Sermon Video: We preach Christ crucified - 1 Corinthians 1:21-25

The field of Christian apologetics is concerned with spreading the Gospel message and defending the faith from critique and attack.  This is an important field, oft used by God, but as Paul makes clear in 1 Corinthians, it operates under an important caveat: We preach Christ crucified.  The message of the Gospel was offensive to some and difficult to accept for others in the 1st Century, and it remains offensive and difficult for the Lost to accept today as well.  Paul was willing to try different approaches to his preaching in order to make it possible for the audience to hear the message, but he was completely unwilling to adjust the message to fit the audience.  Why?  Because "Christ crucified" is the wisdom and power of God.  Should anyone attempt to change the message to make it more palatable, they will only exchange the power of the Gospel for popularity, a poor choice indeed.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Stepping into history: A conversation with Jo Beach

Jo holding newborn Clara in May of 2015

I had the privilege yesterday of visiting with a member of my church, something I do as often as I can for those who have difficulty in getting to church.  I went to the home of Jo Beach, who is in her 98th year and has been a member at First Baptist for over 80 years.  In our conversation, Jo talked about the past quite a bit, which is always fascinating to me as a lover of history.  Three things in particular stood out from that conversation: (1) That Jo's grandfather was a POW at the notorious Andersonville, Georgia prison in the Civil War.  Jo's grandfather never got over the horrors that he witnessed there, and was unable to work the rest of his life.  My grandfather was in the merchant marines in WWII which was 75 years ago, what an incredible step back into history that Jo's grandfather was a Civil War veteran, that war having ended 151 years ago. (2) Jo herself was born 16 days after Armistice Day, the end of WWI on 11/11/1918.  Her father was not yet conscripted, but would have soon joined the army to be shipped over to Europe, but the war ended. (3)  Jo was born near Cook Forest and her father worked at one of the lumber mills there.  The lumber mill only paid its employees with script redeemable at the company store.  One day, Jo's mother went to the store and demanded a portion of her husband's earnings in cash, to which the company employee replied, "What do you want cash for?"  Jo's mom made her husband quit his job, presumably after an interesting conversation, and the family moved before Jo started school here to Franklin where several of their extended family members already lived.

The next time you have a chance to talk to somebody who was born sixty years or more before you, take it, you won't regret the chance to get a glimpse at the window into the past that they can provide.

Sermon Video: The Foolishness of the Cross - 1 Corinthians 1:18-20

The Message of the Cross, that is the Gospel message about the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, has always been foolishness to those who don't believe it.  In the first century, it was the shame of dying upon a cross that Paul had to overcome, and while that connotation has been replaced by the much more positive symbolism of the cross following the triumph of Christianity within the Roman Empire, the message itself still remains hard to accept.  Why is that?  It isn't the message, per se, but what the message requires of us.  To accept the Gospel, we must first admit our own failure and allow God to save us from our sins.  The problem with this step is of course human pride.  It is an act of humility and submission to bow before Jesus Christ, and plenty of the Lost are unwilling to countenance that step.
The difficulty of the Gospel message raises an important question about the relationship between faith and reason.  Do we arrive at faith through reason or do we abandon reason in order to have faith?  While there have been famous Christian philosophers who embrace their God given reasoning ability in service to their faith, there have also been Christian theologians who reject the use of philosophy in connection with theology.  In modern American Christianity, those rejecting the role of reason in faith evidence an anti-intellectualism that in particular tends to despise science.  It is not, however, all wisdom that God thwarts, only that of the world that in opposition to God, his people ought to be using their God given reason to serve his kingdom.  It is true that we do not arrive at faith by reason alone, nor is it true that faith ought to be devoid of reason, when we understand our faith properly it has reason as a partner.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Temptation to be a Culture Warrior as a Pastor, and why I'm not interested.

I've been a pastor for ten years, five at my first church in Palo, MI and five here at Franklin, PA.  During that time I've received many expressions of thanks and many heart-felt signs of appreciation for things that I've done in my capacity as a pastor such as funerals, hospital visitations, my class on the history of the Bible, and various sermons.  These are the kinds of things that keep a pastor going when his desk is covered in post-it notes, like mine usually is, of things to do.  This job is a calling, and the person who first said that you shouldn't be doing it if you can envision yourself doing anything else, was right.  It is uniquely demanding in many ways, but also uniquely rewarding.  I can't see myself doing anything else, and the only task that compares is one that I do as part of this profession anyway: teaching.

A couple weeks ago here in Franklin a controversy started brewing.  An anonymous letter writer threatened to sue the city of Franklin if the nativity scene that had long been placed in the downtown park's bandstand wasn't removed.  I was asked by the religion reporter of our excellent local paper if I would comment on the impending decision by the city council as to whether they would acquise to the threat of a lawsuit and remove the nativity, leave it as is and risk the cost of a lawsuit, or seek some sort of compromise.

Those of you who have followed this blog for some time, and/or know me in person, know that I've chosen to avoid politics in my public life.  I don't talk about politicians, elections, or the latest culture war issue raging on Facebook.  It is a choice I've made for reasons that I believe are extremely compelling.  They include: (1) That ministering to the Gospel is far more important than whatever political decision is currently being made, (2) that the marriage between the Church and politics has always been a one-sided affair that tarnishes the Church's reputation, and (3) that the last thing I want to happen is for somebody to avoid coming to my church to hear the Gospel, or choosing to leave it, because of a position that I might take on a political issue.  During the 2016 presidential election in the U.S. my patience was sorely tested, there were a great many things crying out for comment, but I refrained.

There are exceptions to this self-imposed rule, when the issue being discussed is primarily one of morality and not politics, and when the issue is of local concern.  My comments about the nativity fit that restriction.  I spoke to the reporter about why I'm troubled by the threat of a lawsuit being a reason to make a decision, whether it is a church, school, local government, or business that is being bullied by the threat.  I also spoke about how this was the type of issue that could easily have been dealt with locally by a compromise that works for all concerned rather than bringing outside organizations into it, thus making any equitable conclusion more difficult.  Those were carefully considered comments, and pretty much the limit of what I was willing to say about this topic.

Long story short, the city council voted unanimously to compromise by placing some secular items in the bandstand along with the nativity and thus hopefully negating the threat of the lawsuit without removing the nativity.  The crowd that had gathered at the council meeting cheered this outcome when the vote was taken.

What has happened since the article quoting me appeared in the paper is another reason why I remain committed to NOT being a culture warrior as a pastor: I've been congratulated, a lot.  I've received phone calls, personal remarks, even an old fashioned letter in the mail, cheering on my stand on this issue.  Are these appreciated and appropriate?  Sure, but they illustrate a very solid fourth reason why I should avoid politics and make only very rare exceptions to my own rule.  A pastor could easily grow to love the adulation and let it influence how he does his job.  It feels good to have so many people express confidence in you and say they're proud of you, it really does.  The never ending culture wars in America are a ready-made source of cheers for any pastor who wants to be their champion.  But that's not why I was called to be a pastor by God, and that's not the mission I'm responsible for.  If all I wanted was the cheers of men, I could easily have it by shouting about the latest battle in the culture wars, but Jesus warned us of this temptation, "when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men.  I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full." (Matthew 6:5)

I don't need to tempt myself by doing things that will allow me to be "seen by men", I don't need to find out if my pride can be kept under control, if my preaching can be kept focused on what the Word of God is saying, not what I think people want it to say.  These are temptations that have ruined the ministry and reputation of far too many pastors.  If you want to be a culture warrior, that's your business, I've already got a job, and my boss' kingdom has higher priorities. 

