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.

Reality Bites

Here's the scoop.

I'm too much of a post-modernist to believe that every question has, or needs, a pat answer. Or that only those with sufficient and acceptable education should have a voice. Or that the arts are nothing more than helpful illustrations in an otherwise serious book.

But I'm too much of a modernist to believe that nothing is really true, or that certainty has no place. Because what I'm about to say is something I will not let go of.

The way I see it (there I go, talking post-modernese) we each have three choices as we attempt to discern the nature of reality:

A) Reality is a shape-shifter that morphs and customizes as it travels from person to person, and from one day to the next. No one has the right to speak with any certainty about it, and by no means does anyone have the right to correct anyone else's perceptions. (This is the one and lonely dogma of post-modernism.) We each define our reality, allowing it to flow to us fresh with each new whim and situation, and we listen to the observations of others like we would read a good novel, or view an abstract painting.

B) Reality is the easiest, most comfortable solution to my particular quandaries. There is indeed a solid floor to stand on, but I know I have not found it until it truly makes me happy. Nevermind that one man's truth is another man's heresy. Nevermind that every last satisfying belief I hold dear makes someone else bristle with irritation. Apparently the universe was shaped and molded to meet my expectations, and help me to sleep soundly every night.

C) Reality is full of hard truths, and hidden truths. There is no need to despair, because hope is present and powerful. But in order to know what is real, we have to be prepared to accept some ideas that seems unfair, or unreasonable, or downright ridiculous. Truth is stranger than fiction, and often harder to swallow, and no one finds it without a substantial dose of humility.

If you know me very well, you may be tired of hearing this stuff, but as I said, I just can't let it go. If you want to accuse me of skewing the choices, go ahead. Feel free to re-write them, or tear them down entirely, in the comments.

But whether you comment or not, at the very least, THINK ABOUT IT.

I Would Have No Problems If There Were No People

Sorry if the blog posts have been a little sparse. Unfortunately, that is likely to be a trend for the time-being. My advice is to write something yourself, and then read that. ;-)

But I will share with you a few thoughts I had yesterday.

Imagine you're a photographer going out to shoot long, gorgeous vistas of the mountains. The weather is perfect, the sunlight is perfect, and you're already pumped about the finished result.

But everywhere you try to point your camera, trees get in the way. Every kind of tree imaginable seems to be looking for opportunities to ruin your sight line. You take the pictures anyway, and come home disappointed.

But when you pull up the images, you're astonished to see frame after frame of stunning photographs of trees. Every variety, all mingling harmoniously together, lapping up the sunrays. It's not even fall, but the colors are ravishing. At once you realize that you had gone out looking for one thing, but found something much better.

Those trees are the people in your life. We all set out looking for something for ourselves. We know what we want, and hell if we're not going to get it.

Ambition is fine in and of itself, but what do you do when people get in the way? If we are wise, we will see them as God's objective from the beginning, and that we should see them as the subject, not the obstacle.

May your heart (and mine) be molded to the purpose of God today.

Deuce: Leadership vs. Community

There is a post-modern tension in the church when people look at community on the one hand and leadership on the other. It's like watching people watch a tennis match. They look back and forth, and begin to be troubled by the seeming necessity to pick one and abandon the other.

Community is fluid. It is mutual submission and love. It is not controlling or power hungry. It is spontaneous and organic and beautiful.

Leadership is structured. It is wisdom and responsibility. It is not fearful or timid. It is intentional and heirarchical and beautiful.

Quite a quandary, indeed... so long as we're trying to line up organic community with hierarchical leadership onto the same plane--that of relationships.

But Community and Leadership do not belong on the same plane. Community is indeed a function of relationships. God has called us all to submit to one another in love. Husbands to wives, wives to husbands, pastors to parishioners and parishioners to pastors. They will know we are Christians by our love for one another. And this commandment of love does not shift and change with positions, promotions and power. It is an interconnected web of equality.

So what about Leadership? The fact is that leadership does not belong on the plane of Relationships, it belongs on the plane of Objectives. Tasks. Roles.

Becoming a leader should not change the nature of your relationship to others. It should change the nature of your relationship to the task at hand. Naturally, that will affect the context of your relationships to others, but not the nature of them, which is love and mutual submission.

