The Swiss Cheese Curse

"Brendon... the ground you walk on is cursed, and no matter what kind of job you have, it will suck in one way or another. And chances are, most months there will be more month than there is money.

"Kara... you'll probably give birth to children someday, but without drugs the pain will make you wish you were dead. Oh, and Brendon will never quite meet your expectations, but he'll dominate you anyway."

I hereby pronounce you husband and wife. You may now start having second thoughts.

A few weeks ago Christina and I were able to travel to Portland, Oregon to see my brother (Brendon) get married to the girl of his dreams (Kara). Thankfully, the wedding didn't sound anything like the words above. I'm pretty sure no wedding ever has.

That's because the passage in Genesis 3 that this exchange is drawn from is A CURSE. People don't want to think about curses at weddings. As the King of Swamp Castle said in Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail, "This is supposed to be a happy occasion! Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who!" But I digress...

What I'm saying is, when you see a curse, it's best not to encourage it. The best thing to do is fight it, defy it, pray against it, live into the blessing.

But I think as many of us try to live out our lives as men and women, and as husbands and wives, we end up slouching towards the curse anyway. As I explain, I'm going to leave out the part about child-bearing. Drugs, no drugs... you can make up your own mind on that.

Adam, as we know, was formed from the dirt. Which is why, incidentally, it is so hard for a man to get, or stay, clean. Eve was formed later on from Adam's rib so that pastors would have something clever to say at weddings about the woman being equal to man because she came from his side.

Even when God was most involved in the lives of humans, he tended not to deal with us in a very direct fashion. He did not pop Adam and Eve out of thin air (ex nihilo for your seminarians,) he used materials. And it's as if those materials are always there to tempt us to put our trust in matter (materialism) instead of its Source.

Adam's matter was dirt. So how did God curse Adam? He cursed the dirt, so that men throughout history would have to bust their butts all day long, and this is the thanks they get from you kids?

Eve's matter was Adam. So how did God curse Eve? He said that she would always desire a relationship with him, but he would rule over her. She would always long for equality and intimacy and emotional/spiritual compatibility, but Adam would be too stubborn and dirty for much of that. Plus he'd be at work all the time.

At first glance, Eve's curse looks demeaning (although it shouldn't be strange that a curse would be demeaning.) But many women have lamented their fate to be subordinate to a man, and have decided that they'd rather have Adam's curse... workaholism! Now that's living the dream...

The fact is, they're both curses, and God does not expect us to seek out either one. He created us to be equal... for the first woman to come out of man, and every subsequent man to come out of woman. Similarly, he created us to seek God. When men (or women) try to achieve significance through their work, or when women (or men) try to find ultimate fulfillment in their human relationships, we are all missing the point. We are chasing after the curse instead of the blessing.

I probably don't even need to say that the curse is largely unavoidable, this side of eternity. But thankfully God's grace, especially as displayed on the Cross, has punched huge holes in it, through which we can see and live out what God intended for his children.

That is true religion... not to set up systems that play into the curse, but to guide ourselves and others into the blessings that God has made possible by his own sacrifice.

Now.... you may kiss the bride.

Red Letter Ramblings

One very formidable trend that has developed with Generations X and Y (for lack of better terms) is the desire to be a "Red-Letter Christian".

For the uninitiated, many editions of the Bible print the words of Jesus in red, and the rest of the words in black.

If there are any accountants or finance-types reading this, I have a question for you: Does red ink make Jesus words look better, or worse? Seems like it might be a barrier for those who fear "the red".

Aside from purely cosmetic concerns, I believe this type of thinking can be dangerous. First, whose decision was it initially to put the words of God the Son in red, but not those of God the Father? Is it not disconcerting to anyone else to read about the baptism of Jesus and see the very voice of heaven descending in ink of black? It wouldn't bother me, except in a Red-Letter Edition.

It is a magnificent truth that Christianity is not based on a set of teachings, or on a philosophy, or on a group of people or a historical event. It is based on a person; the person of Jesus. So why shouldn't we let his words stand out?

And that's the way the thinking goes... fair enough. But there's more.

I don't see this simply as a Bible-reading trend, but as a move away from a holistic Christianity, and into one that has a too-narrow focus on the person of Jesus. This has caused many people to believe that Jesus was not so much the agent of the Father here on earth, but rather a rogue liberator attempting to rescue humanity from the wrath of a Crabby Dad. Read more about that here.

A case in point: The 4th of 10 Commandments, in Exodus, commands that we keep the Sabbath day holy, and do no work on that day. In Jesus' time, the Pharisees abused this law (like every other law) and took it to extremes. As we read Jesus' attempts to correct that abuse, we begin to think that he is rescinding the commandment itself. And whatever we read in red letters seems to trump everything else. (As an aside... my trouble with honoring the Sabbath is that I can't find where God said that the Sabbath should roll over to the first day of the week, instead of the last. Still percolating on that one...)

The problem is, this approach to the mission of Christ ignores the following red letters from John 8:28: "I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me." Does this bold assertion leave us any reason at all to lift the words of Jesus above the words of God the Father? Has anyone ever proposed putting all the words of God in red?

Because, in their red letter fervor, some people have even become suspicious of the non-gospel books. Here's my question for them: Do you believe John accurately recorded Jesus' words? Then why not read his three epistles and Revelation just as seriously? Do you believe Luke accurately recorded Jesus' words? Then why not read Acts just as seriously? And if you do, you'll see that Jesus (in red letters) appointed Paul to be an apostle. Then why not read the letters of Paul as divine scripture? And when we read the red letters themselves, we can see how Jesus honored the words of Moses and the Prophets. In our efforts to follow Jesus and be like him, should we not do the same?

We should. Otherwise we risk letting our faith run into the red.

The Question of Suffering

Yesterday my boss had to take the day off because he pinched his sciatic nerve. Normally he provides the office music from his iTunes, which can include anything from Johnny Cash to the Beastie Boys.

But yesterday was quiet most of the day, so eventually I decided to turn on our local NPR station, and listen to Fresh Air, one of its more popular interview programs.

Although I was only able to listen to snatches of the show, I did catch that Terry Gross was interviewing an author named Bart Ehrman, whose book is called "God's Problem". Ehrman is a former minister and fundamentalist, and his driving point was that Christianity, and religion in general, have not found a satisfactory explanation for human suffering. Here is a quote from the book:

Eventually, though, I felt compelled to leave Christianity altogether. I did not go easily. On the contrary, I left kicking and screaming, wanting desperately to hold on to the faith I had known since childhood and had come to know intimately from my teenaged years onward. But I came to a point where I could no longer believe. It's a very long story, but the short version is this: I realized that I could no longer reconcile the claims of faith with the facts of life. In particular, I could no longer explain how there can be a good and all-powerful God actively involved with this world, given the state of things. For many people who inhabit this planet, life is a cesspool of misery and suffering. I came to a point where I simply could not believe that there is a good and kindly disposed Ruler who is in charge of it.

