we enjoy but don't deserve while other believers quite literally die daily for the faith. Also humility concerning the rising and falling of nations. They do so at the hand of God, not the hand of other nations. No nation is "God's chosen nation," rather He has chosen to preserve the church. A focus on our nation can help us realize our frailty.
3. A greater burden to win our own communities to Christ as we focus on the people of THIS nation, rather than everyone else's nations through foreign missions.
4. A greater appreciation for where our nation is currently at, as God guides the hands of our leaders. This can also awaken us to the mystery of God's will, as our rulers rule in ways contrary to the Bible. How could God lead our leaders this way? The fact that we don't understand His wisdom does not make Him unwise. It just makes us finite.
5. A platform to focus on the city that is to come. A perfect city that is truly free by the grace of God through Christ Jesus.
So I would say that it is not the act of dedicating a service or two to the topic of our nation that is wrong, but rather how it is done. Here are some things that should be avoided when focusing a service on our nation:
1. Avoid suggesting that our nation is invincible or chosen of God and is somehow better or more loved by God than anyone else's nation. We are one nation among many that God has shed grace upon. This grace does not always look the same. It has risen at the hand of God and someday will fall at the hand of God.
2. Avoid praising men over Christ. Men produce momentary salvation, but Christ has provided eternal salvation. The sacrifice of fallen soldiers truly is a great gift, but even greater is the gift of Christ's sacrifice. Show appreciate for those soldiers, but worship Christ.
3. Avoid praising political leaders for national success. Remember their leadership is ultimately lead by God.
4. Avoid suggesting inequality based on ethnic diversity by your words and actions, even for this service. There are many in our North American churches that have their roots in other countries, and also family in other nations. How would your actions and statements make them feel? Are we not all equal in Christ?
5. Avoid leaving the singing of national anthems as merely an anthem to the nation. Provide a God-centered context for all things in the service.
In conclusion, I want to reiterate that this is a subject of grace. Is it wrong to hold a church service in recognition of our nation? For some, maybe. Depends on what they are fully convinced of. It also depends on if they make our nation or fallen hero's out to be greater than Christ. This type of service can be done poorly. But I believe it can also be done in a way prefectly pleasing to God.

2011-06-30T07:55:00.000-07:00

"Let the good times roll"
This has been a song played over and over on a radio station playing in my office at work. And doubtless it is the theme of countless other songs. People, including myself, want nothing from life but happiness, euphoria, and freedom from any sort of trouble.
But "trouble" is inevitable. And what happens when life strips us of the ability to quench our troubled heart with more exuberant music and light-hearted banter? What happens when we are forced to discover that all of this ecstasy is nothing more than a sham?
Life is real. Entertainment is distracting. When people live for entertainment, they merely waste their life chasing a distraction, a lion that preys on the naivety of shallow souls.
Perhaps the purpose of trials is to do nothing more than to deepen the strength and maturity of our souls. Maybe it's not to learn a specific lesson, but to recover our childish dreaming from the sea of vanity. Maybe its purpose is to do nothing more than to free us from the suffocation of idle entertainment. To awaken our souls to real life...to the fact that life is more than eating, drinking, and merriment. To take life seriously. To grow up and claim responsibility while at the same time accepting inadequacy - that we are all "that guy who can't do anything right himself or protect those in his charge." This is all the Lord's doing, and it is precious. It just doesn't seem like it at the moment.

2011-06-27T07:36:00.000-07:00

What if you were asked to give evidence that you are saved? What would you say?
Take a minute and think about it. Chew on it. Perhaps you need to wrestle with this question. Take your time.
I believe that many people in our churches are not actually of the household of God. That is, they are given to a false gospel. Though not many will read this post, I believe if many were asked this question, they would give answers such as "before I was saved I drank, smoked, shot up, and slept around. But now I don't. I haven't done those things since I got saved 20 years ago. That is how I know I am saved," or, "I am different from those around me. I don't ___ and I ____."
While I whole-heartedly believe that Christ changes lives and makes us different from the world, to offer a changed or different life as the proof for salvation is to subtily (sometimes not so much subtle!) suggest that one truly relies on his own efforts for his salvation. The Gospel is life-encompassing. To say one can be saved by grace, and then mistakingly live sanctification by works because he is immature is to walk a dangerous line of possibly providing a false assurance for salvation. There is no fine line between grounds for salvation and grounds for sanctification. One may claim salvation by grace but prove with his life that he really believed in salvation by works. A catholic may believe in salvation by grace through faith and protect this belief militantly. But a discussion on purgatory will reveal what they really believe about Christ's sacrifice for sin. I believe many in our church believe in purgatory...only in life, rather than after death. We live like our acceptance before God is relative to our standards and lifestyle.
Check out 1 Corinthians 1:8-9. This passage pretty much sums it up. We are 1. Called to salvation according to the faithfulness of Christ, 2. Kept by Christ's faithfulness, and finally 3. Completed by Christ's faithfulness. Where do our works have a place? Check out Hebrews 3:6 - their part in this story is merely responsive to Christ's faithfulness. Christ is not faithful to us because we are faithful. Rather we who are in Christ are faithful because Christ is already faithful to us. We are proven to be of His household through our faithfulness only because Christ is faithful to His house and will not let any of us go. On these grounds does our salvation - past, present, and future - rest. It's easy to get this backwards in a world that teaches that we must earn anything good, or that good only comes to those who deserve it. But the Gospel teaches that salvation only comes to those who DON'T deserve it! What wonderful news, if we will claim our sin and then claim Christ's faithfulness! So why do we try to deserve it through our reformed lives and standards? Because we give ourselves over to a false Gospel. What evidence do we have for salvation? Christ's faithfulness. That's it. Not ours, not our church's, not an enduring legacy of goodness. Christ's faithfulness to us is our proof. The church needs evangelized just as much as the world does.

2011-06-08T09:38:00.000-07:00

I want to comment on a song by Red called "Let it Burn." Below is an excerpt from the song:
I watch the city burn
These passions slowly smoldering
A lesson never learned
Only violence
Is your world just a broken promise
Is your love just a drop of rain
Will we all just burn our fire
Are you still there
How long can you stand the pain
How long will you hide your face
How long will you be afraid
Are you afraid
How long will you play this game
Will you fight or will you walk away
How long will you let it burn
Let it burn
Let it burn
I will not condemn what was said in the song. I do offer commmendation, rather, for the honesty therein. I feel many of us feel these things without admitting it. We have family members that we've tried to lead to Christ for years with no steps forward. Friends continually push aside Christ's Gospel. Perhaps, like Red, we grieve for groups of people or the world in general, wishing that they might be reconciled to God. Tears are shed over these people and hearts are broken over lives and deaths disassociated from God. We wonder "where is God here? Doesn't He care about them?"
In these situations it is encouraging to think that though we love them, God loves them more. Though we grieve over their wandering, He grieves more. They torment us with their mockery of Christ, but God is tormented all the more. Can we honestly believe that the shadowy love that bubbles out of our feebleness, though genuine, exceeds the love God has for them? I don't know why some are saved and others are not. I don't know why I'm saved and not them. But I know God's love is greater than mine. Regardless of what we think needs to happen, we are merely to shuttle His love. Though He may seem absent in a persons life whom we dearly love, He is still there. God loves you. God loves them. Grieve. Weep. You are in good company.

2011-05-18T15:51:00.000-07:00

Pastor, elder, bishop, minister, reverend, etc. Though the names for "pastor" are many, even more so are the various qualities from pastor to pastor. From one pastor to another, there can be various different abilities, passions, beliefs, preaching styles, personalities, and emphases. A couple broad generalizations that I was thinking about this morning are "retail pastors" and "corporate pastors," also describable as "picture perfecting" and "frame perfecting" pastors. I prefix my more detailed description with the statement that these can interrelate. Retail pastors can have corporate qualities and vice versa.
A "retail" pastor, or "picture perfecting" pastor, is one who likes to get his hands dirty. This is the pastor who, before and after services and throughout the weeks is always hopping from one person to the next, getting to know the people intimately and helping them individually, one-by-one. He finds his greatest fulfillment in constant face-to-face interaction with his flock. His messages focus more on day-to-day stuff rather than broad principles. And though he loves preaching, he can't wait for his messages to be over so he can get back to more personal interaction. This pastor focuses on the "picture" and does what he can to make it as whole, crisp, and beautiful as possible detail by detail.
While every pastor should have retail qualities, some pastors are more corporal, and focus more on the frame that holds the picture in place.
The corporate pastor cares for his flock just as much, but focuses more on the general structure which provides the atmosphere within which his flock breathes and moves. He loves to analyze and adjust programs and systems based on his perception of the needs and gifts of the ever-fluid flock. He carefully organizes the responsibilities of deacons and other church leaders. His biggest concern is that the flock have perfect framework within which they can flourish and show forth God's beauty.
I believe that every pastor should have both qualities listed above, but not every pastor has the same ability as the next. Some are made to do better at one end than the other. Both sides are important. Figuring out which fits you the best may help you determine how to distribute responsibility among elders.

2011-05-03T09:00:00.000-07:00

Church progams.
So how do you determine what church programs you should have and what church programs you should not have? This blog is not meant to be deep or profound, but rather to just address a portion of an issue that is continually on my mind.
I find that many churches grab onto the latest and greatest programs, turning them into somewhat of a "fad." And the fault here is not directly in the "fadness" of the program, but in the choosing of the program. I think many churches add programs to their churches merely because it's a program, and more programs mean more opportunity for ministry. I find this to be completely backwards.
Take 1 Timothy 5:3-16 for example. The church had a "widow-care program." Did they have this program because they wanted to attract widows to their church?
Consider the culture of their time. Commonly older men would marry younger women. This, combined with the trend for women to live longer than men, would result in a massive amount of widows in society, not just in the church. Often these widows would still be somewhat young.
I use this example to make the point that our church programs need to fulfill a need that already exists, not to attract people to need the program. If there is an abundance of programs within a church body, there ought to have first been an abundance of needs for which the programs were created to fulfill. In the case of the Ephesian widow-care program, their program satisfied the needs of the widows in the church. We cannot tell from Scripture whether or not there was an outreach to those outside of the church. However, I think it is fair to say that the priority was the care of those within the church. I would take "for when their passions draw them away from Christ" to imply that they are already in Christ.
This is not to say we should not have outreach to our unsaved communities. I AM saying that the first priority of the Elder needs to be the health of his church. A healthy church is an evangelistic church. If a pastor is truly evangelistic, he will see the many potential evangelists within his own church, rather than just himself, and work to see that they spread the grace of Christ.
When I was a freshman in college, we had a "church fair" where the new freshmen can go around and talk to a number of pastors to help figure out where they want to go to church while in school. I remember one pastor being asked "what kind of evangelistic outreach does your church have?" The pastor's response was "I will build my own church. Just leave the evangelism to me." This is a sign of a church from which you should run because the pastor is not truly and deeply concerned about the health of his church OR evangelism.
But in short, church programs should come from a passion to meet a need that already exists. Church programs are not needs in and of themselves. They represent and meet the fundamental needs of people. Especially those within the church. And you determine what programs you should have by assessing the needs first within the church, and second outside of the church. You do not determine your program line up just because the program sounds like a good ministry opportunity to get involved in.

2011-04-28T14:25:00.000-07:00

When a person seeks after something and ends up dissatisfied when he finds it, chances are he was seeking for something else.
For example, if a person seeks for and attains wealth with little satisfaction, he probably wasn't seeking wealth. He was probably pursuing the contentment and happiness promised to him by his perception of wealth and the lifestyle that is promised to come with wealth.
Generally our pursuits are much simpler than the thing we are seeking. When we seek a nice car, we are rather seeking the happiness we feel it will bring us. We perceive a status that comes with the nice car, and want to rise to that status because we feel it would make us feel good about ourselves. It would help us feel content.
I feel Pastors have a similar temptation. Instead of a nice car, they want a nice sized congregation. Instead of a nice paycheck, they want a structure that they feel rises above the rest. If they don't get what they want, they are dissatisfied with their church, or at least the position their church is in. There's a difference between this and being dissapointed because of sin. What I'm talking about is the fact that our specific desires come from a much simpler passion. Do we who are pastors or are seeking to be pastors have our ideal picture of what we want our church to be like, and will be dissatisfied if reality does not match our desire within an unspecified amount of time? Our purpose is the shepherd the flock of God and to help people grow to be God-resemblers and glorifiers. This is all progressive. There is no end to this task. If we have an ideal "spot" or "vision" in which we feel we can be satisfied in reaching, is this no different than the man who fills his storehouses and then tells himself to eat, drink, and be merry? Isn't this a pastors version of materialism? Where are our pursuits? Is our basic pursuit the pleasure of God or the pleasure of ourselves? If we are dissatisfied with anything besides what we envision for our church, chances are our real, basic desires are something unrelated to real ministry. It is not our vision that matters. It is God's.