There is no leadership position which mandates, or permits, controlling others. And there is certainly no rationale for abuse or power-mongering.

I can sense some of your misgivings, and I'll address them here:

Guidance - Since Jesus is the true shepherd, and we are his sheep, we are called to follow him alone. Paul says that no one should identify themselves as followers of this person or that person... only Christ. So be a guide to others is, once again, a responsibility to represent the guidance of Christ, and not to be controllers of others.

Discipline - Similar to guidance. When someone in a church requires discipline, the leader's responsibility is on the plane of infraction and correction. When the leader and the wayward member can come together on that plane to each exercise their own roles (the leader to administer discipline, and the member to receive it graciously) then they have behaved as equals in Christ.

Can you see how this frees us up to accept our God-given roles without becoming arrogant, or resentful, toward one another? We can rejoice in the fluidity of community and the structure of leadership without constantly being pulled back and forth.

Now the trick is... doing it.

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.

The Discovery Sessions

Within a few weeks/months The Core plans to start a small group to study and discuss what it means to follow Christ, at the most basic level. Chances are it will meet Wednesdays at the Front Porch, from 7:30 - 9:00 pm. The best title I can think of for a group like this is a "Discovery Group" since I want both newish believers and seekers to feel welcome, and be able to benefit. I'm posting here my preliminary ideas for the content of each week so I can get your thoughts about the material, and about whether the word "discovery" is kind of cheesy, or "modernistic". The reason the content consists entirely of questions is not so I can be the "answer man", but so that people can really add to their perspectives to the whole experience. Although we will accept, and even embrace, uncertainty when it seems spiritually appropriate, Biblical truth and certainty will not take a back seat.

Week 1 - What is the Bible?

It might seem a tad fundamentalist to start right off talking about the Bible, but unless we establish it as a foundation for our spiritual knowledge and dialogue, everything else we talk about will be based on mere human ideas and theories.

-Who wrote it?
-What part has God played in its authorship/compilation/translation?
-What do we mean when we say its authoritative and inspired?
-What is the role of the Old Testament in our lives? The New Testament?
-What parts of the Bible should we consider "binding"?
-How does the story of God play out from Genesis to Revelation? What does that have to do with my own story?

Week 2 - Who is God?

To embrace mystery and uncertainty right out of the gate, we will talk about the Trinity. The Trinity defies modernistic, scientific analysis, and lays a good groundwork for our discussions about God. If we could analyze him, and fully understand him, then we should worship someone else. But he has revealed enough to us for us to have a relationship with him.

-What is the Trinity?
-Did God really create the universe? How did he do it?
-How is God like people? How is he unlike people? Is God male/female/neither?
-What are the essential characteristics of God? Can he contradict himself? Can he limit himself?

Week 3 - Who is Jesus?

The entire Discovery Group series is for both believers and unbelievers. Although no one will be pressured at any point into making a personal decision, week 3 will be a prime opportunity for unbelievers to seriously consider surrendering their lives to Jesus.

-What does "Son of God" mean?
-Why is it important that Jesus was born to a virgin? Why is it important that he never sinned?
-What did Jesus do on earth? Why did he have to do it?
-What did Jesus teach? Why?
-What's with all the miracles and healings?
-Did Jesus really raise himself from the dead? Why is that so important?
-How did Jesus' culture (Israelite) play into his life and mission?
-What is Jesus doing now? What will he do in the future?
-What does Jesus expect of me? How should I respond? What is Baptism?

Week 4 - Who is the Holy Spirit?

All denominations believe in the Holy Spirit, and the vast majority agree about the essential nature of the Holy Spirit. Controversies will be lightly discussed, but not debated. For example, tongues, baptism in the Holy Spirit, and the femininity of the Holy Spirit.

-Is the Holy Spirit a "thing", or a "being"? A "he", or a "she"?
-What is the Holy Spirit's relationship to the Father and the Son?
-What role did the HS have in the Old Testament? The New Testament?
-What role does the HS have today? In my own life?
-What does the "baptism of the HS" mean? What's with the speaking in tongues, and other strange things?

Week 5 - Who am I? What is humanity?

In order to round out an understanding of the God - man dynamic, we need to understand our place in creation, fall and redemption.

