Sermon Video: Paul prefers to boldly go where no one has gone before - Romans 15:17-24

After giving glory to God for the success of his ministry thus far, the Apostle Paul explains to the church in Rome that his previous hesitancy to visit them came from his own conviction that God wanted him to take the Gospel to places where Jesus was unknown.  After decades of doing this, now Paul is planning to visit the church at Rome on his way to another new frontier for the Gospel: Spain.

Sermon Video: Bring them the Good News - Romans 10:14-15

Believing in Jesus is simple.  Salvation can be attained by anyone.  But only if they know about it, only if they get the chance to accept Jesus.

Which is where we come in.  God entrusted this task to us, to those of us who have already found Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Sermon Video: Bring the Good News - Isaiah 40:9-11

Having brought good news to the exiles of Judah in Babylon, the prophet Isaiah now calls upon them to share that news, shouting it from the mountaintop.  Likewise, when the Advent of Jesus brought forth a greater fulfillment of Isaiah's words, the Good News was shared by the shepherds, later by John the Baptist, and eventually by Jesus' disciples following his command to take the message of forgiveness and hope to the ends of the earth.

What is our calling?  Take the Good News to everyone who needs to heart it.

The Climate Change denialism of Evangelicals will be damaging global Gospel witness for generations to come

 

It was painful, personally and professionally, to watch so many of my fellow Evangelicals (as well as Fundamentalists) in America deny the reality of COVID-19 in the face of ever increasing evidence.  It was also disheartening to hear fake 'cures' touted by some of these same voices while the readily available vaccine was rejected (as part of some global, even Satanic, conspiracy).  Having spent time in our area hospital praying with and for exhausted nurses, and having presided over the funeral of a fellow pastor and his wife who died on the same day of COVID, this lack of acceptance of basic facts and the nasty hostility toward doctors and scientists, has left a mark.  I won't soon forget it.  However, when it comes to the grand sweep of history, as traumatic and disruptive as COVID-19 was to the world for two plus years, it will one day be relegated to the history books along with such momentous moments as the fall of the Berlin Wall and 9/11.  Future generations will be unlikely to continue to hold the mostly politically motivated, fact denying, COVID-19 related actions of millions of American Christians against them.  Climate change is a different sort of beast.  Why?

The affects of COVID-19 are fast fading, wounds of this sort to the human psyche heal when the harms fade away, but the mounting affects of climate change are increasingly being felt.  If the predictive models are true, the ongoing cost will be upon the shoulders of billions of people throughout the world, and not just once, but over and over again with each successive drought, wildfire, flash flood, and hurricane.  COVID-19's impact lasted 2+ years, and we were all so tired of dealing with it, climate change won't have an expiration date, it will build and remain, year after year.  With widespread suffering, and the pain (as it always is with such things) felt more by the poor and powerless, the world will look to blame those who stood in the way of mitigating the worst of climate change's affects in the early decades of humanity's grapple with it, when decisive action might have made a big difference.  There will be plenty of blame to go around, China will receive some of it, but most will fall upon the West, America in particular, in part because only in America has there been widespread denialism and opposition to mitigating steps, even by private businesses. {In Europe, conservative parties disagree with liberal ones about how to mitigate climate change, not about the reality of it.}

To those on the outside looking in, it may seem curious that American Evangelicals/Fundamentalists have been so deeply and vehemently opposed to the scientific consensus regarding climate change {As if, by force of will, you can change facts}.  Four reasons for this stance stand out among others: 

(1) An anti-science attitude that dates back to the Scopes Trial {Young Earth Creationism paved the way for anti-science / anti-vaccine Evangelicals}

How exactly does one witness to those with a degree in science if your theology demands that they abandon generally accepted scientific conclusions on a whole host of topics in order to become a Christian?  This is a long standing issue, but one that has grown in recent years into outright hostility toward not only scientific facts, but those whose work revolves around science.

(2) An embrace of conspiracy theories, especially when they involve the U.N. {For example: An analysis of Rev. Danny Jones, "Is this Coronavirus a Sign of the End of the World?"}

When #'s 1 & 2 combine, we have the increasingly common acceptance of the notion that any scientific consensus is itself evidence of a conspiracy theory, something we saw manifested during COVID-19.  If 99% of global climate scientists agree that our current era's climate change is largely affected by human activity, that fact becomes a primary reason to oppose said consensus.  One of the reasons why is #4.

(3) A political viewpoint that declares that whatever 'they' support we must oppose, to the death. {The proper counter-point: Afraid of being called 'woke' or 'conservative'? Preach the Whole Counsel of God - Wisdom on this issue from John Piper}

We know this to be true: If the Republican party supported policies to combat climate change, and the Democrats (for whatever reason) opposed them, Evangelicals and Fundamentalists would be shouting their support of these policies to combat climate change from the rooftop, and thumping their chests about how important this is to God.  This is certainly not the only issue where we see the Church in America acting as if it has a Red wing and a Blue one, often to our shame.

(4) An in-our-lifetime eschatology that is convinced the End Times are upon us, thus negating any serious commitment to environmental conservation or protection.  If it is all going to be destroyed in the next few years, who cares? {This attitude disastrously applied to COVID-19: The Mark of the Beast isn't what you think.}

Yesterday I saw, for the first time, a meme from a pastor that proclaimed that climate change MUST be false because it violates the sovereignty of God.  A small amount of knowledge about world history will debunk this foolishness.  Humanity has been affecting the environment in which we live for thousands of years, mostly in a negative capacity.  North Africa during the time of the Roman Empire was a productive province, responsible for much agricultural production, things have changed.  God's power and control has not been diminished by this human impact on our world in the past, nor is it in the present.  