2011-04-13T08:51:00.000-07:00

I've been kind of following the comments on The Gospel Coalition 2011 conference going on right now via Facebook and Twitter. I have to say, the conglomeration of what I'm reading is kind of troublesome. And the problem is neither that anyone is saying anything heretical, nor criticizing what is going on there.
I think that the thing that gets me is that most of the comments are rooted in the raw fact that these people are at the conference where the big name preachers are, theoretically moshing in the conference room chairs. Whether you're a fundamentalist or emergent or whatever, whenever a conference rolls around, the only thing a lot of people care about is that they are able to take part in something that popular preachers took part in. It's like the association makes them feel more important and trendy. Has the Gospel become a trend? I fear it has for many blog enthusiasts and new-release aficionados. The Gospel is bound up in the faith of Christ, not John Piper or Mark Dever. Why is it that we cannot speak of Christ apart from speaking of or quoting these men? Instead of the Book of Mormon, we have adopted the Book of Famous Prophets. I do not doubt that their influence is great, and that Christ is truly magnified by their work. The blame is not theirs. The blame is upon those who react to these men. Let us, rather react to Christ. Let us expose ourselves to Him, not just via second-hand exposure. Let us know Him first hand. Let us develope a personal relationship with Him. By all means we ought to take advantage of the resources that these famous preachers provide for the benefit of our spiritual walk. But let's not make the Gospel trendy. When it becomes trendy, it then becomes amiable and theoretical. One would do well to consciously guard himself from seeing the Gospel through the eyes of theory, and see it through the eyes of true, personal relationship. Christ is not an idea. He is a person. How are you getting to know Him?

2011-04-06T07:21:00.001-07:00

Accountability: while it may be good for many people in many cases, I believe that in many other cases for many other people it is spiritually paralyzing.
The good: When someone has been involved in habitual sin, or addictive sin, it is good to have a source of accountability who is continually providing focused edification in the arena of a person’s specific sin. Because let’s all be honest – we aren’t meant to live self-sufficiently. We as Christians are meant for community. We are meant to edify and be edified by each other toward righteousness. And I don’t think it is a stretch to say this is good “especially” for those who have developed a strong tendency toward a specific area of transgression, whether internally or externally.
However, I think accountability is often used as a type of crutch upon which one places their dependence in order to change. They replace personal motivation and intentionality with their accountability partners efforts. Proverbs tells us to “rule over your own spirit.” But many times we give that rule over to someone else, or just plain forfeit it because it’s not easy to rule over our spirit. It’s easier to just let our deceitful heart run its course, and let our accountability partner manage and/or clean up the mess.
Not completely segmented from the above, having an accountability partner also leads one to shift their focus. Their motivation can easily become pleasing their accountability partner rather than pleasing Christ. They want to be able to tell that partner that they went the whole week without ___. Their motivation becomes keeping to a system of ethics rather than growing in their relationship with Christ. Is this not the beginning stages of legalism? Often legalism and true religion look the same on the outside, but the intentions of the heart are very different.
The point is, you are responsible. Perhaps you are irresponsible with your responsibilities, but you are still responsible for yourself. You cannot expect others to change you. You cannot depend on a system or program or person to give you Christ. You are RESPONSIBLE. The question is, will you take responsibility for yourself? Will you choose to rule over your own spirit? Will you say no to the impulses of your emotive heart? Will you consciously choose to think thoughts that differ from what is easy to think? Your husband, wife, pastor, friend, etc. is not responsible for your walk with God. You are. Take responsibility. Own it. Rule over yourself.

2011-03-17T07:02:00.000-07:00

My pastor was talking last night about Christ washing His disciples feet. I never really saw the symbol of Christ’s substitutionary atonement in it before. Usually when it’s preached, all I hear about is service, but God impressed the atonement on my heart yesterday. I mean, what did Christ mean when He told Peter “you don’t know what I’m doing now, but you will hereafter”? How do you preach that as simply service when it’s obvious that “later” refers to His sacrifice on the cross? Sure, Christ’s example here could be applied to every-day service, but only, in context, through the example of Christ taking upon Himself the form of a servant, and taking our place on the cross, becoming sin for man that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. The foot-washing was not just gross. It was lowly. Just like His going to the cross for us. He took our lowly state upon Himself. If Christ does not wash our feet, we have no part in Him. In that sense, Christ tells Peter “if you don’t know what I’m doing here, then you don’t know me.” And Peter understood many more things after Christ ascended. Namely, that Christ took our shame upon Himself that He might nail it to the cross, and we bare it no more. One only needs his feet washed, that is, his shame. His filth. Christ took responsibility for our sin as our head; He took our responsibility as His own. We are no longer bound to the wages of our sin! Tullian Tchividjian said, “The Gospel frees you from the pressure of having to make something of yourself.” Truly, we are all we need to be in Christ. Our shame was already substituted. If you don’t believe this, you might as well believe in purgatory or some other means of after-the-fact purification. If you don’t believe in something like this, then why suffer guilt and shame? Even the law given to Levi to minister to the people of Israel was a law of peace. How much more then is the law of Christ a covenant of peace? Look to Jesus, not your shame or lowly estate! That which makes us lowly has been substituted with the righteousness of Christ! Take heart, buck up, and move on in your glorious estate.

2011-03-07T13:44:00.000-08:00

This post is the product of something I've been thinking heavily on for the past few days. I'm going to try to articulate my feelings, which is not always easy. This has to do with being a husband and a father, both of which I am a novice at. First I will deal with being a father:
Malachi 4:4-6: "Remember the law of my servant Moses, the statutes and rule that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction."

Many would take this reference to fatherhood and have it stand alone, preach a whole message on how fatheres should have a special bond with their kids and leave it at that. And fathers should have this special bond. But I think that, in context with the rest of what Malachi was just talking about, there is far more to this reference to fatherhood. If I remember right, this is the only reference to fatherhood in the book of Malachi. Why does He bring it up now at the end? Conclusions are usually summaries of the previous message. So what is Malachi summarizing? The big picture of Malachi is, in my opinion, "proper and holy adherence to the people's covenant relationship with God." So why does Malachi include fatherhood when summarizing this message? I will put this in terms of the Church, the bearers of the new covenant: because Fathers are foundational to the spiritual upbringing of their children, and therefore the Church. The way a father rears his children is symbolic of the health of the Church. When fathers take responsibility for their children, edifying them in a relationship with God, loving them, and providing for ALL their needs, they and the church flourish. This is not to say that children don't make their own choices, however many times children make those choices because the atmosphere that the fathers create in their home is not a Christ-centered one. Nor do the fathers take proper responsibily for their children. They put that on the church. The very church that rests on the fathers and husbands to be godly influences. It is not a godly influence to transfer your God-given responsibility to the church. You make up the church. You take responsibility. You, father, train your child up in a relationship with Christ. You have the sex talks with your sons and daughters. You confront them of sin and guide them in a way as to flush out sin with a deeper love for Christ. You teach them how to choose and develope good friendships. This is not the job of the sunday school teacher or the youth pastor. You are their dad. You take responsibility. When you don't, the church dies, dad by dad, child by child. Our covenant with Christ becomes a side-thought and a mockery. Legalism, dictatorships, and abuse are used to control families to make them what the father deems acceptable.

Perhaps a godly father will look like this, though I do not present prerequisites to fatherhood 101: he will read the bible aloud with his children. He will chat with them about practical applications of biblical truth. He will talk to them about life’s hard issues including sex, drugs, and relationships because he knows that if they are hard for him, they are impossible for his children. He will get involved in their lives, so that when they talk to him it is not like they are talking to a foreign dignitary who only drops in on their lives when there is a crisis or need for punishment. He will express God’s mercy and grace where necessary, and also express His chastisement where necessary. He will accept them as they are, but seek to help them mature and change, understanding that they, as well as he, are accountable to the same God. He will make his expectations known, but not be overbearing or unreasonable in them. In all things he will love his children from the inside out.

Now the husband is the head of his wife. And the quality of this headship is the discussion here. This is where I personally am the most involved. My daughter is 10 months old. She isn’t struggling with issues of sex, drugs, or relationships. She doesn’t even know English. Her biggest struggle right now is whether or not applesauce is right for her. Though I still need to be there for her and provide for her, most of my life’s communication will impact my wife. And here is where I have suffered the most conviction as of late.

I caught myself in a dangerous position. I have adopted the American mindset that a husband and wife are co-heads. We are a team that shares all responsibility. And those who know me and my wife know that my wife has a stronger and more expressive personality than I do. This is not bad, however it presents a struggle for me as far as my headship is concerned. So the struggle looks like this: When an issue arises where the outcome will steer our family in one direction or another, I generally concede. When I don’t have much of an opinion about something, the decision goes to her. I fear responsibility, not because I don’t want to do anything, but because I don’t want to take the fall, because if we are all honest, we know that whoever takes the most responsibility will take the most fall when things go bad. So I don’t want to take the blame for failure. And I know my wife doesn’t fail, so to me the answer is simple. But the answer neglects my God-given duty, whether taking on this duty is immediately efficient or not. The fact is, God made man the head of the woman. The man is to relate to his wife as Christ relates to the church. Christ did not sin, but He put Himself in a place of responsibility for our sin. He died for us. So we as husbands are responsible to selflessly care for our wives, whether we feel it is fair or not to take the burden of provision. And this provision goes far beyond going to work and bringing home bacon, and even some bread. This includes spiritual, emotional, physical, relational, and financial provision. This is a heavy list of terms, but this is the responsibility of husbands as heads of their households. This is why those who cannot rule their own households well should not be in ministry. Ministry will tear your family apart if you first have not gotten a hold of your responsibility as the head of your household. Remember, Christ will build His Church. He doesn’t need you. You can wait. Christ’s first calling on your life is your family, especially your wife. How can you communicate God’s covenant with the Church to your kids (or your church) if you can’t live it out with your wife? I am convinced that there are many in this world who entered ministry prematurely, and therefore have an “ok” ministry. Maybe they are expressive and have all the exuberance of a caffeinated chimpanzee, but God’s covenant has not truly been rooted in and grown up in their hearts because they neglect their own families for the sake of the ministry.

A father and a husband of all people is not his own. He is God’s vessel for communicating His covenant to mankind, primarily his own household. If the men in our churches bore Christ’s headship to his family first, I think we would see an unusual fire kindled therein.

2011-03-02T10:52:00.000-08:00

“Shall I sin that grace may abound?”
This attitude seeks to bind God, or trap Him in His words. “Whoops! You promised to take me to heaven if I believed in Jesus. Guess you’re trapped in your words no matter what I do!”
Taking advantage of God’s grace is more than just “utilizing” a gift of God. It is an act of deceitful betrayal. Underneath the act is an attempt to catch God with His own promises. Finding a loophole, if you would, in the covenant contract. Did God not write sufficiently enough that we want more specific fine print? Does a real Christian NEED fine print?
So the real question is, does this attitude comes from someone who really entered into a relationship with Christ? If God did provide more fine print, would this person be any better? Or would he be a Pharisee? Full of religious works but empty of the Spirit?
I think it comes down to this: God did give the fine print, and oh it is fine. It is grace and love. It is a relationship with our Sovereign. Relationships include a bond between two people. And I’m talking about a relational bond – a bond of love. Not necessarily a bond of regulatory requirements. If a person has truly become a Christian, he has entered into this relationship. And don’t get me wrong, relationships grow. Our relationship with God is no different. We will grow from day one in our relationship with God into deeper love with God. But if this love-bond was never there, can you really say you are a Christian? If the details above match the details of your heart I would seriously consider this question. I am no judge, but I think this requires some serious, sober thought.

2011-02-23T08:36:00.000-08:00

Titus 2
11For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, 12training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, 13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
The grace of God, when it takes root in our life, teaches us to renounce ungodliness. In other words, it integrates the word "NO" into our lives as it pertains to our worldly passions. I think that counselors do well to try to help people find ways to change, however we cannot lose sight of the focus of this passage. And no, the focus is not a person saying "no" to sin. Saying "no" is a biproduct of the focus. The focus is the grace of God. And this, I believe, references Christ. Specifically according to the perspective that Christ came to establish God's people - the Church...the chosen people whom God's grace has reconciled, established a relationship, and called to holiness. God's grace teaches us the points in this passage. And this grace is personal. The Biblical counselor's first priority is the aid in a the counselee's relationship with God. The Spirit is real. He really does work in people. We don't have to take His place in order to make things work. But we can help people grow in grace. Sometimes this edification comes in the form of helping people establish disciplines in their life. But we cannot do so in a way that would replace grace with guilt. I.e., a person cannot discipline himself to the point where his religion is formed around the idea that if he touches the unclean thing God no longer accepts him. He IS reconciled. Therefore BE reconciled (2 Corinthians 5:16-21). "Be who you are" rather than "try to attain something that you should be." Spiritual disciplines are initiated by grace unto godliness, they do not attain grace by godliness. I believe it is easy and typical for counselors to blur the lines between these two thoughts. The old has gone, the new is here! Offer hope upon grace, rather than a burden upon burdens.