-What were we created to be?
-What happened? Why is everything so terrible now?
-What is God's plan for the human race? What is salvation? What does it mean to have a relationship with God?
-How do I fit into all this? Does God have a specific plan for me, or the same for everyone?
-How do I exercise my talents and passions? What are "spiritual gifts"?
-Why can't I stop doing things I know are wrong?
-How do I deal with other people when they hurt me?
-Does Jesus promise to "fix" my life?

Week 6 - What is the Church?

Week 6 will emphasize the universality of the Church--that all who believe, and are covered by the blood of Christ, are brothers and sisters in him, and thus, members of the same Church. The local church will be introduced as a practical manifestation of the global Church. Unity will be emphasized (through love, not compromise) and divisiveness will be condemned.

-What does the word "church" mean? What does "Body of Christ" mean?
-Was it really God's idea?
-What is the "true" Church? Why all the denominations and divisions?
-What are the main purposes of the Church?
-What is the leadership supposed to look like?
-What are we supposed to do when we get together? What is Communion?
-What is my obligation to the Body?

Week 7 - How should we relate to the World?

A new believer often needs a period to separate from the worldly culture around him or her. But there comes a time when re-entry is essential. And understanding of the nature of this relationship is vital to make sure a believer becomes an influencer to the world, and not a spiritual victim of it.

-What are the Two Greatest Commandments?
-How do we go about loving our neighbors as ourselves?
-What is the Great Commission? Am I supposed to be a missionary?
-How do we go about making disciples?
-How do I spread Jesus' message without being a bigot/jerk/nuisance/failure?
-How much of the world's culture should I reject? How much can I integrate into my faith?
-What can I do about social injustice and suffering in the world?

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.

Evangelism's Code of Conduct

On Thursday, the Chicago Tribune featured an article about the World Council of Churches and the Vatican teaming up to establish a code of conduct for Evangelism.

Now I can't say that when the WCC and the Vatican link arms, that I'm necessarily gonna be right there with them. And it could be that the code they eventually establish (if they can agree at all) would be rubbish. But I have to applaud them at least for making this effort. I believe it's a worthy one.

It makes me want to write my own code of conduct... like a gentleman's agreement. Not enforcible, but public enough so that can even non-Christians can hold us accountable to it.

Although I think my motive for doing so would be different from the Vatican/WCC initiative. They seem mostly concerned about governments on the brink of passing anti-evangelism legislation. It is thought that an established code of conduct might persuade them that evangelism is not dangerous, and should not be banned. They may be right, or it may be that these goverments are not so much worried about evangelism being pushy or annoying... they're worried about it being effective. Then the only way to appease them would be to prove that the WCC and the Vatican only intend to engage in ineffective evangelism. I could see it, actually.

Maybe the reason that I don't have this motive is that the U.S. is not on the brink of such legislation. Some people would argue with me, and it may very well be the case in 10 or 20 years, but not just yet. So my motive is more about helping the community to understand that we are also displeased with the nature of much of the evangelism that goes on, and we are committed to curbing it, even as we strive to obey the command to spread the Gospel.

So I'm going to jot down some preliminary, off-the-top-of-my-head ideas for an Evangelistic Code of Conduct. Here goes...

DON'T...

1. interrupt people's lives purely for the sake of evangelism.
2. hand anyone a tract until you know they're interested in reading it (and maybe not even then.)
   
3. use tracts that look like money (ever!)
4. wear a sandwich board or hold a sign or use a bullhorn (or shout as if you wished you had one.)
5. use scripture with people who clearly don't care about it.
   
6. wear a big, fake smile and slap people on the back and say "awesome" all the time.
7. argue (ever!)
8. force people to hear your message in order receive something else that they want.
9. lose interest in a person once they've said they're not interested in the gospel
10. separate your "real life" from your "ministry life."

DO...

1. listen carefully and respectfully
2. be yourself, and talk like you talk.
3. be willing to admit that you don't know.
4. be willing to admit that Christianity is not easy.
5. apologize for the times that you, or Christians in general, have failed to exhibit the love of Christ.
6. meet people's needs with no strings attached.
7. invite people into your life.
8. consider living among the people you're ministering to (or minister to the people you're living among.)
   