Sermon Video: The Sorrow of Divisions within the Church - 1 Corinthians 1:10-17

The first issue dealt with by Paul in his letter to the church at Corinth after his introduction is unity.  Paul had received a report that the church was divided, with various members claiming to follow different leaders, including Paul himself, instead of being united under the authority and Lordship of Jesus Christ.  To Paul this was an intolerable situation, one that prompted him to ask the rhetorical question, "Was Paul crucified for you?"
Division within the Church is nothing new, local churches can be divided over all manner of issues, from finances to leadership, not to mention theology, and we know full well that the global Church is hopelessly divided into a multitude of parts.  If we cannot rectify this situation, and that seems clear, Christ himself is likely the only one who will be able to unravel the know we've created, what then do we do in response?  The reality is that the Church is divided, how do we leave honoring Jesus' call for unity in a divided Church?
Every Christian who is a true disciple of Jesus Christ, that is any person who has been washed by the blood of the Lamb by the grace of God and through faith, and who has thus been regenerated by the Holy Spirit, must belong to the Church of Jesus Christ, there is no other church but His Church.  It doesn't matter how we divide things here upon earth, there is only one Church.  Therefore, we must work with, not against, anyone who is a disciple of Jesus Christ, and likewise with any church that proclaims the Gospel of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus.
If we are united on the foundational things, nothing that separates us on the peripheral things can divide us, likewise if we are divided upon the foundational things, nothing that we have in common on the peripheral things can unite us.  Christ is the foundational issue, we have one and only one Lord, one faith, one baptism.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Paul Gives Thanks - 1 Corinthians 1:1-9

Following his regular greeting to start a letter, the apostle Paul writes of his thankfulness to God for the success of the Gospel at Corinth.  Corinth was a city steeped in iniquity, in particular sins of lust associated with its reputed 1,000 prostitutes at the temple to Aphrodite.  Paul, in contrast, brought a message of grace and peace to Corinth, preaching the reconciliation with a holy God.  It was an amazing act of mercy from God, one that Paul himself remembered from his own conversion, that Paul was able to found a church in Corinth.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Creator among Creation: Immanuel

Each year we celebrate Christmas in commemoration of the arrival of the promised Messiah at the village of Bethlehem in Judea.  Few things are commemorated even 100 years after they occur, as the generations that lived through them fade away, so does the living memory and thus the poignancy of memory.  "Remember the Maine" once evoked anger among Americans, much the same way that "Remember the Alamo" reverberated with a previous generation, and "Remember Pearl Harbor" would with a later generation.  Yet these now are a part of history to us, much the same way that "Remember 9/11" will be 100 years from now.  History moves on, the victories and defeats of the past, the joys and fears, don't linger much beyond those who lived through them.

The arrival of the Messiah is different.  It was not simply an event for the 1st Century, nor was it simply an event for the Jewish people.  It was an event for all of humanity, and for all of time.  How could it be?  How could the birth of a child, one among billions that have ever been born, be so noteworthy as to be relevant to us today two thousand years later?

Simply put, the child was not just a child.  He was indeed a human child, but he was also far more.  The term in Hebrew is transliterated into English as Immanuel.  As Hebrew names typically do, the name has a meaning: "God with us".  God had been "with" the descendants of Abraham for over two thousand years, had given them the Law, had sent angels and prophets to them to show them the way, and had even appeared in fire and cloud in the days of Moses.  How much more "with" his people could he get?  It turns out, a lot more.  The arrival of the Messiah was far more than that of just another prophet, more even than an angel who had stood in the presence of Almighty God.  The child of Bethlehem was the Son of Man, but he was also the Son of God.  The very essence of God, God himself, in the flesh, here on Earth.  

History was never the same after that day, a day that separated everything that came before from everything that was to follow.  God With Us.  A change worth celebrating, year after year, down through the ages.

Sermon Video: Hezekiah's Revival, Part 4 (of 4) - 2 Chronicles 32

The final chapter in the Chronicles' recounting of the reign of Hezekiah takes place after the reform and revival movement he helped bring about has finished its work.  The timing suggests two conclusions: #1 God thwarted the evil purposes of Sennacherib until his people had finished their repentance and had renewed their relationship with him.  #2 Doing the right thing didn't make Hezekiah and the people immune to tribulation, instead, it enabled them to stand firm when tribulation came (In keeping with the lesson of Job).
How did Hezekiah and the people respond to this challenge to the very existence of their nation?  They first took all the preparations that were in their power to accomplish, then they declared their trust that God would do what only God can do, and lastly when Sennacherib mocked the power of God, they responded with prayer to the Almighty.
How did God respond?  He delivered his people, in fulfillment of his Word and by way of demonstrating his love and compassion for them.  In the end, Hezekiah and the people of Judah persevered, maintaining their allegiance to God in a time of peril.  Overall, Hezekiah demonstrates what can be accomplished by a devout person of God through hard work, prayer, and faith.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sin remains sin, no matter what humanity thinks about it.

Pride is sin.
Greed is sin.
The love of money is sin.
Lust is sin.
Adultery is sin.
Vindictiveness is sin.
Cruelty is sin.
Bearing false witness is sin.

If this partial list bothers you, take it up with God, he's the one that created it, my job is to simply remind people that these things are not up for debate, nor can they be changed by any act of man.  God has ordained what is right, and what is wrong, based upon his own holiness.  Our willingness to accept this standard, and change our behavior accordingly (by the power of the Holy Spirit) is a necessary beginning of discipleship.

Anyone who continues in sin is not born of God (see 1 John 3:6), anyone who does not produce evidence of the fruit of the Spirit is not a child of God (see Galatians 5:16-26).  This is not negotiable, if anyone connected with a church told you otherwise, they'll have to answer to God for that one day.  Our culture regularly glorifies the sins listed at the beginning of this post; God condemns them.  You choose.

Sermon Video: Hezekiah's Revival, Part 3 (of 4) - 2 Chronicles 31

After having accomplished the emotional high of repairing and reopening the Temple followed by a celebration of the Passover that was better attended and more joyous than any held for centuries, Hezekiah next proceeds to follow up that high point with various administrative reforms.  There isn't anything exciting or glamorous about organization and efficiency, but in order for the people of Judah to worship the LORD effectively, long-term, these reforms were absolutely necessary.  Passover gets everybody's attention, but it is the day to day devotion to the LORD the rest of the year that develops character, and for that, reformation of the priesthood (and their support system) was needed.
The same holds true for the Church.  Large rallies, concerts, and revival meetings may be what gets noticed, and they have their place and purpose, but without week to week devotion to God, the people of God will not make progress in their discipleship.  The Church also needs capable hands running its administrative functions, making the most of the resources given to it by the people, and preventing waste or fraud.  These may be unnoticed tasks with little chance for glory, but they are vital to the continued ability of God's people to do effective ministry in the world.
We all enjoy going to Church on Christmas Eve and Easter, the two services that require the largest amount of preparation and always have the largest turnout of the year, but we cannot allow ourselves to be a people who connect with God only a few times per year, we need to be devoted to God, all year round, from our highs to our lows, from the exciting to the mundane.  If we cannot sustain a high level of commitment to God, how can we expect God to do anything wondrous among us?

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The testing of character: a chance for growth

While preparing my message this week on Hezekiah from 2 Chronicles 32, I came across this thought by 19th Century Methodist theologian Adam Clarke which is insightful enough for me to type it out here...

"Thus God speaks after the manner of men: he either brings, or permits them to be brought, into such circumstances as shall cause them to show their prevailing propensities; and then warns them against the evils to which they are inclined, after having shown them that they are capable of these evils.  To know ourselves, and our own character, is of the utmost importance to our religious growth and perfection.  He who does not know where his weakness lies, is not likely to know where his strength lies.  Many, by not being fully acquainted with their own character, have been unwatchful and unguarded, and so become an easy prey to their enemies.  Know thyself is a lesson which no man can learn but from the Spirit of God."

On this election day, consider this: What has this tumultuous political season revealed about your character, your strengths and weaknesses?  Do not miss an opportunity to grow in discipleship.

