Moving Past Recovery

They say the first step to recovery is admitting that there is a problem.

Well, I feel that happened for me quite a few years ago (in college actually), and over the next decade God began to grow me to the point where I could make an honest assessment of fundamentalism. I have since come to appreciate the rich heritage that I received - things like a hearty passion for the innerancy of Scripture, a desire to remain holy in this wicked world, and a love for the local church.

And yet, God also allowed me to recognize some of the unhelpful trappings that can distract - things such as an emphasis on outward holiness over an internal one, an unhealthy focus on politics instead of the gospel, and a separatism which often neglects social justice and community care.

I praise God that He brought people into my life who helped me question the structure of fundamentalism and embrace the gospel tighter than ever before. Some of those mentors include Tom Winkels, David Auckland, Paul Auckland, Don Cade, John Buckley, Jack Tomkinson, Mark Farnham, Bill Brown, Ben Peterson, the faculty at Baptist Bible College, my parents, and the teachers I had at Biblical Theological Seminary. Through it all I had great friends who made that journey with me, and while some reacted vehemently to fundamentalism and rocketed to the other end of the spectrum, most have become some of the most charitable, Bible saturated people I know - Dan Harney, Tim Klabe, and Justin Phipps are a few of these dear friends.

All this to say that I have felt in recent months that it is time for the conversation about fundamentalism to come to a close - at least on this blog. That is not to say that there won't be further ramblings at some point if God so leads, but for the topic of fundamentalism to be the thrust of this blog is disproportionate to what God is doing in my heart and life. He is growing me in so many ways, and teaching me so much about the gospel and His church, that I have lost interest in writing about fundamentalism. Instead I would like to have a place to jot down thoughts on the gospel, the church, our culture, etc...

God is so good!! I want to focus a little more on Him and a little less on the particular segment of Christianity that I grew up in.

So, you will notice some changes to the blog in the upcoming weeks - starting with the name. But I plan on continuing to write about what God puts on my heart, and I pray that the conversation might be re-stoked and we all might grow together.

History of the Pharisees

http://theresurgence.com/from_righteous_to_religious

Good article about how we might have prejudice without even realizing it

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/FullerYouthInstitute_blog/~3/SZcMF4tCOfk/

Gospel Elements

We as pastors had a very thought-provoking and edifying conversation the other day about the elements of the gospel - what it includes and what it does not include.

All evangelicals would agree that the gospel is paramount in the life of the church - after all it is central to the name evangelical. Yet I believe a fruitful discussion involves what exactly this gospel constitutes. After all, if it is central to everything we do, and we are supposed to fiercely guard against any tampering of the gospel, we must study and seek a Biblical definition of the gospel.

This post is not designed to define the gospel comprehensively, but instead to initiate discussion about the nature of the gospel, particularly in relation to whether the gospel includes physical redemption or merely spiritual redemption. In other words, does our presentation of the gospel need to be accompanied by a physical display of love and good works, or is the gospel in and of itself a bundle of truths or concepts that address the mind, heart and soul?

We pastors all agreed that the gospel (good news) is in its essence truths that must be communicated to an unbeliever, and unless those truths are communicated (via spoken word or written word) the genuine gospel has not been relayed. We cannot give a cup of cold water to someone and legitimately claim to have shared the complete gospel with them - yes, we served them in the name of Christ, and God's Word even says that act of service was done unto Christ, but there was no truth communication about sin or redemption. We redeemed their pallet, but that was about the extent of it. Yet, can we say that in some valid way (even if seminal in form) the genuine gospel was shared? If Christ brings redemption to every part of creation, was our act of service a gospel work in essence?

Let's tweak the scenario - what if we share the cup of cold water and then preach the good news of Christ with our lips. When did the gospel begin to be presented? The moment we opened our mouth, or even before that when we gave them a compassionate look and handed them some water?

What about Jesus' call to ministry found in Luke 4:18? Jesus says:

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed; to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor."

Jesus is of course quoting Isaiah here and I believe that He is speaking fundamentally of the spiritual healing and redemption that He imparted. Yet it is surely no accident that Jesus also physically healed multiple blind men and spent most of His time with poor people. Jesus is the gospel, and He embodies for us a holistic presentation of the gospel - redemption of all creation - both spiritually and physically.

All of this discussion led me to consider that perhaps the relationship between physical redemption (gospel acts) and spiritual redemption (gospel words) is similar to the relationship between faith and works in a believer's life. Faith without works is dead (i.e non-viable), and yet Scripture teaches very clearly that it is faith and not works which is the stimulus for salvation. I have also heard it explained with the analogy of a horse and cart. The cart (works) will always accompany the horse (true saving faith), and yet it is only the horse that drives the operation. There is nothing that is energizing in the cart, and yet it completes the process and serves a distinct purpose.
Could it be the same way with the relationship between the works and words of the gospel? Is it possible that it is only the message of the gospel that initiates a heart change in somebody, yet the accompanying gospel action completes it?
We certainly want to present a holistic gospel, and we want to guard from erring to either extreme of the spectrum.
So what do others think? Is the gospel only the message of the good news? Or is it both the message of good news and the redemptive acts that accompany? Or should we keep our definition of the gospel separate from acts of mercy?