2011-01-26T12:53:00.000-08:00

Charles Hawking said something that has become a cheer and a herald for atheists: "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." Though atheists treat this statement with as much respect and admiration as a puppy does his owner, it really does nothing to promote the cause of Atheism.
First, it does not provide any reason to reject God. It merely states (though emphatically within context) what theists already believe, that men are free to accept or reject God and His Son (i.e., the existence of a theos and the means by which Christians believe He relates to mankind). I don't think it is a stretch to say Christians actually believed the basic concept before it ever entered the thoughts of an atheist. It does not provide evidence, logical or physical, against theism. It does, however, claim there is no evidence for theism. But it does nothing to build actual evidence against theism.
Second, it does not provide support for Atheism. In fact, the exact same phrase could be used in reference to atheism from the theistic standpoint. Charles Hawking himself, when confronted with the need to provide evidence for atheism during a debate with William Lane Craig, could not provide evidence, but rather avoided the question with much stuttering. It was a perfect opportunity to muster evidence against God in a crowd of both believers and atheists, but he didn't.
Third, it implies, or should I say that the popularity of such a vague statement implies that those who honor the statement believe at some point that the absence of evidence for a theos provides evidence for absence of a theos. This is purely illogical. You cannot disprove the existence of something based on the fact that you haven't seen the proof.
Now, I do not say that the statement is illogical or wrong within the confines of it's limitations. However, I write this in response to the popularity that the statement has achieved among atheists. It is nothing but a fluff-packed pillow that an atheist can rest his weary head on after he has exerted hard labor out of his pre-determined heart. The statement does not flow out of someone seeking truth, but rather someone who has already decided.

2011-01-19T13:38:00.000-08:00

We must be careful not to blur the lines between not compromising our positions and having sacrifice without mercy.
James 1:27 "Religion that is pure and undefiled before God, the Father, is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world."
Our religion (speaking as James would define it, rather than some program or whatever) is not based upon how well we hold to a belief, but rather how we love people. The last description is often a can of worms in this department, as many tend to throw in their ten cents concerning what being "unstained" looks like. Well, here's my tens cents. Take it for what it's worth (pun intended).
I would define "unstained" within its context. I would treat this as a neat segway to chapter 2, where James further describes how we should treat others, just like 1:27 was describing. I believe the context supports the notion that being unstained from the world refers to not live according natural tendencies to treat people differently based on status.
Anyway, all that to say, "unstained" is not quite so broad and subject to opinion as one might think.
Back to the point. Our religion is not based on how dogmatic we are about our doctrinal stances. Rather it is based on how we relate to those around us. It is founded in a relationship with Christ, and that reveals itself through our relationships with other people. When we choose to break relationships because of our inability to compromise, we defile our religion. We sacrifice, but neglect mercy. Now, there is cause for separation, but even that is to the end that heavenly and earthly relationships are restored. When a brother or sister in Christ chooses sin and/or to follow a false Gospel, then there is a reason to separate, all to the end that the wanderer might return to Christ and to the fellowship of believers.
When we become so "sold" on beliefs concerning issues that do not necessitate such a "sold" point of view in order to progress in our relationships with Christ and others, we set ourselves up for nullifying Phil. 1:27 and Eph. 4:12-13 with our lives and relationships. I will not give specific examples so as not to stir up disunity, however this is something that we ought to meditate on. Is my dogmatic stand concerning ___ more important than my relationship with someone? Is my or someone else's relationship with Christ really at stake if I or they do not believe ___? If not, then we should be willing to compromise.

2011-01-06T10:33:00.000-08:00

I heard, in relation to counseling, that a person has to hit rock-bottom before he can turn his life around. I've been thinking about that quote. At first thought, I would like to think that it's not true. I mean, come on...I've changed without sulking into depression, feeling like there's nothing left where I'm at. But the more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with the statement. "Rock-Bottom" is basically another term for "realizing your current state, and honestly coming to grips with the truth." This person is fully exposed to HIMSELF. He has quit fooling himself and allowed himself to admit to his wrong and his need for radical change. I remember the man in Luke 18:13 - "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner." This man was justified in the eyes of God. But who does that these days? Stand, looking to the ground, beating one's chest, praying aloud, grieving. I guess it would follow to ask how many people return from their prayers having their relationship with God mended? Not to say one must beat their chest to be heard. But this just shows a sincere and exposed heart. And exposure is not something people are comfortable with, no, not with their unseemly parts. And this is not to say we ought to live our lives with guilt. But this is to say that there ought to be sincerity and grief when confronted with those things about ourself that are not fit for a child of the King. I think the following quote from A.W. Tozer would be fitting:

"It is possible to go through life believing that we believe, while actually having no conviction more vital than a conventional creed inherited from our ancestors or picked up from. . .our social circle. If this creed requires that we admit our own depravity we do so and feel proud of our fidelity to the Christian faith. But from the way we love, praise and pamper ourselves it is plain enough that we do not consider ourselves worthy of damnation."

So, back to hitting rock-bottom: Must one hit rock-bottom to really change? If the change is going to be real, lasting, and sincere rather than just externally conforming, then I believe so. Not only is hitting rock-bottom a place where we realize our depravity, but it also, when joined with the hope Christ brings, gives us deep motivation to change, and purpose behind the actions that follow. If we haven't known conviction deeply within ourselves, then perhaps we aren't really convinced that it's all that bad. And when we DO change, it is as Tozer said - because we're led by our individual culture (which could be merely a comment from a fellow church member or a quote from the pulpit, or the fact that those around us act and dress a certain way or do certain things) rather than conviction in Christ. Our change is done in order to fit into a system of ethics that we're continually developing, rather than a relationship that we SHOULD be continually developing. Therefore we are not conformed into the image of Christ, but rather the image of those that surround us. If they look like Christ, then we may come to look like Christ to, but we are not like Christ. Weirdly enough, the only true way to grow in Christ's likeness is to hit rock-bottom first. It is there that we rid ourselves of the self-effort and self-sufficiency that plagues us, and we reach out to Christ from our miry clay. Then He will be the one who sets our feet on a rock.

2010-12-28T07:11:00.001-08:00

Psalm 119:105
"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path."
What a glorious verse! Especially when taken in context. I think that people misinterpret this verse in an effort to give hope in specific situations. And there is still truth in the common misinterpretation of this passage. But, even if the misinterpretation does give hope, the hope is limited. The true and pure meaning of this passage is all the more glorious.
Read verses 104 and 106: "Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way." "I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments."
Now read verse 105 again: "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path."
The normal teaching of this verse, almost always taught alone while ignoring the surrounding verses (note the previous verse is under a different hebrew letter, however is a grand segway to the following poetic segment), is that all you have to do to find God's will for specific situations is read the Bible. And much of this is true, however the teaching usually locks arms with false understandings of God's will - that God's word and prayer are spiritual portals to understanding the future, knowing the exact decisions God wants us to make, and knowing God's purpose behind situations, and that God generally wants you to know these things ahead of time. I will not focus on this teaching now. Rather, I want to express the glorious teaching in Psalm 119:105. Perhaps a proper understanding of God's will will be revealed as a consequence.
"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path." God's word shows us how God wants us to live ALL the time! The word that comes to my mind is "illumination." It gives us a taste of God's perspective. This illumination is not meant to show us what decision to make so as to take the struggle out of life and leave no need for faith-based decision making, but rather to give us the outlook that will transform our every-day lives, including the way we go about making specific decisions. This illumination via the Word is first and foremost for the sake of sanctification. Decisions are a part of life. They are not the focal point of God's will. I like how the ESV translates 1 Thessalonians 4:3a: "This is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should..." Paul basically uses "sanctification" as another word for God's will. He then goes to specify sanctification to the Thessalonians, providing life changing details. His reason for change, per the will of God, is that "God has not called us for impurity, but holiness." And this sanctification takes place through the influence of the Holy Spirit (v.8)
So then David's full discourse helps reveal that God's will is "fleshed-out" from the inside-out as one is influenced by God's personal Spirit through the reading of His Word. He changes our mind. He changes our heart. He changes our perspective. He changes our life. And this is the will of God. Not that we should not ask for guidance, as this is a natural reaction of a dependant to an authority when faced with the unknown. But when we ask, it is not like we are taking a responsibility off of our desk and placing it on God's until he makes the unknown known. We must still make decisions even though we are left without surity sometimes. The difference is, our unsurity is accompanied by the fact for those who love God all things work together for good,for those who are called according to his purpose. It's far less about what happens and far more about our relationship with God. So seek God! Let Him illumine your eyes to life from His perspective.

2010-12-16T06:51:00.000-08:00

I recently read a quote by Erasmus that states, "By dying for a conviction a man proves only that he is sincere, not that he is right." The quote got me thinking about the evidence we hold for the Resurrection of Christ, being that the disciples were willing to die for their claims. Though this is powerful for those who already believe in Christ's resurrection, it would not give an ounce of proof for skeptics who desire something more. Though, I wonder, is providing "proof" something we should focus on? Can men be "convinced to the point of faith in Christ" by means other than external proof? In Hebrews 6, it is written that God did certain things to convince the "heirs of the promise" of His trustworthiness. In Acts 1, it is written that Christ "gave many convincing proofs that He was alive." Paul went out reasoning (literally, "apologizing") with people concerning Christ many times. My conclusions that follow will be basic. I will not dig deeply into the souls of men and discuss methods by which people are convinced to the point of faith. But I do want to distinguish, since the topic is here, the difference between proof and faith, and each role in bringing people to Christ.
Proof for Christ is limited. But evidence is still there. The Bible speaks of nature showing off God. Not that nature convinces men of the Gospel of Christ. However it is evidence of a theos (though many justifications arise from skeptics about such evidence, just as any one of us so easily and often justifies our own sins. Thus, it is to be expected). This evidence, when received, begs the question of how this theos relates to us, His intelligent and therefore purposeful design. This evidence merely sets us out on an adventure to find the true revelation of this theos. But there are many versions, most of which are wrong. How can we be sure which is correct? How can we be sure that our Christ is the true manifestation of God and salvation? What was Paul reasoning?
I think the best we can do for skeptics concerning proof, without attempting to take the place of the Holy Spirit, is reveal that this book called the Bible reveals a worldview that is not absurd, but rather stands firm in and of itself. And beyond that, the worldview that the Bible presents is the most concrete worldview and the best explanation for what is, thus explaining that it is logical. And this logic is certainly something skeptics are after. This of course requires that we explain the Bible topically. Topics such as the resurrection, the flood, creation, etc. And these are supported by Scripture, logically. But it is only natural to receive criticism, as with the separation between man and God came, as a consequence, so did the separation between man's mind and God's reality. For all men by nature seek their own, and justify it. We eat drink and be merry and do that which is right in our own eyes, and make that which is wrong to be right in our own eyes.
So how is a man won to Christ? Proof wil win the mind. And there is nothing wrong with winning a mind. In fact, the mind must be won before the heart is. But there is everything wrong if a person's mind is the only thing that is won. In all reality, if the mind is the only thing that is won, then the mind has not really been won. When someone understands TRUE Gospel, and chooses to believe it to be true, it will not remain in the mind. How? Because if the TRUE Gospel takes root in the mind, it is only because the Spirit of God is bringing them to it. Otherwise the Gospel that they receive in mind only is not complete. The Gospel is more than mental. It is practical. It is spiritual. We cannot, in our methods of convincing skeptics, expect for our "proof" to win any man to Christ. This is only a work of the Spirit. We can tear down cognitive barriers, but only the Spirit will tear down the barrier of sin between that man and God. We can reveal that someone's beliefs and way of life is un-justifiable, convincing men of sin. But only the Spirit will draw them to saving relational knowledge of Christ. That's what it's all about anyway. We can introduce a couple, and convince our friend that this girl exists, and has exceptional character that far surpasses any other, and that he needs to date her, but we cannot force a relationship upon them. It's up to them to enter into a relationship. And this relationship is far more than mental.

2010-12-10T08:47:00.000-08:00

I don't claim to be an expert on agnosticism, but I still have a question in my mind that I've been pondering.
Why does the agnostic choose only to follow his agnosticism?
Here's why I wonder (taking into account that I don't know all the in's and out's of their beliefs): The agnostic believes we cannot know God. We cannot know what is true. There probably is truth, but we just don't have the capacity to know it.
So my question is, why does the agnostic choose to live with his agnosticism? If truth is out there somewhere, even though we can't really know it, at least if they believed in something they'd have better odds at being right than remaining in their chasm of uncertainty. Especially concerning matters of eternity. From their viewpoint, "What if there is a God, and a heaven and hell?" Well, since we can't know for sure what is true about these matters, I might as well not believe anything." Even though they know it is possible for the truth to be in something, regardless of our capacity to know it. So what makes them choose "nothing" rather than "something," seeing that "nothing" comes with the greatest risk (100%) for dying apart from truth? I'm not sure exactly. I would guess that it has something to do with the natural desire (or a "default state of being") to have freedom from the rules and restrictions that are popularly perceived to come with the territory of believing in "something," and to control their own lives. This could be enhanced by different experiences these people have endured in their lives. They disown religion because it didn't work for them before in certain circumstances. "I prayed for God to heal my mom, but she died instead. If there was a God, He wouldn't have let that happen." Thus begins the vicious cycle of logical justifications for disbelief in God, beginning with an occurance wherein things didn't happen in a way that the person thought they should have happened if God were the way they thought Him to be (and not to harp on this, but as a rebuttal, how can those who now claim to not be able to know truth claim that they know what God should look and act like? But the emotional damage has been done [not by the hand of God, but by a reaction that came from a false understanding of God mixed with a circumstantial trigger], and they are sold in their new belief) The possibilities are endless. All this to say, I wonder why agnostics sit on their beliefs when the greatest potential outcome is failure?