In the end, what is sorely lacking in much of the 'Christian' vitriol against the scientific consensus regarding climate change is a proper orthodox understanding of stewardship.  The Biblical narrative begins with stewardship in the Garden of Eden, but somewhere along the way segments of the Church in America decided that environmental stewardship was not our responsibility.  A biblical understanding of stewardship would also act as a check on the rampant consumerism, and disregard for the poort, that affects so much of the American Church, but alas it is a neglected theological imperative.

One hundred years from now, when communities the world over are grappling with the negative affects of climate change, those hoping to share the Gospel in them will have to respond to accusations such as this: "We are in this mess because of American Christians, why should we listen to what you have to say about Jesus?"

Sermon Video: The Resurrected Jesus: peace, understanding, evangelism, Luke 24:36-49

The first Easter Sunday culminated with a surprise visitation from Jesus to his closest disciples.  After a day of wonder, angelic messages, and doubt, Jesus suddenly stood among his disciples.  They responded with fear and doubt, but Jesus was willing to show them his hands and feet, and then to eat in front of them, to put their fear to rest.  Afterwards, Jesus took the time to explain how his past three days fit into the prophecies of old before honing in on what his disciples needed to do now that he was back from the dead: share the Good News.

Sermon Video: Advent Witnesses Part 5 - Shepherds: The 1st Evangelists, Luke 2:8-18

 

As we continue to consider the Advent of Jesus Christ from the perspective of the witnesses, we now come to the day of his birth and a number of shepherds going about their jobs working the night shift.  God chooses them to receive the angelic message of Good News and great joy, to be the first to come see the newborn Messiah, and also to be the first to go tell others about this wonder which God has done.  In other words, God chose them to be the first evangelists.  Once more God's preference for making use of the meek and lowly amazes us, the willingness of these shepherds to be instruments of God's will encourages and challenges us to go and do likewise.  Christ the Savior is born!  Share the Good News!

Sermon Video: "Peace be with you!" - John 20:19-23

 On the evening of the first Easter, following a confusing morning involving an Empty Tomb and visitations from angels, the disciples of Jesus were gather together, with the doors locked for fear of arrest. Suddenly, Jesus enters the room and dispels their collective anxiety and fear, telling them, "Peace be with you!" (Shalom in Hebrew) Not only was their recent fear releaved, for Jesus was truly alive, but the future's concerns were suddenly less daunting. Jesus immediately tells them their next step, to go and tell the Good News. Without Jesus, they were anxious and afraid, with Jesus, they were confident and ready to take on the world. That's the difference that the presence of Jesus makes, he brough peace then, and he brings peace now.

Sermon Video: Mark 8:22-33 - Can you see Jesus clearly?

 After healing a blind man, enabling him to see clearly, Jesus asks his disciples who others believe him to be? That easy question answered, he asked the tought one, "Who do you say I am?" Peter answers correctly, "You are the Messiah." Peter's answer demonstrates that the Light of Jesus can be seen even though humanity is living in darkness. With God's help, Jesus can be seen clearly. Unfortunately, the text continues and reminds us of the difficulty of the task by showing that Peter's next answer was dismal. After Jesus tells his disciples that he must soon suffer and die (before being raised to life), Peter rebukes him and tells Jesus that he doesn't see his own future clearly. Jesus strongly rebukes Peter, showing that an impartial view of Jesus isn't good enough. We can't just have Jesus at Christmas, we need Good Friday and Easter too. Jesus didn't just come to heal and to teach, although both of those were very important, but to save humanity from sin and death. In order to fulfill this role given to him by the Father, Jesus had to die on the Cross as the Lamb of God. When we see this fulness of Jesus and his mission, we see him clearly.

Sermon Video: Don't turn away from God's presence - Mark 5:1-20

 Upon his arrival on the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus is confronted by a man possessed by an 'impure spirit'. This frightening man does not challenge Jesus, but falls at his feet begging for mercy. Having just demonstrated his control over the physical realm (calming the storm), Jesus here demonstrates his lordship over the spiritual. Having delivered this man from spiritual darkness, Jesus then speaks with the local townspeople who rush to the scene. However, the people are afraid and ask Jesus to leave. Coming into the presence of God can be daunting, and these people would rather turn away. The healed man begs to go with Jesus, but Jesus has a better plan, and sends him to his hometown to share with them what God has done for him.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: The Parable of the Sower - Mark 4:1-20

 In the well known parable, Jesus explains that the 'seed' of God's Word falls upon various 'soils' representing differing human beings.  How do they differ?  Some are hostile to God, some have other more pressing concerns, and some readily respond.  Those who fully respond, the 'good soil' produce 'fruit', that is they work to reproduce in other people what God has done for them.  Healthy churches need to make disciples, they need to cultivate open and dedicated hearts (good soil) that encourage service and self-sacrifice.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Fishing for People - Mark 1:16-20

Now that Jesus is publicly proclaiming the coming of the Kingdom of God, he turns to the task of recruiting disciples to teach and train.  At the Sea of Galilee he finds two sets of brother, Andrew and Simon, and James and John; all fishermen from Bethsaida.  Having called each pair in turn, they quickly join Jesus who promises to send them to "fish for people".  This interesting metaphor connects to their background, and speak to the need to pull people in with the 'net' of the Gospel that they too might learn of God's forgiveness and love.  We continue that task to this day, as a Church, and as individual Christians, sharing the Good News of Jesus Christ with the Lost 'fish'.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Interaction with: "Keeping a church going is a tough cross to bear" by Peter Greene

In this morning's News-Herald/The Derrick is a column from Peter Greene, retired Franklin High School English teacher regarding the challenge of keeping the county's numerous churches going, in particular its number of massive (relative to our current population) church buildings.  The article ends with a call to attend tonight's forum that is being hosted here at First Baptist with the Oil Region Alliance, the Bridge Builders Community Foundation, and a national group called Sacred Places.  The meeting will discuss how to preserve sacred spaces through utilizing them as community resources, a function that the building here at First Baptist already performs, but one which we are eager to learn more about.  So please, join us tonight if you can.