Sermon Video: Hezekiah's Revival, Part 2 (of 4) - 2 Chronicles 30

Having cleaned and re-dedicated the temple, and reconsecrated the priests and Levites, Hezekiah and the leadership of the people of Judah next turn to reinstituting the Passover feast.  Along the way, they face a variety of potential set-backs, each of which could have derailed the opportunity to bring the people of God together in order to praise God, but each of which were dealt with by compromise.  Hezekiah chooses to pursue the spirit of the Law, not the letter, making exceptions to the rules in order to bring about a truly national revival of repentance.  When the people show that they have a willing heart, Hezekiah doesn't let their past violations of the Law keep them from returning to the worship of the LORD.  It is for us an important reminder that the heart is more important than the outward appearance, and also that the people of God ought to be willing to stretch themselves in order to welcome lost sinners when they turn to God in repentance.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Hezekiah's Revival, Part 1 (of 4) - 2 Chronicles 29

When Hezekiah became king of Judah, he inherited a kingdom in grave crisis.  His father Ahaz had suffered multiple military defeats and left Hezekiah with enemies on all sides, including the aggressive Assyrian Empire to the north which had recently destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel.  How was Hezekiah to respond, where should he even begin?  Hezekiah chose, in the first month of his reign, to focus his energies and attention upon the temple of the LORD in Jerusalem.  Enemies without were not his first concern, for Hezekiah knew that the spiritual corruption and root within Judah would surely destroy his kingdom by bringing down upon them the wrath of God's justice.
With the temple defiled and in disrepair, Hezekiah brought together the priests and Levites, putting them to work on the task of getting the temple ready once more for worship of the LORD.  16 days later, the temple was ready.  The very next day, Hezekiah brought with him the leaders of Jerusalem for a ceremony of re-dedication that contained a significant focus: atonement.  Until the sins of the nation had been atoned for, the wrath of God still hung over the kingdom, Hezekiah knew how serious this situation was, he not only fulfilled what the Law of Moses required to atone for sin, but went beyond it as well.  The resulting ceremony not only featured sacrifices for sin, but vocal and instrumental worship as well, followed by an opportunity for the people to demonstrate their thankfullness to God.
Hezekiah knew his nation desperately needed revival, he began in the only place that will work, with repentance and re-dedication to the worship of the LORD.  If we, as a Church, or as a nation, truly desire revival in our day, we will heed Hezekiah's example and begin with purifying our own hearts and committing ourselves to truly being disciples of Jesus Christ.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

A lesson learned from the victories and defeats of running

I'm sure I lost some potential readers already when they saw the title and realized this is about running, perhaps I gained a few to even them out who wouldn't have read this otherwise.  For those who don't know me personally, I was a competitive runner in high school, making it to the state finals my senior year with a best time of 16:54 (5k), and a somewhat competitive runner in college at Cornerstone University, where I was never quit able to make my goal of 28:30 (8k) in order to be an Academic All-American.  Having worn my knees down to a nub, running became an occasional thing for me after college until we moved here to Franklin, PA.  For fifteen years after college I had played basketball each week with the same group of guys, my primary exercise during that period.  When we moved here, I looked for a competitive and enjoyable basketball game to join, to no avail.  So I took up bike riding, knowing that it would be easier on my knees and knowing that we have excellent trails here along the river.  Unfortunately, my back was not a fan of this plan, it made a hard workout on a bike enough of a pain that it was no longer enjoyable.  Which brought back running.  About four years ago I received custom orthodics (would have saved me a ton of pain in HS and college) which alleviated much of my knee pain which I had for years endured as "normal".  Why not take up serious running again?
That first year I lost 20 pounds, almost down to my old college weight, the goal I'm inching closer to.  I also ran in the Applefest 5k, proving to myself that my old sub-20 times were going to be well out of reach without some serious hard work.  The second year of running saw my 5k time fall to 20:11, good enough for 1st place in my age division, which was (gulp) now 40-45.  I also tried something I had never attempted before, a 50k (that's 31 miles).  And not just any 50k, the OC100 held at Oil Creek State Park along the Gerrard Hiking Trail.  This "trail" is a rock and root strewn obstacle course with about a dozen significant hills along its huge loop amount to many, many feet of elevation gain during the race.  I had trained for the race, to an extent, and went out at a blistering 9:30 pace for the first 12 miles, good enough for 9th at that point (remember the hills, road race comparison times are not valid here).  And then the dehydration hit me, hard, I finished the race barely able to walk at 6 hours, 40 minutes, a brutally slow pace to finish the race, with about two dozen people passing me.  It was frustrating, a hard lesson learned about hydration.
Which brings me to the lesson I learned these past couple of weeks.  Beginning this past January I decided to run more than ever before, using my new Garmin watch to gauge my progress.  I ran while the snow was still on the ground, excited about trying the 50k again this year.  And then I didn't get in.  The available spots fill up very rapidly, dozens of people missing out on a spot.  So I decided to try to find my speed again and focus on my 5k goal this year.  I trained harder, and more consistently than even in my college days, confident that my sub 20 goal would be easily reached.  June brought a calf injury, slowing my progress.
When the Applefest 5k rolled around I had a plan, at the turn (1/2 point) I was at 10:05, only five seconds off my pace, well within striking distance.  But it didn't happen, my legs just didn't have more speed in them that day; I finished 2nd in my age group this time, a disappointing 21:07; slower, than last year, despite at least three times as much training and hard work.  I tried again at another race this the next weekend, only to turn in a 21:11.  It was frustrating to say the least.
I had set a goal, one that felt realistic, worked extremely diligently toward it, only to come up short.
What then is the lesson?  It could easily be that a 41 year old is not as fast as he was when he was 18, but we all new that already.  What I learned from running came during two of my training runs out at Oil Creek on those rugged trails.  I had missed out on the 50k this year, a real bummer, but still ran out there some because of the beauty of running through those rugged wooded hills.
The course I was running is an out and back from the bottom of the hill (a serious hill) at Petroleum Center to the campsite at Cow Run and back.  My previous best on that course, last year, had been about 1:39.  Last month I decided to see how fast I could do it, and went much harder than before, finishing at 1:29:40 (an 8:54 pace).  I was certainly happy with this significant improvement, but following my dual disappointments at the 5k distance, I gave it another shot two days ago, this time 1:26:03 (and 8:24 pace).  It was an amazing feeling, watching my old personal record fall by 10 minutes, and then taking another nearly 4 minutes off of that.  Next year, maybe I'll be able to get it down to 1:20.
What did I learn, something akin to that quote about the best laid plans of mice and men.  I wanted to prove to myself that I could be "fast" again, at least for 40+, no such luck.  But that didn't mean I couldn't achieve a goal, I just needed to search for another one, one without the crowds or awards of an official 5k, just me, the woods, and my Garmin.  Don't give up, even if your goal remains inches out of your reach; search for another.  Find something else you can achieve, keep trying.  God has given me some ability as a runner, I intend to continue to find ways to put it to productive use.