2010-12-10T07:24:00.001-08:00

"Love is Blind." I truly believe this. But not in reference to love for others. Rather, in reference to love for one's self. When we love ourselves more than other people, we are partially or entirely blinded to our own sin and need for change. We are also blinded to the good things in those with whom we participate in relationships. We turn into unthankful people. We want the good life at little or no cost to ourselves. Work for other people without expectation for return turns into a miserable, half-hearted, boring chore. Let the reader know that expectation for return could be more than money or a returned favor. Sometimes we are satisfied with the return of appreciation, enhanced status (in their mind or just our own), self-fulfillment in some sort of personal merit system, or the knowledge that they feel that they owe us. Sometimes these things are enough to bring the self-lover enough satisfaction to make the work worth it. But when the self-lover has to work without receiving any sort of satisfaction in return, they are miserable. Like a child who has to do the dishes or take out the trash without getting an allowance or extra t.v. time. Only the older we get, our expectations generally get more complicated and obscure. But one thing that is not so complicated is that the person who rarely experiences thankfulness or appreciation for others can conclude that they love themselves more than they love others. Do you appreciate your wife/husband? And not just in your head. Does your heart sing because of their goodnes toward you? Does your heart sing because of God' goodness toward you (keep in mind that our relationships are not solely earthly. The most important relationship to keep in mind is a heavenly one)? Thankfulness and appreciation are not solely mental. The mind acknowledges the kindness, and the heart appreciates it. And heart-felt reactions DO come with emotions. It's the way we are made. Not a charismatic kind that makes us speak in tongues, but something that connects our hearts, or comes from that connection, in agape and phileo love. This is something that opens our eyes to God's intent for our relationships. And this is more fully known when we love others as we love ourselves. It is not known when we love ourselves more than we love others, because this love is blind and cannot fully appreciate the good things around us every day.

2010-12-09T07:34:00.000-08:00

Why do churches seem so stale, even though there are plenty of activities and programs for the people to get involved in? Even in churches where the people seem to get along well and show loving, family-like qualities? Perhaps these two qualities deserve individual emphasis. But my pastor was preaching yesterday on the church's obligation to society. And it got me thinking.
First, one must understand the difference between "a church" and "the Church." "A church" is a unit that provides a place for fellowship and learning. This could or could not be a place where the true Gospel preached. "The Church" is the individual (singularly) or group of individuals (universally) that is/are born again into the family of God and walks or does not walk according to the statutes and passion of Christ. "A church" is the place that puts on programs. "The Church" is the person who has a relationship with Christ and is the spring within which the Gospel resides, and from which the Gospel pours out.
My point in writing this is not to bash churches world-wide. There are many churches that are vibrant and growing (spiritually and numerically). However there are many other churches that, dispite their many organized ministry opportunities, are falling apart. Why? I believe a reason for this (among potentially many) is that these churches neglect to make a practical distinction between "a church" and "the church." What would a "practical distinction" look like? When a distinction is missing, perhaps that pastor/congregation neglects to disciple the individuals, and relies on the programs to cultivate their walk in the Spirit. So, as a result, there are a lot of people working, but few people growing spiritually. So then the work that they are doing lacks the true passion, compassion, commitment, and/or concern of Christ. There may be a commitment to a work, but the commitment to the Word is minimal at best.
Churches ought to treat programs as additions to or avenues of evangelism and discipleship, rather than the sole means of them. What is important is that the people become like Christ...at the root of their very being. Not just act right and get involved in good things. God would have mercy without sacrifice. Perhaps this means that certain programs should be done away with in order for an atmosphere to develope that refocuses the people on Christ. God's desire is that we change within. And what happens in the churches should not be in order to build churches, but rather build up the Church...the body of Christ. And this begins within the people of the local churches. Where there is a program, there should be accompanied personal discipleship and accountability to the end that relationships with Christ are built up and fortified, and that the Glory of God through His Gospel is emphasized. It's easy to forget the goal in the midst of the work. A program is only as good as its people, and the people are only as good as their relationship with Christ.

2010-11-12T08:09:00.000-08:00

I am convinced that selfishness is counter-productive.
When a person is selfish, they put so much effort into controlling their environment, and the people in it, that the satisfaction they receive from accomplishing their selfish goal is greatly suprassed by the pain, effort, and/or stress involved in trying to make things happen the way they want. Rather than trying self-control on for size, they rather attempt to control or manipuluate others (especially those closest to them) so that they can be comfortable. Rather than setting aside expectations and ambitions for the sake of relationship, they cling to those things, while making others miserable. They thereby are placed under more stress, as they end up trying to control numerous other individuals, as well as events, rather than just themselves and their own reactions to their environment. They leave themselves free to react however they please, and usually that includes bad attitudes, anger, complaining, lack of contentment, and other forms of negativity. This could all be avoided if they tried to show a little self-control and God-dependance rather than others-control and self or circumstance-dependance.

2010-11-05T08:05:00.001-07:00

I've been thinking about the state of the world and its great need for change and for someone to make a difference. I want to be that person who makes a difference. I want to preach sermons and write books that present the REAL gospel and the REAL Christian grace-walk. I want to be involved in mass-change throughout the world. But each time I think like this, I am smitten inside.
Is it pessimistic to believe that no single person will change the world? To define terms - "person" does not include any "person" of the Godhead. "Change" means to turn everyone's (or at least the majority of people) heart and life to Christ.
I do not believe this is a pessimistic outlook. It could come from a pessimistic heart, and it could be seen as pessimistic, but i think there is a better way of looking at it.
What is God's will for the church? For one member to do all the work and stand out among the rest? No. Rather God's will is for it to work together as one complete, healthy body. Not to say that there are some gifts that do stand out. Some gifts are meant to not be seen. By nature, that is how they work best for the body of Christ. Also, there are parts that MUST be seen in order to work best. God made the church to work as a unit made up of many parts. However, for those who have those gifts that are meant to stand out, they must be cautious. With every strength, there is the potential for weekness. Those who stand out should give greater heed to be humble. It is natural for him to distract from Christ. It is natural for the hearers to give heed to him rather than the Word, almost setting him us as an idol to which one can look and find God and spirituality.
Also, to expect one's self to single-handedly change the world, or even to change a city, is to go against God's established order. Paul went from city to city making churches so that those churches could win the souls in that area (which obviously meant he had to win souls to Christ!). He had a huge influence for the Kingdom, however his actions lead toward the establishment of local bodies that would work together to grow together in Christ and win their society to Christ. And our efforts should not be sourced in individuality, but they should rather follow God's intention of colaboration and relationship within the family of Christ. This is not to say that one's passion for Christ should be quenched to the point that he does not act unless others are willing to as well, like some sort of "Groupon" method of ministry, especially in the case where one's local church does not share a similar passion. But rather, this is a plea to those that want to change to world to first spread their vivacious plague to nearby relatives in Christ. If the world will change, it will start in the Church. It is a great failure among me and my peers to think, like Elijah, that we alone truly work for God and need to take the responsibility upon ourselves to change the world with our "unique" and "revived" views, ministerial methods and ideology. Do we seek to be the next Spurgeon or Moody, standing out among the rest? Let us rather seek to take our place in the glorious Body of Christ, that we might truly glorify God and bring people to Him rather than to bring them to our ideas and proposed culture. Let us bring people to the person of Christ rather than a series of ethics and ideas.

2010-11-03T12:02:00.001-07:00

As I follow Christ
Why preach unless you feel you have something good to say of God? Then, if you have something good to say of God, could you then not say, “Follow me as I follow Christ”? If you cannot say this, then you cannot preach. Preaching is providing something for listeners to follow. And we preach as we are lead of the Spirit. We preach for the edification of the people and the conversion of souls. If this is our aim, then as we preach, we can say “Follow me as I follow Christ.” I don’t think you have to “have it all together” in order to say thus. Paul sure didn’t think he deserved to preach. But he could still say “follow me as I follow Christ.” And I think only the weakest and humblest can speak thus. It does not say much about ourselves. It says much about our Christ. It does not mean we think much of our selves or our “spirituality.” Rather it means we think much of the power of Christ and the Spirit that He has left with us. And this is not a proud statement. The nature of this is founded in an adoration of God. “As I follow Christ” implies that the power within me is not my own. It implies that I know that I am still in need of Christ’s leadership, and that I know I haven’t got it all together. Thus, this statement cannot be made by those who “have it all together.” Truly, no man or woman does. Otherwise they cease to exist under grace.

2008-08-13T08:59:00.000-07:00

One of the arguments against the existence of God that I've heard during many one on one witnessing opportunities is that there can't be a God because bad people succeed and good people fail. A God wouldn't let that happen. First of all, without a standard of good and bad, good and bad wouldn't exist, and God set that standard. Second, and my main point, God doesn't let bad people succeed and good people fail. I believe this deals with perspective. Let us compare two passages of Scripture. First, Ecclesiastes 6:1-2 -- "There is an evil that I have seen under sun, and it lies heavy on mankind: a man to whom God gives wealth, possessions, and honor, so that he lacks nothing that he desires, yet God does not give him power to enjoy them, but a stranger enjoys them. This is vanity; it is a grevous evil." In this passage, we learn that fulfilled desires is not the same as enjoyment. Getting that which one counts as success is not the same as actually enjoying the fruits of success. While the evil man flourishes with success, most likely he is also drowning in despare, for he has all he wants, but does not truly reap the happiness that he thought his success would bring him. Rather, someone else enjoys his success for him, possibly that poor failure known as a righteous man. This man knows happiness, and gets it from the rich, successful, discouraged man. The second passage we should acquire wisdom from is Psalm 92:7, 12-15a -- "Though the wicked sprout like grass and all evildoers flourish, they are doomed to destruction forever...The righteous flourish like the palm tree and grow like a cedar in Lebanon. They are planted in the house of the LORD; they flourish in the courts of our God. They still bear fruit in old age; they are ever full of sap and green, to declare that the LORD is upright." Here we find that the success of the evil man is of the earth and will soon transform into destruction. Everything comes and goes in its season. All that which is of this earth will be reduced to vanity, and all who trust in it will perish. But the righteous man, whose flourishing is in the house of God, will succeed forever, and will always be full of "sap," or, abundant, healthy, productive life, even when he is old. And this is so that the righteous can "declare that the LORD is upright." So I think success is all a part of perspective. To pile up vanity to oneself or to fill one's self with the uprightness of the Lord: which is true success? On the outside vanity is much more appealing. At least during life. But what then? All one has to offer God for his life is vanity. That which melts with the elements. Truly the righteous man who seems to fail in this life is filled with success that far exceeds the evil, wealthy man. That man can't even fully enjoy his wealth. So I will seek God. Not for pleasure, but because He is worth it. He is worthy of it.

2008-07-01T07:41:00.000-07:00

Is God limited by reality and logic? How do reality and logic relate to one another? I will attempt to give an anwer from my limited understanding. The introductory question is one given by many who would attempt to undermine the limitless nature of God. However, a look at the nature of reality and logic, in my mind, undermine attempted undermining. What is reality? Is it something that can bind God? Is it an essence that can be escaped from? I think a more appropriate question is: is reality something that is to be escaped from? Let me explain. Many words within language are words that represent ideas rather than entities. Such words include "existence" and "victory/defeat." These words do not represtations of things, but rather ideas related to things, occurances, etc. Likewise, reality is not a thing. It is an idea that refers to what is. God IS boundless. That is reality. If God escaped from reality because of His boundlessness, He would consequentially escape from boundlessness. Reality is not an entity, it represents the God who is, and everything else. Reality is not a type of Alcatraz that provides the inhabitants a sense of capture and imprisonment. Reality is not even something that has inhabitants. We are not co-inhabitors of reality along side of God. Reality is an explanation, not a composition, of what is. How is reality related to logic? Is God bound to logic? Logic is a means by which intellectual beings understand reality. It is the ability to identify observable or otherwise comprehendable realities and conclude other realities. Math is an example (deductive). Betting at horse races is another (inductive/abductive). Is God limited by logic? Is logic a realm? I would say, no. Logic is a means of identification. Logic was not created. God is logical by nature, and He passed on that trait to the image in which He created man. Logic finds its roots in God. Is God limited by mathmatical equations? Can he not work outside of those bounds? Or is math representative of the mind of God? I suppose He could change math laws. I'm just not sure if such laws are a creation or if they are part of God's established logic, defined by His nature. Either way, He is not bound by logic or reality. Neither are entities that have the ability to bind anyone. They are representations and explanations of what is.