Marital Purity in the Old and New Testament

After reading Ezra 10 this morning, I have to admit my mind was swirling and I didn't like what I read. How could it be God's will for all of the religious leaders to divorce their wives and send them out of their house along with their children? This is one of those passages where God does not do what I expect, and I am reminded that I am always growing in my knowledge of Him.

I Corinthians 7 says:

"If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy."

This is the Scripture that has framed my theology of marriage, and so I think that is why Ezra 10 comes as such a shock to me.

So what is it that is different between the Old and New Covenants? As much as I like to highlight the continuity between the Old and New Testaments, I cannot deny there are some distinctions, and this is certainly one of them. It seems that under the law God is more concerned with the purity of His people than with them being a sanctifying influence on their unbelieving spouses. These foreign wives had polluted God's people and lead the men (even the Levites) into idolatry. God needed to purge His people, and that purging involved tearing apart families that were unequally yoked.

I suspect that is why I Corinthians 7:12-16 was penned. We deal with the same issues that the Israelites did, and there are many who are unequally yoked in our day. Yet God wants us to take a different approach from that of Ezra 10. Despite the sin of marrying an unbeliever, God wants that unbeliever to experience the gospel through the words and actions of a redeemed spouse in hopes that God will bring redemption in their own heart. After all, part of the mystery of the new covenant is the fact that God is bringing all people groups to Himself, and His church is a multi-faceted body that collectively brings glory to Him through their diversity. This was not the case under the Old Covenant, where Israel's ethnicity and culture set them apart from the rest of the world, and God wanted that sanctification to be displayed starkly so all other nations would see it. I guess one could argue that sanctification looks different between the two covenants - Under the Old Covenant sanctification was more tangible - what you eat, how you dress, who you are married to... However, under the New Covenant sanctification is measured primarily by the fruit of the Spirit that you evidence. Still observable to be sure, but not quite as measurable. Perhaps this explains some of the seeming contradiction between Ezra 10 and I Cor. 7. Not sure though.

I am still trying to wrap my mind around Ezra 10, but I am reminded this morning that I need to be reading through all of God's Word, so that I may know His character and personality in a deeper way.

The Beautiful Wilderness of Pastoral Unemployment

3 ways that I have been enriched through the last months of (unemployed) job search:

1. Precious time with my family - Since I have not been working at a church since the end of August, every day since has been filled with the opportunity to relish the extra time with my four girls.
   I have been able to form a special bond with Preslie during the first months of her life, and that is something you can't put a price tag on.
   Quinn often grabs my hand and says "Daddy, dance with me!" And guess what - I do.
   In addition, I have had several opportunities to be a part of Avery's first experience in school - from driving her there and participating in field trips, to speaking to her class. This also is a precious thing that I thank God for.
   For crying out loud - my wife and I were playing rock band yesterday afternoon and enjoying every minute of it! How often do you get to do that on a weekday?


2. Opportunity to refine my ministry philosophy - The pastoral job search process forces you to answer tough questions like "what are the most important aspects of youth ministry?", and "what would our church's youth ministry look like under you?". All of this has refreshed my perspective on what ministry is about, how God wants it to be carried out, and what part I can play in that.


3. Deeper understanding and appreciation for various denominations - Each time I considered a position at a church, I would research the church's particular denomination thoroughly. I discovered many things I did not know before, and this helped me weed out certain denominations and consider others I never would have before.
   This is one thing I never really experienced in my fundamentalist upbringing - a charitable exploration of various denominations. Yes, there are reasons we have these various denominations, and No, we should not just all join hands, sing "Kumbaya" and form one ecumenical church. But we would do well to learn the heritage of our brothers and sisters in Christ, and consider the good that has come through each particular community of evangelicalism.

I pray that my time in the wilderness of pastoral unemployment is nearing an end.
Yet, I am very grateful for how God has been growing me and refining me. I am so glad that His ways are not my ways, and He has everything figured out.

Neither candidate holds the cure

I have been following this presidential election closer than any other, and for the first time I have dug deeper into the political earth and discovered how complex and intriguing the relationship is between the Christ-follower and government.

After watching last night's debate, I was left with a nagging sense that neither candidate will be the answer we really need.

As I ponder these things this morning, I believe that we as believers desperately need to recognize a few things during this political contest (and they are listed in progressive levels of importance):

1. We have the God-given privilege to vote for the candidate that we believe will manage government in a way that most glorifies God and builds His kingdom. We should cherish this privilege and act upon it.

2. We must respect our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ who sit on the other side of the political aisle. In the realm of eternity, I believe it matters more how the church exemplifies Christ' love and unity than how they vote.

3. Most of all, it is imperative that we remember that neither candidate in any election holds the cure for the dilemma of sin. I read this quote from Spurgeon this morning:
“Gethsemane provides the medicine for the ills which followed upon the forbidden fruit of Eden.”
What our country and world really needs is a leader who can cure our sin sickness, which poses an even greater threat than the financial crisis that is looming over us.

Let me be clear about this - The relationship between a Christian and government is an important one that should be soberly considered. And, we as Christ-followers must do all we can to make  a difference in the political landscape. However, at the end of the day - We can be thankful that we serve a King who not only holds all things together by His mighty hand, but who died upon a cross so that all our infirmities might be laid on Him.

No matter who wins the election next month, we as the church must remember our primary duty - Living  and breathing the gospel to every creature. This is the cure that the world really needs.