In addition, Greene's article touches upon a number of topics related to church attendance and church growth, I'll quote the relevant portions below in bold and interact with them.

We've had a real estate problem in Venango County for a while.  We have too much excess capacity, too many buildings with too much space, built in a time when the county had many thousands more people than it does now.

This is true across the board in real estate: residential, commercial, educational, and sacred.  The population drop since the height of the oil boom has been remarkable, resulting in a population downward trend that must bottom out at some point, but hasn't yet.  It is thus inevitable that the county contain "too many" churches, unless the % of people within the county who attend church were to have risen as the population declines, it hasn't.  Some churches have closed, as evidenced by the consolidation in Oil City of the Catholic parishes from five to one, but most remain open.  Within two miles of my office in downtown Franklin there are 18 churches, and while that includes several in small buildings, it also includes the sizable buildings of First Baptist, St. Patrick's, First UMC, Christ UMC, St. John's Episcopal, First Presbyterian, and Atlantic Ave. United Brethren.

Gallup Poll shows that church membership hung around 70 percent from 1938 until 1996, then dropped off a cliff, landing at 50 percent in 2018...young folks are the most likely to be unchurched these days.

That this is a trend isn't news to anyone involved in church ministry.  However, here in our county the affects of it are harder to gauge because so many of this community's young people leave the area for college and don't return.  Thus churches in Venango County (and much of rural America) must face the prospect of lesser proportions of the younger generations simply because their community's population is trending that way anyway.  Once again, in order to have as many people in their 20's or 30's in our church as we have people in their 60's or 70's, we would have to be reaching a significantly higher percentage of that target population.

There are a gazillion explanations out there.  Some argue that the mainstream churches lost ground because they got too wrapped up in social causes.

This is the go-to explanation from conservative churches regarding the trends within liberal churches (using those terms despite the inevitable comparison to politics, here they rather reflect theological perspectives, although the two tend to bleed together).  To the extent that any church or denomination has walked away from the historic creeds and teachings of the Church, and/or replaced the primary focus of the Church (the proclamation of the Gospel and the making of disciples) with unrelated causes, that explanation seems to have traction.  If what once brought people to Church, the worship of God and the proclamation of the forgiveness of sins, is no longer relevant to what a church is doing, why exactly would people go there?  I have not, however, experienced this with the 'liberal' churches here in Venango County, instead I've found authentic and passionate commitment to the Gospel at, for example, St. John's Episcopal Church (with whom we partner for the Shepherd's Green Food Pantry).

Others argue that more conservative religious voices have turned off young folks with their political involvement.

I have certainly argued about the danger of mixing religion and politics, describing it as an unequal marriage that will corrupt the Church with the pragmatism (and win-at-all-cost) of politics rather than impacting politics with the morality of Christianity.  In 1999, Pastor Ed Dobson and Cal Thomas warned about the failures of the Moral Majority in their book, Blinded by Might but unfortunately that warning has not been heeded and things have grown much worse.  Examples of my writings on this include: A rejection of a One-Party Church, and pastors as political operatives and The Culture War rages on; the Church's role in it is toxic.

Oddly enough, those arguments represent two sides of the old saying, "When you mix religion and politics, you get politics."

And this is where it gets dicey.  'Liberal' churches and their leaders decry the politics of 'Conservative' churches and their leaders, and vice versa, without both sides realizing that they are doing the same things, just from a different perspective.  For example: the mixing of the Gospel with socialism is just as dangerous as the mixing of the Gospel with free-market capitalism.  That sentence might upset some of you because you hate one of those economic systems but love the other, but from a Christian Worldview that honors the teachings of the Apostles and Church History, there can be no other conclusion.  The Gospel cannot be mixed with our economic, social, or political viewpoints and remain the Gospel.  This is a dilemma as old as the first generation of the Church, one that our ancestors in the faith struggled mightily to not be overcome by (See for example their failure: The Thirty Years War), and one that endures to this day.  In the end, a Republican Gospel is just as much of an anathema as a Democrat Gospel, both must be rejected.  In this I am somewhat fortunate, as the American Baptist Churches have a history of supporting the separation of Church and State.  However, with the 'liberal' and 'conservative' Church in America leaning heavily in the direction of greater involvement in politics, I've often felt like a 'voice calling out in the wilderness' on this issue.

Locally, churches have had nowhere to go over the last century but down.  Churches like First Baptist in Franklin were built by wealthy patrons who help(ed) both raise the building and fill it.  General Miller expected his employees to be in church Sunday morning, and he sweetened the pot with features like a nationally respected orchestra.  The church was filled to overflowing, though how many were there because of deep religious commitment is open to debate.

First off, thanks for the shout out in the newspaper to First Baptist.  It is certainly true that First Baptist was overflowing 100+ years ago.  We have Sunday School attendance books that show weeks with 1,000+ in attendance between the various classes for men, women, and children.  General Miller taught his afternoon class for decades, it would be fascinating to me to learn what those classes consisted of.  About half of the cost of the 1,800 seat addition that was completed in 1904 (it was all part of a 3/4 circle sanctuary then, now that  mega-sanctuary addition is a recreation area and auditorium) was borne by Charles Miller personally.  Whatever else he was, Charles Miller was a titan in this church's history, and the primary reason why we have this big, and beautiful, building.  I've also been told that Charles paid his workers, either a nickel or a dime, to come to church each week.  That story is ubiquitous here in Venango County, leading me to believe that it has some basis in truth, although no records from the time attest to it.  How genuine was that church attendance?  How much of it was simply giving in to social pressure?  We have no way of knowing, although the social pressure thing has certainly decreased in recent generations.

