Sermon Video: Jacob turns the tables on Laban - Genesis 30:25-31:18

 

In this chapter of his life story, Jacob's relationship with his father-in-law Laban deteriorates, eventually breaking.  Both men are to blame, as both seek to cheat the other.  In the end, Jacob is successful in obtaining most of Laban's wealth, and then leaves with his wives and children to head back to Canaan.

Sermon Video: Do Not Give the Devil a Foothold - Ephesians 4:25-28

As a follow-up to his command that Jesus' followers adopt a new attitude divorced from our former futile thinking when we were apart from God, the Apostle Paul offers up in these verses three examples of what that will look like: (1) Embracing truth by putting off falsehood, (2) Keeping anger in check so that it does not lead to sin, and (3) Sharing what we have earned rather than taking (stealing) from others.

With respect to anger in particular, Paul frames it as a potential "foothold" that the devil might use to ensnare those who sin in their anger.  The same holds true for the other two issues, and really any situation where we give in to temptation.  The answer is always the same: embrace righteousness.  When we say and do what is right, temptation (evil) has no opportunity to affect us.

Sermon Video: Abram fails to live by faith - Genesis 12:10-20

Abraham and Sarah are heroes of the faith, but their lives had challenges just like our own, and they failed to meet some of them with faith.  When famine caused them to seek refuge in Egypt, Abram was willing to put his wife at risk in order to avoid danger that he feared.  This form of, "Let us do evil that good may result," is wholly unacceptable for God's people.  Our call is to do what is morally upright, circumstances don't change that.

When the storm is raging at sea, ask a sailor for help, not a taxidermist: How can we navigate the COVID-19 pandemic?

Given some of the private conversations I've been having, let me issue a clarification: I do not now, nor have I previously, had issue with those who have different opinions from myself {unless they be outright immoral views, i.e. antisemitism from anyone or heretical views, i.e. denial of the resurrection of Jesus from a self-professed Christian}. As a firm believer in ecumenism within the Church {treating non-Baptist Christians as true brothers and sisters in Christ}, I take seriously the need to separate the Majors from the Minors {something I was taught by excellent professors at Cornerstone University like Andy Smith and Dr. Ronald Mayers}. That is, to see what is essential/eternal vs. what is opinion/preference/cultural/changing. The Majors are worth striving/fighting/dying for, the Minors are not even worth losing a friend over. I thus have Christian brother and sisters whom I love and respect who are Republicans, some who are Democrats, and some who couldn't vote for either. I have friends who believe in public education, those who champion private education, and those who home-school.

That being said, in regards to the current COVID-19 pandemic. If you believe that the government should re-open the economy now, that is an opinion based (hopefully) upon currently available facts. If you believe the government should wait, or re-open with caution, that is also an opinion based (hopefully) upon currently available facts. Americans clearly disagree about this issue, and that's ok, it is part of being citizens in a republic with free speech rights.

What our rights as Americans (and for myself, the superseding rights and responsibilities of being a Christian) do not grant us are: (1) Our own set of 'facts', or the right to ignore the facts when they don't suit us. (2) Expertise in areas that we do not possess education, training, and experience. For example: I have opinions about war, and have formed them having read widely on the subject of both ancient and modern war, its methods, purposes, and affects. My opinions are not based on nothing, but I recognize their limitations. Thus, if a combat veteran, a professional soldier, has an opinion, I will give it added weight; his/her training and experience has earned it. When the topic is Education, I am on firmer ground, having spent ten years as a public school teacher and having the education/training that proceeded that. I will thus weigh the opinion of other teachers as being similar to my own. Lastly, when the topic is Religion, specifically Christianity (more specifically Protestantism, American Protestantism, Baptists, and finally American Baptists) it is precisely within my education, training, and experience to share opinions that ought to be given more weight {A measure of common courtesy and decency that we reciprocate topic by topic and allow those with education/training/experience in the issue at hand to be shown respect} (3) Therefore, in the case of a global pandemic, such as COVID-19, our go-to response ought to be to give more weight to the opinions (based hopefully on solid facts) of ER physicians, epidemiologists, public health officials, and various others whose education/training/experience helps elevate their viewpoints toward being more consequential than that of the average citizen. Have medical professionals disagreed about COVID-19? Certainly, and that too is to be expected from such a complicated issue whose details continue to evolve as new studies and new data come to light (and old ones are revised or proven to be accurate). What do we do when the experts can't agree? The same thing you do when one mechanic tells you that your car needs an expensive repair and another says there is an easy fix. Look beneath the surface, seek additional opinions, check to see if your own bias is affecting your judgment about who to trust.