Knowing that it would be fodder for his detractors, in the interview he specifically referenced the book of Job. He claimed that Job, rather than providing an explanation for suffering, depicts a man who questions his intense suffering, and is reprimanded for it by God himself. Job says "Why? I don't deserve this!" and God says "Be quiet. Did you create the universe?"

Ehrman tears down the traditionally positive view held of Job, and rips into his character, saying that Job, rather than accepting his suffering in faith, constantly complained and defended himself. In response, God then (in Ehrman's view) scolds Job for even asking such questions.

I disagree not only with his view of Job, but with his completely cerebral approach to suffering. Perhaps if I read the book I would feel differently. But I certainly don't want to be guilty of it myself, and fail to recognize the suffering you may be experiencing in your life, even as you read this. Life hurts, and sometimes it's torture. No amount of analysis or exegesis or debate can make a dent in that. If you're suffering right now, the second worst thing I could give you is a rational explanation. But the number one worst thing I could give you is the sense that God doesn't care, and you're not allowed to scream in his face for relief. I'll talk more about that in a minute.

So book knowledge alone just doesn't cut it... even when that book is the Bible. Sometimes it doesn't matter how many chapters or books one has memorized from the Bible, because Ehrman has far more than his share. Memorization does not guarantee absorption, and certainly not relationship.

Because when I read Job, I do not see a God who sends lightning on those who ask why. I see a God who overwhelms Job with the power and awe of God's own presence; to the point where Job might even forget about his own pain for a moment.

Solomon says that man cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end. God was reminding Job that he is completely incapable of seeing the big picture, and steering him back to faith, not necessarily away from all doubt, but away from despair.

Humanity is absolutely not wrong to question its own suffering. Look at the Psalms, especially 22 and 69. Here is David, the "man after God's own heart", pounding on the chest of the Almighty, screaming out for answers. And God calls this sacred scripture--something each one of us should read and internalize. And for one reason more than any other... these passages point directly the sufferings of Jesus.

And that, more than anything I can think of, is the fulfillment of the question of suffering. Notice I don't say "the answer to the question" because modernity has convinced us to seek hard-and-fast answers where perhaps there can be none. It is my belief that, in those cases, we should instead seek fulfillment. Relationship. Then what is the fulfillment of the question of the suffering of humanity? I believe it's the suffering of Christ.

He did not promise us answers. He promised us himself. "I will be with you, even to the end of the age."

If we want anything beyond that, we do not want Jesus at all.

Fruits of the Flesh - Happiness

This is the third installment in the series "Fruits of the Flesh". Here is the original post.

The second Fruit of the Spirit is Joy. The second Fruit of the Flesh is Happiness.

I wrote at some length about Love vs. Romance, but for Joy vs. Happiness I'll be brief.

One response to the original post was about the denigration of the word "happiness", and the fact that the Greek and Hebrew words most often translated "blessed" in the Scriptures are just as accurately translated "happy". Such as in the Psalm 1:1 "Happy is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked," or Matthew 5:7, "Happy are the merciful."

The most common approach to Joy vs. Happiness is that Joy is deep and resilient, whereas Happiness is temporary and circumstantial. I have no qualms about that view. But is there a chance we're giving Happiness the short-shrift?

One of the primary post-modern criticisms of Christianity attacks the naive, happy-clappy, see-no-evil disposition. It bothers me, too. But is happiness the culprit, or the victim here? It would be a funny thing to translate Matthew 5:4, "Happy are those who mourn". Mourning people aren't happy, they're sad.

The second fruit of the flesh is a Happiness that is sought in and of itself. But much like Romance, and the other Fruits of the Flesh, Happiness needs to be a by-product of the Spirit, and becomes an evil thing when it is sought directly. Joy, on the contrary, can be sought directly, because we cannot have it without a whole-hearted trust in God. Happiness is an emotion, but Joy is a commitment.

And no matter what emotions joy may lead us through in this life, happy is the one who joyfully perseveres to the end, where happiness is not the exception, but the rule.

Fruits of the Flesh - Romance

Yesterday I lined up the world's counterfeit fruits in the post "Fruits of the Flesh." Now I'm going to hit each one briefly, for a little explanation.

The first Fruit of the Spirit is Love. The first Fruit of the Flesh is Romance.

The Fruits of the Flesh are not, inherently, bad. The only people I know who would call Romance bad are the unromantic. Romance, to them, is what gives the Romeos and Don Juans an unfair advantage. But apart from them, most of us can agree that Romance is a good thing, especially within marriage.

But here's the kicker. God says, "Love." The world says "Fall in love." That's what Romance is: Falling in love. It's not something you have any control over... you're a victim. It just happens. So you get swept off your feet, and carried along by a sweet summer breeze.

And it's only logical that if you don't have any control over the beginning of something, you won't have any control over the end, either. Falling out of love. Breaking up. Divorce. Romance, like money, is a great servant and a terrible master.

One of the great tragedies of the English language is the multi-tasking it often is required to do. I'm not going to ask you to stop saying how much you love Snow, or Motorcycles, or Burger King. But when you talk about loving people, you've got to switch into another gear. DC Talk wrote a hip-hop ditty called "Luv is a Verb" which was cheesy, but right on target.

If Love is a verb, it's not something you can "fall into". It's a bull you take by the horns. And if it's all mushy and emotional then guys will get really quiet when they say "I love you" to each other, and have to add the word "dude" or "man" or "bro".

So I'm gonna finish with a word to the men. If there's anything masculine out there, it's action. Decisive, Aggressive Action. No wonder we've shrunk back from loving each other... our society equates it with sex, sunsets and satin sheets. And those things have their place. But love is a thing of action! It is a thing of reckless sacrifice and relentless devotion. It means making a decision and never, ever swerving from it. Do you think you're stubborn and tough? Make a pact with God right now (or renew the one you already have) to never leave your wife... legally, physically, sexually, mentally... period. Make a pact to never abuse her, or your kids. Never in a million years. Make a pact to work like an ox to provide them everything they need. Make a pact to shut the hell up when they just need you to listen.

Because Love is a verb... bro.

Fruits of the Flesh

For the fruit of the flesh is:

Romance, Happiness, Compromise, Coolness, Friendliness, Social Awareness, Security, and Autonomy

Let's see them side by side:

SPIRIT--------FLESH
Love----------Romance
Joy-----------Happiness
Peace---------Compromise
Patience------Coolness
Kindness------Friendliness
Goodness------Social Awareness
Faithfulness--Security
Self-Control--Autonomy

Each fruit of the flesh is a counterfeit. It can be easy to see them as worthy of our effort, or even as equivalent to what the Spirit desires. I will explain the difference between the left column and the right in future posts.

A Fashionable Faith

One very good way to seem holier-than-thou is to be unattractive.

You may be one of the few individuals who have had the misfortune of being born beautiful, and have to take deliberate steps to be homely. I recommend wearing thick, heavy glasses, tangling up your hair, eating poorly, adopting a sedentary lifestyle, and replacing your wardrobe with frumpy, out-dated and mismatched apparel. Combined with a strict code of morals and a Bible college degree, these simple steps can make the most naturally attractive person seem quite holy.