If we still had 1,000+ people here on Sundays it would now represent 15% of Franklin's total population, an amazing amount.  That ship, however, sailed a long time ago, as the impressive numbers here at the turn of the 20th century faded as the century wore on.  In theory, there is a large number of people who could walk here to church on Sunday (only a few do, most who attend here live miles away), although parking is an issue at downtown churches (all across the country), a limitation that evidently didn't stop our ancestors from getting here (in part utilizing Franklin's trolley system, yes, we had trolley lines back then) .

Growing a church in this area is a special challenge.  There are few "new" people moving in to the area and looking for a new church home, and the ranks of the unchurched who can be won to the faith - well, that's a pretty shallow pool too.  So there are only a couple of ways to grow a church.

It is indeed easier to grow a church when new people are moving to the area and one need not increase the % of various demographics being reached to still grow.  It is much harder to grown when the population is shrinking.  What about the unchurched? (FYI, I keep getting that red line below 'unchurched' that tells me it isn't a real word as far as the computer is concerned, as a former English teacher myself, I wonder if it bothered Peter while he was typing his column).  They are certainly the key to this whole issue.  If the churches in Venango County don't find a way to get more people to become a part of the church who are not currently, we will have to contend in this next decade or so with a number of additional church closures.  As the Baby Boomers leave us, what will be left behind?  To reach the unchurched is a serious challenge.  There are reasons why certain individuals and certain families have no connection to a church, those reasons are not easy to overcome.  From an outside perspective the challenge seems insurmountable.  From the inside it looks really tough too.  In the past decade our church has helped hundreds of people through the Central Help Fund and various other forms of assistance, the vast majority of whom are unchurched.  In response, one of them came to church, once, and although many have promised while asking for help that they would come to church, they haven't.  Results like that are disheartening (and topics of discussions at our Franklin ministerium meetings), but there is a bigger picture.  We, a Christians, are planters of seeds, not the one who makes them grow.  I disagree with Peter Greene that the ranks of the unchurched who can be won to the faith are a shallow pool, but at the same time I do not believe that the answer to that is in my hands.  The Holy Spirit can bring revival to our community, turning stony soil into fertile ground, bringing forth new life from seeds that were planted long ago.  I don't know if that blessing is coming, God's people have certainly prayed for it, but it is not for us to determine the outpouring of God's grace.  Until then, our efforts to show the love of Christ to the unchurched will continue, whatever the results may be.

One is to gather up the young folks.  Use video games, parties, fun trips - anything that gets them in the door.  They'll bring their friends, and maybe their families, but so many young people grow up to leave the area that this approach gives limited returns.

Going after the young is the #1 Church Growth approach.  Churches with full bands and a pastor wearing hipster jeans have cornered this market, but as Peter sees clearly, in a rural community this process is never-ending, as the teens of today are tomorrow's ex-Venango County residents.  In addition, in a town like Franklin, there can be only one or two "cool" churches where the teens hang out.  Today they are Atlantic Ave UB and Christ UMC, a generation ago they were different churches.  Reaching the young people certainly has value, but it can only be one piece of the puzzle, especially for the rest of us.

The other approach is to grab disaffected churchgoers who just left their old church because something there upset them.  Some local churches used to specialize in this type of recruitment, just as some churchgoers have a long line of abandoned churches stretched out behind them.

Yeah, this is definitely true.  I'm not sure which local church specialized in sheep stealing back in the day (I've been in this community 9 years now {I know, right} but Peter Greene has been here longer), but as a pastor I can tell you that none of us is happy with a pastor who builds his church by recruiting people from other churches.  The Kingdom of God doesn't grow a bit when people simply swap churches.  Of the growth that we've had since my arrival, a majority have been through people who used to go somewhere else (most were are the time, however, not attending), although we have had the joy of adding a few people 'from the outside'.  I have not, however, nor would I, encouraged people to leave their church to come to mine.  The opposite is actually how I operate.  When I speak with people in need (of counsel or assistance) I recommend to them that they become connected with a church in their neighborhood, personally recommending churches and pastors by name that I know will be a good home for that person.  

And yes, there are a number of people in our community who are on a church-hopping merry-go-round.  The pastors know who they are, aren't surprised when they leave, and won't be surprised years later when they come back around.  It is a recent phenomenon, one that was not possible in the old village parish church days, but one that has a negative affect upon the Church as a whole.  If people don't take ownership of their local church, if they don't invest themselves in it, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health, they'll never become the pillars upon which the next generation of the church needs to be built.  Sometimes it is necessary to leave a church, to walk away from a toxic situation, but that's a rarity, not the real reason why church loyalty has plummeted in recent decades.  Instead, churches are now viewed, by many, as a service provider, much like any other business, and if the service you receive from that church isn't up to your expectations, drop them just like you did AT&T or Chevrolet.  This is, of course, the opposite viewpoint from what it ought to be.  A church is a place where you give to the work of the Kingdom; you will certainly receive great blessings through that connection, but that isn't the reason why you should be there.  We live in a consumer culture, where advertisements try to lure you away from the businesses you utilize now each day; that attitude, when applied to the Church, is toxic.

Is there some secret to recruiting and retaining church members?  If somebody knew it, I'm sure they'd be making a mint running a church consulting service.