2008-05-18T21:33:00.001-07:00

Empty handed I am. This is a fact all men can claim with personal application. However, some come to learn it through lonliness of heart. "Some" includes me. With a smile on my face, rotting my soul with its hypocrisy, I drown in emptiness. Can I not just be honest-faced? Is it that I do not trust that the body of Christ will care for its own members? It's most likely it will not, at least not with real concern, but there are a few that would truly reach out. A couple for sure. However, the issue extends to more closely related subjects. They might be discussed here in this physical representation of my scattered mind.
I can not live; I can not work; I can not read; I can not pray; I can not sing; I can not love; I can not laugh; I can not cry; I can not play. I can only appear to do these things. But my wholeness is not welcome at these festivities. This has only just occured to me. I know neither how nor why. Perhaps I do, for I can know one thing, and in this one thing changed the world: "Your love is better than life." Surely this one thing can change one who helps make up the world. May it do more than make sense. May it make me. He loved me first, and my natural response ought to be to first love Him. But sin makes one go against He who bought and changed him. I want to want to love Him. God uses that. It allows for perseverance. Not that God needs that; it's merely an aspect of such a condition.
"You make oceans from the rain, bringing life into this place. And I will drown inside your love until I see your perfect face."
I want to do this drowning.
Who else besides my self will I hurt because of the false sense of emptiness I experience? I know a few.
How is it a false sense, knowing that the things I know I don't have cannot be had anyway in the truest sense apart from intimacy with God? Here's a clue: the knowledge manifests itself in apathy and the selfish kind of depression, if there is any other kind. I'm not sure. One can know truth, and apply it selfishly. A lot of Atheists do this everyday. So do some fundamentalists with their perfectly ok policies, only in a different way.
So how can I know this truth in a selfless way? Not through force, that's for sure, for there is none that seeketh God. For me to seek through my power would be to ensure failure, for one that seeketh with his own power will not seek God, but by default seeks his own. But the one who seeks by His power by default seeks God's own, for he is and acts like God's own. Once again, the prevailing, one-word answer is. . .yield. Yield your soul, your life, your pride, everything inside and out. "What is man that thou art mindful of him?" But You use him for your glory as you deserve. What is man. . .you are mindful of Him? To understand this fully, the "you" must be understood. At least to an extent. But that' for our own personal thoughts and studies. But at least, know this my soul, that He who began this great work in you is faithful to complete it. So set your will, your struggles and strifes at highest second to the one Who can not fail at what He sets out to do. For to seek God's own is the highest calling for all who live, including God. And all who set out to do it in His power will be blessed with victory.

2008-04-22T21:16:00.000-07:00

Why do we get proud when God does something great through us? Is it at its core because we like to take the credit for ourselves? I think that could be one way of seeing it. Another way of seeing it might be this way: men are of little faith. When confronted with a situation/opportunity/etc., we religiously pray that God would use it for His glory, when in all reality, our real desire is so that something good would happen so we wouldn't have to admit to messing up again, and/or that we may be lifted up in the eyes of men. The reasons can go on. So perhaps the prayer is merely a mentally spoken desire addressed to ourselves but tagged with the name "God." We do this maybe because we have more faith in the works or our own hands than in the hand of God. This is due to a belittled view of God. Perhaps I don't believe God works in my personal life, even though I can see that He did in the great Christian men of the past. So we feel alone. We feel the burden layed on ourselves to make the opportunity great. But we still pray, "Dear God, please. . ." We know as a fact that we have no strength, but we don't realize how much God actually does work in our daily lives. He really is real. He really does get deep into our lives. Deeper than we get into them. When we speak with Godly ferver, it really is Him speaking great things, not ourselves. But we, when we speak great things, don't acknowledge that God really does do great things immediately through us. We then perceive our actions as merely our actions. And when the action is great, we think we are great, when it was God working all along. All because we don't see God when He really does work. The memory gets blended with the times when we really did work in our own strength.

2008-04-09T23:11:00.000-07:00

If everybody in the world had a mental illness due to something not detectible by microscopes, CAT scans, or anything else that detects physical problems, and that mental illness influenced the thoughts and corresponding lives of those who had it, and one person lacked that illness, that person would be seen as "different" or "abnormal." As far as the majority goes, they think they are "right" because each one of them is "normal." Normality is relative to the majority, not to what should be. And far too often people critisize others for not being "normal," whether the subject of normality be phsycological, physical, or spiritual in nature. Let's deal with the spiritual aspect. Fundamentalists have a view of what is right based on their interpretation of Scripture. So do liberals. Fundamentalists judge liberals and liberals judge fundamentalists. First of all, neither of them has to be right about whatever topic is being discussed. Second of all, there has to be one conclusion to every discussion, whether that conclusion is subjective or objective in nature. How does one know what is the right conclusion? If I could answer that, I could eliminate the terms "fundamentalist" and "liberal." But I'm not going to do that. I do not doubt my fundamental beliefs, for I believe they are sound, but I cannot uplift dogmatism so high that it refuses to accept something else as truth if it is a better fit to reality than what I presently believe. When personal agenda reigns as the king of perceived truth, I no longer seek to find truth, but rather I attempt to make truth and I am unwilling to accept reality when God shows it to me. And this reality shows us intended normality. This normality is what God created, but man lost because of sin. To be driven by dogmatism is to be like the majority with the undetected mental illness. When they see someone who is "healthy," they cannot allow themselves to accept that they are "sick" and are the ones in need of change. Certainly there are diseases that are obviously detrimental to overall health, but what of the one who is merely...different? Cannot something be learned of him? Is the majority supreme, or is truth? Is historical normality the standard, or is truth? Truth is not found in "what always has been" or "what most people in our circles believe." Truth is its own substance and cannot be determined by what people say it is. Truth paints a picture of the immutable God - or should I say, truth is a product of the existence of God. Understanding changes. It always has. God doesn't. Logically we can deduce from these two statements that, historically speaking, 100% truth has not been found by men, nor will it be until we're all dead. Only glorified individuals who have seen God and have cast off the filthy, defiled flesh can truly see 100% truth, for only the glorified individual can see the complete picture of God. And even then we are limited. Who are we, who yet live in the flesh, to claim supreme health and be unwilling to learn from those who are different? Do we have to admit that they are right? Not necessarily. But we must be humble enough to learn, for our understanding about just about everything is still incomplete and always will be until we're dead. But our understanding can progress. This happens by learning, evaluating, discerning, praying, and yielding to the Spirit. No dogmatic (proud) man will know truth according to the Spirit as he ought. No, not much more than an unregenerate man can. I do not mean by this post that man cannot please God because he will never be able to truly see who He really is. God is pleased by one's desires more than He is by one's accomplishments. Accomplishments are done by the unregenerate everyday. But they are filthy rags. Rather, God looks on the heart. What we give Him today from our hearts pleases Him. This is yielding. This is relationship. Women and men don't understand each other very well. But a love and desire for the other (all things pending) will keep them together. Understanding within this bond will keep growing. But little or much understanding does not have to regulate little or much love. We can have a vibrant relationship with God, even though we don't really get everything about Him. So let's seek the love relationship. Understanding will come when the Spirit shows us. We must be willing to accept it when it comes though, whatever twists it may throw in our preconceived ideas. Our goal is truth as it displays God, because we love Him and want to know Him and understand Him. Love is curious about the deep things of the other. Should we not seek the deep things of God, while not making conceptual endeavors god instead?

2008-04-07T16:35:00.000-07:00

Why does it seem that the focus of marriage centers on what is physical? If such a focus displayed reality, then that would also be the focus that God has on marriage. But when in the Scriptures does it emphasize the physical above other things? When I think of Scripture passages dealing with marriage, I think of topics dealing with love, respect, understanding, sacrifice, giving and giving up, etc. These are the major emphasese, not the fulfillment of physical passion. Not that this is non-existant in Scripture, but it is not what is displayed as being the most important. But it is nevertheless what men and women look forward to the most on their wedding day. At least this is so according to my limited sources of observation. Welcome to America. Anyway, here are what I perceive to be the most important qualities of marriage: The permanent bond between two helps fit for each other-helps fit to aid in their spiritual walk with God, help in the work of God, lift up the other when they are down, to weep with, to rejoice with in all things for the rest of their lives; to have someone to understand and be understood by; to give and receive joy due to common love; to fulfill each other's love by being there, for no love desires to be seperated from its object. Many reasons are buried within these broad discriptions, and there are many more that could be mentioned. And I suppose this love that is true and in its right place doesn't have to be beckoned by the Spirit into the arms of God because its already there. It has recognized its King. It has fallen in love with Him too, foremost. First-not in a time sense but a priority sense. This is how love for another on earth can be its deepest and purest-when the fullness of one's love is buried deep within the heart of God. Otherwise, love only causes the Spirit to beckon and battles the Spirit when He beckons. This is the root of selfishness, the deepest enemy of love. This is what causes lust, aka love corrupted by the cancer of selfishness. Therefore, love cannot be what it is meant to be, hurting one's relationship with God and the other individual involved. Maybe this is one reason those entering into a marriage relationship find things the hardest right at the beginning. The physical relationship has transformed, and so often one's mind concerning the other individual has done so as well, replacing love with lust within the marriage relationship. Just because something's legal doesn't mean it has to be understood the proper way. Lawful fulfillment of passion doesn't have to be done in love for the other person. But it is done in love. For self, which, corresponding with one's relationship with the other, is lust. So where is the emphasis of marriage? It's found in the other person. It's found in God.

2008-02-10T19:26:00.000-08:00

If one knows not truth, but ends up telling truth though his heart sought to lie, is it not counted a lie? If one is misinformed and tells a falsehood thinking it to be a truth, is he not yet counted with the pure in heart? If one makes the righteous statement, "I love God," yet in his heart he has not renounced unrighteousness and cleaved to the Good, is he not a liar? Though he might suppose that since the statement is Christian, "and therefore good," is he not still a representative of the infadels at heart? Then again, if a person says, "I do not love God. Look at me: how could I?" and in his honesty rather the opposite is true, is he not still a man after God's own heart? Consider the prayers of the publican and the pharisee.

2008-02-10T18:44:00.000-08:00

I can picture God as I or any struggle through thoughts of depressed relationship between us: He looks upon us with wide dialated eyes and forcefully yet with peace and an overflowing heart says, "I still want you. I have not changed my mind about you yet, nor will I. Here's my love. Take it. Know it. Embrace it. I'm embracing you. I do not say you have never forsaken Me. I do not say that you have never played the whoremonger. I do say My faithfulness toward you will endure. Remember - I am love. Therefore, I am faithful. Your relationship with me is not based on you and your character. It is based on Me and Mine. I will not change. My thoughts about you won't either. Therefore, you are mine forever, o dearly beloved of My soul."

"I love you more than the sun and the stars that I tought how to shine - you are Mine and you shine for me too. I love you yesterday and today and tomorrow, I'll say it again and again - I love you more!" - Matthew West

2008-02-10T13:10:00.000-08:00

What does it mean to be "right with God"? I would suppose that it means to be a person who runs after God's own heart. Wouldn't that assume that the same person is himself resembling God's own heart? Granted we are fallen. Granted we will not fully resemble Him until glory. But, like David who was an obvious sinner more than other Biblical examples of a Godly person, we can have God's desires be our own and pursue them as much as we are able. My problem is realizing that I don't have to understand every problem to the fullest extent in order for it to be dealt with. I can seek God while still having problems. Isn't God the one who is able to defeat the sin? So why do I think I have to have my problems under my thumb in order to be "right with God"? If I wait for that I will never be useful for God because I will never be satisfied because of Him. Rather, the recognition of our sin ought make us awefully consider God who calls us His beloved and chosen regardless of our sins against Him. We ought to consider the grace that yet called us. What did David do in most of his Psalms? Work out his own problems in his head and then display his thoughts on parchment? Rather he drew a picture of the person of God, to His praise. When David saw his sin, he turned the gaze of his heart to God who did not change His mind about him.

2008-01-15T23:30:00.000-08:00

I was reading Isaiah 5 this morning before bed and was immensely blessed by the first 7 verses. It tells an allegory of a planter planting a "beloved vineyard" and making all the necessary preparations to assure a quality and bountiful reaping of grapes. To the planter's dismay, all the vineyard produced was wild grapes. It was as if the planter had done nothing to the vineyard at all. Had he done nothing, the end would have been the same. Nothing but wild, useless grapes. God compares this story to His interaction with Israel. Though God dealt wisely with His beloved nation and blessed them beyond measure, Israel still lived as though God had no part with them - as though He never had existed. They claimed their own lives. Back to the allegory: God, acting as the planter, upon realizing the outcome of the crop, decided to let the field be "devoured" or "grazed over." He tore down the walls to the field for it to be trampled down by whatever fealt like coming through. The planter would no longer weed or till it. Comparing it to Israel, it was as if God said "If you wish to live as though I don't exist, then I will grant your wish. I will leave you to yourselves that you might see what will become of you apart from Me." The vinedresser in the allegory left the field to itself and it was destroyed by natural events. In like manner would Israel be destroyed when left to it's weak self. What's this mean to me? Many times I play the part of Israel in this story. I live as though He doesn't exist, though I make my pious claims that my circles expect. My heart doesn't really acknowledge Him, though my mind might. I have no feelings for Him at all, and true love will always come complete with feelings of some sort to some degree. Through all of this, I lose sight of reality; I find myself strong, and God unneccessary. So, God lets me see what I am when left to myself, and it is the most depressing experience imaginable. However, the point of His tactic is to bring me back to Himself, as it realines my perceptions with reality. Too bad I don't always recognize reality right away when it layed out right in front of my face. I'm way too stubborn. Dumb pride.