Sermon Video: The disastrous reign of Ahaz - 2 Chronicles 28

It takes a lot of incompetence or wickedness to be considered among the worst leaders in a nation's history.  History is full of candidates for the title of "worst leader ever", sadly there have been many vying for it.  The history of Israel is no different, both the combined kingdom and the split kingdoms of Israel and Judah had leaders who were disasters for their people.  Among this litany of woe is Ahaz in Judah, a king who only reigned for 16 years, but who nearly destroyed the kingdom even so.  Ahaz's father Jotham had been a great king, even if he is little known to us, serving the LORD faithfully his whole life.  Ahaz was the complete opposite of his father, he not only became an apostate himself, walking away from the LORD, but did seemingly everything in his power to lead the entire nation away from the worship of the LORD, going so far as to remove the sacrificial impliments from the temple and shut its doors.
In addition to his violations of the first and second commandment through apostasy and idolatry, Ahaz also practiced an abomination in his worship of the Canaanite god Molech: human sacrifice.  In this case it was even worse than what you're thinking, for the sacrifice was that of Ahaz's own infant son.  The moral bankruptcy of Ahaz and the people of Judah who followed after him, brought the wrath of God down upon them, leading to multiple losses in battle that severely crippled the standing of the nation.  Ahaz, however, did not repent, he only kept digging deeper, piling sin upon sin.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The "lesser of two evils", an anti-Biblical viewpoint

Much has been said of late about the desire to choose between the "lesser of two evils".  These two choices being discussed by many self-declared Christians are both acknowledged to be "evil" to one degree or another.  Which raises the question: Is it Biblical to choose between the lesser of two evils?  Why do I ask if it is Biblical?  Because this is the only standard by which we, as Christians, have been commanded to order our worldview.  Thus if something is anti-Biblical, it is by necessity anti-Christian.  A person may disagree with an assessment that both choices that are being considered are indeed "evil", but once that assessment has been made without self-interested excuses in the way, it is incumbent upon the Christian to refuse to choose either.  The lesser of two evils is still evil.  Nowhere in the Scriptures are we commanded, encouraged, or even permitted to choose evil.  God's Word to us is rather this, "Be holy, for I am holy."
The philosophy behind the "lesser of two evils" mentality is Pragmatism, otherwise known as Utilitarianism.  While this may be an exceedingly popular way of governing in the world today and throughout human history, the common usage of pragmatism in moral decision making in no way makes it Christian.
Let me offer some examples from recent American history, beginning with WWII, to illustrate decisions that were made with a "lesser of two evils" viewpoint.  Again, a person may disagree with one of these examples, thinking that in these difficult situations that it can be excused and not called an "evil", but the consequences of these actions weigh against that conclusion. (1) The appeasement of Hitler prior to WWII, putting off the confrontation until Germany was far stronger and making the Holocaust a possibility. (2) The alliance with Soviet Russia, and evil regime if ever there was one, during WWII, which led to 70 years of Communist domination of Eastern Europe. (3) The fire bombing of German and Japanese cities during WWII, which caused hundreds of thousands of non-combatant deaths and failed to shorten the war at great cost in material and lives on the Allied side. (4) The use of the atomic bomb on two cities to end WWII. (5) The failure to prosecute fully Nazi war crimes because those same Nazis were useful for the West in the Cold War. (6) Alliances made with brutal dictators all over Africa, Latin America, and Asia during the Cold War because they were anti-communist.  (7) Support of the Shah of Iran, leading to the revolution which set the groundwork for the anit-Western obsession of Islamic fundamentalism and the terrorism plaguing the world today. (8) Involvement in Vietnam to stop the "domino effect" of communist expansion. (9) Leaving Saddam Hussein in power in 1991, and then coming back twenty years later to remove him. (10) The U.S. government allowing and/or encouraging torture following 9/11.
The list could be longer, I could keep listing pragmatic decisions by world leaders throughout history, many of which led to more evil, not less.  These leaders may have thought that they had no choice, or that the choices before them were only evil, but such thinking will not stand up before a holy and just God's scrutiny.
For Christians, it is tempting to excuse immoral behavior by saying that the only choices available are bad ones, therefore we must choose one of them.  For all those who choose to embrace an evil choice, remember this, you will answer for all of your decisions in life, and the attitudes that led you to make those choices, while standing before Almighty God.  Far too often, Christians have embraced pragmatic morality in their pursuit of wealth, fame, and power, this has to stop.  It is time for the Church, for Christian organizations, and for individual Christians to disavow pragmatic morality.  We have been called to live holy and righteous lives, we will be judged for how we live, for we are Christ's ambassadors here on earth, our Savior never chose the "lesser of two evils".


Romans 3:8  Why not say—as some slanderously claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is just!
- The context is about sinning so that God's holiness can be more clearly seen, yet Paul's emphatic reply should be warning enough against attempting to justify an evil choice on the hope that good will come of it.

Sermon Video: The Steadfastness of Jotham - 2 Chronicles 27

In an era when fame, for any reason, at any price, is valued highly by so many, it is certainly worth our time to consider those mentioned in the Bible who aren't household names, never having achieved either fame or infamy.  Jotham, as a king of Judah, fits into that category.  Because Jotham died at only 41, his 16 years on the throne were not memorable enough to make us remember him as we have other kings of Israel and Judah, whether that be for their righteousness or their wickedness.
Jotham, unlike his father who died of leprosy as God's judgment, lived a life of steadfast devotion to God, consistently doing his best with what he had to work with during the time that was allotted to him.  It wasn't flashy, but it was a life pleasing to God, and just as importantly, devoid of the regrets that had plagued his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather.
Jotham also showed wisdom in that he retained that which he learned from his father's capable administration of the kingdom, and at the same time entirely rejected the mistake that his father made in pride of presuming to usurp priestly duties.  For anyone to emulate what was good about our upbringing, and reject that which was bad, and then go on to live a life of walking before the LORD steadfastly, surely this is a worthy life.  You may not remember Jotham, but any of us should be glad to have a life lived as honorably.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

True Repentance comes at a cost - Psalm 6

There has been much discussion of late about the "apology" of various politicians for the immoral things which they had done which have become public.  Whether or not the voters "forgive" a politician or not has absolutely nothing to do with the forgiveness that is needed from God, for this form of political "repentance" has little or nothing to do with the real thing.
To actually repent of one's sins requires a broken and contrite heart.  If one brags of sin in private, treating it as a laughing matter, and makes excuses for that same sin in public, blaming it on someone else or trying to minimize it, how can this possibly reflect a heart that is broken before a holy God?
David, as a man of God, was also a man who committed heinous sins.  In his most egregious sin, David was brought to repentance through God's grace in the sending of the prophet Nathan to warn David that his sin could not be ignored.
In Psalm 6, David writes about the foes that oppress him which he realizes are a sign of the judgment of God against his sin.  In response he writes of the anguish caused by his guilt, "I am worn out from groaning; all night long I flood my bed with weeping and drench my couch with tears.  My eyes grown weak with sorrow; they fail because of all my foes." (Psalm 6:6-7)  It is the attitude of genuine horror and revulsion at our offenses, committed against God, that is the hallmark of true repentance.  Do not be deceived, those who "repent" for public consumption will in no way fool Almighty God.  It is only by throwing ourselves upon the mercy of God and trusting in the cleansing power of the Blood of the Lamb that we can find forgiveness, cleansing, healing, and finally salvation.

How do I know what to believe? Intervarsity, Human Sexuality, and the authority of Scripture