Welcome to Christian ministry.  The number of books, seminars, and consulting businesses that have grown up around the question of Church Growth are astounding.  It seems like the only thing preventing us from being a multi-site mega-church is our failure to follow the 7 easy steps outlined in the latest craze.  There are some good resources, and some useful habits and ideas that churches ought to adopt, but no magic bullet.  There is, by the way, a lot of money flowing in the Church Growth consulting field, distinguishing between the genuine ministries with a passion for the Gospel, and the ones just making money is no small task.

In the meantime, churches might try mastering some of the basics.

Amen and amen.  Focus on what church is supposed to be, on doing things the right way for the right reasons, and let God be responsible (as he already is) for the results.  Worship, Pray, Love, Serve, Share.

Don't announce that certain people aren't welcome there.

Absolutely, I'm not sure what type of 'announcement' he has in mind, but it is foolhardy in the extreme to put forth the impression that the Gospel isn't for a particular subset of 'tax collectors and sinners' to which your church objects.  All have sinned, all are lost, all need a Savior.  Our doors are open to anyone, from any background, who wants to hear the Gospel.  In the long-run, churches do need to integrate into their community people who are willing to accept the teachings of God's Word and live accordingly, but the call of the Gospel needs to go out to everyone

Act as if you believe what you claim to believe.

Few things get under my skin as quickly as Christian hypocrisy.  We, that is all of us in the American 21st century Church, have done a poor job of convincing the world that we take our own beliefs seriously.  The number of scandals related to immoral church leaders is sickening, we must do better.  Oddly enough, I was preaching about this very topic last Sunday: Sermon Video: The Dark Side of Church Leadership 

Be welcoming without being creepy.
There's a sweet spot there that isn't that hard to find.  As far as I can tell, our churches are doing a pretty good job on this front.  But yeah, avoid creepy.

And maybe ask yourself why, exactly, you want to recruit new members.
A good question.  "So that we survive as a church" isn't a good enough answer, even if it is an honest one.  The correct answer is, "Because this is what Jesus told us to do."  We are in the business of replicating in the lives of others what God has done in our lives (through the power of the Holy Spirit).  Why?  #1  For God's glory.  #2  Because it is what people need #3  Because we can't help but share the love, joy, and peace that we've found with others.

But in the meantime, Venango County is loaded with big, beautiful, underused churches that are a financial burden to their congregation.  We're in a place where having your giant aging church burn down can be one of the best things for its long-term health.
Sadly I've heard this sentiment before from a fellow ABC pastor who bemoaned that our church building hadn't burned down a long time ago.  There is no doubt that a bigger building than your congregation needs is a resource drain, but it is also an opportunity.  Our church isn't 'underused' despite our congregation being a tiny fraction of its peak 100 years ago, thankfully our board and congregation have made it a priority to invite local non-profits and community service providers to use our space Monday through Saturday {For example: AA, MSM, Jamie's Kids, Girl Scouts, Celebrate Recovery, AARP tax prep, etc.}
Each day as I walk from the parsonage, circa 1881, into the church building, retaining almost all of its architectural and artistic beauty from 1904, it uplifts my spirit and encourages me, reminding me of the legacy that we are a part of.  If this building were to burn down, not only would it be a travesty to Franklin's historic district, our heritage and culture, it would be a brutal loss of beauty in its own right.  We can keep this church going, in this building, for generations to come.  We can continue the legacy of Charles Miller (and countless others) who brought us to this point from the church's founding in 1867, through its 31 pastors, to this present day.

I'll see you at tonight's meeting.

The challenge of being salt and light - Matthew 5:13-16

Matthew 5:13-16 New International Version (NIV)
13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.
14 “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.

The Church is made up of people attempting to be disciples of Jesus Christ.  It is made up of people who have been called from a state of living in darkness, who have been introduced to the light of the Gospel (the Good News of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ on their behalf), and who by the power of the Gospel (through the Holy Spirit) have been transformed in their hearts and minds.  It is the will of God that those people, set free from bondage to sin, but not yet fully transformed to Christ-likeness, should remain living upon the earth to act as the "salt and light" that Jesus commanded them to be.  This is where it gets difficult.  Exactly how these redeemed, but not yet fully sanctified, disciples of Jesus can remain pure (salt) and at the same time live and minister in a world that remains dark (where they are to be a light) does not have a one-size-fits-all answer.
One option that has been tried from time to time in Church history has been that of withdrawal from society.  Beginning in the Early Church with hermits who literally withdrew to lonely places to avoid much of human contact, or even the Stylites ("pillar-dwellers" primarily in Syria) who lived at the top of stone pillars, to the later development of Monasticism where those living withdrawn from society did so in a community of like-minded people.  Without downplaying the importance of the monastic system for preserving knowledge from the Fall of Rome until the Renaissance, none of these attempted solutions were full answers to the command of Jesus, for while they may have been helpful in preserving purity (saltiness) they were at best only partly effective in sharing the Gospel with the Lost (being light).  If you withdraw from society, you may cut down on its ability to influence you toward immorality, but how can you influence it toward righteousness.  The same holds true for interactions with individual people, much of our potential sin involves interacting with other people, and so avoiding people might lead to less sin, but at the same time, most of our potential for righteous deeds involves interactions with other people, and curtailing those interactions will decrease righteousness as well.
Because withdrawal can, at best, only be a half or partial measure, the heart of the matter is how Christians can remain on the path of increasing Christ-likeness, thus preserving their saltiness, while at the same time engaging with the culture and people among whom they live so that their light will shine in the darkness.  The first step for any individual Christian in his/her need to be both "salt" and "light" is for that individual to not attempt the task as merely an individual Christian.  Like the Apostles that Jesus called to be in a community with him, and the other men and women who followed his ministry, Christians of every era, no matter how hostile or cooperative the culture they live in, need to be a part of something more substantial and more stable than anything they can do on their own.  The community created by Jesus, specifically for that purpose, is the Church.
How then does the Church help individual Christians retain their "saltiness" and enable their "light" to shine?  The purity (moral character) of individual Christians is enhanced and strengthened when they interact regularly with each other in community worship, prayer, service, and mentoring relationships.  It is easier to accomplish a difficult task, and rejecting sinful impulses to embrace a servant's heart of righteous self-sacrifice certainly qualifies as a difficult task, when attempting that task as part of a team.  Having other Christians by your side, to serve as both examples of how victory is possible, and to correct us when we go astray, is a boon whose worth cannot be calculated.  In addition, our ability to be a light in our community, to witness to the truth of the Gospel, is also enhanced by our connection to the community of believers.  One candle shining in the darkness will draw attention, yet it is difficult for that one light to sufficiently illuminate the way for others, but dozens of people holding lit candles will function more as a lighthouse or beacon.  For example: When a Christian participates in a ministry of the local church to which he/she belongs, like volunteering at a food pantry that the church runs, he/she not only gains valuable character shaping experience, but also is participating in an outreach effort that demonstrates to the Lost the love of God for them reflected in the love of God's people for them.
We don't expect all of our interactions as a Christian to be connected to our Church, at work and with our family and friends we will often be apart from the support and group effort of that community, but having the local church as one of the most significant aspects of our lives will absolutely make it easier for us to continue to be "salt" and "light" in those instances as well.