2008-01-11T16:47:00.000-08:00

I've been thinking a lot about Christian liberty lately. Most would apply the discussion to personal standards, but I'm not so sure the idea keys in on standards. It may impact standards practically, but only indirectly. Galatians 5:1 tells us to stand in the liberty of Christ, not the yoke of bondage. This yoke is what the false teachers, probably Jews, were trying to give new Christians, saying they had to keep the law of Moses with Christianity. I have fallen into this belief personally, but the yoke is not the law of Moses. Rather I convince myself that unless I can comprehend Scriptural ideas as much as I can apply practically, I am not right with God. I have been learning that the Christian life is lived by the same grace that saved me, and my salvation is based on the mystery of God's love and providence. Both of which factors I cannot comprehend. How then is my life to be based upon rational ability instead of faith? Is not faith the evidence of things not seen? So I have replaced faith with self-effort, similar to the yoke of Moses' law. I am commanded to live in liberty. Liberty lets one live free because of the expense of another. I've nothing to contribute - not even my mind or heart. Rather, those are effected by the one who is sovereign over them, and wisdom is gained only because God chooses to impart it to the one who has already known God by His grace through faith.

2007-11-10T12:47:00.000-08:00

This is a response to a question asked regarding a previous post: how do you limit the noise in church? In order to answer this question, one must have a proper understanding of noise. What is it? Is it completely external? Noise is anything that hinders clear transferal of communication. Examples of external sources of noise would be an email written in cell phone text language, a noisy room, staticy phone, etc. In church, some examples would be the pastor wearing a clown suit, the sermon being choppy and illogically presented without flow. These are some typical examples. However, one often goes unnoiticed: a traditionalistic mindset in the congregation. This mindset finds it's comfort in the fact that everything is done the way it's always been done. If something is different, critisism and offense arises in the minds of the people. Notice this comfort and basis for offense has nothing to do with what church is about. This mindset comes with a "spiritual" contentment with "doing church" regardless of terminology involved. Therefore, the working of the Spirit is quenched by "leave everything the same" mentality. Change is a swear word. The mindset toward church inevitably latches onto one's mindset toward spiritual things in one degree or another. As I have observed churches, this is typical. A church gets stuck in a rut of traditionalism, spiritaully grows weaker - both tr'ism and spiritual weaknes working together - but then experiences revival. Then things naturally tend to change in the service: the people welcome and even encourage spontanuity, things are cut out of the service to give room for something else that's actually worth doing, etc. So what needs to happen to eliminate noise? One thing, get rid of comfort in how things have always been done. The people need to come to church wanting to worship their God together, regardless of the order of service or elements involved (as long as those elements are worshipful in the first place). If the mindset of the people worships God with the individual elements, then they can do so no matter what order they are in. The problem is that people just "do" the elements of church without being consumed by their God in those elements. So, the lack of noise starts with a right heart. Other options beyond that is to change things up to help people not get stuck in a rut. If a rut is perceivable, it might be wise for a pastor to have a family discussion with the congregation about it, and maybe even take out the cause of the rut for a sufficient amount of time. The service does not have to reflect the immutability of God, but rather praise Him for Him.

2007-09-06T11:08:00.001-07:00

A house fire will eventually go out on its own. But the hard work comes with preventative measures - keeping the fire from starting in the first place. Most Christians think they show patience when the internal heat eventually goes away. Rather, such quenching is the natural degression of the flame as teh flame sparking event grows more distant from the concern of the individual. This happens faster or slower depending on the personality's response to or thought processes concerning a certain event. But the flame itself, though not necessarily displayed outwardly, is still spiritually destructive and sinful. Patience is the spiritual fruit that prevents a flame from appearing altogether when a spark occurs. It is making the house flame resistant by nature. This quality grows in a person as Christ imparts to that individual His mind and heart. "Let patience have her perfect work." To be perfect is not to be relative to the extremity of circumstances.

2007-09-03T18:49:00.001-07:00

Some see hell as the gun held to their head as someone threatens them. "If you don't accept My grace, I'll pull the trigger!" Hell was never intended to be used by God to threaten. It is a byproduct to ignoring His grace. It was "created for the devil and his angels," i.e., not for humans. So why does one go to hell? That one fails to allow Go'd grace to reign and do His work, i.e., to reject the saving blood of Christ. Why does a person go hell for that? It is a rejection of cleansing by the stained person whose stains cannot enter the presence of God because of His holiness (uniqueness, seperateness). It is a challenge to His glory. Therefore, we are saved for His glory, not our eternal comfort, nor because we give into the hell-gun threat. To give into a threat is not to do so because of the worthy nature of the threatener, but because of desire for personal comfort and life. We are not saved for such reasons. This would mock God by our pride filled motives. We are not saved for us. Heaven is not a reward for accepting His grace. We are saved for God and because of God. We are created for His pleasure - should we be saved for any other reason?

2007-08-29T14:08:00.000-07:00

Two new posts today. . .what in the world.
What is it to give one's will? one's desires? It is to seek the best for another, to want good for another regardless of personal gain and satisfaction. How does God do this? Doesn't He love Himself first? I suppose my definition of love is merely how humans ought to love. Since God is transcendant He is also unique in the sense that He deserves glory. How would only be just by acknowledging this fact. Therefore, He gives that we might be satisfied in Him alone, thus acknowledging His Holinessand self-sufficiency compared to our opposite nature. He loves that we may respond in worship. Though there be no attractive qualities in us, He yet seeks a personal relationship with us, for we are His image barers, spreading or quenching His fame in the eyes of all. How does He deal with both in love? The spreader He gives yet more grace to thrive. To the quencher, he who resists His grace, he remains consistent with Himself and performs justice where justice is due. On earth, He deals justly that the quencher might turn into a spreader. In eternity, He deals justly because He loves His own glory, and cannot look upon sin, and cannot accept the stained into His presence.

2007-08-29T13:48:00.000-07:00

God's glory is foremost on His mind in every action and thought. he created all things with the intent that all created beings would bring Him pleasure and glory in one way or another. An olympic runner carefully trains himself that each step He takes will be as effective as possible - to the end that he might reach the finish line. A goal is always more important than the means, because it is the driving force that causes one to utilize said means. If the goal is appropriately assessed, the means will properly conform to the nature of the goal. So what is it to "glorify God"? Is it not to inwardly exclaim His magnificence and fame, producing outward response, the exclamation of His Name in one way or another?So how is God's goal of personal glory attained by Him? He knows His specific tactics. But that which is obvious - He gains Himself glory according to His love: for others and for Himself. In short, love is the giving of one's will freely for the benefit of others without thought of personal gain or satisfaction. Satisfaction is merely a natural outcome of love. So how is it that for His own glory's sake, God freely dispenses His will and desire to another? Love is a display of His glory. To be a receiver is to suggest on is lacking in some area and subject to the supply of another. To be a giver is to suggest that one is sufficient and another is in need. God's love for us is different than our love for Him. We love Him because He first loved us, and gave Himself for us. Being in sin, we cannot love God without His provision of grace. God is unique, holy, in that He is sufficient. He cannot help being love. Though He is love, however, He is also just, because He loves Himself foremost. When a man denies His free grace, He, being righteous and unable to commune with sin, must remain seperate from that sinner for eternity. Condemnation glorifies God since it magnifies this righteousness and justice. Plus, whatever God does spreads His fame. If it didn't, His action wouldn't be perfect, and He wouldn't be God. Therefore, the condemnation of a sinner brings Him glory, though He is yet not willing that any should perish.

2007-07-31T10:30:00.000-07:00

So I was reading today in 2 Cor. 9 where it talks about generosity. I don't suppose it would be too far a stretch to say that the generosity of which Paul speaks could refer also to spiritual gifts. According to my understanding, shaped by 1 Cor. 12-14, our gifts are not there to benefit us. Rather they are there to give us something to express our love through, that God may be glorified through the edification of the church. And let us not forget that these gifts are given individually for specific reasons by the one who has the lives of us all laid out before Him. Now we get to our passage in 2 Cor. 9. "And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times ,you may abound in every good work" (v. 8). In other words, in order to complete His good work, God, who has every moment and every area of our lives laid out before Him at all times, has given us all everything we need to do what He wants us to do. There is not a time in our life when we are deprived of any source needed to use our gifts as God would have us use them, for His purposes. Verse 11 states, "You will be enriched in every way to be generous in every way, which through us will produce thanksgiving to God." "In every way" is an interesting statement. What is included in that? Is it only physical enrichment for physical generosity? money, housing, stuff, physical labor, etc? Or would that include those areas that are inside ourselves? To the bible communicator, would God deprive you of those things necessary to appropriately address a situation? Isn't such a conversation or sermon a tool He provides to bring Himself glory through the edification of the church and teh evangelization of the lost? Would He deprive Himself of glory? So doesn't it make sense that He would provide the understanding and the means of communication that are necessary to do so? Will He not work in the listener that they might understand also? So why do we worry? Shouldn't we rather seek the mind and heart of the One who knows what He is doing? He has promised to provide what is necessary for us to bring Him glory. So, where we seem to lack, we don't really lack, cuz God doesn't, for some reason, mean to glorify Himself in that area, but rather another. He gives us gifts. Why is the provision for the physical always pounded, while not giving thought to the spiritual? He provides the means to glorify Himself within us more, cuz without the inside, how will we be what we should be outside? To the communicator, God promises to give what is necessary to communicate effectively. Will we neglect His provision by not acknowledging it? It's His work. Don't think it's your own. Otherwise, you provide for yourself from your empty storehouse, and ignore God's abundance.

2007-07-27T10:09:00.000-07:00

So what's the deal with church? Why are yawns more common than Amens? Why is easy believeism practically becoming its own denomination? Why are the churches with the biggest bands and most up beat music and entertaining programs the churches with the greatest attendance? Is it the fault of the pastors? the people? the culture? I believe, yes, in different degrees in different circumstances. Here is a commonly overlooked initiator (common because I've never heard it as a reason before, so common to me): Noise. Noise is a business term that describes anything that interferes with effective communication. In many fundamental churches, the truth is preached(properly is a different issue), but the people are not phased. One aspect of this noise is daily information overload. Most people in our congregations are involved with business on a daily basis in one form or another. Information is thrown at us from every direction constantly. No longer is work highly physical labor, but rather mental. We get information in every internet page we visit. We get it in every meeting, email, letter, business document, conversation, newspaper article, and radio broadcast. Also, on the way home information is given through music, signs, dashboards, construction zone. At home it is given through answering machines, grocery lists, children, husband/wife, etc. The world is busy. The world is full of easily accessible and forced information. So it's no wonder our minds turn off when we go to church. The church also throws information at us constantly, even before the sermon. By the time the service gets to something that matters, noone cares anymore. The pleasant church surroundings and cushioned pews provide a nice atmosphere in which to zone out. The church member hears enough information to parrot when the time comes to act spiritual, but the rest of the week is spent in the "real world," as it has been made to be known. Little of the reality of Christ is known. The constant intake of information that doesn't need to be taken to heart trains a person to hear the Word and accept it only mentally. The heart is not trained to respond. Therefore, the people cannot understand a vibrant relationship with Christ. Therefore, they die, or remain in their death. So when will the church decide to cut out the unecessary noise and get to what matters? 3 services on Sunday, and one midweek, all complete with announcements the people already read in the bulletin, 400 verses from the hymnal that noone cares to understand, special music that rarely raises an eyebrow, 4 prayers that noone really means, a sermon that the people are too tired to listen to by then, an invitation that is more honestly a nap time, another clincher hymn, and then dismissal, which the people actually look forward to. Why do we tire the people out for the sermon? They're already tired of receiving information by the time they get there. "Prepare their hearts" - how do you prepare a dormant heart? Do we get bigger upbeat music? No, that just covers and excuses the problem at hand. So do most contemporary tactics. I say, according to the character of the church, start with cutting down the unneccessary noise. Who cares if that's how we've always done it. The sermon has just becomes another addition to the service. It is not longer the desire of the people. It is a "have to, cuz that's what we do." More later concerning church.