OK, enough of that.

The truth is that I believe every person is beautiful. Not just on the inside, either. Granted, this belief is buried deep in my soul, and my eyes and mind will spend my entire life trying to live up to it. I have no doubt that God has a sense of physical, visual beauty, and that he literally "sees" every individual as beautiful, despite any asymmetry, malformation, handicap, skin disease or cultural disadvantage. It is not creation, but culture that causes some to rise above the rest, and to be crowned sexy.

Religion has responded to this cultural tendency in very severe ways at times. Both Peter (in I Peter) and Paul (in I Timothy) give warnings to the women of the Church not to decorate themselves, and to dress with modesty. And then there's the verse in Proverbs that says how "beauty is vain". This is all the fuel that the legalistic set needs to develop a counter-culture with attitudes like the one I expressed in the first paragraph. "The world has sinfully exalted attractiveness, so we will exalt homeliness! The less you do to develop your physical appearance, the better!"

So here we are... caught between two mistakes: pride in beauty, and pride in rejecting beauty.

It's obvious that physical beauty has a role to play in God's plan... At least 10 major Old Testament figures are identified for their beauty, and not just women. Sarah is so beautiful that her husband Abraham tries to pass her off as his sister so he won't be killed. Rebecca draws the immediate attention of Isaac's wife-searching servant. Rachel's beauty instantly inspires 7 years of hard labor from Jacob. Bathsheba pulls the "man after God's own heart" way off course. Esther wins an empire-wide beauty pageant to become Queen of Sheba and save her entire race. As for the men... Saul's beauty is defined by his extraordinary height. David, although considerably shorter, is described as handsome. And his wicked son Absalom was the Fabio of his day... with long, luxurious locks and "not a blemish on him". It is a poetic justice that he dies by hanging... his hair caught in a tree. And who can forget Solomon and the Shulammite Woman, his first wife, who praise each other's beauty over and over in Song of Solomon?

Beauty is a powerful thing in scripture. Sometimes it leads to disaster (as with Bathsheba) and other times to salvation (as with Esther.) Is it possible that physical, cultural beauty is a gift with a purpose, just like so many other things? Perhaps God knows the power of attraction and desires to use it to his advantage.

The Art of Fashion is not highly respected in Christian circles, for reasons I've already mentioned. It smacks as narcissistic on the one side, and voyeuristic on the other. And in many, many cases I believe this is probably true... not only do its excesses and misuses lead to selfishness, they lead to lust, rape, adultery and even idolatry. So it can be hard for devoted Christians to justify the mountains of money spent on textiles and cosmetics. But maybe, just maybe, there is a baby somewhere in this bathwater. I've had to think about this a lot lately, with our Benefit Fashion Show (called "Hit the Lights") coming up on December 8.

We have no doubt that God gives certain people a beautiful voice. Would you rebuke a talented young woman for spending lots of time and money on voice lessons, or even a voice degree, and dedicating her life to singing and teaching others to do the same? What about those who seem born to paint, or calculate, or invent, or build, or advise?

I'm going to use a word that I don't think I've ever heard applied to beauty or fashion... STEWARDSHIP. Is it possible that those born with pleasant features might actually be held accountable to God for their stewardship of this gift?

Yes, it's extremely easy for an attractive person to become arrogant, like The Fonz with his comb, or Marsha Brady with her hairbrush. But isn't that the case with every gift? God has given us all the freedom to ignore his call, and assume that we are gifted simply because we deserve it... we're better than others.

In our approach to every gift of God, we should seek him desperately to know his purpose in all of it. Why am I such a great quarterback? Why do I love drawing so much? Why do people always come to me with their problems? Why have you made me so attractive to others? How do you want to use me?

I'll finish with a story. When I was in high school, I belonged to a youth group with a few stereotypical "valley girls" who cared deeply about their clothes, their hair, their tans, etc. One of them always had extremely fancy nails, painted with different designs and patterns. Most of us assumed these girls were pretty shallow and didn't have much interest in the things of God. And in all reality, they probably did go overboard with their appearance, and were likely guilty of some degree of vanity.

To everyone's surprise, three of these girls decided to go on a mission trip to Lithuania, I think. I wasn't there, but I heard afterwards about how the little girls they met there reacted to the American girl with the extreme fingernails. They absolutely flocked around her, and flooded her with questions. And when they had learned all they could about her nails, they wanted to know everything else about her as well... including her faith. Because of her fingernails, she had instant respect, and dozens of little listening ears.

Not only did this have a spiritual impact on the Lithuanians, but the three American girls were never the same. Because others had labeled them as shallow, they had come to believe it themselves. But to see what kind of influence they can have on others, they started to understand that God really did intend to use them, just like those who had other, more "spiritual" gifts.

And that's a beautiful thing.

Merge - The Next Six Months

So I'm feeling pretty good about our new Sunday morning set-up... Merge Worship Gathering, 10:30 am, you know...

Last Sunday was really beautiful, I think. You should come see for yourself. It was comfortable, it was casual, but also challenging and impactful, too. Everybody got to have a say, get involved, get to know each other in an authentic way. I liked it.

Now I'd like you to know what I've got in mind for the next six months, as far as the discussions go. For now I'll just mention the framework to give you a rough idea. I'll work on the creative stuff later. Here's a few things you should know first:

-So far, Merge's definitions of a "discussion" is some people sitting in curved rows, some at tables, some at couches, at varying distances from the platform. The discussion leader sits on a stool placed on the floor somewhere toward the front of all this. This could change, and it could vary. I like it, but I hope it does change and vary. And I expect other speakers to rotate in from time to time.

-When I talk about "going through scripture" I'm not checking off chapters or verses like a to-do list. I want people to get a sense of the Grand Story of God, and simultaneously to realize that they have an important part to play in it. So scripture will be used as a springboard for real life issues, and as a measuring stick to hold us accountable. So scripture is one of those bendy rulers that are fun to wack on your desk when you're feeling ancy.

-The discussions will be a combination of asking questions, but also clear teaching. God has given us real truth to work with, just not as much as some people think. And unless we listen to those we are addressing, we're in danger of speaking to someone who's not even in the room.