There isn't an issue more talked (argued) about in recent American culture than human sexuality.  Many in our culture have arrived at conclusions that in previous generations would have been considered very radical.  It is one thing for non-believers, i.e. the Lost, to change their beliefs, this is to be expected as human wisdom changes over time.  It is quite another for a Christian, a self-acknowledged disciple of Jesus Christ, to change what he/she believes about an issue of moral significance.  That this has happened, for many Christians, raises an important question: On what basis is the change in moral understanding being made?
For Christians, the answer should only be: Because that is what we understand the Word of God to be teaching.  It is entirely possible for Christians to come to a new understanding of Holy Scripture, for better or worse, Church history is full of examples of both.  What is not acceptable is for a Christians to arrive at a moral position in opposition to the teachings of Scripture, or without concern for what Scripture teaches.  In other words, a moral understanding based upon emotion, feelings, logic, philosophy, science, or any other basis that circumvents or ignores the revelation of Scripture is an act of rebellion against the authority of God.
This devotion to the teachings of Scripture applies in every moral question and controversy, not just human sexuality, from the Christian attitude to war, to gambling and alcoholism and everything else.  What is important, is the attitude of submission to the revealed will of God.  If we lack that willingness to submit, we will find a way to ignore the teachings of Scripture.
Recently Intervarsity Christian Fellowship, the largest evangelical Christian organization on college campuses with chapters at 667 colleges and 1,300 staff members, released a position paper entitled, A Theological Summary of Human Sexuality.  In light of the moral position that Intervarsity is taking on such an issue of significance, the organization has asked its employees to voluntarily quit their jobs if they are unable to accept it and live by it.  This is the same commitment to an organization's mission and statement of faith expected of employees at Christian colleges, charities, and churches throughout the world.  In other words, it would be no news at all if not for the current debate ongoing in America on the issue of human sexuality.
What is more important, over the long-haul, than the particular conclusions of those who put together Intervarsity's statement, is the way in which they came to those conclusions.  The statement itself is full of references to Scripture that demonstrate a desire to be obedient to the original intention of the text and the Church's understanding of the text throughout its history, as well as a desire to follow the whole council of God and not cherry pick it.  Putting references into a statement regarding a moral position does not make one necessarily right, we all know the danger of proof-texting, but it illustrates that Intervarsity's motivation in this endeavor was to be ruled by the authority of Scripture.  This is, and must be, the way in which individual Christians, Christian organizations, and the Church itself operates.  If we ever deviate from this path, and for those who already have, the consequences we will face will be the judgment of God against us for putting our own will above that of God as revealed in holy Scripture.  For those who do not value the authority of Scripture, what I am saying is a moot point, but it has been the belief of the Church, since the beginning, including that of Jesus himself throughout the Gospels, that the Word of God is binding upon us.
Intervarsity will likely receive much negative press for their decision, and will also likely be kicked off some college campuses in an ironic appeal to tolerance.  Whether one agrees with the conclusions reached by Intervarsity or not, whether one agrees with their decision regarding their staff members in light of those conclusions or not, the most important thing in this whole episode will be that a Christian organization decided to follow Scripture, after much study and contemplation of it, instead of the culture in which they operate.  For the Church, this is the path forward, this is how we act as salt and light in our world, by being steadfast in our commitment to let the Word of God rule in our hearts in all things.

The Church in a Post-Christian society

Much discussion has occurred in recent years, and will continue to occur, regarding what the Church's response should be to the growing number of non-committed, agnostic, and atheist young people in the Western World.  One of the motivations behind the conscious decision made by Pastor Andy Stanley eight years ago to change his approach to evangelism is his desire to make a greater impact upon a post-Christian America.  While it remains to be seen if we truly are entering into an era of post-Christian society, after all a majority of Americans still self-identify (I know the accuracy of such things is debatable) as Christian and trends can run both ways, but given that a significant portion of Millenials and other young people have a negative view of the Church, Scripture, and God, it behooves us to consider whether or not we ought to change our ministry approach in response.  Those churches which have embraced a seeker-friendly attitude are one such attempted response.

Let me, however, offer a counter-point and word of caution.  If indeed our society continues in its current direction of removing the sacred and the divine in the process known as secularization, does it really seem wise for the Church to imitate them by downplaying Scripture, prayer, or worship?  Shouldn't we maintain our emphasis on the exalted nature of our worship services so as to provide a contrast to the secular world?  Aren't we showing the world what it is missing as God's Creation when we continue to hold high not only the authority of Scripture, but the sacred qualities of prayer and worship?  For a church to downplay its religious symbols and to make worship more approachable for the Lost by putting the Bible and God in a lesser role, is not making them more appealing to those who need God, but removing from them the one element that society without God cannot imitate, the presence of the Holy Spirit in our midst.
It is absolutely legitimate to hold a rally or have a special gathering that is seeker-friendly, but this cannot be what we allow our worship service to devolve into.  Why are we in the house of the Lord on his day?  To lift his name, to worship the Almighty, and to be molded and shaped as his disciples.  The Lost are absolutely welcome to join us, to observe our worship, and hear the Word of the LORD preached, but it would be a mistake for us to remove from our worship the things that make them uncomfortable.  The Lost should feel welcome in our midst, but they shouldn't feel comfortable, for the wrath of God abides on them until they repent; seeker-friendly can't change that fact, and the Church should never try to hide it.

Why did they go astray? Why the authority of the Bible is crucial.

After learning of the struggles in the United Church of Canada about defrocking a self-proclaimed Atheist minister named Gretta Vosper, those unfamiliar with this denomination (like myself, an American) were probably left wondering, how did they ever get to a place where a minister could openly denounce belief in God without being thrown out by his/her own congregation, let alone the denomination?  In its article on her "coming out" as an Atheist, the Toronto Star provided the answer: "In her sermons each Sunday, Vosper spoke openly about how she did not believe the Bible was “the authoritative word of God for all time” — a conviction she’d held long before her ordination, and one that is not uncommon among United Church of Canada clergy."  To Vosper, the Bible had long since become secondary.
If the authority of the Scripture is laid aside, if it becomes the words of men instead of the Word of God, there is nothing left to build upon, sooner or later, the whole edifice of the Church will come crashing down.  It is evidently not uncommon for a UCC pastor to view the Bible as optional, a position that Vosper learned, horrifyingly enough, in seminary.  There is no doubt that a similar story could be told about several American denominations, we have the same problem of abandoning the Bible here as well.
For those who don't understand all the hub-up about Andy Stanley's recent comments that we need to downplay the Bible and instead emphasize Jesus, it is the mess like the one the UCC finds itself in that frightens those who have taken umbridge with Stanley.  Andy Stanley has since responded that, “the Bible is without error in everything it affirms” and that he “believe[s] what the Bible says is true, is true,”  Where Andy Stanley was hoping to go with his message, and where those critical of that message were afraid his idea would lead, are not one and the same, but one would hope that both his supporters and his detractors can see why such comments aroused the response that they did.  
As a Church, and for myself as one of its many pastors, we must always be on our guard against the devaluation of the authority of Scripture, it is the Rubicon that we cannot ever cross.  Once that river is crossed, nothing is out of bounds, nothing is essential, Christianity without the infallible Word of God is Christianity in name only.

Why both right action AND right belief matter

In response to the action taken  by the United Church of Canada against the self-proclaimed Atheist minister Gretta Vosper, a blogger named Christian Chiakulas wrote that their decision to defrock her for her beliefs (technically, lack of any belief) is why mainline denominations are dying.  The full blog post explains his position, but in a nutshell it appears that he thinks that judging someone for his/her beliefs is wrong and that only our actions matter.  In the post Chiakulas quotes an author named Roger Wolsey as saying, “[Progressive Christianity] emphasizes orthopraxy instead of orthodoxy (right actions over right beliefs); embraces reason as well as paradox and mystery — instead of blind allegiance to rigid doctrines and dogmas…and does not claim that Christianity is the only valid or viable way to connect to God.”  While this may fit the definition of Progressive, it certainly doesn't fit any historically relevant definition of Christianity.  And that is the whole point, what we're dealing with here is an attempt to redefine Christianity by refusing to define any belief, or lack thereof, as being out of bounds.  In other words, progressives like Chiakulas and Wolsey want to remain a part of Christianity whether or not they believe in Christ, whether or not they believe in God, and whether or not they believe in the Gospel, belief evidently has nothing to do with it.
To accept the notion that right belief doesn't matter you have to surrender to two fundamental presuppositions both of which are extremely dangerous and both of which are anathema to what the Church has been and stood for during the past two thousand years.  The first premise is this: There is no such thing as Truth with a capital T.  All truth must be relative, the Bible must be a collection of stories, not a revelation from God.  If there really is an absolute Truth, it would certainly matter whether or not a person embraces or rejects it, so Truth has to go.  The second premise: That mankind is inherently good.  If right behavior is all that matters, mankind must be capable, on his own, of being good.  This however flies not only in the face of human history, but of the explicit teachings of the Bible.  We cannot possibly please God, on our own, simply by doing what is right, because our very nature is sinful and we cannot fellowship with a holy God until we are reborn in Christ.  
Lastly, in his blog post, Chiakulas claims a remarkably stunning thing, "Jesus welcomed everyone who was willing to follow “The Way.”  Everyone.  And there was no religious test to becoming an apostle, other than a willingness to forsake all for the Kingdom of God."  What Chiakulas is failing to understand is that the disciples whom Jesus called to follow him were already believers in the God of Abraham, in the LORD, they already believed.  That Jesus allowed them to follow him until they saw that he was the Son of God, instead of requiring it first, was certainly not an affirmation that such a affirmation must come from them eventually.  That this claim of Chiakulas can be refuted by Jesus' own words, easily, ought to prevent someone from claiming it about how he conducted himself, but here it is.  If Jesus cared so little about what his followers believed, how could he say to them, "I am the way and the truth and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14;6)  And how could John end his Gospel with, "these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." (John 20:31)  The list of Biblical quotes that utterly refute such an asinine assertion that Jesus didn't care what his disciples believed, could go on and on and on.  
What we belief absolutely matters, for as anyone remotely familiar with the writings of Paul knows, it is by grace we are saved, not by our works, when we call upon the name of the Lord.