2007-07-25T20:04:00.000-07:00

How is it that we can think of Christ apart from emotion? Can we think of a lover apart from it? What is "first love" love? I like how John Piper put it: it is the love that is known between a wedded couple on their honeymoon, when they can't bare to be apart from each other for even a moment. If they're not wrapped up in arms, then they are lost in their eyes. Are we told in Scripture that we are supposed to lose this love for Christ? Then how can we think about Him without emotion? Is it because our considerations of Him are purely scholastic? Is it because we have given our love to another, and left little for Him? Is it becuase for one reason or another we have obstained from the full relationship that He wants to have with us? When Christ spoke with the woman at the well, He mentioned that He would give her "living water." Contrary to popular exegesis, "living" refers not to eternal life, but to vibrant, rushing waters. He compares the life He wishes to give to His own to the raging, bubbling, turning and tossing waters of a rushing river. But why is it that fundamental Baptists especially have traded this promised life for stagnant, bitter cisterns? Why have we left our first love? In order to leave one thing, one must go to something else. What have we sought in the place of Christ? To whom have we given our deepest love? I think, ourselves. This makes sense in context with this thought. Eternal life grants us not only length of life, but quality of life as well, which quality begins revealing itself in the mortal flesh. To love Christ, to abound in such a relationship with the one who calls His chosen the "dearly beloved of [His] soul," to be overwhelmed with His living water, is to enter into the quality aspect of eternal life. To love self is to retain the length of eternal life, but to deny the quality of it. Therefore, pride equals misery when one considers the life Christ gives. Not that we love Christ to gain abundant life, for to do that would be to miss the boat completely, living in the world of stagnant self-aggrandizement. To love Christ is to at the same time be "for Him" in every way shape and form, to show His splendor. To think otherwise is to lack love all together.

2007-07-24T20:17:00.000-07:00

Let's discuss love again. Why is it so hard to love people that we really don't get along with? And yes, "not getting along with" and "love" are two seperate, sort of unrelated ideas. Personalities clash. It's a known fact. There's not much one can do about that. But, we can set our pride aside and love them anyway. We see love as though it is something that needs to have handles to hold on to. Like, there has to be some substance to which it can hang on. We can see something of the nature of love by the classic and undermined example of God loving us. Did we provide God's love with a handle (I am NOT talking about "love handles." On that note. . .)? Rather our nature does everything possive to push his love away from getting ahold of us, that He might love us, let alone depriving Him of a handle. Therefore, we ought love as God loves. "Uncoditional" is the term used, but what the stink does that mean? It's in our head. It's in our heart. It has nothing to do with those we strive to love. To have Christ's mind and heart is to with all our feeling, emotion, drive, desire, compulsion, longing, be for the sakes of others. Love is not a feeling that comes up at situation altering (greatening and quenching) moments. It is a state of existence that comes only to those who find it with God in their life in His immediate, yet, invisible presence. If one does not find that their above inward state characteristics are for God, then it will never be for man no matter how hard he tries. The unsaved have no real understanding of love. They can't find it, for to find it, one must gain it from a relationship with God. Let me clarify something - a relationship with God is not there so one can love. One loves so he might inflame the fire of God's popularity and image of beauty and majesty (aka glorify). So the question is - why do you want to love? Why do you want to better yourself? Why do you want to be successful in ministry? Why should you care about any of this? If the reason ends with anything other than God's glory (that's not just a textbook answer; it's never known by a 2 second soul searcihng) then your throne is occupied by vanity. WHY is a wonderful question to ask yourself throughout life. The answers come short of His glory all the time. But it's a needed thought.

2007-07-17T18:40:00.000-07:00

I admit, it's been a while. I also admit, a part of me misses writing on this stupid thing. Only a small part though, which, to be honest, is shameful. The whole reason I started doing this was to lay out my thoughts on various subjects that I stumbled across, and, while doing so, provide a means of edification whether it be through the mind of a reader, or through personal spiritual and rational developement put to use in every day situations. But, here I go anyway. But I warn the reader: I do not wish that this motive should change. In fact, I would purge the more-or-less statement of -or-less in reference to wanting to do it for personal enrichment, whatever that means. This is a warning because my unfiltered thoughts can sometimes lack tact to a great degree, so read at your own risk and take the statements merely as unfiltered thoughts containing no desire to offend negatively. Only positive offenses allowed, that is, those offences that draw us nearer to our Lord. But, acknowledging the presence of an audience, I will do my best to limit those offences cloaked with negativity. That's all for today. This post is a good example of my ability to say so little in so many words.

2006-08-22T10:14:00.000-07:00

Well, summer camp at Ironwood is over for 2006. I've been home for three days and it feels like 35 brothers and sisters just died. I'll see them again though, no doubt, almost every day from now through eternity, if eternity has days. I can't express in words what I learned this summer. The classic answer would be "I've got a lot to learn," which is deffinately true. But about what? Here's an example: love. When I left for camp, I thought I had a pretty good grasp on the concept of love and I thought that I truly loved people. Little did I know. . .yah. I'm coming to learn that love is probably the deepest subject of all, and the most neglected by today's Christian. After all, Love God and Love neighbor are the two greatest commandments given by Christ. It makes sense to ignore it, right? I mean, humility is part of it, and that's just not cool. To give, or be willing to give, 100% of myself for someone else's welfare, "Lord, you don't understand!" To which the Lord responds, "I've shown you reality, will you live in it? I've revealed to you my heart, will you seek that it be your's as well?" Maybe it's just that we don't realize it's place of prominence in the reality of God. It took a summer of intense outpouring of self to give me a taste of it's importance. Here's a trap we usually fall in to: Marshal Mike gave us this example while trying to teach us this: God wants us to move to Philadelphia, not to just stay clear of Colorado. In other words, we see "don't hate people" and "love your neighbor" as the same thing. They are completely different ideas. How do I get to Philadelphia? "Stay clear of Colorado!" Dumb directions. You have 1 in a billion chance of finding Philly, where God's will resides. Don't just not hate people! Love them! That is evidenced in 100% service-from the heart, not from duty.

2006-05-01T13:24:00.000-07:00

God's will has been on my mind a lot lately, mostly in relation to man's handling of it. We can either submit to it and walk lovingly in it moment by moment, or we can deny it, deceiving ourselves, and subject ourselves to fallen human strength which results in some measure of worry. I'd like to apply the first, but more often than not, I find myself losing a heated battle with the latter. Pride is really the foundation of it. Do I want to deny myself that the Father might be exalted at my expense? Fall in love with Him, with His will, and choosing to do His will becomes easy by His grace. It's often said, "Do what you love and you'll never work a day in your life." His providence may not always sound all that great. Ignorance is one thing normal people can't stand having, and we let it get the best of us sometimes. But regardless of how "great" trusting His will may sound, if we love Him, the choice is a no-brainer. Worry is cast out by such faith. Who is going to take care of those I have been discipling over this summer? Are they not His first? He's got them covered. What does He want me to do, and in what location? The work is planned, the tickets paid for. God has our lives before Him, complete. We see pieces as He shows them to us. So what's the worry? Forget yourself. Acknowledge Him. Trust.

2006-03-27T18:21:00.000-08:00

Been thinking a lot about death lately. Have heard of several instances in the past couple of weeks about loved ones dying or having certain deadly diseases, both the saved and the unsaved. I tryed to get into the mind of an unsaved person getting ready to die, and O how frightful, even not being in the situation. To consider one without hope passing out of life, not having received Christ in life, and dying twice, without Him. In life, they have nothing to look forward to, whether they believe in hell or not, the consideration of death is torment. But, why is death so bad for we who are redeemed? Why are we saddened at the thought? While we live, it is unto Chirst, to the Glory of the Holy. When we die, we should already be used to it, for in life we die daily for Christ's sake, so do we die physically, only the end being the casting off of this piece of filth and seeing His face, thereby being at last changed into His image. That is a day "when life's trials and torments are no more, and we may worship before His very feet forevermore, when His glory is proclaimed through the mighty works He has wrought, and at His hand His enemies to shame are brought; when the unashamed statnd hand-in-hand with their Lord in the glory-land. This is a day, a beginning, to which life has lead; the glory of man's Head, Who is risen, but for three days was dead. Glory be to the Holy Three-in-One, the battle is finished, the war won." Do not fret death, for to fret it is to claim earthly treasures. "For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." As Dr. J. stated today concerning one who had passed, "I'm jealous." Profound, really, concidering the heart of man. Be jealous. Be very jealous.

2006-03-09T09:46:00.000-08:00

Been studying Paul's first letter to Timothy lately. Was smitten by 6:8 - "And having food and raiment let us therewith be content." One of my favorite journal entries by Jim Elliot applies: "I have been musing lately on the extremely dangerous cumulative effects of earthly things. One may have good reason, for example, to want a wife, and he may have one legitimately. But with a wife comes Peter the Pumpkin-Eaters proverbial dilemma---he must find a place to keep her. And most wives will not stay on such terms as Peter proposed. So a wife demands a house; a house in turn requires curtains, rugs, washing machines, et cetera. A house with these things must soon become a home, and children are the intended outcome. The needs multiply as they are met---a car demands a garage; a garage, land; land, a garden; a garden, tools; and tools need sharpening. Woe, woe, woe to the man who would live a disentangled life in my century. II. Timothy 2:4 is impossible in the United States, if one insists on a wife. I learn from this that the wisest life is the simplest one, lived in the fulfillment of only the basic requirements of life---shelter, food, covering, and a bed. And even these can become productive of other needs if one does not heed. Be on guard, my soul, of complicating your environment so that you have neither time nor room for growth!" Even though I am far from having a wife, the same principle that he presents applies to every area of life. Once you first "mind earthly things," however small a thing it might be, you start your fall on a slippery slope that ends in spiritual destruction for you and those you might have impacted for Christ. "But Godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out." This statement according to the context is in direct relation to serving others, specifically others in authority to us, but the same heart attitude will serve those equal or subject to us. When we put others aside for however short a time, we become earthly minded and cannot be content with "food and raiment." "But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, Godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life. . ."

2006-03-02T16:00:00.000-08:00

Found yet another problem with today's church in Pauls first letter to the Thessalonians. 4:13-18: v.13 Paul speaks of handling the loss of loved ones. He admonishes them that they not sorrow after their deceased as they which have not received the Gospel. For the unregenerate, deaths wail, whether it flow through the lips or curdle in the heart, is always existant, at least to those who care. For the redeemed of the Lord death is merely the doorway to Glory; in that we can rejoice. Why can we rejoice? "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord." Now, here is the problem with the church: V.18: "Wherefore comfort one another with these words." Whether the believer be rejoicing or mourning, we are exhorted by the Word of God to channel this Truth to other believers. Who does that? On top of that, who is comforted by those words? Who cares what trial someone is going through: exhort one another with these words. I have been counceled in the past to not use this form of exhortation with the sorrowful because "that's not what they need." Bogus. Any true Christian who is truly God-fearing will rejoice at these words amidst whatever trial. One who doesn't has already taken his eyes off of the prize and has focused on a distraction, however good a reason. I may sound insensitive, but according to how I know God and what I know in His scriptures, this is truth. I could be wrong, but I don't think so, obviously, seeing that I have posted it. To sum everything up, there is way too little comforting with "these words" in the church, the body of Christ, and way too much earthly mindedness.

2006-03-02T15:38:00.000-08:00

Here is a picture of the Maranatha renound Marshall Mike. Most can only picture him wearing a suit and a hiking bag twice the size he is. I sure can't wait to get to know this guy more this summer at Ironwood.

2006-02-24T11:00:00.000-08:00

Recieved a blessing from I Thessalonians 2 today. Paul speaks to them, "For yourselves, brethren, know our entrance in unto you, that it was not in vain:" Why was in not in vain? "But. . .we were bold in our God to speak unto you the Gospel of God. . .For our exhortation was not of. . ." fleshly motives. Today's subject can be summed up into one question: Why? Why do I do what I do; why do I speak what I speak? Paul gives several negative characteristics with which they could have spoken, and many had, a couple of which stick out. V.5: "For neither at any time used we flattering words, as ye know, nor a cloke of covetousness; God is witness: Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others." Paul, Sylvanus, and Timotheus did not carefully strategize their sentences to be inticing and elegant. Nor did they pretend to be passionate about their God (which is what I believe "covetousness" represents in this passage). They were real with the Thessalonians because, as the rest of the book explains, they loved God and they loved the Thessalonians. Elegance in speach seems to be of none affect in the mind of the speaker when he is overcome by love. They also obstained from wrong motives because they realized V.4: "But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the Gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, whcih trieth our hearts." This Gospel is mine as a gracious gift. It is not initially mine. It is God's property as it speaks of His Son. Therefore, as God trieth the hearts, God is jealous of my motives, my works, and my fruits, for they are rightfully His. If He is not the center of the previously stated, He is displeased with us. If we do are not in love with God and those He has sent us to, we will end up speaking with wrong motives. It's inevitable. God, try and purge my heart, and receive complete usefulness from me.

2006-02-16T10:18:00.000-08:00

Philippians 3 was a huge encouragement today. Learned again a basic principle of walking. "I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, and be found in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: that I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death." Paul states that he "suffered the loss of all things," most of which was because of imprisonment and other forms of persecution--against his will. But notice what he says next: "and do count them but dung." He didn't just lose everything physically, but he was purged of the desire to have those things that he was without, being content in whatsoever state he was in--part of learning how to be abased. He counts these things that he had and had done as loss that he may win Christ. Christ is not fully pleased with us when we still hold onto earthly ties; concerning a relationship attained thus far: "Not having mine own righteousness," "I count not myself having apprehended," etc. Concerning the tangible: "For many walk (look righteous),. . .and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is their shame, who mind earthly things." What earthly things entice us? Ask for God's cleansing. Seek those things which are above. For Christ's sake, Paul learned how to abound and to be abased, that his heart might not be in want when that excellent knowlege of the Lord Jesus Christ was his, knowlege emphasizing familiarity with His person in a relationship. "For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body. . .He is able even to subdue all things unto Himself."