NEXT SIX MONTHS: The Jesus Saga
(this is all subject to change at any time)

November - Prophecies and Pre-figurations of Jesus

November 4 - The Fall of Man, the Curse and the Promise
November 11 - The Exodus, the Angel of Death
November 18 - Melchizedek, the Pre-Incarnate Christ?
November 25 - Prophecies of Pain - Psalm 22, Isaiah 53

December - Advent

December 2 - Messianic Prophecy, Inter-testamental period
December 9 - Anticipating a Savior (Israel, Elizabeth, John in the womb)
December 16 - Mary & Joseph
December 23 - The nativity
December 30 -

January - The Early Years

January 6 - Jesus' circumcision, Simeon & Anna, Epiphany
January 13 - John the Baptist, Jesus' cousin & fore-runner
January 20 - Water into Wine, the first miracle
January 27 - Calling of the Disciples

February - The Ministry of Jesus

February 3 - Sermon on the Mount
February 10 - Two Greatest Commandments
February 17 - The Inspirational Miracles
February 24 - The Compassionate Miracles

March - The Road to the Cross

March 2 - Clearing the Temple
March 9 - Jesus and the Pharisees
March 16 - Palm Sunday - Last Supper & Good Friday
March 23 - Easter - Resurrection Day
March 30 - The Great Commission & Ascension

April - The Aftermath

April 6 - Pentecost & the Holy Spirit
April 13 - Explosive Growth
April 20 - Saul's Coversion & Contribution
April 27 - The First Century Church

Authority, Homosexuality, and a Piss-Poor Epistemology

Over the next few weeks (and months) I'm going to be thinking (and talking) a lot about Scripture, personal conviction, and the teaching work of the Holy Spirit. What I have to say today may seem dis-jointed, but only because it's intended to lead into other things.

Before reading on, you may want to download a PDF of a transcription of theologian N.T. Wright's lecture on Biblical Authority. Although it's 19 pages long, and scholarly in nature, it's quite down-to-earth.

As I was reading this document, I began to think about how each of us arrives at our convictions. And I realized that no one really believes something just because someone told them it was true. The exception to this is the groundwork for worship. Sound confusing? Keep reading.

Little kids tend to believe everything their parents say because they worship their parents. And when you're little, that's not a bad thing. But have you ever heard someone say, "That's what I believe because my pastor said so."? It's getting less and less common, for sure, but it reveals an attitude of worship toward one's pastor. The word for the way people know and understand things is called epistemology, and this is one example (pardon the phrase) of piss-poor epistemology.

Obviously, we are called to worship God. And therefore, whatever he speaks directly to us is something we should believe wholeheartedly. And you may infer from this that I'm going to say something about literal belief in the words of the Bible, but don't make any more assumptions... and keep reading.

If we're paying attention, we all get the sense from reading the Bible that God is talking to someone else besides us. In the Old Testament, it's the Israelites. In the New Testament it's a variety of Jews and Christians from the Mediterranean region. You don't have to disrespect the timeless, inspired nature of the Bible to wonder which of these million or so words God has really intended you, personally, to obey.

And even if you've figured that out, what responsibility do you have, if any, to tell other people what they're supposed to do? Has God really called us to make these kinds of determinations on others?

It looks like I'm in danger here of descending into a bog of abstraction, so I'm going to put a face on the question. What should a Christian do when he (or she) meets an actively gay Christian? Let's suppose the two of you have the opportunity to get to know one another, and you develop somewhat of a rapport.

You worry about your friend, and his lifestyle, so you've decided it's time to say something. But what? Here is what I would say, if it were me (and this will probably change, but for the here-and-now I like it.)

I would talk to my friend about his relationship with God. I would ask him about his desire to really obey God and live a life that's pleasing to Him. I would ask him if he is willing to obey God, even if obedience is painful or inconvenient. I would ask him if he believed that God is the creator of sex and sexuality, and if he has the right to guide us in our expressions of it.

You may think, once again, that you know where I'm going with this, but you'd probably be wrong. Most people would have difficulty answering "yes" to every one of these questions. If he says "no" to even one of them, then homosexuality is not the issue. The issue is his orientation towards God... that he has acquired a misunderstanding of God's dominion, or has never acquired a worshipful stance towards God to begin with.

If he does, in fact, answer "yes" to all of them, then I would ask him if he believes that what the Bible (particularly Romans chapter 1) says about homosexuality applies to him. If not, I would ask why not... and I would press him to make sure he's not just skewing the words to his own advantage (after all... he said he was willing to obey God even if it's painful.) But if he has honest doubts about the scripture, or consistent reasons why he doesn't believe he is bound to those words (even if his reasons aren't academically sound) I would simply tell him what I believe and why, and ask if I can pray for him. I would tell him that I worry, not only about his physical and psychological health, but about his spiritual health.

But here's my divergence: After that I would leave it alone. After all, my friend would never believe me just because I said so, unless he worships me. But if I continue to see evidence that my friend really longs to obey God, and makes sacrifices to do so, but does not see the Scriptures about homosexuality in the way that I do, I would respect his spirituality, and continue to pray for him. Because seriously... aren't we all rejecting some facet of Scripture every day, quite intentionally at times? Do you think a man whose children are unruly should be exempt from serving as a pastor? Do you think a woman who sports jewelry and short hair and a loud voice should be ineligible to teach Sunday School? If God, at some point, convicts these two people to make a change, then that's his business, but until then, we can respect their spirituality and their position in the Kingdom of God.

By the way, I'm not trying to equate homosexuals with incompetent parents or short-haired women. But we've got to come to terms with the way we excuse ourselves so often in regards to Scripture, while condemning others. Often we settle in to accomplish whatever scriptural requirements we find personally manageable, and then set about judging everyone else based on that standard.

But the point is... what's in the heart? You can't argue with that. (For man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the... what?) And, in fact, we can have some sense about what's in a person's heart. It just gets frustrating when we realize that God is the only one who really knows.

Short Skirt/Long Jacket and the Proverbs 31 Woman

Who better than a chronic sufferer of foot-in-mouth disease like myself to find two things that disgust women and put them together?

I refer to a song, and a scripture passage. The song is "Short Skirt/Long Jacket" by Cake, and I don't know any women who are really against it. (If it's not ringing a bell, think of the line, "I want a girl with a short skirt and a long..... long..... jacket.) Most people I know just think it's funny and clever. After all, it's surprisingly non-sexual, and non-shallow. The "short skirt" desire is probably the only shallow thing in there, and the only references to appearance at all are the mention of "fingernails that shine like justice" and "eyes that burn like cigarettes". The rest of it is all about attitude, intellect and, well... business acumen.

The writer of this song is expressing a desire for a woman who has it all together, and even exhibits a number of traditionally masculine traits. A case in point is the line "she's touring the facility, and picking up the slack." This is an intensely independent woman... the kind that doesn't really need a man, which is a point that makes me wonder if this song is perhaps much deeper than it sounds.

Is it a satire? Is the writer really saying that men don't want the killer woman? Is it trying to communicate the pressure that women are under to measure up to an impossible standard?

Either way, I'm almost positive that the writer was inspired by the second half of Proverbs 31... because that scripture passage seems to create a lot of the same feelings in women as the song. "This is what men expect??? Well, screw that... I'm not taking care of two toddlers and turning a profit on a vineyard in my spare time! And hell if he's gonna see me in a short skirt again."

Good point, ladies. If this song, and this scripture, are true representations of our standards, then we've got another thing coming.

I said in a recent blog post that there are some verses which are just plain none of your business. And I think the second half of Proverbs 31 is like that... not really written for men to read. It is something women should be inspired by, without thinking that men are standing around, supervising their growth. The only benefit it has for men was expressed pretty well, I think, by Mark Driscoll. He said that a lot of young men set out looking for the Proverbs 31 woman to marry. But they haven't done anything to deserve her. He believes that the P31 woman is a woman who has been invested in over a period of decades by her husband, and many others. In short, if you're looking for the perfect wife, go find the perfect husband, because he's already got her.