Atheist Minister Gretta Vosper is being defrocked, why wouldn't she be?

A 23 person committee of the United Church of Canada voted 19-4 recently that Gretta Vosper, minister at the West Hill United Church in Scarborough, is "unsuitable to continue serving" as a minister in the United Church of Canada.  By her own proud admission, Vosper does not believe in God, nor Jesus Christ, nor the Holy Spirit. Vosper responded to the decision, according to the Toronto Star, by saying, “My sadness is for the many clergy and members and individuals currently studying for leadership in the UCC who are now also being told they need to keep quiet about their true beliefs or risk censure...The majority report said nothing about ethos and spoke exclusively to theological belief. A very sad day for the UCC.”
The United Church of Canada, "a historically inclusive and open-minded Protestant denomination" according to the article in the Star, has at least been willing to take a stand that its ministers need to believe in God.  Vosper in an interview with the Washington Post said, “We don’t talk about God,” and then added that the church needs to give up “the idolatry of a theistic god.”
The correct term for Gretta Vosper is not atheist, but apostate.  She has, like Bart Ehrman to cite a famous example, abandoned the faith that she previously professed.  It doesn't really matter what Vosper wants to replace God with, according to the Star interview, it is "adopting a more metaphorical interpretation of religious symbols and a greater emphasis on humanist, environmental and social justice causes."  Without God, whatever you put in his place, is meaningless and void.  This shouldn't be controversial in the least, that Vosper has been allowed to continue down this path for years should be shocking.
There is no way, at all, to apply the term "Christian" to what she is doing.  What we believe matters, for our hearts determine our actions, not the other way around, as Jesus said, "out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks" (Luke 6:45)  The heart of the Gospel is that mankind apart from God is lost in sin, we are hopeless on our own, and thus our ONLY hope is in salvation by grace through faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus.  These beliefs are not optional, they're essential in every way.
A "Christian", let alone a minister, who does not believe in God, AND more than that, who does not embrace the Gospel, would be a nonsense proposition to John Calvin, Martin Luther, Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, the Apostle Paul, the Apostle Peter, and of course Jesus himself.  For two thousand years the Church has proclaimed the Truth of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead in victory over sin and death.  To share the Gospel and make disciples of Jesus' followers, is why the Church exists.
Gretta Vosper may think that it is a "sad day" when 19 out of 23 members of a committee vote that an Apostate minister is unfit to lead the Church of Jesus Christ, I happen to see it as a "sad day" that 4 of the 23 voted to allow her to remain.

For additional consideration, Vosper's Church, West Hill, officially ended its use of the Lord's Prayer among other prayers, rewriting them along with classic hymns, for example:

From The Lord’s Prayer...

Then:

Our loving God, who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name, Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses …

To Words of Commitment...

Now:

As I live every day, I want to be a channel for peace. May I bring love where there is hatred and healing where there is hurt; joy where there is sadness, and hope where there is fear …

From “How Great Art Thou Art …”

Then sings my soul, my Savior God, to Thee,

How great Thou art! How great Thou art!

Then sings my soul, My Savior God, to Thee,

How great Thou art! How great Thou art!

By Carl G. Boberg

To “Then Sings My Soul …”

Then sings my soul in wonder, full and free,

amazed at all I hear and see!

Then sings my soul in wonder, full and free,

a sacred gift is life to me!

By Gretta Vosper and Scott Kearns (2007)

Sermon Video: The Prideful Presumption of Uzziah - 2 Chronicles 26

One of the oldest and ongoing conflicts in human society is the struggle to define and maintain morality.  In the pride of the wickedness of the human heart is the presumption that we can overthrow or ignore that which God has decreed concerning righteousness and wickedness.  All those who attempt to do so, will fail, they must fail, for God has revealed what is holy and what is sinful in his Word, and all human attempts to circumvent this are but vanity.
As a king of Judah, Uzziah was a great success, both in foreign policy and domestic policy he was a wise and capable ruler.  Uzziah might have gone down as one of the greatest kings of the people of God, and he would have had he continued to walk in the ways of the LORD, but as his success increased so did his pride.  When God had granted Uzziah great blessings because of his obedience, Uzziah's pride brought about his downfall.  Uzziah decided to usurp the responsibility of the priestly descendants of Aaron by offering incense in the temple of the LORD.  While this might not seem like much of an offense to us, it was clearly forbidden in the Torah, making Uzziah's actions an act of rebellion against the authority of God.
God chose to respond to Uzziah immediately by striking him with leprosy after Uzziah had spurned the correction of the priest Azariah, a condition that remained with Uzziah for the rest of his days, days which he lived apart from his people and cut off from the temple.  It was a sad ending to a life of great accomplishments, but Uzziah paid the price for ignoring the Word of God by thinking that his will was above that of Almighty God.  For all those who follow in his footsteps, ignoring what they don't like about what the Bible says to them, the result will be the same: the judgment of God.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

If God hasn't forgiven you, you're not a Christian, period.

"I have great relationship with God...I like to be good. I don't like to have to ask for forgiveness. And I am good. I don't do a lot of things that are bad. I try to do nothing that is bad...I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't."

The above quote is typical of a post-modern, "I'm good enough for God" attitude, one sadly often acquiesced to in some Christian circles, though they certainly should know better.  What would Paul's response be to such twisted thinking?  A few simple quotes from his letter to the Ephesians ought to illustrate it: "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace (1:7)...As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins (2:1)...Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.  But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions - it is by grace you have been saved. (2:3-5)...For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast. (2:8-9)"

We are not good enough for God on our own, never, ever does the Bible say anything of the sort, the idea is anathema to the Gospel.  We must be forgiven for our sins, period, and this only by the blood of Christ, only through faith, only by grace.  Anything less, and we remain dead in our sins, to pretend otherwise is to leave the sinner separated from God.

The initial quote is from a famous person, somebody who claims to be a Christian, who is accepted as a Christian by many people, but who most certainly is not a Christian if those words reflect his/her heart.  The true follower of Jesus Christ knows that he/she is only a sinner saved by grace, and knows that God's forgiveness means everything.