2006-02-13T16:16:00.000-08:00

Been far from God the last few days: I forgot Him. Could barely stand up this morning for longing of His presence: He sought me. The reason: 2 Timothy 2:4 - "No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please Him who hath chosen him to be a soldier." I didn't just entagle myself, I forgot the war altogether. I became David instead of Uriah. Thank you Lord for showing me my folly before I shamed you before others. How did He show me? Ephesians 6:10-18 - "Put on the whole armour of God." We are in the midst of a hot battle right now; that is why we need the armour. "Of God" - it's His: we cannot stand without His grace and the "power of His might." "If God be for us, who can be against us?" Surely we wrestle with "spiritual wickedness in high places," but what are they when the Most High God is on our side to deliver us, to purify us? The high places of wickedness are truly higher than I, but cannot reign above my Deliverer. "Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. . .Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching. . ." We are called unto this battle; let us recognize it. Our enemy is detestable, for he detests God. Take heed, stand fast, lest ye fall.

2006-02-10T15:46:00.000-08:00

"If so be that ye have heard Him, and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man. . .and that ye put on the new man which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." - Ephesians 4:21-24
How do we glorify God? Truly, willingly, sincerely - how can we worship His Majesty? How can we be clothed in holiness and righteousness? "If so be that ye have heard Him, and have been taught by Him." Some of the Ephesians could very well have heard Christ speak while He was yet on this earth. Most, however, probably did not, as the book was written 30 years after Christ's death and since Ephesus is over 500 miles away from anywhere Jesus preached. Thus, I am inclined to believe Paul is not speaking of audible teaching of Christ, but rather His illumination, that leads an unbeliever to salvation and a believer to "true holiness." Illumination, after salvation, is unfortunately foreign to many believers. It is, however, the avenue of grace that we become like Christ. I like to see it as the Spirit giving a man a greater, more complete picture of the Spirit Person of God, a vision from which a man can not come out of the same. Jim Berg states in Changed Into His Image, "No man can be proud of his level of spiritual maturity or theological understanding when he has been exposed to God's nature. . .Such are the impressions on the intellect of man when he sees God. He is at the same time taught, humbled, and made bold. How can it be otherwise--he has seen God!" Intellect is vain if it is not humble and dedicated. Dedication is not reserved to situations and objects, but to knowlege as well. When we dedicate our learning to Him, then greater is the Spirit's illumination in us, lest we be like the Gentiles in this passage: "Walk not as the Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, becauseof the blindness of their heart" through apathy toward the spiritual (VV. 17-19). These Gentiles of which Paul writes were most likely those involved in gnosticism and other mind-exalting beliefs. They were intelligent people. But they listened not to the Spirit; therefore they are "darkened," "ignorant," and "blind." The Spirit's illumination gives true understanding. It gives you a taste of the Lord's goodness, of His person. Knowlege is not ours. It is God's. Seek the Spirit's illumination instead of head knowlege and be truly holy, as one cannot be the same when he has seen God.

2006-02-07T13:46:00.000-08:00

"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." - Galatians 5:1
"Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" - 3:3
The Galations were saved by grace through faith, as all born again believers are, but false teachers, probably Jews in the religious sense, brought them to ignore, even deny salvation by grace through faith, and to trust in the keeping of the law to bring them salvation. These Galations are true Christians: "the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ," "For ye are the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus" (3:24,26). But, possibly in addition to their salvation, they have burdened themselves with the law that is dead to them, and they to it. "Are ye so foolish?" he replies. Are we so foolish? Why do fundamental Baptists have the reputation of being legalists? Sure we (in general) are more conservative by conviction, but sometimes we make up our own convictions, thereby burdening ourselves with a "yoke of bondage," and we then see ourselves as "spiritual." Oftentimes we forget the "unmerited favor" part of grace and try to be closer to God by intensifying our standards. "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." The best I understand "fallen from grace," it states that one has transferred his dependance from Christ onto his own works, transferred his avenue of strength to please God from Himself to himself. Since we cannot lose our salvation, this transfer robs God of sweet fellowship with His children and His glory is not seen by other people, or us. I could be wrong, but that's my observation. Who leads us in life? Why do our standards exist? Do we try to work out sanctification through vain standards that are not wrong, but lack a heart for God? "But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law." "If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit." Completely rely on God for sanctification, for we have no power over the spirit, to draw it unto God. "Grace upon Grace." Christ is our Standard, our shield from the enemy. Standards help in some instances, but to replace Christ with standards is to leave a well manned fort to hide behind a tree.

2006-02-03T14:18:00.000-08:00

Heard a song yesterday which had a line that went, "Where are you, Father where are you? You have promised you would always be near." I find myself crying this out sometimes, and the absurdity of the statement is great. When one would consider the second clause, the first seems unspiritual and illogical. Usually when a man cries out the first portion, at first he emotionally feels God has left him, and in the same heart he states the latter. Who is God? What are His promises to us? They are life. They cannot fail. Therefore, I'm not so sure someone who cries these two clauses really understands at the moment what he is saying. The question "Where are you?" in the sense that God has left us is usually born in a heart that seeks God for peace's sake, not for His own. Selfishness. Also, because of God's promise to "always be near," He will not leave us because God is not a liar. Asking "where are you?" in relation to His promise questions His infalability. On the other hand, one can ask "where are you" because he knows he is lost; he has stepped out of the lighted path and cannot see his Leader. Therefore, while recognizing His promise rightly, one can ask "where are you" in a God-honoring fashion, seeing that it is not God Who has left, but rather himself, but one must, by the grace of God, have clear, unselfish understanding; by the grace of God, because selfishness and pride are what cause us to step out of that Light in the first place. He will always provide the grace to return. Receive it. I'm not so sure one can be right in putting the two clauses together, for it seems that each would have to come with a different mindset, seperately, in order to be right, but I could be wrong. Lord, give me understanding.

2006-01-31T12:36:00.000-08:00

"For He knoweth our frame; He remembereth that we are dust." Yes, God knows who we are. He remembers what He made us out of, our frailness. "Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him." How pitiful are we? This is our nature. Fear Him, and His grace will be strong in us. Humble is our estate, but not our heart. He remembers who we are. We forget, and few have ever come to some kind of understanding of ourselves, for we neglect/refuse to fear God. "Lord I surrender!" is the cry of many, but beneath the cry is contentedness, though often painful, with an imagination of personal strenth and orderliness. "He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities. For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is His mercy toward them that fear Him." Return unto the Lord thy God, O man; fear Him and prostrate yourself before Him, being expendable.

2006-01-30T14:43:00.000-08:00

Hear the decree and purpose: "And Moab shall be destroyed from being a people, because he hath magnified himself against the LORD." and again, "Recompense her [Babylon] according to her work; according to all that she hath done, do unto her: for she hath been proud against the LORD, against the Holy One of Israel." How have we lifted up ourselves before our God? How easily are we deceived! O, to see His face! Only then will I give Him pure, unadulturated glory and fellowship. Pride. The most self-emptying prayer and fellowship that man can offer to the Lord still has a measure of pride intertwined within it, for until we see the face of the Christ and be like Him, this flesh deceives us. Free me from this bond of death! May I be mad over You, as Babylon was with it's idols, and more so, for in You is Truth and Life! Then will You be pleased. It's amazing how much grace we a dependant on. Can I love, serve, enjoy God without His grace? I believe the answer is obvious. He supplies for His own, ultimately for His own glory. He wants fellowship with us more than we want it with Him. He is more fervent about getting it; He deserves it. Therefore, if we will, He will, and it will happen. Where is the sweet fellowship? God is ready to have it. We deprive Him of it, if God can be deprived of any thing. What is pride? I gather that it is a lack of understanding of Who God is and who we are. God, give me understanding.

2006-01-28T15:53:00.000-08:00

Read a tragic display of the human heart today in Jeremiah 44. Verse 16-17 says, "As for the word that thou hast spoken unto us in the Name of the Lord, we will not hearken unto thee. But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth." Hear the words of these men before judgement is foretold: "Pray for us unto the Lord. . .that the Lord thy God may shew us the way wherein we may walk, and the thing that we may do."(42:2-3) From what did such scorning and hate arise? The rebellious spirit overwhelmed them even in their statement of submission. I believe the answer is found in 45:5: "And seekest thou great things for thyself?" Why did Israel only turn to the Lord during trajedy? they sought great things for themselves. At this point (they knew their past) they expected God to "return" as He did in the past. But Jeremiah prophecied that they would be captives even if they turned back now. God knew they would only continue in the cycle, never taking thought for God's pleasure, but rather for their inhabiting a peaceful and prosperous land. Are we willing to live unto the pleasure of the Lord and still go to hell for it? God will not suffer that to happen, but would we be so overtaken by Him that we would suffer hell that He might have pleasure? Why do we exist, but for His pleasure? Is there any other Infinite? Behold, all things are His dominion; He is Ulitimate. Our pleasure and good matter not. He searches the hearts for one to please Him, to show HIMSELF strong. He is jealous. He deserves to be. "And seeketh thou great things for thyself? seek them not." "I am the Lord. There is none beside Me."

2006-01-26T09:02:00.000-08:00

"Is the distinction between living for Christ and dying for Him, after all so great? Is not the second a logical conclusion of the first?" - Elizabeth Elliott
This quote I acquired by my brother A. T. Pierson. If I do not desire to die a Christ-like death, do I really want to live a Christ-like life? I find it easy at times to admit that I would be willing to do anything, even die a miserable death, in and for the Name of the Beloved. But saying something, though one be convinced in his mind, is not proof of truth. Words are backed by actions. Without actions, assertions are vain. Would I give my life up to Death for Christ? I will know when I come to that bridge, whether I be willing to cross it. Today, I will give to Him all that He has given into my hands, for they be His anyway. I will plan to do so tomorrow. When the day of testing is come, by His grace - for I am lean, His great Name will be uplifted. Lord, will you privilege me so, that I should have opportunity to give my life in death for my Saviour? O, the unseen privilege it is to live in Christ unto His praise and maginification. Your Covenant and your cross, O Christ, are blessed, though brought because of our curse. I will die today as by Your strength, Your right hand, I walk.

2006-01-24T19:10:00.000-08:00

The Lord reveived a sinner into His fold today at Ethan Allen. Praise be to God, He has chosen these stones to tell of His glory: the Lord Jesus. A soul, so deeply stained, cannot resist the saving power of the Majesty. What is sin but offence against the Holy One? if that Holy One will wash a soul, it is washed through faith according to the Word of God. If God will keep a soul, what can make it flee? This newborn is eternally Thine, O Lord, for you have saved his soul according to your hearts yearning. How is it that you groan in your spirit for such a soul as mine? have I attained your favour? No, you have freely given it. How, Lord God? I don't understand your heart, the depths of it, nor will I until I see your Express Image. Come quickly, Lord Jesus. Rid me, for your pleasure's sake, of this body of death, of iniquity. I will be caught up to YOURSELF: I am yours and always will be, no matter how decieved I may be. You have glorified Yourself; I know you will do it again. Do it in me, for you are worthy to recieve of your own.

2006-01-19T12:49:00.000-08:00

Read in Jeremiah today of the yoke of Babylon on the shoulders of Judah. This yoke, the chastisement of sin, was to be their cursed slavery. But my God gives me a yoke as well. This yoke is a slavery as well, but not cursed in any sense, for it sets me free from bondage from my Lord. I am free to commune with my God according to His lovingkindness. What sweet communion, for God is with me in this yoke, beside me, yet with His hands on the reigns. But how often do I kick against the pricks. Foolishness, for I know not the destruction into which I will lead myself. Who am I to direct my steps? He is infinite; in Him do I have my very being. My Lord will not suffer me, chosen in Christ, to lose His fellowship, for He wants the same. Only as I choose another god on which I will lay my passion will my Lord, for His eternal pleasure, strip me of His nearness. Thy Word, O Lord, and the promises thereof, shall be my guide. I can not stray when the eyes of my heart follow hard after Thee, for you have promised "I know the thoughts that I think toward you, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end. You shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart." Amen, Lord God. I will rest in your promises.

2006-01-19T10:02:00.000-08:00

Been having a dry spell lately concerning fellowship with my Lord. Feel that I'm becoming one of the dry-rot Christians that can sure keep the outward commandments, but the internal commandment of loving Him with all of the heart, soul and mind gets neglected. What is the purpose of man? Do we exist to experience joy, peace, love, and fellowship? All these things are products of fulfilling our true purpose: Giving God Glory in that He enjoys sweet fellowship with us. Lord, may I not fall into Israelite pride that claims your blessings as its own, lest you be compelled to turn against me, a stone chosen to praise Your name, the dearly beloved of Your Soul, for this is unpleasing to you. It greaves Your heart, your soul. This person that speaks to you is not who You meant him to be, and in that your soul is grieved, though perfect, just, loving, and righteous. You have given grace and strength to change and to do your bidding. I want to grasp you. Here am I.