9. pray earnestly for unbelievers, and for your ability to be Christ to them.
10. enjoy people's company, plain and simple.
    

OK... I know I'm missing a lot, so you'll have to add a comment to help me out. Go ahead... click that little "add a comment" link... I know you can do it.

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?

Let Jesus be Jesus to you

I was reading Scot McKnight's blog, Jesus Creed, and I think he said something really beautiful for those who spend a lot of time in ministry. I'm going to put it in my own words.

Those of us in the ministry tend to always think of ourselves as having a responsibility to be Jesus to others. And really, that's true.

But don't forget to take time to let Jesus be Jesus to you. Or even to let others be Jesus to you.

Next time you're reading a story of Jesus' healing or teaching or compassion, instead of identifying with Jesus, identify with those receiving his ministry. Instead of being the healer, be the healed. Instead of being the redeemer, be the redeemed.

Mark Driscoll, founding pastor of Mars Hill Church, has also taken it upon himself to stem the tide of burnt-out ministers. It's worth a look.

Freedom Isn't Free...dom?

I can't believe I'm actually going to write a post complaining about the ultra-obnoxious 1990s WWJD hysteria.

But I ran across a published statement by a minister recently that brought it up again in my throat like so much, well... you know. The assertion went like this: "The freedom you enjoy is encased in the Person of Jesus. Whatever He would do in a situation, is what you have the freedom to do. Yes, He associated with sinners, but did not become like them."

That second sentence helps us to understand his main point, which is that we have to be careful with the whole freedom shtick, because people might run off and do whatever they want. True... Jesus did not sin like the sinners. But that does not mean he didn't join them in their non-sinful activities, right?

I think all this brings up a very interesting hypothetical scenario. What if Jesus really were "in my shoes?" (The "in my shoes" part is important, because that is part of the original question in Charles Sheldon's classic book "In His Steps". But I guess WWJDIMS? is not as catchy.) What if Jesus were writing The Core Blog, or pastoring The Core, or married to my wife, or working at the Bellwether instead of me? Let's call him Jesus of Bartlesville (my childhood hometown.)

If this were the case, that means Jesus grew up in a normalish midwestern Christian family, cares more about creative and intellectual pursuits more than athletic or business pursuits, enjoys analyzing things to death, and chews his nails... sometimes. Naturally, he would do things differently if he were Jesus of Bartlesville, than he actually did as Jesus of Nazareth.

But how different? Would he still become a carpenter? Probably not... because my dad is not a carpenter (at least not a serious one.) Would he still speak Aramaic? Doubtful. Would he still walk everywhere he went? Possibly. Would he still have long hair, a thick beard, and wear a blue sash over a white tunic? Um... moving on.

But that's not even the most interesting part of the scenario. Not only do I have no way to know what Jesus would do in my shoes, I don't know how many different things he might do. Of course each human being can only respond one way to each situation he or she encounters. We don't get "do-overs" or alternate universes to play out every option.

So Jesus of Nazareth handled each situation in exactly one way. But how many ways could he have handled them that might have still been consistent with his character and purpose? Might he just as easily have said to the Gentile woman asking for healing, "I know you are a Gentile, but I sense that you have faith, so be healed!" instead of the bit about giving the children's bread to the dogs?

My point is... the one-dimensional perspective of freedom stated at the outset is very constricting. In essence, it is not freedom at all. Back when the Ford Model-T was the thing, people used to say, "You can get it in any color you want... as long as you want black." This is the concept of "freedom" held by millions of Christians, and I believe it has caused them a great deal of anguish as they struggle to figure out the precise will of God. I write in depth about this in my post "OK God, this is the part where you tell me what I'm supposed to do".

The fact is, we can't assume that God has only one right answer for every problem (just some problems.) Furthermore, we don't know what Jesus would do in our shoes. If it helps you to think about Jesus as you go about your life, that's great... I think that would be good for all of us. But perhaps we should replace WWJD with two much wiser questions:

1) WDJD: What did Jesus do? - If we're going to live Christ-centered lives, we have to pay attention to what he did do... and what is doing in the present, and will do in the future.

2) WITHSTMTD: What is the Holy Spirit telling me to do? - This takes two forms: understanding God's requirements of all people as stated in his Word, and maintaining an intimate relationship with him, so that you can hear his voice clearly, IMHO.