How important is your church community in your life?

How important is it to you to be in church on Sunday, to worship, pray, learn, and serve with God's people?

If you are a follower of Jesus Christ, you are commanded to be "salt" and "light", it is not optional, to accomplish that task you need to be a part of the community that Jesus created.

Sermon Video: Humbling ourselves for the sake of the Gospel - 1 Corinthians 9:19-23

Are we responsible for presenting the Gospel to the Lost in ways that mesh with their cultural and intellectual/emotional state?  The Apostle Paul thought so.  He was willing to humble himself to reach as many of the Lost as possible.  Figuring out how to do this may be difficult in practice, but the principle is firmly grounded, we ought to be "all things to all people so that by all possible means I (we) might save some."

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Trying to persuade people about Jesus - Acts 28:17-31

In the finale to the book of Acts, Luke shares the story of Paul's attempt upon his arrival in Rome to share the Gospel with the leaders of the Jewish community there.  It was not their first encounter with Jesus, they had been a divided community regarding the question of whether or not Jesus was the Messiah since at least AD 49 when Claudius expelled the riotous Jewish community from Rome about twelve years prior to Paul's arrival.  After a whole day of explaining the Gospel on the basic of the Law and the Prophets, Paul is able to persuade some, but only some, of the group.  Why is that?
Paul's explanation for the failure to see the Truth of the Gospel echoes that of the prophet Isaiah and of Jesus himself who also quotes Isaiah 6:9-10.  The problem is a hardened human heart.  It is not a matter of the eyes or ears (i.e. an intellectual problem) but of the heart (i.e. a spiritual problem) which has become calloused.  That frustration, of Paul, which echoes God's frustration, results in a decision that is relevant to the Church to this day.  If the Gospel will not be accepted by those privileged enough to receive it, it will be sent to others who are willing to believe.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

The Church's responsibility: evangelism and transforming discipleship

One of the numerous misconceptions about the Church, coming from both those outside of it and those within, is that the Church is a place where those who are already righteous (upright morally) come together.  This is not a new issue, the Early Church struggled with the question of whether or not the Church was intended to be a place for only saints to gather, or a place where both saints and sinners (i.e. those already redeemed/saved and those who had not yet committed themselves to Christ) together sought the kingdom of God.  Following the persecution instituted by Emperor Diocletian (AD 303-305, during which 1/2 of all those martyred prior to Constantine were killed); those who had resisted and risked their lives rejected as unworthy of being a part of the Church those who had capitulated in order to save themselves.  The courageous 'confessors' chose their own bishop, Donatus Magnus (see: Donatism), believing that only a bishop could forgive such a grave sin as 'lapsing' in the face of persecution, and that only a faultless clergy could administer valid sacraments.  In the end, the North African Church was split in two, never to heal, despite the attempts of two councils, the use of Constantine's soldiers to try to force a reunion, and even the power of St. Augustine's persuasion arguing that the Church was not supposed to consist of only of those who are already pure, but of those who long to be pure.
The Church was intended, by its founder Jesus, to be a place where both evangelism and discipleship take place concurrently side by side.  As a Church it is our responsibility to both share the Gospel with those who do not yet believe, and to help those who have committed themselves to following Jesus in their transformation process from someone dominated by sin to someone overflowing with the fruit of the Spirit.  Thus a healthy church will contain both those who are, hopefully, being called by the Spirit of God to accept the Gospel, and those who are being led by the Spirit of God to more and more closely adhere to the example and teachings of Jesus.  If a local church, or a denomination, fails to attempt/accomplish either task, the results will be grim.  A church without new converts is a church whose days are numbered, it may be a great place of fellowship, and excel at making disciples of those already there, but when they grow old and die, what then?  Likewise, a church that excels in "winning souls" through evangelism, but fails/neglects to disciple these converts, will result in a people of shallow faith where immorality is tolerated and the fruit of the Spirit in short supply.
It isn't easy for a local church, especially a small church with a bi-vocational pastor, or perhaps with a jack-of-all-trades solo pastor, to hit home runs in both evangelism and discipleship.  In my experience, most of them are better at discipleship than evangelism, better working with the people they already have than the people outside their doors.  Conversely, one of the criticisms of mega-churches is that due to their size it is easier for the numerous converts (certainly a good thing) to slip through the cracks, even with a large staff and small-group programs.  All churches have strengths and weaknesses, specialties and deficiencies in their ministries, but all are equally called by God to both bring lost sinners home and work to transform those redeemed by the blood of the Lamb into practitioners of righteousness.  We must share the Gospel, we must welcome outsiders and seek them out, and we must take the moral obligations of our people seriously, striving against both sins of commission and omission.  The challenge is immense, the kind of thing that keeps pastors up at night, the obstacles are plentiful and diverse, but the task once it is being accomplished it certainly worth whatever we put into it, and more.  Imagine a local church where new people are coming to Christ on a regular basis, where both those who have recently come to Christ and those who have journeyed with him for decades are encouraged and aided toward ever increasing Christ-likeness through righteous living and acts of service to others.  Nearly every pastor wants that for his congregation, books and workshops on how to achieve it are legion, the Spirit that makes it possible is willing.  Let us pray that we may be worthy of this high calling, my church and myself included.