I like this perspective, because it challenges both men and women to strive to be their very best, and hopefully takes our attention off of each other's progress, or lack thereof.

But I just couldn't get over the similarities between the song and the scripture, so I wrote a parody of the song, using as many actual words from Proverbs 31 as possible. I'll paste it in here for you. If you want to read the original lyrics, and the scripture passage, they're pasted into the first two comments. So here it is. (By the way... I already have a wife like this, so if we get a chance to perform it, I'll have to get some young bachelor to be the singer.)

I want a wife of Noble Character
I want a wife like few can find
I want a wife with worth like rubies
Who can afford me, her husband, some peace of mind

I want a wife with the right motivations
Who is good, not bad, and has nothing she lacks
She’s pricing the market, she’s working with her hands
She’s choosing the wool, and picking out the flax.

I want a wife with a short past and a long…. resume

I want a wife who gets up early (gets up early!)
I want a wife who stays up late (stays up late!)
I want a wife who sets about her work vigorously
Who buys her own vineyards, and makes no mistakes

With fingernails that are grasping her distaff
And spindles, and ledgers, and alms for the poor
She is strong, generous, and dresses in red
She takes on the blizzards and has nothing dread

I want a wife with a long temper and a short…. short… memory.

I want a wife with a smooth set of bed sheets (smooth set of bedsheets!)
I want a wife with a sash outlet store (sash outlet store!)
At the city gate we will meet accidentally
We’ll start to talk when I offer her my chair

She wants a wardrobe with strength and dignity
She wants a repertoire of observant jokes
She’s speaking with wisdom and teaching her skills
And trading in idleness for a watchful eye

I want a wife with a short engagement and a long… long… honeymoon

The Agony and the Irony

Quiz time:

Evil and Righteousness have a common root, which is the all-consuming desire for... what?

Add a comment to this post, and make your best guess. Let me know if you need a hint.

The Inclusive Jesus

In the process of reading through the gospels once again, this morning I came across what I believe to be one of the most intriguing scenes in the entire Bible:

"On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. And as he taught them, he said, 'Is it not written: 'My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations'? But you have made it 'a den of robbers.'' The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching." -Mark 11:15-18

Now this is a man's memory verse, and I've mentioned it several times before in that capacity. Although John is less descriptive of this controversial act than Matthew, Mark and Luke, he does mention that Jesus drove them out with a whip that he made himself. That tells us two very important things:

1) Jesus was not guilty of rage, or of losing his temper. He had thought things through far enough in advance to make a whip just for this occasion. And,

2) Jesus had some mad skills.

Those two ideas were not new to me as I read the passage this morning. But in an effort to draw more out of Jesus' teachings, I have taken the advice of Ray VanderLaan, and started paying close attention to the source of Jesus' quotes. VanderLaan teaches that, when Jesus quotes the Old Testament, his true message is often not so much in the actual words he says, as in the passage he is referring to. This is not to say that Jesus is being misleading or disingenuous--every word he says is true--but that there is deeper meaning available for those who familiarize themselves with the Bible of Jesus' day. And I believe this is the case with the temple-clearing scene.

When he rebukes the temple officials, Jesus quotes two Old Testament prophets in one sentence. "My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations" comes from Isaiah chapter 56. The second part, about the den of robbers, comes from Jeremiah chapter 7.

OK, that was easy enough. All you have to do is check the footnotes to find that out. But now how about reading those two chapters? What are they really about?

One very intriguing thing about the temple-clearing passage is the emphasis on Jesus' teaching. You'd think, at a moment like this, everybody would either be cheering or jeering because of Jesus' behavior, not his words. But even in the midst of such outlandish deeds, the focus is on what Jesus is saying. Mark does not suggest that he is shouting his memory verses at the top of his lungs as he throws tables over the wall, and busts open the pigeon cages. Rather it says he is teaching the people. Likewise, when the chief priests heard this, they wanted to kill him, not for causing a ruckus, but because the people were amazed at his teaching.

Now I don't think we can conclude that the priests and teachers wanted to kill Jesus out of jealousy. As if one instructor at a school wins the educator of the year award and the others set right out to build a gallows in the teachers' lounge. It is indeed possible that Jesus' popularity and competency as a rabbi aroused the green-eyed monster among his colleagues, but it is far more likely that they wanted to kill him for what he taught than how he taught.

So what was Jesus really teaching? That the temple officials were getting a little carried away with the merchandising? That things were being run too much like a business and not enough like the house of God? Perhaps that people were getting ripped off and short-changed?

These things could all be fairly drawn from the text, and I don't think they would be wrong. But look again before you set fire to your church bookstore or tip over the soda machine. Because I believe that Jesus' heart on the matter lies in the message of Isaiah 56 and Jeremiah 7.

The Isaiah passage makes a beautiful promise to Israel's outsiders; to those who fear that their lineage will exclude them from the kingdom of God. A special comfort goes out to the eunuchs, who have been so mutilated as to never be considered among the circumcised. God essentially is telling the world, "No matter who you are, where you're from, or what your past is like, if you bind yourself to me, and keep my commands, I will hear your prayers and accept your sacrifices." What an incredible message (especially in the Old Testament!)

Now it's important to recognize that the Temple in Jerusalem had four courts: The Court of the Gentiles, and going inward from there, the Court of Women, the Court of Men, and the Holy of Holies. It is obvious that God intended people from all nations to be welcome at the Temple (even if only in the outer court,) to worship there and offer their sacrifices. But by Jesus' day, the rulers of the Temple had allowed (caused?) the Court of the Gentiles to overflow with merchants and money changers. This made it impossible for non-Jews to worship there, and sent a very strong message that they were not welcome.

So Jesus barges in and declares that the Temple was meant to be a house of prayer for all nations, not for one nation only! Israel had a sacred duty to welcome people of every stripe to God's house, and they had failed.

Not only had they failed to provide hospitality to the nations, they had traded hospitality for iniquity. A place designed to radiate the grace of God was serving instead to highlight the greed of men. Thus the Jeremiah quote about the 'den of robbers'.

And this is where we really come to understand that Jesus is not merely venting about the misuse of a worship facility, but pronouncing doom on a nation who ignores God's commands. Because in Jeremiah chapter 7 we can see very clearly God's displeasure with those who would "oppress the alien," among others (verse 7.) God commands Jeremiah to stand at the gate of the temple, and announce that God is giving his people one last chance to reject false gods and serve him only, to treat people with love and grace and hospitality, and he will continue to accept their offerings and allow them to live in the Promised Land.

But if they do not--and Jesus was making it very clear that they had not--then God would no longer accept their sacrifices. In fact, God told them they might as well keep their sacrifices to themselves, because he was about to destroy the temple and scatter them from their homeland.