What this perspective doesn't do: Make everyone who isn't an expert in a field shut up and obey. That's not the point at all, hopefully it isn't what you're thinking while reading this. My point is not elitist, not by any stretch, it does not require an Ivy League education to become and expert, just a real one.

What this perspective does do: Allow those who have the best chance of being correct on an issue (thanks to education/training/experience, this do matter) to rise above those who have the least chance of being right on an issue.

When the plane I'm on is in danger of crashing, I want a pilot to be in charge, not a preacher. When faced with an angry bear in the woods, I'd rather have a park ranger next to me than a stock broker. When I need to understand something about God, let me look to someone who has dedicated his/her life to the service of God. And when people are dying of a new disease by the thousands, let me first turn to the doctors who has chosen to spend their lives trying to heal the sick.

God bless you all, I know our viewpoints on regarding COVID-19 are far ranging, and that animosity has been dangerously boiling up in our political life as a nation. Please, we can do better, we have to try.

Why is the Truth treated like a second rate commodity? Life lessons from an ESPN article: Happy 59th! Or is it 58th? Cracking the mystery of Don Mattingly's birthday - by Sam Miller

Do yourself a favor, read the ESPN article: Happy 59th! Or is it 58th? Cracking the mystery of Don Mattingly's birthday - by Sam Miller.  In a world of pandemics and political turmoil, an innocent mystery about a baseball card from 1987 is like a relaxing balm.

Yes, I have this card; several copies of it.

This story connects with me on multiple levels: (1) I was an avid baseball card collector in my youth {thus spending nearly all my paper route money} with tens of thousands of cards now stored in boxes in my parents' basement back in MI, (2) Don Mattingly was one of the four players that I tried to get every card of {along with the Tigers' Matt Nokes, the Mets' Dwight Gooden, and my all-time favorite, the A's Ricky Henderson}, and (3) the reason why I'm sharing this, I too care about accuracy and truth.

Why is it that so many people today can't even be bothered to spend 30 seconds to determine (painlessly and for free) whether or not what they're about to share on social media is a hoax, fake, or an outright lie?  What happened to the idea that, "My word is my bond"?  Why doesn't it bother more people that they're being used as tools to advance causes they may/may not agree with on the basis of falsehoods?

Baseball historian Bill Haber spent countless hours tracking down the truth about even totally obscure baseball players, writing letters and spending money for public records because he cared about the truth.  The author of the story, Sam Miller, dug around until he found the answer to a mystery (It's an interesting mystery, read the story) because he too wanted to know the truth.

As Christians, the Truth is supposed to matter more to us, there's a reason why I use a capital "T" when talking about it as a principle.  Dozens of times in the Gospel Jesus begins an important statement with, "I tell you the truth..." {"Verily"is the old school translation in the KJV}.

Numbers 23:19 New International Version
 God is not human, that he should lie,
    not a human being, that he should change his mind.
Does he speak and then not act?
    Does he promise and not fulfill?

John 4:24 New International Version
God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

John 14:6 New International Version
Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Those are but three of dozens of examples of the insistence upon the Truth from God and by the people of God.  When we lie, or share lies, we not only harm our own reputation as people who value Truth, but we are indeed committing acts of sinful rebellion against a God who rejects utterly the notion of using evil like a tool, no matter what the goal may be.  You may think you're serving a higher purpose by lowering the truth from a necessity to a nuisance, that your cause is worth the cost, but you're not, and it isn't.