I guess I've made my point... while drinking a lot of water... better visit the WC.

BFN
TTYL
ROFLMAO
OK

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.

"OK God, this is the part where you tell me what you want me to do."

I was raised in a denomination that took the “will of God” very seriously. Not only that, it was an allusive, mystical thing that could only be tapped by a certain amount of faith, prayer and spiritual-mindedness.

The result was a throng of earnest but frustrated Christians who would sell their firstborn for a real assurance of God’s direction for their lives (which, to their dismay, would undoubtedly include the admonition, “Don’t sell your firstborn.”)

Things could have been different. If he wanted to, God could certainly decide to micro-manage our lives, separating the spiritual men from the spiritual boys by calling out each step in a voice only the truly spiritual could hear. Imagine an army taking orders by radio, at an extremely precise frequency that takes a great deal of practice and effort to find.

I know many people who suffer under this misconception, always wondering why God doesn’t just speak up already, and tell them what school to attend, what job to accept, what person to marry, what house to buy. God’s silence is understood not as silence on the part of the speaker, but deafness on the part of the hearer, and an intense guilt is incurred for one’s failure to “tune in.”

Granted, I believe that, in many cases, God actually does have a school picked out for someone… or a job, or a wife, or a house. But there is really only one thing that he specifically wants for every person: to become more like his Son, Jesus.

So let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that we all manage to drop our little petitions, and focus our hearts on being conformed to Christ. It would not take too long for us to notice ourselves becoming more wise, more joyful, more satisfied, more selfless, and (most importantly,) more interested in bringing glory to the Father.

Isn’t it inevitable that a person like this is going to make much godlier decisions about his or her life? So if you want to know the will of God for your life, and you are actually interested in that step-by-step stuff, I’ll give you my take:

1) Do what I just talked about. Check your heart, and make sure you’re really committed to following through on all the stuff God has already told you to do, like praying, giving, reading the Word, denying yourself, loving your neighbor, etc, etc. God may have said something very specific in the past that you weren’t interested in, such as “I want you to get rid of your TV.” Have you done it yet? If not, God is unlikely to trust you with greater responsibilities.

2) Even though, by this point, your heart is in the right place to begin understanding God’s will, you still need to ask him the specific questions that are on your heart. As I said, it’s possible that God really does have a particular house for you to buy, so you’ll want to give him an opportunity to express that to you. Just take some time to clear your heart of selfish biases as much as possible, and listen. Do not consider yourself to be done with Step 2 until you are certain that you’ve really listened to God with an open mind and an open heart, and you were ready to accept anything he had to say.

3) If you are certain in your heart that God has told you to do something, do it. If not, then gather all the facts, surround yourself with wise and godly counsel, and keep praying that God will be with you. Then make up your mind. Oftentimes God is ready to bless any decision we make, when we proceed with a selfless and godly attitude.

4) Now it’s time to re-think your pre-conceived notions of success. If you pick a school, then can’t afford it and have to leave after a year or two, does that mean that God disapproved of your choice? If you marry a man, and he cheats on you, does that mean you missed God’s will? What about if you start a church and it fails (a little too close to home for me…)?

If we have begun the process by conforming ourselves to the character of Christ, we should also see a change in how we evaluate the effectiveness of our lives. There are many examples in the Bible of people who failed in the eyes of the world, but succeeded wildly in the eyes of God, so we should always be asking him to show us how he is using us within our particular circumstances. Otherwise we are bound to measure ourselves solely by the world’s standards.

In the end, if God is the only one we really want to please, it will be impossible to fail.

3 Promises

It is a comfortable and happy religion to get a little book of God's promises and read them all the time. There's usually several hundred, and apparently we are supposed to "claim" them for ourselves.

God makes many, many promises in the Bible. But the fact that is disappointing for many people is that almost all of those promises were made to other people. To claim those promises for ourselves is a type of spiritual theft.

When it is all boiled down, God has really made only three promises to those of us who surrender our lives to Him:

1) I will be with you.

2) I will fulfill My perfect plan for your life, which includes being conformed to the likeness of My Son.

3) I will not hold your sin against you, so that when you die, you will live with Me forever.

Is that enough for you?