When Jesus referenced Jeremiah 7 (and when he said other things about the Temple, like "not one stone will be left on another") , he was making it very plain that Israel had had her chance, and she blew it. No wonder the chief priests and teachers of the law were fuming.

But right there, in the midst of a proclamation of doom, Jesus was making a promise of redemption. All the people were amazed at his teaching, because they were sick of being excluded. What a thought, that God would welcome everyone into his presence! What a thought, for you and I, that God is calling us to stop holding the "undesirables" at arm's length, and start truly showing them the love of Christ! Over and over we see it: Jesus talking with the Samaritan woman or the Roman general, Philip baptizing the Ethiopian eunuch, Peter seeing the vision of unclean foods, James inspiring us to honor the poor, or Paul dedicating his life's ministry to the Gentiles. What a grand theme of Jesus' life... to subvert the natural order, to exalt the humble and humiliate the self-exalted!

Despite the grand message, you might have concluded that Jesus didn't go far enough in his purging. Yes, he fought to give back the Court of the Gentiles, but what about all the separation? Why should the Gentiles be considered less than the Jews, and the women be denied privileges reserved for men?

During his life, you'd be right. Jesus did stop short. But when he was crucified, all that he'd been saying came to an explosive climax. Because at that moment, the curtain in the temple, designed by God to keep virtually all people separated from his presence, was ripped in two from top to bottom. Now, not only are Gentiles welcome among the Jews, but each and every person who trusts in Jesus is granted access to the heart of God!

Paul said it best in Galatians 3:28. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

Amen.

None of Your Beeswax (or, Waning Eloquent)

Take heed, ye blog readers, to sacred Scripture, and let us hear the words of the Lord.

"Take a sharp sword and use it as a barber's razor to shave your head and your beard. Then take a set of scales and divide up the hair. When the days of your siege come to an end, burn a third of the hair with fire inside the city. Take a third and strike it with the sword all around the city. And scatter a third to the wind. For I will pursue them with drawn sword. But take a few strands of hair and tuck them away in the folds of your garment. Again, take a few of these and throw them into the fire and burn them up. A fire will spread from there to the house of Israel."

Thus saith the Lord.

Let it not be said that I, Coreman, preach only vain philosophies and intangible precepts. Let it neither be said that I brush away the commands of Almighty God for the sake of poetic figuration or "cultural relevance". As I once observed so crudely adhered (and crudely phrased) upon the fender of an automobile, "God said it; I believe it; that settles it." Indeed, I adhere to a literal reading of scripture, much like that store-bought automotive paraphernalia.

Therefore, in the interest of obedience to our Sovereign Lord, I will lead by example. I will find a sword at some local goth emporium, then shave my face and head with it. I will then burn some, scatter some, and tuck the rest away, God be praised. And I expect that you, my loyal blog readers, if you be loyal indeed, will do the same.

OK, that's enough of that. Hopefully you've gathered that I'm not making fun of those who read the Bible literally, but I am challenging you to realize that not every Bible command is directed at every Bible reader.

One pet topic of mine that serves as an example of this is Tithing. It seems to me that the only time you'll hear the word "Malachi" mentioned from the pulpit is in a sermon about giving to the church (typically delivered during budget shortfalls.) The passage is Malachi 3:6-12, and you don't have to read it very carefully to see that God is having a conversation with the "sons of Jacob", otherwise known as the Israelites. They had been in the practice of ignoring God's command to bring tithes and offerings into the storehouse, and God was angry (though even in his anger, he promises amazing blessings if they will turn and obey.)

Is there still something very important for us in 2007 to learn as we read this passage? By all means, yes. Can we glean spiritual truth from Ezekiel 5:1-4, quoted above? Definitely. God's Word is eternal, and no matter how much or how little is written to us, it is all written for us. On the matter of giving, it is easy to see from the entirety of Scripture that God wants us to be generous, both sacrificially and joyfully. Isn't that enough? Why should we have to perilously re-contextualize an otherwise obscure passage to make people understand why they should give?

I've got another favorite example of latching onto a scriptural command that doesn't apply to you. When I think of it, I am reminded of the old beer commercials where the guys in a bar are divided into two factions, bellowing back and forth "Great taste!" and "Less filling!" Except in this scenario the men and women are split down the middle of the sanctuary, orthodox synagogue style, shouting "Wives submit to your husbands!" and "Husbands love your wives!"

When I read the third chapter of Malachi, and see in verse 6 where it says, "So you, O descendants of Jacob..." I immediately think, "OK, the stuff coming up is addressed to the nation of Israel, and is probably not intended to be a universal precept. So when I read it, I should not automatically presume that God's precise intention for my life is contained here, but I should ask him what he wants to teach me through this."

This is what should happen when you read Ephesians 5:22-28. If you are a man, and you read verse 22, which begins with the word "Wives," you should realize that this command is essentially none of your business. And women should do the same with verse 25 and following.

Just imagine if those of us who are married took that energy we normally spend wishing and complaining about how our spouse isn't being obedient to God, and re-focused it on actually being obedient ourselves?

What if we husbands could manage to just plumb forget how our wives are supposed to treat us? In fact, let's do it right now. (I would make a similar admonition to you ladies, but I plumb forgot what I was supposed to tell you.)

Normally at this point, I would close out the post with some pithy one-liner, but all I can think about is how I'm supposed to love my wife as Christ loves the Church.

Um, so yeah... love your wife. If you have a wife. If you are a wife... you're on your own, I guess. Also if you're single. Sorry.

A Study in Contrasts

John the revelator
Jacob the liar

Isaiah the orator
Moses the stutterer

David the hero
Paul the terrorist

Ruth the widow
Solomon the polygamist

Nicodemus the statesman
Mary Magdelene the outcast

Job the philanthropist
Joseph (NT) the peasant

Mary the virgin
Rahab the prostitute

Joshua the warrior
Jonah the deserter

Samuel the young
Sarah the old

Daniel the influential
Jabez the obscure

Abraham the faithful
Bathsheba the adulteress

Samson the strong
Gideon the weak

Rachel the beautiful
Leah the homely

Esther the humble
Joseph (OT) the arrogant

Rebecca the generous
Matthew the tax-collector

Jeremiah the patient
Peter the impetuous

Saul the tall
Zacchaeus the short

Elizabeth the believer
Thomas the doubter

Nehemiah the obedient
Eve the defiant

Hezekiah the leader
Adam the follower

Noah the tireless
Lazarus the dead

Elijah the bald
John (the Baptist) the long-haired hippy

What makes you think God can't use you?

God the Father, God the Son

There is a reason why so many preachers focus so heavily on the New Testament. It's the same reason that people publish pocket New Testaments, but decide to throw Psalms and Poverbs in for good measure.

I understand those little things are designed to be compact, but they still bother me a little. Sure, when you're talking about scripture you can pick out whatever verse or chapter suits your topic, without quoting the entire thing. But to print and bind a book called the Bible, while leaving out the "less important" half just seems a little, I don't know... haughty.