Why don't we care more about Truth?  Why aren't we deeply concerned that we might inadvertently be spreading lies?  There is an answer, but you're not going to like what it says about us.    I use the plural pronouns because even though I do spend the time and put in the effort to honor the truth to the best of my ability, when some fellow Christians do not always do so, it is all of our reputation that suffers.  If we can't be bothered to care about the Truth in politics (to use a common example) why would anyone believe we know the Truth about life after death?  When enough Christians (or at least those professing to be Christians) have earned a reputation for dishonesty, that character flaw is ascribed to all of us, it becomes a weight that we must carry as we attempt to share the Gospel and impact our communities for the Kingdom of God.

Facts matter, honor matters, integrity matters, and yes, the Truth absolutely matters. If you can't be bothered to seek the truth, please stop pretending to represent Christianity.

This blog was "blacklisted" by Facebook, here is my response.

As some of you may have heard, my blog (a link to which I cannot provide here for reasons that will become clear shortly) was "blacklisted" by Facebook's automated system on Wednesday of this week " because it includes content that other people on Facebook have reported as abusive." Well, at least that's the error message I'm getting, since there are no actual human beings at FB to help with such issues, I'll never know who objected to my blog posts (shared on FB), how many people objected, which post(s) they objected to, nor what about my posts bothered them so much...

So let me muse about what it might be. Some things are relatively easy to ascertain...

1. It isn't about politics, at least it shouldn't be. The only comments I've made in the past 7 years about politics are responses when politicians, pundits, etc. have invoked the Bible, have claimed to be representing Christian morals/principles. As a pastor, I have both the education and the obligation to defend the Christian worldview against those who would bend and twist it to satisfy their own lust for power. If taking the stand that Christians should not trade their souls for temporal power has offended some Christians, I refer such feelings to the one who commanded them to devote themselves to Him alone.

2. It isn't because I've insulted people, which I haven't. It isn't because I've bullied anyone, haven't done that either. The only times I've named individuals in my blog posts have been when I'm quoting them. Many of those being quoted are long dead (like Machiavelli, I was hard on his this week, but since he died in 1527, I don't think it was him), or else are public figures who have made their opinions known (Bart Ehrman, James White, Andy Stanley, Pope Francis, etc.) in topics directly related to Christianity. Even when I've disagreed, strongly, with these individuals (Bart Ehrman for example), I've done by best to quote them in context, to represent their views fairly, and to explain why I disagree (when I do) with their statement/idea/belief without resorting to name calling, mocking, or hysterics.

3. It isn't because I revel in hot-button topics. Go ahead, visit my blog, look at the topic list on the right...I'll pause, since there is not direct link, it might take a second...In about 8 years, I've written about homosexuality 8 times (Gay marriage and gay rights brings the total to 14), I've written about Islam 16 times, sex/sexuality a total of 28 times...compare that to: The Gospel, 95 times, the Church, 121 times, poverty 38 times, prayer 35, Jesus 138 times, The will of God 84 times, forgiveness 42, faith 83, I think you get the point. I write about what my congregation needs to be thinking about, what I encounter in my pastoral work, the issues that face our community of Franklin, and the wider issues affecting the Church as a whole. I don't choose things to be "click bait", I don't say things I don't truly believe just to rile people up, and I don't make statement that aren't backed up by Scripture (to the best of my understanding and ability).

So, in light of this little introspection, what am I going to keep doing?

Will I continue to call upon Christians to live like Christ, and point out the hypocrisies and failures of the people of God when we do not? Yep.

Will I continue to reject the siren's call of power, wealth, and fame which have so infected so many claiming the name of Christ in America? Yep.

Will I continue to advocate for the poor, the downtrodden, the refugees, homeless, despised and rejected of society? Yep.

Will I continue to call for ecumenism within the Church and for adherence to the Gospel's call of universal Truth and application to people of every tribe, nation, and language? Yep.