The Church in America has lost Billy Graham, but doesn't seem to have a replacement

The man who preached in person to 100 million people the straightforward message of the Gospel during his 99 years has passed on to his reward, Billy Graham is no longer here, and it seems like the Church has nobody to replace him.  The combination of bedrock Gospel presentation with an apolitical attitude has gone out of favor among most of the preachers that you've heard of today.  Some have abandoned the Gospel of the Apostles, favoring either a version that demotes Jesus from being the Son of God and thus robs the message of its transforming power, or a version that distracts from Jesus with a focus upon wealth and prosperity, once again robbing the message of its trans-formative power.  Other preachers have retained their preaching of the Gospel, but have wedded that presentation so closely with the culture wars and their own support for (even unabashed support for, and excusing of, non-repentant sinners as "Christian leaders") politicians and political causes that they're only preaching to the choir, no longer able to be heard by the half or more of America that disagrees with the political party they've anointed as God's own.  Sadly, even Billy Graham's own son, Franklin, has fallen victim to this trend, having become a political cheerleader whose presentation of the Gospel is now weighed alongside his political pronouncements by those who need to hear the undiluted message of the Cross.

Can you imagine a popular preacher today who has the courage to maintain and defend the Gospel AND the kindness of heart and humility to minister to both Republican and Democratic presidents, or even just Republican and Democratic members of a congregation?  It may be a while before we see another preacher like Billy Graham, but our nation sure could use that voice sooner rather than later.

A Consumer Friendly Church? - What we can, and can't learn from the business world.

An important trait for businesses, of all kinds, is to be consumer friendly.  If those intended to purchase the goods or services provided by the company are turned off by their interactions with the company, especially those unrelated to the product itself, they will be less likely to continue to be consumers of that company's products even if they like the goods/services provided by the company.  For example: If the place that makes a decent burger down the street is habitually unclean with rude employees, won't you go someplace else?  If your doctor's office is conveniently located, staffed by friendly people, and appointments take place on time, as long as your doctor is competent, won't you continue to go to that doctor?
In business, these things are obvious, and companies that ignore them do so at their own peril, if competition exists in their market, they will lose customers until they make the experience of their customers more user friendly.  Those who fail to take customer relations seriously end up in bankruptcy sooner or later.
But what about the Church?  Is the Church supposed to be user friendly?  That really depends on what you mean by that.  It is important for a church to have a decent website, convenient parking, handicap accessibility, competent and safe childcare, proper lighting and sound in the sanctuary, service times that work for the community they are in, and other such similar things which are positive, not negative, factors in the relationship between a church and its congregation and potential new members.  Are there churches that ignore these things, making it more difficult than it has to be for people to be a part of that church?  Certainly, and everything else being equal, they will lose congregants to similar "competing" churches, and tragically some people who experienced that less than friendly interaction with a church will cease to go to church anywhere.
Where the discussion gets sticky, and controversial, is when the desire to make church user friendly spills over into the core functions of the church itself: worship, proclamation of God's Word, discipleship, and outreach to the unsaved and those in need.  If the church in question molds these areas into what their consumers (congregants) want, are at least the church thinks that they want, they risk creating a man-centered experience that puts the emphasis on pleasing people not God.  Whatever they build, even if it is wildly popular, won't stand the test of time nor will it please our Heavenly Father, for the Church gathers together to honor God, not please ourselves.  On the other hand, if the church in question sticks rigidly to their way of doing things, ignoring what their consumers (congregants) want, or even purposefully working against it, they risk emptying out the place and leaving themselves with a remnant who actually like the way things are, but no real potential for bringing in anybody new.  Both extremes are not hard to find in the wider Church today.  There are plenty of churches whose ministry feels an awful lot like they're trying to entertain people more than they are to transform people, and there are a lot of churches where the "its our way or the highway" approach has them on life-support.
This is, like so many things in society, a modern phenomenon.  Our ancestors by and large went to the local parish church that was nearest to their home (transportation being so much of a bigger deal back then).  That church was in almost every aspect a mirror image of its neighboring churches in how they did things, thus the experience for the consumer (congregant) would have been almost the same even if they had traveled further.  Today, it is not uncommon for most people who attend church to drive past a few, if not dozens, of churches on their way to the one they attend.  With denominational loyalty at all-time lows, churches feel pressured to be "attractive" to potential new members.
What is needed, as in so many things in our lives as Christians and as the Church, is balance.  Balance between what the people want and what they need, between doing things the same old way, and following the latest trends.  A spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down, perhaps, but not a cup full, and not a "eat it, its good for you!!" approach.  If we remain in balance, we can focus upon doing what we do, as a church, in a way that honors and pleases God, and we can do so knowing that it is ok to tweak how we do what we do, as long as we keep honoring and pleasing God as the reason why we do what we do.
Should your church update its music to be more user friendly?  Perhaps, music changes over time, we're not still using Gregorian Chant are we?  Should your church consider using a translation of the Bible that is easier for people to understand?  It might help, as long as the preaching remains centered in God's Word no matter which translation is used.  Should your church start a new poverty relief program, update the way it does discipleship, or consider a new approach to evangelism?  If things are not working well now, it is certainly worth studying to see what else you could do, there isn't any virtue in continuing to do things in a way that is failing.
In the end, the Church exists to make disciples of Jesus Christ, it is our one "product" our one indispensable "service", something that we must always do with honor, truthfulness, integrity, and dedication to serving others.  How we do that very thing is open to change, different approaches work better in different locations, and at different times, but we have nothing else to offer, so if we aren't doing that, whatever else we're doing won't make up for it.
Should the Church be friendly?  Absolutely.  Easy to approach and join?  You'd better believe it.  More concerned with what the people think than what God requires?  Not at all.  Willing to compromise our core beliefs to give people what they want?  Sorry, no.  We have one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, regardless of whatever else may change over time, that must always remain the same.  So go ahead, be more user friendly, just do so in a way that is in balance, that honorably maintains the Gospel of the Apostles, no matter how it is packaged.