Sermon Video: The Half-hearted obedience of Amaziah - 2 Chronicles 25

It is often a dangerous thing to enter into a commitment half-heartedly, whether that be a commitment in business, relationships, politics, or most importantly with God.  Amaziah, one of the kings of Judah, did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, but not as it turned out, wholeheartedly.  Over time, his outward obedience and inward indifference (and/or rebelliousness against God) began to be evident in a series of moral failings which culminated in a barbarous act of cruelty toward the POW's his army had captured while warring against the Edomites, and in the idolatry that he engaged in afterwards as he began to worship the gods he had captured from them.  In the end, despite its hopeful beginning of obedience, Amaziah's reign was a failure and he died at the hands of his own men, the same end that had befallen his father.  Trying to sit on the fence with God is a losing proposition, there is no such thing as a part-time disciple of Jesus Christ, if we are to be the people of God, we need to be such with all of our hearts.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Why the Church shouldn't be afraid of the "Nones" - Romans 11:36

Much has been made of the rapid increase here in America (and previously in Europe) of those who consider themselves to be a "none" regarding faith and religion.  While it is certainly true that those who do not consider religion (Christianity in particular) to be worthwhile have been on the rise of late, historically speaking a generation or two does not make a break from all of human history.  Since the beginning of recorded history, mankind has consistently sought after a connection with the divine.  The ways in which this goal has been attempted have varied a great deal, but the need has always been nearly universally felt, throughout the world and across the barriers of culture.  The reason for this is quite simple: We were made this way.  It is a part of our DNA, as it were, a portion of humanity that cannot be quantified by science, but the evidence for which is abundant.  Modernity may have given some people the sense that they no longer have to look to the heavens for the meaning and purpose of life, but science will not and cannot answer these questions, nor can human philosophies nor trivial self-centered pursuits; people will always in the end lift their eyes to the heavens and consider what God requires of them.
Paul wrote about this in his letter to the Romans, describing our relationship to God in poetic form in Romans 11:36, "For from him and through him and to him are all things.  To him be the glory forever!  Amen."  Paul understood that the glory of God and the happiness of mankind are not divergent goals.  It is only when we obtain the spiritual transformation of new life in Christ that we truly understand and experience the purpose for which we exist.

To illustrate this point, in the September 26th 2016 issue of Time magazine, in an essay by Susanna Schrobsdorff, a self-described member of the "none" group, Susanna speaks about her experience with religion, about her mother's loss of faith, and why her mother reached out to God as she was dying.  Reflecting on her mother's return to faith at the end, she writes, "It was a comfort I envied as I watched her slip away...but when she was gone, it felt like a void had opened up.  Then, as now, I long for faith.  That essential human need might just be proof that God does exists...We have innate cravings for food and sleep and love, and so perhaps a desire to identify with a higher power is not an accident of our design...That built-in yearning is there because there's something worth yearning for."

And that is why I'm not afraid that we are about to become a nation of "Nones".  Humanity cannot escape its connection to God, no matter what it may try to put in God's place, no matter how loudly people protest that they don't need God nor believe he exists.  The fact is, he does.  God does exist, he did create you, and me, and he put within us a longing to have a relationship with our maker, a longing that will in the end always gnaw away at those who deny him.  For our part, the Church needs to remain faithful to its proclamation of the Gospel, maintaining the witness of our forefathers on back to the apostles, and continuing to live righteously in an immoral world.  It may not be "If you build it he will come", but the idea is similar, the Gospel will draw people by the power of the Holy Spirit, as long as we continue to lift high the cross of Christ.

What justice do the families of terrorists deserve? Deuteronomy 24:16

Terrorism has been part and parcel of the political discourse of nations all over the world since 9/11.  The evil on display in terrorist acts has caused great anger, and rightly so, and some of that anger has been aimed not at those committing the terrorist acts themselves (or even supporting them) but at those associated with terrorists by either their ethnicity, country of origin, or religion.  It is easy for a people feeling threatened and afraid to lash out at whichever target they can get their hands upon, including the families of terrorists.  It has even been suggested by an American presidential candidate that we should kill the families of terrorists as a purposeful tactic in violation of the Geneva Convention.
What does God have to say about such guilt by association?  We needn't wonder as to the answer, because God included a denial of the concept of guilt by association in the Law of Moses.  Deuteronomy 24:16 states, "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin."  To kill the wife or child of a terrorist in retaliation for even a barbarous act of terrorism, is an affront to the justice of God, it is not the action of a people who live according to the ethics of the Word of God.
We've been down this road before, the same guilt by association was used during WWII to justify the leveling of cities from the air, a tactic which was as immoral as it was ineffective.  At the time, it was argued that the civilian population was supporting the war effort through their work in the factories and thus they were fair game, it was a Faustian bargain, and a losing one.
Terrorism seeks to change the attitudes and thought processes of those it is used against.  If we lower our belief in the value of life, justifying it in the name of protecting our own lives and way of life, we will have failed the test.  The Law of God was clear on this issue in the Covenant of Moses, right and wrong hasn't changed.

Sermon Video: What If? James 5:19-20

The counter-factual is a staple of sci-fi writing, used to show how our world would be different if one event in the past were changed.  While this may spur our imagination, we know that the past cannot be changed.  It is the future that remains unknown to us, and it is to the future that James looks as his finishes his letter, speaking of what can be accomplished if a sinner is turned from the error of his way.
That Christians can "wander" away from their faith is taken as a given by James, and so is the hopeful response that they can be brought back again.  What you conclude about this leaving and returning will likely be a reflection of your own view of the Calvinist/Arminian debate, but for James, the important point is to reassure his readers that they should be active in the ministry of reconciliation because bringing a wandering believer back to obedience will not only save that person's life, but also "cover over a multitude of sins".  Imagine the impact of helping a wayward Christian to return to God, not only will countless sins that would have been committed had that path continued be negated, but a child of God will be returned to fellowship and once more be contributing to the kingdom of God through works of righteousness.
The focus of James is upon the wayward believer, and the value of bringing him/her home to God, but the same blessing is there when one of the Lost is shown the way of salvation and leaves a hopeless life to find new life in Christ.  Our purpose, as a Church, and as the individuals who make up the Church, must have as its foundation the ministry of reconciliation.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The Power of Prayer - Part 2: James 5:16-18

Continuing his thoughts on prayer, James makes a connection in vs. 15b-16 between those illnesses which are caused, at least in part, by sinful actions, and the prayer needed to repent of them.  James isn't making the mistake of Job's friends, that is claiming that ALL misfortune is because of specific sin, but he also isn't glossing over the fact that some of the ailments that are common to man are indeed the result of our own sinful actions.  We all recognize that the alcoholic's failed liver is a consequence of sin, as is the STD of the sexually immoral, but the reality goes much further than that and hits much closer to home.  All manner of sinful actions and attitudes have consequences in our physical, emotional, and psychological health.  The solution to these health needs much include repentance, along with medical care, if the root problem is to be uncovered and dealt with.
For the Christian, the most effective method of repentance involves the support of fellow Christians that is connected with the confession of sin that brings that which is hidden out into the light where it can be destroyed.  James doesn't specify to whom the confession should be given, whether the pastor or another mature Christian, the purpose is the same: to support the repentant sinner.
To show the power of prayer, to even overcome the grip that sin can hold a person in, James cites the power that was available to the prophet Elijah through prayer.  Elijah may seem like an extraordinary man, not like us at all, but only because he became just that through obedience to God and faithfulness; it was God's power that made Elijah a powerful prophet, he was simply a humble servant.  We too, then, can have access to God's power, through prayer, if we too like Elijah are obedient and faithful.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The Power of Prayer, Part 1 - James 5:13-15

Prayer is a fairly common human response, to troubles in particular.  For the Christian, prayer is a necessary part of our relationship with God.  Through his Word he talks to us, through our prayer (and praises) we respond to God.  Whenever a Christian is in trouble, for whatever reason, he/she should pray.  Whenever a Christian is experiencing happiness or joy, he/she should give God praise.  In all things, our response is to look to God.
James focuses, in particular, upon prayer associated with our health concerns, and rather than simply telling us to pray in response, we are told to bring these needs to the Church (through the church's leadership, i.e. elders) so that the body of Christ can pray together for its individual members.  This process teaches us two things: (1) God certainly cares about our physical needs, frail and mortal though we are, our suffering still matters to God, and (2) the Church needs to care about them as well.  With spiritual needs so pressing, it can be easy for the Church to focus solely upon the souls in their charge, but instead God reminds us to care for the whole person.
Why doesn't prayer always work?  Why do some people make miraculous recoveries, and others, equally fervently prayer for, continue toward the death that awaits us all?  The short answer to this large question is that it is not always the will of God to heal.  That may be tough to swallow, but Job didn't get an explanation from God, and he certainly deserved it more than we do, he simply got a reminder that God is God, enough said.  We never know who will be healed of their illness and who will not, our responsibility is thus to pray for everyone whose need comes before us, to should their burdens, and thus fulfill the Law of Love.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Dead-End of Anti-Intellectualism in the Church

One of the favorite themes of a growing number of politicians is an anti-intellectualism aimed at scientists, professors, and intellectuals of all kinds.  They combine this thinly veiled envy with a heaping dose of blue-collar mentality and grand conspiracy theories.  The end result is best illustrated by the insanity of the long-running anti-vaccine movement, a movement that is immune (pun intended?) to scientific evidence for it is all dismissed as being part of the global conspiracy involving governments, the CDC, the UN, and many more.  This same anti-intellectualism continues to be attached to issue after issue, to the detriment of our democracy, for few things are as dangerous to a healthy democracy (yes, I know, our gov't is a Representative Republic, but most people don't know the difference between that and a Democracy) as a purposefully uninformed electorate.
The Church is equally at risk when in the grips of anti-intellectualism.  Many evangelicals routinely belittle the public education system (thereby slandering the many good God-honoring men and women working in it), and look upon the higher education system with nothing short of hatred.  Secular though this education may be, it is still absolutely necessary that the people of God be an educated people.  Why?  Because when they're not, they're easy prey to heretics, charlatans, and frauds, not to mention the politicians who look at them with disdain while pandering to their hot button issues.
Just today I came across two examples of anti-intellectualism that are a clear danger to the Church.  The first was also mixed with racism (not a good combo) in that it was a protest against the teaching of the basic tenants of Islam to school children.  As a former teacher, I'm aghast at the idea of limiting the knowledge of the world that our children are given, and as a pastor, I'm entirely convinced that Christian children need to know the basics of not only Islam, but Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Shinto, plus the ancient religions of the Greeks, Egyptians, Norse, not to mention the basic ideas of Communism, Fascism, and a host of other ideas that make our world tick and explain how we arrived at where we are.  Why?  Because ignorance is a haven for horrible ideas, and ignorance breeds bigotry like cockroaches.  When a Christian teens goes off to college, private or public, religious or secular, that teen needs to know his/her place in the world, needs to know where he/she stands and has little chance of being prepared for the many ideas that will soon flood his/her way if we've chosen to shelter those inside the Church from the many competing ideas that exist in our world.  Teachers need to teach, not pretend that ideas don't exist, how can a high school senior possibly understand the world that we live in today without knowing about the world's religions?  How can people appreciate the government that we do have if they are ignorant of the horrific alternatives that have already been tried?
The second example was once again the same ol' anti-intellectualism of the KJV Only movement, this time from a Chick Publications video that denigrated a seminary education (thereby slandering the many God-honoring men and women who work at America's seminaries) and instead elevating an "ignorance is bliss" attitude about the Bible.  In the video, David Daniels dismisses the manuscript evidence for the Bible, mocking the scholar and archaeologists who continue to work in this field, and treating the term "textual criticism" like a profanity instead of the vital tool that it is.  Why is anti-intellectualism a cornerstone of the KJV Only movement, the answer is quite simple: the entirety of the historical evidence, modern scholarship, and the way in which translations work are so firmly against their belief system that the only way to avoid total embarrassment is to dismiss the opposition as part of a huge conspiracy led by the dreaded intellectuals.  To say this attitude gives the Church a black eye is an understatement.
The Truth is not our enemy.  Facts, history, and knowledge are not the enemy of the Church, never have been, never will be.  We serve a risen savior, a Messiah whose life, death, and resurrection are firmly established in history, to veer off into anti-intellectualism, as a Church, is not only needless and foolish, but a dead-end.

Sermon Video: Should my word be my bond? - James 5:12

In all manner of aspects of business, politics, and personal relationships, the world is rife with the deceptions of lying, cheating, and stealing.  In many ways, those who find "success" in this world live by the mantra that "if you're not cheating, you're not trying".  For the people of God, such things are entirely unacceptable.  God's people, in contrast with the world, must live by honesty, integrity, and faithfulness.  We don't need oaths to strengthen our word, for our actions, day by day, ought to confirm to those around us that our word can be trusted.  It will cost us to live by a higher standard, we may lose out on business to an unscrupulous competitor, we may lose out on friendships with those live by deception; so be it.
Christian businessmen must choose to be honest and true in their dealings, Christian politicians must choose to abandon the back-stabbing, lying, and character assassinations so common in our current political scene (and those who claim to represent Christian values, but wallow in these vices, are in no way representing God's people), and Christians need to deal with their family, neighbors, and friends in honesty and integrity.  These are not optional choices for the people of God, but demands upon us by our Father.
FYI, this also means that in our arguments and debates, with fellow Christians or with unbelievers, we must embrace the truth, quote people fairly, eschew dirty tactics and character assassination, and treat our opponents with dignity.  That this behavior is sadly lacking, especially in what passes for debate on the internet, is painfully obvious.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The Patience of the Prophets, the Perseverance of Job - James 5:10-11

Suffering and difficulties of every sort are inevitable in this world.  We will all go through them, and those who live by faith will also potentially face persecution because of it.  What then is the response that God requires of his people?  To explain our obligation in the face of suffering, James illustrates the two character qualities we need to develop and employ, patience and perseverance, through the actions of the prophets and Job.  The prophets were given their occupation by God, to be his messengers and speak his words to his people, but were not generally rewarded for being honored by God in this way.  Instead, the prophets were mistreated including imprisonment, beatings, and martyrdom.  And yet they employed patience to continue, for decades, to fulfill their obligation to God's people, preaching his message no matter the cost.  This then is our example.  We too must have patience, responding to persecution by continuing in the fruit of the Spirit, not responding to hate with hate, but with love.
Some will endure greater difficulties than others, few will be able to stand alongside Job.  Job lost everything: wealth, family, and health, but steadfastly refused to blame God for his loss.  He persevered, despite the insistence of his friends that his troubles were his own fault, and maintained his character through the worst of times.  And so must we, whatever comes our way we must persevere, holding fast to our faith and maintaining our commitment to righteous living in every circumstance.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The History of the Bible, five minutes a week.

Having taught my history of the Bible class several times now, I'm looking for ways to share this crucial information with those who have been unable to attend the whole class.  Two weeks ago I started something that I'll likely be continuing for months to come, that is working through the material of my six hour class (it gets longer each time I give it, imagine that) five minutes at a time at the end of the Sunday morning worship service.  During the first one, I talked about how the Bible's original languages were Hebrew and Greek (with a smattering of Aramaic), last week we covered the obstacle that the original autographs (those written by the hand of the authors) have not survived, leaving us with copies of their work.  This coming week we'll begin to look at the evidence we have from the copies that allow us to overcome the hurdle; and so on, and so on.  Eventually we'll get to the end of the story where our modern translated English Bibles emerge.  As a teacher, it isn't easy to open up a topic, talk about it for a few minutes, and then wait until next week because I want to keep going with the story.  It reminds me of reading the Sunday comics as a kid, there were several strips that only appeared in the Sunday edition, and to see what happened next, you have to wait till next week.  If the people are left wanting to hear more of the story each week, that isn't a bad thing.

There are crucial aspects of Church history, such as the history of the Bible, that God's people need to know about, things that are easier to cover in hour long classes, but we always miss some people when we limit this knowledge to those willing/able to come to a class.  Perhaps this is the start of something, at least it is my way of affirming that the Church is only benefited when the laity know its history.