The truth of the matter is that I have no idea who objects to views or why. I doesn't really matter, I've been called by God, ordained by his Church, chosen to shepherd this particular local church here in Franklin, and dedicated my life to the cause of Kingdom of God, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and the living out of the Fruit of the Spirit. My course is set, my life is not my own, I was bought with a price, the precious blood of the lamb.

Facebook has been a help to getting people to see my blog posts, and working around the blocking of my site will be annoying for as long as it lasts, but I'm not changing a bit. Not because of pride, nor stubbornness, but because I've always approached the words I speak and the words I type with gravity, and so I will quote the words of Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms (without any pretense to my situation being at all of the gravity of his)..."Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God. I cannot and will not recant anything, since it is neither safe nor right to go against conscience. May God help me. Amen."

Once again, rushing to judgment leads to error.

It should be obvious to Christians that being quick to judge another Christian, especially one you don't know personally, especially one who you only have an incomplete picture of, is both foolhardy and dangerous, and an avenue leading to sin.  While the phrase, "Judge not, lest ye be judged" is ingrained in our minds, we are at the same time bombarded with snap judgments and half-truths (if that) from the constant stream of information flowing our way, much of it politically motivated, through both the news media and social media.  The desire to get a story out fast, and the ease of sharing or re-tweeting something, especially something that confirms our own viewpoint or something salacious, can turn a small story into an avalanche that leaves fact-checking and a balanced view in the dust.

In recent months, a handful of people with an online/media presence have hammered away at an apologist that I often listen to (though don't agree with on everything, of course) named James White.  I first came across James White in college when his book, The King James Only Controversy was required reading for my Biblical Criticism class, that book would later form the nucleus of my History of the Bible lectures.

Those critical of James White in relation to a two-part dialogue he participated in with a Muslim Imam, have filled the airwaves/internet with a vast amount of partial truths, innuendo, name calling, and outright lies (easily refutable ones).  Why would they be able to get away with such character assassination?  Because God's people have allowed themselves to become lazy.  They've been spoon fed opinions in the political realm, leaning one way or the other, and have long since grown accustomed to accepting what they hear as the truth without verifying it.  I know that while watching the news, or reading an article online, it isn't possible to verify everything that you see, but when the issue involves accusations of "heresy", "cowardice", and claiming that a Christian is in league with mysterious Islamic forces that are trying to take over the world, one would think that you and I would be willing to at least dig enough to see whether such startling accusations have a basis in the truth.

Throughout this whole ordeal, the video of the dialogue in question has been available online, easily accessible to any willing to watch before reaching a conclusion about it.  Unfortunately, many of those who have been critical have too much invested (politically, emotionally, financially) in an apocalyptic narrative that is threatened by peaceful dialogue with Muslims.  For some, a clash of civilizations, WWIII style, is a desired outcome.  They see this as a pre-cursor to the 2nd Coming of Christ, and/or are looking at this issue through Nationalist eyes and not through Gospel ones.  Do some within Islam want worldwide Jihad and death to all the infidels?  Of course, many of them have joined terrorist groups to further their vision of utopia.  Does their desire make such a global fight to the death inevitable?  Not at all.  The Cold War ended without WWIII erupting, that was a far more grave situation against an enemy far better equipped to wage war, yet it never fully erupted into all out war.  One should then ask, why are so many people in Europe and America so heavily invested in seeing the current level of conflict become a global war?  Why do they want the dream of the terrorists, global war, to come true?

For the sake of the Church, and the sake of the Gospel, we cannot afford, as Christians, to close our hearts and minds to the need of the Muslim people to hear and receive faith in Jesus Christ.  If we choose to write off a billion people as beyond the reach of the Gospel, great will be our shame, and severe our judgment before Almighty God.  If we choose to abandon them, for any reason, we will have failed as the people who have been called by God to take the Gospel to the ends of the earth.