Do all religions worship the same God?

Do the religions of the world worship the same God?  This fundamental question begs an answer to this question: What is Truth?

Christianity is built upon several presuppositions about knowledge and Truth which must be understood which will then answer the first question.

Truth exists and is knowable by mankind.  Not simply truth from my perspective, but Truth that exists apart from my belief or disbelief in it.  If Truth doesn’t exist, or if it is unknowable, humanity’s quest for it has been doomed from the start and the meaning of life cannot be determined.

Truth claims that are mutually exclusive cannot both be true.  In other words, either God exists or God doesn’t exist, both can’t be true; either humanity is fallen/corrupt or humanity is inherently good, both can’t be true, etc.

The religions of the world make mutually exclusive Truth claims, not complimentary ones.  If reincarnation is real, then the Eastern religions are correct and the Western ones are wrong.  If there is only one God, then the monotheists are right and the polytheists are incorrect, etc.

The Truth claims of Christianity are exclusive.  Christianity requires the belief in the divine/human nature of Jesus Christ, in his virgin birth, sinless life, vicarious death and resurrection.  If this is True, it negates the Truth claims of all the other world religions, for none of them afford Jesus Christ his exclusive role as Savior and Lord.

          The basis of Christian Truth claims is the revealed Word of God.  Christians don’t claim to have discovered the Truth, they are only recipients of Truth that has been given by God.  The Word of God forms the basis for all Christian theology and morality.

Do the religions of the world worship the same God?  No, no they don’t, for their claims regarding who that God is, what that God has done, and what that God requires of humanity are mutually exclusive.  It is on this basis that Christians have, since the founding of the Church, sought to share the Gospel with those who do not believe, it is not an act of arrogance, nor does it derive from a sense of superiority; Christian evangelism is driven by compassion, for just as God desires that none should perish by failing to believe in his Son, so too do his people want their fellow man to find God’s grace and mercy through Jesus Christ.

Do Christians really want Muslims to be saved?

In light of recent venomous criticism raised by self-proclaimed Christians against Christian author and apologist James White because of his willingness to dialogue with and debate Muslim apologists and imams with respect and fairness, an important question needs to be asked of the Church.  Do we, as followers of Jesus Christ, really want Muslims to come to know the love of God that is in Jesus Christ?  Do we want Muslims, any and all of them, to be violently killed or saved by love and grace?

If you actually do, as a Christian, want Muslims to come to know the love of Christ, (like any of the Lost: Atheists, Mormons, Hindus, etc.) what attitude would best help that evangelistic effort?  Do expressions of hatred help spread the Gospel?  Does calling all Muslims terrorists help them see that they need to come to Jesus by faith?  Or do we actually push forward the cause of the Gospel through dialogue, openness, respect, honesty, and charity?

James White has been the lightning rod of this issue, but it is far bigger than him.  The Church is being challenged by the violence of terrorism to reject hatred and remain steadfast in the embrace of the peace of Christ.  Giving in to hatred it easy, it appeals to our fallen human nature, it appeals to our tribalism and racism, but it is the opposite of the Fruit of the Spirit which we are supposed to be cultivating as disciples of Jesus.

Consider Saul of Tarsus.  He was a violent man, full of hatred, responsible for the deaths of Christians.  Should the Early Church have killed him in self-defense?  Should they have spewed hatred at him in return?  What did God do about Saul of Tarsus?  He showed him Jesus, and turned him into the Apostle Paul, perhaps the greatest missionary the Gospel has ever seen.  If Peter or John had given in to the temptation to respond to Saul with hate, how many souls would have remained Lost instead of hearing the Gospel?

A related question that we, as Christians, need to answer: Is our hatred of Muslims being driven by our politics?  When contemplating the criticism directed his way, much of which has only a token connection with the truth, James White recently said, "If your politics destroys your passion for the Lost in your life, dump the politics, stick with what has eternal value."

Are you a Christian?  Do you want Muslims, the vast majority of which are non-violent no matter what nonsense you read online or hear from politicians trying to get your vote or businesses trying to get your money, but even the terrorists who have killed Christians, to find forgiveness in Christ?  You have been forgiven for your sins, you came to Christ by grace, are you willing to be so ungrateful an adopted child of God that you would push others away from God's love?  All have sinned, all need a savior, if you think you have any right to be God's gate-keeper and decide who deserves God's grace and who deserves God's wrath, you are woefully and dangerously mistaken.

If the Gospel you claim to believe isn't for everybody, then you don't really believe it.

If you don't show love to the Lost, you have failed in your responsibility to share the Gospel.