But it's not just that it's deemed less important. It's a real stumbling block, both for unbelievers and seasoned Christians... even preachers. And that's why they tend to avoid a lot of it. Sure, it has a lot of great stories, and those are easy to pick out and use at one's convenience, but even then you have to gloss over some gory details. Noah's Ark seems like a happy little story until you realize that it involves the violent destruction of more people (and animals) than all the most gratuitous Hollywood action movies ever made. Read some other examples here.

So it is nothing new to Christianity to have a tenuous relationship with the Old Testament, and to have our doubts about the God presented in it.

The result for many has been to see Jesus as the rebellious hero... a sort of Robin Hood figure. He noticed his dad was behaving pretty harshly, so he snuck out of his room in the middle of the night, climbed down the tree and incarnated himself into a human before papa could notice his absence. Then he systematically revised God's moral code, gave him a P.R. makeover, and died so that people would actually have a shot at appeasing an otherwise impervious deity. In other words, Jesus double-crossed his Father, to our great benefit.

I can understand why people would want to believe this. But it's not hard to see how incompatible it is with the most well-known verse in the Bible: "For GOD so LOVED the WORLD that he GAVE his only-begotten Son..." That doesn't sound like Jesus sneaking out the window to me.

Yesterday was, as you know, Father's Day. And I took the opportunity to think about our relationship to God as our Father, and about some of the words we use to describe that relationship. Fear, for example.

Think about what a "good father" really is. It's not the same as a "cool dad", is it? Not to say that a good father can't be cool from time to time, but the two concepts are certainly not synonymous. A good father does what is best for his children, whether or not they find it pleasant. And a good father will even, in a way, be feared by his children. He will never inspire terror, but shouldn't a child have to think twice before disobeying out of fear of angering his father? One step further... shouldn't a child possibly even fear that his father will require him to do something unpleasant, or move the family to another city, where their lives will be uprooted?

There is a fine line between healthy and unhealty fear. If the child is afraid to approach his father, or losing sleep worrying about what he will do, that is over the line. The fear should be just enough for the child to realize, "Wow... my dad is in control of my life. He can do whatever he wants with me. But you know... he loves me, and I trust him. Even if he causes me pain, I know it's for my good." (Assuming the child is mature enough to really grasp this. Most adults aren't even there yet.)

Although you can't put a price on a love like this, it is not the fullness of love that we need as humans. We also need tenderness and compassion. We need someone to come alongside us in love, in addition to one who condescends in love. A good father recognizes this, and (using the father-daughter example) will do his best to make sure his daughter marries a good man, who can give her the other half of love, that cannot come from a father. In older cultures, the father would literally give his daughter a husband.

When I started to think this way, it made much more sense to me how God the Father and God the Son truly are compatible. The Father loves us in a fatherly way... a way that can inspire fear, reverence and awe. And the Son, our bridegroom, loves us in a husbandly way... on our own level, having been born as a man, he loves us firmly, yet gently.

And I believe we misunderstand God entirely unless we can see the broad smile and happy tears on his face as walks us down the aisle, and gives us away to his only Son, our bridegroom.

Ask a Know-It-All Preacher Man

There are those in the Bible who went through some pretty tough times. If only they could have had a Know-It-All Preacher Man nearby to help them through those times with compassion, clear thinking, and Sound Life Principles from the Bible.

Disclaimer: I am not suggesting that all, over even many, preachers are "know-it-alls". I am just poking fun here at those who are.

Solomon: Meaningless, meaningless! Everything is meaningless!

Know-It-All Preacher Man: You claim to be a wise teacher, Solomon, yet you are in danger of judgment for teaching despair! You of all people should understand that the meaning of life is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever! Many people have struggled with a sense of meaninglessness, but once you have given your life to Christ, and structured your lifestyle according to Biblical principles, despair becomes a thing of that past!

Hosea: She is not my wife, and I am not her husband. Let her remove the adulterous look from her face and the unfaithfulness from between her breasts. Otherwise I will strip her naked and make her as bare as on the day she was born.

Know-It-All Preacher Man: I hardly know where to begin with you, Hosea! First of all, let me say that you should not have married a prostitute! Simply by joining with her in marriage, you have become an adulterer yourself. You really should have taken more time to get to know her, to discern her character, and most importantly, to seek God's will for your life... because clearly you have missed it here. Secondly, you should not talk publicly about, um... breasts and, you know... nudity. That is really inappropriate. And you especially should not talk so scornfully of your wife, even if she is a prostitute. Finally, I really think you and your wife need to come and see me in my office, at least twice a week. Once we start applying the time-tested principles of the Bible to your marriage, I think you'll begin to see an improvement, both in her attitude, and in yours.

Jesus: My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

Know-It-All Preacher Man: Jesus! I see that you are going through a challenging time in your life, and are wondering if God is really 'there for you'. I have helped many people like yourself who have found themselves in 'faith troughs'. You see, Jesus, God has not actually forsaken you. You are simply experiencing a dry spell due to trials and tribulations in your life. If you buy my devotional book, you'll find several daily prayers that will really boost your faith in God, and help you to feel his presence again.

UPDATE: One reader on this blog concluded that I was making a mockery of Jesus in this post. I want to make sure everyone reads my response to him, in case there are others out there of the same opinion. This is my response: "I am poking fun at the 'know-it-all-preacher man' for how he might have tried to counsel Jesus. I believe that, when people go through hard times, often the last thing they need is a pat answer with a 3-step practical guide to happiness. Yet this is what the know-it-alls often try to provide. Jesus, in this scene, shows us that even the most righteous among us will sometimes feel far from God, and it's not necessarily caused by a lack of faith. This realization, sadly, is lost on the know-it-all preacher man."

The All New G-Rated Bible!

WARNING: The following post is a joke. You can draw whatever meaning you like from it, as long as you don't accuse me of being serious. Thank you.

"Mommy, what do you mean Noah only took two of every animal?"
"Well, honey...
"He took two and let the rest of them just drown???"
"Actually there are some animals he took seven of."
"Why?"
"Because... um... they were going to, uh... well... eat them."

_____

"Hey, sport... you've been quiet. What are you doing?"
"Drawing."
"Drawing what?"
"Bible characters."
"Wow... that's great! Can I see?"
"No! Not till I'm done."
"Oh... ok. Which characters are you drawing?"
"Well, so far just Eve."
"I see. Um... before she ate the fruit or after?"
"Before."
"Right..."

_____

"What do you mean Stephen was stoned? I thought he was a good guy!"
"Well, stoned means..."
"I know what stoned means! It means he was on drugs. But only bad guys take drugs."
"No... no, no, no! I mean... yes, only bad guys take drugs, but Stephen wasn't on drugs. When it says he was stoned it means that people threw rocks at him until he, uh... until he died."
"You mean they killed him?!? Well, did he at least come back to life like Jesus?"

_____

If you're like me, you're getting tired of all the R-rated content in the Bible. Many Bible stories are played off as children's tales, and yet contain scenes of violence, pagan ritual, prostitution, genocide and nudity. That's why all of us at the G-Rated Bible Society decided to produce a family friendly version... just for you! And we didn't stop at content editing! We also edited for length, to hold the attention of a media-saturated generation of young people! We've pulled a few pages here from the life of David to show you what kind of good, clean, concise, family-oriented scripture you've been missing all these years:

David & Goliath

"Now the Philistines were a bunch of meanies, who gathered together in the valley to make fun of the Israelites. And there was among them a giant bully (who was six whole feet tall and had the beginnings of a mustache) who stood out in front of the camp, saying all sorts of mean things about the Israelites, and even about God! He said, 'Why don't you puny wimps send out a man to wrestle me, and if he pins me, you can give us all wedgies. But if I pin him, we will give all of you wedgies! I double-dog-dare you!' So David the Israelite, who was small but brave, came out and said, 'I'm not afraid to wrestle you! Even though you're twice my size, I know my God will help me to pin you!' So they wrestled, and after only a few minutes, Goliath was crying for mercy. David said, 'You are defeated!' and all the Philistines were sore afraid, because the Israelites looked eager to give them the wedgying of a lifetime. But David said, 'Stop, my brothers! We do not need to yank their underpants! Let us forgive them for their taunts and jokes, and share our candy with them.' And thus the Philistines and Israelites became best of friends."

David & Bathsheba

"And it came to pass, in the reign of Class President David, that the senior prom was at hand. David had been going steady with a particular girl for awhile, and was planning to ask her to the dance. But then he met a very pretty girl in gym class named Bathsheba. So David asked her to the prom instead. She said, 'but my boyfriend Uriah already asked me.' And David replied, 'Don't worry about Uriah, I'll take care of him. After all, I'm class president, and I am very powerful.' After Bathsheba left, David did something very mean. Since he was also the manager at the local burger joint, he changed Uriah's work schedule, and made him work the same night as the prom! Uriah was furious, but had no choice because he didn't want to be fired. So David took Bathseba to the prom, and there was nothing Uriah could do about it! The night of the prom, everything was going smoothly. Then, halfway through the dance, David's best friend, Nathaniel, came up to him and said, 'I just heard about this rich kid who stole a poor kid's bike!' So David said, 'That's terrible! He should get three month's detention!' And Nathaniel said, 'No, David! You're the real thief!'. After David stood in silence for a moment, he realized that he had been wrong. He left right away to drive to the burger joint, and told Uriah that he was relieving him, and he should go join his girlfriend Bathsheba at the prom. Then little baby Solomon was delivered out of nowhere... by a stork."

The G-Rated Bible Society would now like to make a confession: this is all we've got so far. So please respond to this post with your submissions for G-Rated Bible Stories, and we will consider them for our first edition.

Thank you, and God Bless.

We Worship You... Almighty Book

I love coining new words. Especially when they have some logical familiarity to them.

Today's new word, albeit hyphenated, is "para-biblical", and it arose from the debate between those who believe that all of God's words to us, his children, are found in the Bible, and those who believe that he still speaks specifically and personally, apart from Scripture. Granted, the typical descriptive phrase for the latter, "extra-biblical revelation", is accurate enough. But it seems to imply that God is adding things on top of the Bible that can compete with it for authority. I don't think most Christians believe in this kind of revelation.

A para-church organization is one which comes alongside the Church to complement its ministry. It often does things that the Church, for one reason or another, cannot do. However, if it is contradicting, undercutting, or competing with the Church's mission, it is not para-church; it is really more anti-church.

It is this same semantic logic that brings me to the phrase "para-biblical revelation". God does indeed share his thoughts with us, and quite often they are not verbatim quotes of ancient Scripture. But, if they are God's words, they will most certainly be para-biblical, in that they will come alongside Scripture, supporting it and fleshing it out in our lives.

Here's a good example: Suppose you're reading Jesus' commandment that "if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well." Then you feel God telling you that you should forget about the $1000 your friend cheated you out of last year, and on top of that you should offer to help him with his current money problems. Well, there's nothing in the Bible about that $1000, is there? But in this situation it would appear that the Holy Spirit is giving you a personal revelation about how specifically to apply Scripture to your life, and if you don't do it, you are guilty of sin. I also believe that para-biblical revelation can occur when you're not actually reading the Bible, and even when you may not know exactly how the Bible supports what you've heard (although it's important to find out.)

We need to get honest with ourselves and admit that the Bible cannot do everything. If anyone says that it can, just go look at their bookshelf, and see if they don't read what other people write about the Bible. Or follow them to church and see if they don't listen to a preacher's interpretations. Why would an author or preacher have anything at all valid to write or proclaim about the Bible, unless they could hear God's voice speaking para-biblical words to them? Even a Bible teacher who says that God doesn't speak to us para-biblically is not teaching authoritatively, because such a claim is not found in the biblical text.

Does that mean there is a single commentary, sermon, or lecture that we should regard as "God-breathed"? Of course not. Although other people's personal revelations can be very helpful to us, they are limited by nature.

But your own personal revelation... ah, this is where you might have to rethink what you've been taught. As important as it is to filter everything you think you hear God telling you through Scripture, how would you even know to do that?

Who convinced you that the Bible is authoritative?

Who do you pray to in order to understand it better?

Who did Jesus send to "guide you into all truth" (John 16:13)?

The answer is easy: the Holy Spirit. And this brings us to the primary danger of proclaiming the solidarity of the Bible... it supplants the Holy Spirit, and results in pure idolatry.

Many, many Christians are guilty of worshipping the Bible. And much of this is the consequence of fearing the idea of personal revelation. That is one reason why I think a term like para-biblical revelation is so imporant... it is not quite so scary to those (like myself) who have a high view of the authority of Scripture.

Because the goal, we must not forget, is God. Everything we do and say in relationship to the Bible must be done with our eyes on him, remembering that HE is the only ultimate authority, and knowing the Bible is useless if it does not lead to knowing HIM.

A few Sundays ago I led a discussion about Doctrine, and how we arrive at it. I defined Doctrine simply as our connection to God by way of his truth, and I mapped out the way I believe mature Christ-followers should come to their conclusions. Namely, that our Divine Encounters, Wise Counsel, and Prayers should submit to Scripture, which the Holy Spirit reveals to us through Personal Revelation in order to form our Doctrine. We are also influenced by the World through Culture, Observation, Experience and Logic, which we should then be careful to submit to the Holy Spirit's influence before making our doctrinal conclusions.

I have arranged these influencing factors from top to bottom in order of reliability and authority. Although this is the order I believe they should have for a mature believer, I recognize that they cannot operate in this order for a newish believer, since their skill with Scripture and Prayer have not yet developed (just like how the list on the right tends to be upside-down for children, and ideally will turn right-side-up as they grow.) But I think the following diagram should represent the goal for us as we develop in our walk with Christ, and our connection with the Holy Spirit.

HIS STORY

Note: I know most of you have heard this one before. But it's pretty brief, so I encourage you to read it through. And if you take the links you'll discover