We won't reach Muslims with the Good News by lumping them all into one group as terrorists.  We won't reach Muslims by shouting from street corners, posting insulting videos, or insisting that any conversation include condemnation of Muhammad.  That avenue offers no hope of success, only the self-righteousness of condemning those who are already lost (as if have been told to do so by God).  How will the Muslims of the world be reached for Christ?  Through patience, understanding, friendships, honesty, and kindness.  If you're not interested in being a part of such a loving approach, your problem isn't with James White or the countless missionaries at work for the Kingdom in Muslim countries today, your problem is with the Gospel.

For the sake of the truth, and to show at least a modicum of interest in it.  Read the article below published by ChristianNews.net  If you still think White is a "dupe" or Judas, dig further, or perhaps look in the mirror and ask yourself why you won't want Muslims to hear about Jesus.

Apologist James White Draws Concerns After Holding, Defending Interfaith ‘Dialogue’ at Church With Muslim Imam

FYI, one of the issues being condemned is the use of a church building for this event.  The Church in the NT is not a building, it is a people.  It is not the place which is sacred, but the people who meet there who make it so by having been saved by God's grace.  To use such a building to further the spread of the Gospel is a use that brings glory to God, not shame.

{Update 11/21  The James White that I used to listen to while working no longer has the same ministry.  In the past 3-4 years he has followed Eric Metaxas down the road of political 'sky is falling' conspiracy theory laden hysteria.  I no longer recommend listening to his messages with the exception of the older material related to textual criticism}

What you win them with is what you win them to.

If you do a Google search on that quote, "What you win them with is what you win them to", you'll likely find a lot of blogs from pastors and other church leaders talking about what it means in relation to evangelism and outreach by the Church.  The quote is a variation of something A.W. Tozer said, "You win them to what you win them with", although figuring out who first turned it around isn't easy.  I first heard the new version of the quote listening to James White, Christian author and apologist.

Given the rancor and divisiveness of the 2016 election in the United States, it seems evident that the principle underlying the quote applies to elected officials as well.  If a politician runs an honest campaign, you can expect him/her to govern honestly, if a politician runs a sleazy and dirty campaign, you can expect him/her to govern in a sleazy and dirty manner.  That ought to be obvious enough to the average voter, but it seems that many voters, on both sides, have been operating under the illusion that the person/party in which they place their trust will govern differently than they ran for office, as if the character that is displayed (or lack thereof) in the attempt to gain power is somehow divorced from the character (or lack thereof) that will be displayed in the exercise of power.

The same principle holds true in the business world.  Any company which employs sneaky or underhanded tactics to get customers through the door cannot be expected to treat those same customers with honesty and integrity once they have their money.

I'm also reminded of the various commercials on TV from law firms hoping to recruit people to sue over this issue or that, can one expect a lawyer who would resort to such a blatant appeal to greed to gain a client to subsequently treat that client with anything other than that same greed?  Or consider the cash advance and structured settlement commercials, they too make their appeal based on short-term desires pumped up by greed in order to gain customers, would you expect your interaction with such a business to be based on any other principle than their greed?

Regarding the Church, we have a greater reason than what is practical to heed the warning of using tactics which are less than fully upfront and honest.  It is of course immoral for the people of God to try to increase our membership/attendance through duplicitous or sneaky means.  In addition to our moral imperative to avoid such things, they just don't work.  If you "win" a person for the Gospel with anything less than (or greater than) the Gospel's simple message of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, you haven't "won" that person at all.  The Gospel's power is not based in our tactics or effort, but in its Truth.  If the Church offers the Truth, in love, and fails, so be it.  If we offer a diet version of the Truth, even our successes will be failures.

Should the Church be inviting and friendly, a place where those from the outside feel welcome?  Of course it should, for we have been commanded to share the Gospel with the Lost, but if in our efforts to be inviting and friendly we dilute the Gospel, minimize the focus on worship, or simply offer up a feel-good experience devoid of the Gospel's emphasis on repentance, we will have "won" the lost to our fellowship, but they'll still be lost.  Only the true Gospel, the Gospel of the Apostles as contained in the Scriptures, has the power to save, offering the world anything less is a fool's bargain.

Christians must not advocate falsehoods

This really shouldn't need to be said, but given the current political climate in America, it has become clear that many people who call themselves Christians, from both sides of the political spectrum, have decided that the truth must be sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.  In other words, the truth is getting in the way of winning in politics, therefore the truth has become a luxury that can no longer be indulged in.  The goal of winning against political foes has been valued more highly than the character trait of being a disciple of Jesus Christ who honors honesty and the truth.  The resulting common use of half-truths and outright falsehoods, knowingly, is not only weakening our democratic republic, but the ministry of the Church itself and the effectiveness of the Gospel, for it demonstrates that those who have placed the pursuit of power above the pursuit of the truth, have also placed their allegiance to Jesus in a secondary role, at best.
If you are a disciple of Jesus Christ, a true and committed follower who has been washed clean in the blood of the Lamb and given the gift of the Holy Spirit, you cannot serve another master.  The contrast between the kingdom of God, its priorities and methods, and the world in which we live, is very stark.  To "win" by the standards of this world, is to fail in the kingdom of God.  The world values power, fame, and wealth, the kingdom of God values humility, submission to God's will, and service to others.

Psalm 34:12 "Whoever of you loves life and desires to see many good days, keep your tongue from evil and your lips from speaking lies."
Proverbs 12:22 "The LORD detests lying lips, but he delights in men who are truthful."
Proverbs 30:8a "Keep falsehood and lies far from me"
John 8:32 "Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
John 8:44 "You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire.  He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him.  When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

Don't lie to yourself, if you've embraced falsehoods, if you are willingly believing and spreading lies, you're not serving the kingdom of God.  Whatever your goal is, no matter how worthy it may be, pursuing it this way is sinful.  It isn't worth it, to tarnish your character for the sake of power in this world is a fool's bargain.  The people of God must be speakers of the Truth, and we must have no patience for those who have chosen instead to embrace lies, nor any part in spreading them.

Being a Habitually Accurate person

Much was said in 2016 of the accuracy of the statements made by various American politicians and their surrogates, most of it not complimentary.  We, as a society, struggle with the desire to put Power above Truth, and the willingness to bend, or invent, "facts" in order to win.  These tactics, win or lose, come at a cost; those who utilize them pay by earning a reputation as a person who cannot be trusted, except when acting in their own self-interest.
The Church, and the people of God, must not allow themselves to be swayed by this siren's song of power to taint their trustworthiness with exaggerations, half-truths, bendable "facts", and outright lies.  Whatever is at stake, to "win" by such methods is to certainly lose.
Compare the current atmosphere's emphasis on finding things that are "true for me" with the timeless desire for Truth in the Word of God.  In F.F. Bruce's 1943 classic, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, Bruce writes the following after citing dozens of examples of historical accuracy by Luke in his Gospel and in Acts.

"Now, all these evidences of accuracy are not accidental.  A man whose accuracy can be demonstrated in matters where we are able to test it is likely to be accurate even where the means for testing him are not available.  Accuracy is a habit of mind, and we know from happy (or unhappy) experience that some people are habitually accurate just as others can be depended upon to be inaccurate.  Luke's record entitles him to be regarded as a writer of habitual accuracy."

These words bear weight in the ongoing apologetic effort to defend the trustworthiness of the Bible, but they also remind us of something important: that character (or the lack thereof) matters.
Are you accurate and reliable?  Do the things you say on social media, and the things you "like" and share also value Truth over Power?  If we are inaccurate in the small things, why will others trust us when we claim to speak the Truth about the important things?
The people of God cannot afford to sacrifice their love of the Truth in the pursuit of political power, and must certainly not sacrifice our reputation as Truth-speakers about eternity for any purpose in the here and now.  Speak the Truth, our Father loves the Truth, its that other guy that spends so much time crafting lies.

Sermon Video: The Shepherds go to Bethlehem - Luke 2:15-18

The first missionaries of the Gospel were the shepherds visited by the angels who first came to see the promised child for themselves and then went and shared that Good News with many.  The shepherds did not know how this child would save his people, but because they trusted God they were filled with joy and shared their wonder with others.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

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: