I am a Minister of the Gospel: called, ordained, and entrusted to shepherd the sheep

I may not look the part yet, but perhaps someday

In recent conversations, primarily online, a number of people have 'warned' me against speaking out about the reality of systemic racism and/or the deadly nature of COVID-19 and the efficacy of the vaccine.  Some of these conversations have included predictions that doing so will damage my ministry, my Gospel witness, and call into question my integrity.  Some have suggested that wanting to be right (i.e. know and share facts and truth) is a character flaw, or at least a waste of time when such issues are only matters of opinion.  I would be sugarcoating it if I said these responses didn't bother me; some of them, given my relationship with the source, have been deeply disappointing and emotionally painful.

What then is my response, how do I evaluate this advice in light of my own call to ministry?  The following is an attempt to respond, if you are one of the people referred to in the paragraph above, please read this in the spirit and heart in which I write it, as much as I value our relationship, these issue demand more of me.  If what you wrote/said was coming from a place of genuine concern, I value that.

Therefore, as a minister of the Gospel:

1. I will NOT disregard, dismiss, or 'other' those in need

When we first began working on getting a homeless shelter operating in Venango County {now called: Emmaus Haven of Venango County a wonderful organization my church and I are committing to supporting} there were a number of local people who shared a variation of this idea: "There are no homeless in Venango County, what are you going to do, bus them up here from Pittsburgh?"  This was factually inaccurate, those who work to help solve housing issues in our area were well aware that there are in fact a significant number of homeless individuals (and families) on any given day in our county.  Many of them are temporarily homeless, as opposed to chronically, but they certainly needed shelter.  Additionally, are we as Christians supposed to care less about those who are homeless in the Pittsburgh area?  Are they not our neighbors too?

Thankfully, the local churches of our county, together with our partners in the county government, were able to continue to move forward and eventually open Emmaus Haven.  Whether we see them or not, whether we know them or not, those in need in our community are human being created in the image of God, they are not an 'other', not a 'them' to be ignored.

I will not consider less worthy of compassion, help, and prayer:

A. Immigrants, refugees, and other non-citizens

B. Those who are homeless, downtrodden, and desperate

C. The who suffering with physical or mental handicaps

D. Those living in poverty

E. Those battling addictions

F. The unvaccinated or those otherwise lacking healthcare

G. Those who don't look, act, or think like me.

The list could be longer, or more specific, but you get the point.  As a minister of the Gospel, called to live by the Law of Love, setting up barriers to that obligation is a direct violation of my oath before God.  I cannot allow them in my own heart or mind, and am called to confront them when the people of God wrongly exhibit them.

Psalm 82:3     New International Version

Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.

2. I will NOT excuse, utilize, or encourage lies and falsehoods in the name of the 'greater good', in a misguided attempt to bolster my ministry, or protect my country.

This is the part that frightens me about the health of much of the Church in America today.  I see 'Christian' websites willingly spreading falsehoods because they bolster the Culture War narrative of the moment, 'Christian' leaders embracing easily disprovable ideas for financial or political gain, and much of it without significant pushback.  We seem to care more about 'winning' than the Truth, and that guarantees that the last thing we will be doing with respect to the Kingdom is winning.

A. Truth matters, honesty and integrity do too.

B. We all have opinions, we don't all have facts to back them up.  Opinions are not created equally, authority, experience, and expertise have weight.

C. A disregard for the Truth is a cancer within the Church, WE must always want to be, strive to be, and pray to God that we will be, walking in the light of truth and not the darkness of error/lies.

Titus 1:2  New International Version

in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

Hebrews 6:18  New International Version

God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.

The cause of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is NOT advanced through lies, end of story. 

3. While matters pertaining to God, the Church, the Bible, and Christianity are my area of special concern, training, experience, and relative expertise, that does not mean I will MYOB or 'stay in my lane' regarding the issues that confront me, my family, community, country, or the world.

A. A prophetic voice is a calling from God.  My particular calling, as evidenced by my passion, the testimony of other Christians who know me, and my ability is to be a Teacher.  I will not ignore it or muzzle it.

B. When a minister of the Gospel grounds his/her opinion in a biblical, orthodox, and historic understanding of the Church, the burden shifts to the people of God to evaluate, weigh, and respond to it.

C. If you disagree with my conclusions without offering a biblically, orthodox, and historically Christian alternative, you haven't responded to the prophetic voice God has laid upon me {and tens of thousands of others, I am but one of God's servants}.

Putting B and C together, this is what frustrates me about much of the online, in particular, 'debate'    between Christians.  I see little evidence of attempts to ground opinions in biblical interpretation or the teaching of the Church.  I see ample political argumentation, far too much actually, and plenty of economic or philosophical viewpoints, but very little of it grounded in a Christian worldview, expressing a desire to evidence the Fruit of the Spirit.  It is not the secularists on the outside who are a significant threat to the Church in America, but those who have abandoned a Christian Mind within.

D. There is ample room to disagree within a Christian framework, even strongly disagree.  A healthy Church has diverse opinions within a Christian worldview.

Feel free to disagree with me, if you do so within a Christian framework at least we're having a healthy discussion, an 'iron sharpens iron' type thing, even if we cannot agree.

E. Opinions which are contrary to biblical, orthodox, and historic Christianity are NOT healthy for individual Christian or the Church and should be challenged by every minister of the Gospel.

Such opinions included, but are not limited to, those based in

    (1) Individualism

    (2) Consumerism/Materialism

    (3) Nationalism

    (4) Racism

    (5) Sexism

Philippians 2:1-5  New International Version

2 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

I will continue striving to fulfill my calling, hopefully speaking the Truth, and hopefully doing so in love.  As Luther was purported to have said, "here I stand, I can do no other."  May God enlighten us all through his Spirit at work within us.

QAnon's kidnapping and “adrenochroming of children” is just repackaging the medieval antisemitic Blood Libel, the whole movement must be utterly rejected.

 John 8:44 (NIV)  You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. 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.

2 Corinthians 11:14 (NIV)  And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

The Truth matters, embracing lies, for whatever reason, is the path of self-destruction.  If the Chruch fails to exorcise this QAnon 'demon' now, it will reap the whirlwind later.

When QAnon first appeared on my radar I shared briefly some responses debunking its odd conspiracy theories, with one respondent telling me that I was wasting my time with such a fringe element.  That was a year ago.  Today, roughly 20% of Americans believe (to an extent) that there really is a global conspiracy of elites to kidnap children for pedophelia and/or 'adrenochroming'.  That this is not actually true has not slowed the ludicrous speed of the spread of these lies.  In addition to endangering our republic, and inspiring violence, the basis of QAnon's primary conspiracy is just a repackaged medieval Blood Libel, and if it grows strong enough, it will lead to mass violence against Jews; again, with so-called Christians cheering them on, again.

In April, "Passsion of the Christ" star Jim Caviezel gave an interview {‘Passion of the Christ’ Star Jim Caviezel Pushes False QAnon Conspiracy at Right-Wing Conference} to a COVID-19 conspiracy theory conference in which he claimed to have knowledge of secret riturals being performed by an international elite to harvest the adreneline from the bodies of children (who would be killed in the process) in order to obtain perpetual youth for those who drank this unholy elixir.  The "adrenochroming of children" is just one of the manifestations of the QAnon conspiracy theory about the kidnapping and abuse of children by a shadowy organization, comprised of elites from the political world and Hollywood; a group significantly more Jewish than the population as a whole.  To those who know the sordid history of the relationship between the Church and Jews, this revival of the medieval Blood Libel is not surprising, as evil ideas do not fully die when discredited, but it is ominous, as the last time the Blood Libel gained a wide audience it began the dark road of modern antisemitism that led to the Holocaust.

The History of the Blood Libel

The following section in bold is verbatim from the Anti-Defamation League website: adl.org

The “blood libel” refers to a centuries-old false allegation that Jews murder Christians – especially Christian children – to use their blood for ritual purposes, such as an ingredient in the baking of Passover matzah (unleavened bread). It is also sometimes called the “ritual murder charge.” The blood libel dates back to the Middle Ages and has persisted despite Jewish denials and official repudiations by the Catholic Church and many secular authorities. Blood libels have frequently led to mob violence and pogroms, and have occasionally led to the decimation of entire Jewish communities.

The blood libel is particularly appalling in light of the fact that Jews follow the Hebrew Bible’s law to not consume any blood, which is found in the book of Leviticus. In order for an animal to be considered kosher, all its blood must have been drained and discarded.

ORIGINS OF THE BLOOD LIBEL

The first ritual muder charge took place in Norwich, England, in the twelfth century. A boy named William was found dead in the woods outside of town, and a monk, Thomas of Monmouth, accused local Jews of torturing him and murdering him in mockery of the crucifixion of Jesus. Although many townspeople did not believe this claim, a cult venerating the boy eventually sprang up. At this time the myth began to circulate that each year, Jewish leaders around the world met to choose a country and a town from which a Christian would be apprehended and murdered.

The blood libel spread throughout the Christian world in the Middle Ages. When a Christian child went missing, it was not uncommon for local Jews to be blamed. Even when there was no evidence that any Jew had anything to do with the missing child, Jews were tortured until they confessed to heinous crimes. Some Christians believed that the four cups of wine that Jews drink at the Passover Seder celebrations were actually blood, or that Jews mixed blood into hamantaschen, sweet pastries eaten on the Jewish holiday of Purim. Others claimed that Jews used Christian blood as a medicine or even as an aphrodisiac. Scholars have documented about 100 blood libels that took place from the twelfth to sixteenth centuries. Many of them resulted in massacres of Jews.

THE BLOOD LIBEL IN MODERN TIMES

The blood libel persisted into modern times. In 1840, members of the Damascus Jewish community were charged with kidnapping and killing a Christian priest who had disappeared. Several notable Jews from Damascus were tortured to extract confessions, and an angry mob destroyed a synagogue and its Torah scrolls. Jews were massacred repeatedly in the Muslim world, partly as a result of this libel, which had been imported from Christian society.

Blood libels continued even into the twentieth century as well. In 1913 a Ukrainian Jew named Menahem Mendel Beilis was charged with ritually killing a Christian child whose body was discovered near a local brick factory in Kiev. During a sensational trial, numerous respected Russian intellectuals and scholars testified that Jews attacked Christians and used their blood in obscene rituals. Ultimately Beilis was acquitted of the charges, but not before horrific anti-Semitic claims were repeated and broadcast throughout Russia.

A blood libel even occurred in Massena, New York, in 1928. When a four-year-old girl went missing from her home, a rumor spread that local Jews had kidnapped and killed her. Crowds gathered outside Massena’s police station, where the town’s rabbi had been summoned. A state trooper questioned the rabbi, and asked him whether Jews offered human sacrifices or used blood in rituals. The girl was eventually found alive and unharmed.

And this discussion of origins from Diarmaid MacCulloch's amazing book: Christianity, the First Three Thousand Years, p. 400-401

One of the characteristics of Western Christianity between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries is its identification of various groups within the Western world as distinct, marginal and a constant potential threat to good order: principlal among such groups were Jews, heretics, lepers and (curiously belatedly) homosexuals.  In 1321 there was a panic all over France, ranging from poor folk to King Philip V himself, that lepers and Jews had combined together with the great external enemy, Islam, to overthrow all good order in Christendom by poisoning wells.  Lepers (as if they had not enough misfortune) were victimized, tortured into confessions and burned at the stake, and the pogroms against Jews were no less horrific.  Muslims were lucky enough to be out of reach on that occasion.  From the mid-twelth century, a particularly persistent and pernicious community response to the occasional abuse and murder of children was to deflect guilt from Christians by blaming Jews for abducting the children for use in rituals.  This so-called 'blood libel' frequently resulted in vicious attacks on Jewish communities.  Sometimes higher clergy did their best to calm the community hysteria in such cases; sometimes they allowed shrine-cults of the murdered victims to develop.  Recurrences of the blood libel persisted into the twentieth century as a blemish on Christian attitudes to Jews, spreading from the West into Orthodoxy in later centuries.

And this chilling conclusion about the path that led to the Holocaust from MacCulloch, p. 948

It will not do to point out the undoubted fact that most Nazis hated Christianity and would have done their best to destroy its insitutional power if they had been victorious.  As the Nazi extermination machine enrolled countless thousands of European Christians as facilitators or uncomplaining bystanders of its industrialized killing of Jews, it could succeed in co-opting them in the work of dehumanizing the victims because the collaborators had absorbed eighteen centuries of Chrstian negative stereotypes of Judaism..the most mendacious and marginalizing such as the 'blood libel'

Lastly, below are quotes from the articles linked at the bottom.

But historians offer another thesis for the purpose QAnon serves. The “nocturnal ritual fantasy”—a term coined by the historian Norman Cohn in his landmark study of European witch trials, Europe’s Inner Demons—is a recurring trope in Western history. And it is often a politically useful one. Deployed by the Romans against early Christians, by Christians against Jews, by Christians against witches, by Catholics against “heretics,” it is a malleable set of accusations that posit that a social out-group is engaged in perverse, ritualistic behaviors that target innocents—and that the out-group and all its enablers must be crushed. - Talia Lavin

It is easier to imagine violent predation by political opponents—and perhaps unleash vengeance against them—when you already believe they consort with demons and drink the blood of children for amusement. - Talia Lavin

“This whole blood libel is very prominent there, the idea of kidnapping children for blood,” said Magda Teter, a Jewish studies professor and author of “Blood Libel: On the Trail of an Antisemitic Myth.” “People are going to start googling ‘killing children for blood.’ That will lead them to anti-Semitism even if they may not be initially inclined.”- Ben Sales

Some of QAnon’s supporters are surely aware that they are targeting Jews. But the ideas of harvesting children’s blood and controlling the world through a secret cabal are anti-Semitic even if the growing numbers of QAnon adherents don’t realize it, or don’t directly refer to Jews, Teter said. These ideas are so old and established, she said, that they function as codes for anti-Semitism and obviate the need to mention Jews directly. - Ben Sales

QAnon, Blood Libel, and the Satanic Panic How the ancient, antisemitic nocturnal ritual fantasy expresses itself through the ages—and explains the right’s fascination with fringe conspiracy theories - by Talia Lavin, The New Republic

Fear and adrenochrome: The conspiracy theory right is addicted to crazy ideas about a drug - by Ben Sixsmith, The Spectator World

QAnon an old form of anti-Semitism in a new package, say experts Some of those tracking conspiracy theory note its use of tropes, vocabulary of anti-Semitic propaganda and blood libels throughout history By Ben Sales, The Times of Israel

** An added connection to antisemitic tropes: QAnon's foe is a shadowy group of elites, not much different from the nonsense that "Jews run the world", that lie was used to devestating effect against Jews.  In addition, two of the biggest villains of Q are the Rothschild family and George Soros, in other words, rich Jews. **

There is NO place in the Church of Jesus for QAnon; period, end of story.  Just as there is not place in the Church of Jesus for antisemitism.  A rational analysis of QAnon's beliefs will demonstrate that at its heart, in addition to being a lie, it is full of antisemitism.  The Church must firmly, fully, and forcefully reject this belief system, even if it causes those who adhere to it to leave the church (showing their true loyalty) and even if it costs some ministers their jobs.  This issue is that serious.

Sermon Video: Jesus walks on the water - Mark 6:45-56

 After taking an evening alone to pray, Jesus walks across the Sea of Galilee as his disciples row across. When they see him they are terrified, but after he assures them that it is him, they remain amazed even as their fear dissipates. Why? "Their hearts were hardened." Even though they had seen numerous miracles from Jesus, the reality of his divinity had still not penetrated their hearts and minds. What Truths is God attempting to communicate to his people today through his Word that they aren't hearing? Where are our hearts/minds hard? Introspection is needed, mentorship and discipleship is necessary. The Church needs to hear God when he speaks, needs to be open to the Spirit, for this need we pray.

The Problem with claiming to be a Prophet: What happens when you're wrong?

I'll confess up front, I'm not comfortable with charismatic expressions of Christianity, never have been.  They don't fit well with either the more stoic tendency of my personality, nor the analytical nature of my thinking.  In fact, in high school I was asked by one of my best friends to accompany him to a charismatic church service because he was interested in a girl but nervous about going to her church.  Baptists are in many ways adjacent to the Charismatic Movement.  A  minority of the people in our churches like to lift their hands when singing, some like to respond to the prayers of others out loud with "Yes, Jesus!" and the like, this affinity is typically even more pronounced among our majority Black congregations.  In my mind, there has always been a significant divide between enthusiastic worship expressions (more of a personality thing) and manifestations of the Spirit like speaking in tongues or faith healing (a question of theology).

Which brings us to recent events and the question of prophets.  You may or may not be aware of it, but a number of prominent "Prophets" in the Charismatic Movement predicted that Donald Trump would win the 2020 election.  Given that there were only two real possibilities, and the advantage that Republicans have thanks to the Electoral College, that was at least a 50/50 shot.  But he didn't win.  Now what?

Until yesterday I had never heard of Jeremiah Johnson of North Carolina, although he has 60k followers on Facebook which is about 6,000 times as many as follow me.  Jeremiah Johnson was one of the ministers who predicted that President Trump would be reelected, evidently because of a dream in which he also predicted that the Dodgers would win the World Series this year, and Amy Coney Barrett would be elevated to the Supreme Court.  As Meatloaf famously said, "Two out of three ain't bad".  Except when it comes to prophecy it isn't.  Two out of three is as bad as two out of one hundred when you claim to be a prophet, we're not talking about stock tips or guessing answers while watching Jeopardy.  Prophecy is supposed to be the sharing of communication from Almighty God, since God exists outside of time as the Alpha and Omega, how can true prophecy every be wrong?  There's the rub.  True prophets are always right if what they're given by God is a prediction concerning the future.  Their words may unfold in unexpected ways, or at unexpected times, but they never fail because true prophets speak God's words and His Word is forever True.

How did Jeremiah Johnson respond to his error?  He actually did the right thing and repented of leading his flock astray on this issue, and took a step back from his involvement in politics with some introspection.  He also notably didn't blame Christians for failing to pray hard enough to 'make God's will happen' (there's a number of theological questions about that notion that are prickly), or tell them to cling to the false hope that the election results will be miraculously changed in the next few days (as some false prophets continue to do).  The result of this public apology and willingness to admit error?

"Over the last 72 hours, I have received multiple death threats and thousands upon thousands of emails from Christians saying the nastiest and most vulgar things I have ever heard toward my family and ministry. I have been labeled a coward, sellout, a traitor to the Holy Spirit, and cussed out at least 500 times. We have lost ministry partners every hour and counting.

After publicly repenting on January 7th, I fully expected to be called a false prophet etc in some circles but I could have never dreamed in my wildest imagination that so much satanic attack and witchcraft would come from charismatic/prophetic people. I have been flabbergasted at the barrage of continued conspiracy theories being sent every minute our way and the pure hatred being unleashed. 

To my great heartache, I’m convinced parts of the prophetic/charismatic movement are far SICKER than I could have ever dreamed of. I truthfully never realized how absolutely triggered and ballistic thousands and thousands of saints get about Donald Trump. It’s terrifying! It’s full of idolatry!"

Jeremiah Johnson's FB feed, the post quoted is from 1/10/21

Jeremiah Johnson's public apology

When you mix false prophecy with fervent political partisanship, the resulting concoction is highly volatile, like nitro glycerin, shaking it is not recommended.  Rather than focus on the question of how so many 'Christians' can justify such hate in the name of Christ, let us ponder the question of prophetic error.  

What does scripture say about the prophets who predict rightly versus prophets whose word fails?

1. Prophets who try to lead the people away from God will not be tolerated.

Deuteronomy 13:1-5  If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says, “Let us follow other gods” (gods you have not known) “and let us worship them,” 3 you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The Lord your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 It is the Lord your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. 5 That prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery. That prophet or dreamer tried to turn you from the way the Lord your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you.

2. God's people are to reject false prophets whose predictions fail to come true.

Deuteronomy 18:14-2214  The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the Lord your God has not permitted you to do so. 15 The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, “Let us not hear the voice of the Lord our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die.”

17 The Lord said to me: “What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him. 19 I myself will call to account anyone who does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name. 20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, is to be put to death.”

21 You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the Lord?” 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously, so do not be alarmed.

3.  True or false prophets can also be recognized by their morality.

Matthew 7:15-20  “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

4. The claim of being a prophet is no guarantee of a right standing with God.

Matthew 7:22  Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’

5. False prophets are expected and will deceive many.

Matthew 24:24  For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

6. The true prophet speaks for God alone, not himself.

2 Peter 1:20  Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.

I certainly don't know Jeremiah Johnson well enough to know where he went wrong, his public confession feels like at least a step in the right direction of correcting that error, but in general anyone who claims to be a prophet, that is someone SPEAKING FOR GOD, whose word turns out to be a lie, should clearly be rejected as a prophet.  As I pastor I sometimes misspeak, and I sometimes say things in error, but I've never claimed extra authority as a prophet to tell my congregation a word directly from God.  Those who claim greater authority must accept greater responsibility {Peter Parker's Uncle Ben said something like that}.  The scriptures repeatedly warn the people of God against trusting false prophets.  Israel had to contend with them on a massive scale, both those claiming to speak for the LORD when they did not, and those representing false gods like the prophets of Ba'al that the true prophet Elijah humiliated and then had put to death.  The Church too is warned of the prevalence of false prophets and the need to weigh what someone claiming to speak for God is saying to determine if it is true.

There is a vast difference between attempting to interpret the revealed Word of God enshrined in scripture, what I and many like me attempt to do each week, and presenting yourself as someone with a direct connection to God's words here and now.  When I fail, that's on me, because a correct interpretation of the scriptural passage in question has no doubt been made by many during the history of the Church, but when the supposed prophet fails, that failure calls into question the veracity of God, threatens the faith of those who have followed that prophetic voice, and brings the name of God into disrepute.  To falsely prophecy is no small thing and is in fact extremely troubling, but it should serve as a severe warning to the Charismatic Movement within the Christian Church that Jeremiah Johnson received death threats and profanity laced tirades when he admitted he was wrong, not from those who felt betrayed because they had wrongly trusted him when he was wrong, but for admitting his mistake, from those who would rather believe a false prophecy than objective reality.

Sermon Video: Speaking Truth to Power - The Martyrdom of John the Baptist, Mark 6:14-29

 When confronted with a morally repugnant situation, John the Baptist spoke with clarity, unafraid of the power wielded by Herod Antipas. As a result, he was imprisoned, and eventually martyred. Why did he speak? Because he represented God, and God's Word on the matter was clear. When called to speak, we need the three things that John had: (1) A righteous reputation that doesn't allow our words to be dismissed, (2) Knowledge of the Truth, and (3) the courage to speak, especially to those with power. While you or I may never speak before a king or president, our own families, workplaces, and communities also have those with power, when they abuse it, when they utilize it for immoral purposes, we too must speak up.

The downward spiral of Bonhoeffer biographer Eric Metaxas

At a recent rally, noted author Eric Metaxas, whose book on Bonhoeffer is tremendous (Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy) called Americans who are unwilling to shed blood over the election a parallel to the Germans who stood by while Hitler took power {thus equating, at least on some level, Biden/Harris with Hitler's regime}.  "Everybody who is not hopped up about this … you are the Germans that looked the other way when Hitler was preparing to do what he was preparing to do. Unfortunately, I don’t see how you can see it any other way."  If you're not on board with Metaxas about the election, you're no better than a Nazi enabler!  To top it off, Metaxas sees NO other way to evaluate the current state of America.

I knew nothing about Metaxas when I read the Bonhoeffer book {like many books, I found it at the bookstore, thought it looked interesting, and bought it}, and knew little else about him until recently when he has become extremely political, militantly so.  {To the point of advocating killing in the name of 'fixing' the election: “We need to fight to the death, to the last drop of blood, because it’s worth it.”}

Eric Metaxas' American Apocalypse - by Rod Dreher at the American Conservative {Shared as a source for the Metaxas' quotes/video, not an endorsement.  I don't think Dreher's idea of cultural withdrawal (as the polar opposite of militant partisanship) is the path forward either; here's my response to his book: Fight or Flight? Self-Segregation is the death of the Church's Gospel mission  Dreher himself is, with some irony, far more political than I am willing to be.}

Here are Metaxas' own words from an interview when his book on Bonhoeffer was released: "Bonhoeffer was not a liberal or a conservative, but a Christian. He was zealous for God’s perspective on things, and God’s perspective is inevitably wider than the standard parochial political points of view. It sometimes forces us toward a liberal view and sometimes toward a conservative view." {On Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Six Questions for Eric Metaxas Adjust Share By Scott Horton on December 23, 2010, Harpers Magazine}

However the road led to this point where Metaxas' is on the precipice of violence for political ends, it is sad/troubling/frightening to see Metaxas ignore what he seemed to have known about Bonhoeffer, that being a Christian comes first before one's own political views, and especially the truth that God's view is wider than our incessant partisan squabbles.

This sentiment is extremely dangerous: “So who cares what I can prove in the courts? This is right. This happened, and I am going to do anything I can to uncover this horror, this evil.”  Partisanship does not require Truth, or even truth.  Not an acceptable Christian viewpoint {Christian Worldview self-destruction: A culture without Facts is a culture without Truth}

Eric Metaxas interviewed by Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA {The interview where the quotes in Dreher's essay originate; Kirk likewise elevates partisan politics above Christianity and invokes God's name/will to further his politics}

Partisan Political Christianity is one of the Church's greatest stains, its most horrendous evils were committed under that guise (think 4th Crusade, Inquisition, 30 Years War, etc.}, but it is also 100% illegitimate, an abomination that bears no true allegiance to the Cross of Jesus Christ.  Jesus' kingdom was not of this world, and neither is ours.

That a significant portion of the Church in America is trending in this dangerous direction, hard, is clear, that it will lead to disaster and self-destruction is both history's lesson and the Bible's warning.  What Metaxas (and Kirk) are calling for, whatever portion of the Church follows, will be fighting against God, not for him.

Exodus 20:3 “You shall have no other gods before me."

Exodus 20:7 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

Exodus 20:13 “You shall not murder.

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

The Dangerous Idolatry of Christian Trumpism We can pray peace will prevail, but we’d be fools to presume it will - by David French {David French points out the danger of Metaxas' words, and broadens it out to other calls for violence/war like the Texas GOP's call for secession.  Like Dreher, French is more overtly political in his commentary than I choose to be, but the warning of the danger of the path chosen by many American Christians is accurate.} 

Some Christians express concerns over ‘bizarre’ pro-Trump Jericho March Some Christians express concerns over ‘bizarre’ pro-Trump Jericho March By Jackson Elliott, Christian Post {Another related article, this one quotes Metaxas as introducing 9/11 conspiracy theorist Alex Jones as his 'good friend'.  If that isn't evidence that Metaxas has gone far too far down this rabbit hole, I'm not sure what else you need.}

Eric Metaxas, Christian radio host, tells Trump, ‘Jesus is with us in this fight’ - Religion News Service {A further example of blasphemy/taking the name of the Lord in vain, by declaring that Jesus is on 'our side' in an election...The article contains a link to a story from the summer when Metaxas punched a protestor riding by on a bike in the face (Metaxas was not detained or charged for the assault, even though the protestor was detained then released).}

Sermon Video: His own did not receive him - John 1:6-11

 Following his soaring introductory paragraph, John speaks of the precursor of the Light of Mankind, John the Baptist, and his work to prepare his people for the coming of the Messiah. Then John tackles a difficult issue, while Jesus is the True Light, the very Son of God, his own people (for the most part) rejected him. Not only that, a majority of humanity has never accepted Jesus as the Savior of the world, why is that? It isn't the plan from the Father that is flawed, nor the execution of the plan by the Son, nor the 'tech support' to that plan offered by the Holy Spirit. The flaw resides with the recipients of God's grace. Fallen humanity exists in rebellion against God, with darkened hearts and minds, capable of believing lies and rejecting Truth. 2020 has reminded us of this, with both the pandemic and the election spawning countless false narratives and outright hoaxes, believed by millions. Yet the True Light remains, the Gospel retains its power to transform lives and save souls.

Sermon Video: Make use of what God has given - Mark 4:21-25

 In a series of 4 connected sayings, Jesus explains the nature of the world that God created, emphasizing that the Truth is intended to be disclosed and that both the righteous path toward God and the wicked path away from God are self-reinforcing.  Why?  Because that's the nature of reality.  The universe has a moral law just as much as it has a natural one.  Moving toward God is light and life, moving away is darkness and death; it cannot be otherwise because apart from God there is nothing.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Christian Worldview self-destruction: A culture without Facts is a culture without Truth

 The trend away from general acceptance of the idea of universal Truth, with a capital "T", has been centuries in the making.  It was helped along by the individualism of the Enlightenment, even inadvertently by the stand against collective authority taken by Martin Luther.  While Truth was losing ground in the realms of ethics, philosophy, and religion, Fact (again with the capital letter) was gaining ground in a host of scientific endeavors through the Industrial, Agricultural, and Modern Medicine revolutions.  We, as humanity, knew with certainty more facts about the universe we inhabited than our ancestors could have imagined possible.  Their senses were limited to their own eyes, we could examine the world through both microscopes and telescopes.  Even if we were losing firm ground in the spiritual realm with the breakup of Christendom into competing Catholic and Protestant camps, and the splintering of Protestantism into still further groups, we were gaining a common understanding of objective reality that led, not without bumps along the way, away from Thomas Hobbes' description of life outside of society's embrace as 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.'  Life expectancy was on the rise, starvation and childhood death rates were plummeting, work was less back breaking, leisure was invented.  In short, aside from the rude wake-up calls of war and genocide, optimism was a warranted conclusion.

In this world of increasing scientific fact, there was an opportunity for religion, Christianity in particular, to trumpet God's proclamation that lying is beyond his nature.  In other words, Christianity should have embraced scientific discovery as a further revelation of God's nature.  The relation between science and religion, which could have been harmonious, was instead rocky.

Hebrews 6:17-18 (NIV) 17 Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. 18 God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged.

The Church made the mistake of viewing Scripture as a scientific journal rather than simply observational reporting.  The prime example is the way in which the heavens are described, the 'firmament' of Genesis 1, as it was observed by the ancients.  This was not a scientific description of what lay beyond earth's atmosphere, but only how it looked from where they stood.  Without telescopes, what more could they have known, and why would God have explained it to them in ways they could not have understood?  Thus when Copernicus and Galileo revealed through observation that the earth revolves around the sun, the Church should have welcomed this new insight, but instead insisted that Scripture declared that the geocentric model was correct.  Thus began a long and fruitless fight against scientific discovery that later encompassed numerous fields beyond astronomy, all fought misguidedly in the effort to defend things that holy scripture had not asserted.

Fast forward to 21st century American Evangelicalism (and to a lesser extent American Christianity in general).  The cause of objective spiritual Truth is seemingly at a nadir, long held moral beliefs are challenged forcefully by the culture at large, and what is the response of the Church?  A seemingly all-out assault on Fact.  Rather than defend Truth, American Evangelicalism has largely embraced a no-holds barred war against science.  It began, in earnest in 1925 with the Scopes Trial pitting an interpretation of the Creation account in Genesis against the theories of biology, but quickly expanding to hold that interpretation also against discoveries in archaeology, astronomy, geology, physics, and more as the defense of an earth that could be no more than 6,000 years old was seen as the Rubicon of scriptural inerrancy.  If Science is allowed to explain the origin of the universe and of life on earth, the war would be lost and religion would be discarded, so we have been warned with increasing fervor.

With what end result?  A significant portion of evangelicals now believe that the scientific community is engaged in a massive demonic conspiracy to discredit the Bible.  It is now common belief among many that your average paleontologist or astronomer is an atheist that hates God.   On the flip side, many of the West's most educated people have grown cynical about spiritual things in general, and Christianity in particular, in part because of this anti-science stance.  What we are left with is never ending trench warfare with evangelicals touting attempts to refute science through organizations like Answers in Genesis, a process that has inevitably become more and more political, less and less theological.

In recent decades this war over the Facts of Creation has expanded to touch upon other scientific discoveries.  Because millions of evangelicals look at science with disdain once reserved for Voodoo witch doctors, there is little wonder that an anti-vaccine movement has developed, that Climate Change is one of the most divisive political issues in America today, or that we now live in an era when a phrase like 'alternative facts' can be uttered with a straight face.

Is Science, if something so nebulous can be taken as a whole, blameless in all this?  Certainly not, one need not be a fan of Michael Crichton (I am) to recognize that human genetic engineering requires significant safeguard and raises massive ethical questions, nor to agree that recreating carnivorous dinosaurs would be a bad idea, if it were possible.  In virtually every field Science has ethical questions to answer.  As Crichton's character Ian Malcolm says in Jurassic Park, “Scientists are actually preoccupied with accomplishment. So they are focused on whether they can do something. They never stop to ask if they should do something.”  Here's the irony in all this, Science can't answer questions about what whether or not they should do something.  Those questions are ethical questions, and ethics lies in the realm of philosophy and religion.  Science NEEDS the spiritual realm to answers questions that go beyond the test tube, that are not answered by a peer reviewed study, but rather than act as a counselor and guide, much of American Christianity has treated Science as the enemy.

No matter what you believe about HOW God Created the World, the war on Science has already begun to boomerang. 

I know that many Christians are firmly convinced that only a literal 6 Day Creation occurring approximately 6,000 years ago can possibly do justice to Genesis.  {I've written about this issue previously: Faith, Science, and Creation, is there a way forward?}  If this is the only option, we are at an impasse, for scientific discoveries have not invalidated previously put forth theories about the age of the universe.  To continue in this stalemate is a lose-lose situation.  The more Facts are eroded by religion, and especially by the politics of the religious, the less and less trust will be placed upon Truth by the culture at large.  Facts and Truth are inextricably linked, you can't have one without the other.  Faith and Science NEED each other, whether either side is willing to admit it or not.

If there are no objective Facts that can be agreed upon, there is no Truth either.  On what basis will you build the case that the Bible is True while at the same time you preach that human beings cannot trust their own senses?  Radical empirical-ism, that each of us can only trust what we sense and no objective reality lies beyond our senses, is a death knell not only for any hope of a democratic republic, but of organized religion as well.  But that radical individualism is the foreseeable end result of a constant dismissal of Facts.  If Facts and Truth do not exist independent of us, but are rather subject to our will to believe or disbelieve them, they cease to have any useful meaning.

2020 has shown us the acceleration of this process.  Recently highly influential evangelical pastor John MacArthur has declared against a mountain of scientific evidence, "there is no pandemic", a statement that was met with thunderous applause by the 3,000 non mask wearing people in the sanctuary of his church.  Here's the problem, the virus doesn't care if you believe in it or not.  Science denial is now a political badge of courage, but this is not surprising, it was the next step in the ongoing assault on Fact by many Christians.

{John MacArthur fails to distinguish between necessary and unnecessary risk, plus End Times anti-government speculation}

{John MacArthur jumps the shark with COVID-19 response}

It doesn't have to be this way, we don't need to sow the seeds of our own destruction.  We can't have Truth without Facts.  When you assault one, you attack them both.  If Christians want to be people of Truth, they need to be people of Facts too.

For more on the topic of Truth and its relationship with Fact: 

The apparent blasphemy of My Pillow founder Michael Lindell regarding a COVID-19 'cure'.

2020 has taken the measure of the Church, and found us wanting

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

Faith is not anti-fact, at least it's not supposed to be.

The ungodly growth of Holocaust Denial

Those are just the last two years, when you minor in philosophy the idea of Truth is never far from your mind. List of 37 posts on my blog about Truth

The apparent blasphemy of My Pillow founder Michael Lindell regarding a COVID-19 'cure'.

 It is no small thing to commit blasphemy against God.  It seems like doing so on national television would be doubly foolish.  Yet that is what My Pillow founder Michael Lindell just did, whether he is aware of it or not.  Before looking at why Lindell's statements are a violation of the 3rd Commandment, let me get this disclaimer out of the way.  Michael Lindell believes very strongly that Donald Trump is the best President in the history of the United States.  I could care less what his political views are.  Up until this point, I hadn't given him much thought at all, until his interview with CNN's Anderson Cooper where he invoked the name of Jesus Christ, and proclaimed to be doing the Will of God in his stumping for Oleandrin as a miracle cure for COVID-19.  While this pandemic has produced many quake 'cures' and false hopes, this one stands out precisely because the man pushing it is doing so in Christ's name.

It is blasphemy, a violation of the 3rd Commandment {Exodus 20:7 “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name."}, to use the name of God for any of the following purposes (examples from a larger list), it is my contention watching Lindell's interview, that he has done all four.  Also, Michael Lindell claims to be a follower of Jesus Christ, I'll take him at his word, and consider him a brother in Christ who has lost his way (at least in this regard).
Michael Lindell's interview on CNN with Anderson Cooper
4 facts about oleandrin, an unproven coronavirus treatment reportedly pitched to Trump - by Nicole Pesce of MarketWatch
1. Personal financial gain
Michael Lindell has an ownership stake in a company which just so happens to process Oleandrin.  If enough people believe his claims that it both prevents COVID-19 infection AND cures it, he will make a whole lot of money.
When Prosperity Gospel preachers, or just gold old-fashioned TV evangelists utilize the Gospel and people's devotion to God to enrich themselves, they're committing blasphemy too.  If a businessman does it, he/she is equally guilty of that sin, in the false-preacher's case there are additional points of immoral behavior as they have taken a position of leadership in the Church.
2. To take advantage of the weak, vulnerable, or innocent
During a global pandemic, those most likely to listen to 'snake oil salesmen' are those most vulnerable to the disease in question.  No doubt Oleandrin tales are already spreading around social media under headlines like, "The cure the government doesn't want you to know about.."  Lindell's advocacy will appeal to conspiracy theorists, to desperate people with health conditions who fear the virus, and whose only fault will be listening to him, in part because he invokes the name of Jesus to make his appeal.
3. When your actions will likely harm others
It is highly likely that people will take extracts of this highly toxic plant, at doses that may cause them real harm, because they believe that it will be a 'miracle cure'.  A secondary harm will come from those who take it, are not harmed by it directly, but then who ignore all social distancing precautions because Lindell promised them that they could no longer catch or spread the disease once they begin taking Oleandrin.  {In the interview, Lindell proclaimed himself to be 'immune' to the virus because of Oleandrin.}  The end result will be an increased spread of COVID-19, more false information in the public consciousness, and greater resistance to protective measures.  Lastly, some who catch COVID-19 will be convinced to ignore medical treatment, or fail to quarantine themselves because they're taking Oleandrin.  All of these scenarios are highly likely, and an unknown number of people will be harmed by Lindell's 'cure', once again, in Jesus' name.
4. To avoid scrutiny, as a substitute for Truth, facts, or evidence.
Throughout the interview, Anderson Cooper pressed Michael Lindell to site any reputable study, any evidence at all that Oleandrin could do any of the things that he was claiming, or at the least proof that it wouldn't be harmful to those who take it.  Rather than offer up substance, Lindell on multiple occasions resorted to proclaiming that he was doing what he was doing because God had given him the platform to do so.  In other words, rather than truth, facts, or evidence, Lindell offered up God's reputation as a substitute.  There's just one problem, God's reputation isn't a crutch for you to use to get out of a jam, it isn't a substitute for truth, or a 'no facts necessary' excuse.
Had Michael Lindell left God out of his conversation, I would ignore him, but he didn't, he chose (whether purposefully or not) to use the name of Jesus and the Will of God as surety for his claims.  For all four reasons listed above, that is sadly a classic case of blasphemy.

{Update: FDA rejects oleandrin, an unproven coronavirus therapeutic pushed by MyPillow CEO, as a dietary supplement ingredient - by Jen Christensen and Jamie Gumbrecht, CNN, 9/4/20}

John MacArthur jumps the shark with COVID-19 response

John MacArthur preaches to a nearly full sanctuary with virtually no masks.

Let me start off by saying, Pastor John MacArthur has accomplished many great things for Christ's Church over his many decades of service.  Grace Community Church and The Master's Seminary are tremendous legacies, and of course there are likely thousands of people who have come to know Christ as Savior because of MacArthur's ministry.  That being said, nobody is beyond reproach.  In the past I wrote about my disagreement with John MacArthur's very limited ecumenism {Are 95% of self-proclaimed Christians really still Lost? An answer to John MacArthur} and more recently, when John MacArthur indulged in snarky laughter at Beth Moore's expense, I called him on it. {Why does John MacArthur think it is ok to tell Beth Moore to 'Go home'?}.  I'm sure if John MacArthur spent an hour reading my blog or watching my sermons on Youtube he'd find something worth criticizing, and if he did so from a place of principle, he'd be doing what I'm attempting to do right now: seek the Truth.
A number of well reasoned responses to the reopening of Grace Community Church in defiance of the restrictions put in place by the state of California have already been written: When John MacArthur Reopens His Church Despite COVID-19 Orders Civil disobedience, conscientious objection, and what to make of believers defying the government. - by Morgan Lee, Christianity Today

A Time for Civil Disobedience? A Response to Grace Community Church’s Elders - by Jonathan Leeman, Editorial Director of 9Marks

Response to John MacArthur's Statement of Defiance - by Jeff S. Kennedy, Senior Pastor of Christ Community Church / Idaho Falls, ID.

Let me, then, focus in on the brief interview given by Pastor MacArthur to Fox News' Tucker Carlson on July 28th, (to see the interview: John MacArthur on Tucker Carlson) which contains a number of troubling statments.

“First of all and foremost, it is a first amendment right,” MacArthur said. “This is the United States of America and the government cannot intrude into worship. We stand on that amendment.”

At this point, I'm already concerned.  Rather than address his primary responsibility to his congregation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, that of a shepherd watching over his sheep, MacArthur chooses to lay claim to First Ammendment rights.  What the government can or cannot do legally in America with respect to the Church is primarily a legal issue for politicians and lawyers.  What the Church should do is a moral question for pastors and church leadership.  MacArthur chooses to focus on what he believes his church can legally do, not what it should morally do.

“The second thing that makes this so sensible is that in the State of California there are 40 million people. 8,500 of them have died with COVID. That is .002 (percent),” MacArthur said. “So, in California you have a 99.99 percent chance to survive COVID. So why would you shut down the entire state?

Here's the thing, let's assume MacArthur's numbers are correct, that as of the end of July 2020, 8,500 Californians have died from COVID-19.  But COVID-19 is a pandemic, it isn't over yet, and tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands, of Californians will die in the future before it ends.  The chance of dying is not static, it can, and almost certainly will, continue to rise as the pandemic spreads.  The way in which MacArthur cavalierly embraces these stats without concern for the future, is bizarre.  This pandemic is not history, it is an ongoing threat.

A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, unfortunately, neither Pastor MacArthur (nor whomever is advising him) are statisticians or epidemiologists.

If the state is not allowed to meddle in Church affairs, should the Church refraining from administering public health policy?  As a Baptist, I continue to warn about the need for separation of Church and State, in this case, Grace Community Church is upset about what they perceive to be the state crossing the line in their direction, while aggressively returning the favor (by belittling social distancing and mask wearing, refusing to meet outside, etc.) in the other.

“We have had 21 weeks with no ministry to a thousand little children, to a thousand university students, to junior high students, to high school students to senior adults,”...“We’ve had no funerals. No weddings. I can’t go to the hospital. I’ve had to go on the phone to talk to dying people at the hospital,” MacArthur said.

When the church can't meet in the sanctuary for worship, does ministry stop?  The pandemic restrictions have indeed been troublesome, but the work of the Church continued, as it has always been more than what happens on Sunday morning.

“Finally, I started preaching in an empty auditorium. I did it two weeks, three weeks and then the people without saying anything started coming back. They didn’t buy the narrative,” MacArthur said. “They kept coming back and last Sunday 3,000 of them came back and they rejoiced. They hugged each other and they didn’t wear masks and they sang songs. They understand the reality of it.”

Where is the leadership at Grace?  People just starting coming back in, on their own, without the church's chosen leaders considering the implications and having a plan in place?  Before we re-opened for in-person worship with social distancing in June, my board met virtually to discuss the issues, until that moment, the only people allowed in the sanctuary were those responsible for making the service happen online.  What 'narrative' did his congregation reject?  The one where 150,000 (and rising rapidly) Americans have died?  The one supported by the CDC?  This is a serious issue with modern American Evangelicalism, scientific facts are not a narrative for us to buy or sell, they are facts.  This is a dangerous trend that is growing among Evangelicals, and sadly John MacArthur is endorsing it.  In addition, why couldn't they have met AND practiced social distancing, AND mandated the wearing of masks?  Are these precautions forbidden by the 1st Amendment?  Is there no room for caution, wisdom, compassion, humility?  By celebrating this decision, and the open defiance of social distancing and mask wearing, Pastor MacArthur has left himself and his church only one chance at a positive end to this path: If COVID-19 is an overblown hoax they'll turn out looking ok, if instead, as doctors around the world continue to warn, this is indeed a pandemic that is far from over, they will have helped spread it, and people will die when a church service at Grace Community Church becomes a super-spreader event.  What then will be the value of insisting upon rights while ignoring reality?

After decades of ministry, why risk it all on the hunch that you know more than those who have dedicated their lives to the study of medicine?  Sadly, for his congregation and his legacy, John MacArthur has jumped the shark.

{Update: John MacArthur believes the Bible trumps COVID-19 public health orders. Legal scholars say no - by Alejandra Molina, Religion News Service}

{Update: MacArthur asserts ‘there is no pandemic’ - by Mark Wingfield, Baptist News Global, 9/3/20}

2020 has taken the measure of the Church, and found us wanting

It would not be difficult to criticize the American political response to the combined blows of COVID-19 and the racial reckoning that followed the murder of George Floyd.  It has been painfully clear as both of these unfolded that our current entrenched gerrymandered hyper partisanship is ill equipped to handle either crisis.  As a realist (some would say cynic) about politics I did not have a high expectation given the level of dysfunction that exists in the system.
It would also not be difficult to criticize the American cultural response to the pandemic and race relations, as there are plentiful examples that illustrate where our culture has fallen far short of any number of ideals.
As a minister of the Gospel, however, my primary focus is narrower than the entire American political and cultural sphere.  When I look at how self-professed Christians have responded to COVID-19 and the evidence of ongoing/systemic/systematic racism in America, the results have been little better than that of America as a whole.  This is not acceptable.  If the Church cannot be salt and light, cannot differentiate itself from American politics or culture through its increased commitment to a higher moral standard, especially in times of crisis, what then is the value that the Church brings to society, or what is the appeal of the Gospel?
Before highlighting the areas in which we, as a Church, have fallen short during 2020 thus far, let me explain why I often use the term 'self-professed Christians'.  The Church, in the tradition of Saint Augustine, is made up of both those who have already been saved (saints) and those for whom hope of salvation remains (future proselytes/converts).  As such, it will also contain within it those who are not currently being directed by the Holy Spirit, who remain slaves to sin, and who will likely therefore not be living up to the moral standards expected of those redeemed by Christ.  In addition, the Church today, like Judaism in the 1st Century, contains its version of Pharisees (self-righteous) and Sadducees (theologically misguided) who while not new to the Church, still lack the indwelling of the Holy Spirit because they have failed to live by faith.  In contrast with would-be converts, this minority within the Church is not actively seeking redemption as they wrongly assume they have already attained it.  To make a long story short, the Church will always have those within it who represent the Church without actually being a part of the Bride of Christ; they have joined the Church in the physical/social realm, but not the all-important spiritual realm.  Some of the criticism to follow is aimed at Christians who (should) know better, but have failed to live up to the high calling of being a disciple of Jesus Christ during these trying times, and some of it lands upon those who are 'in the Church, but not of the Church'.  As God is the only one who truly knows hearts, I won't attempt to judge which is which, for the call to repentance remains for both groups.  Lastly, I do not believe that what follows is true for the majority of the Church in America, although quantifying such things is difficult, it does however appear to me to be true for at least a significant, often vocal, minority, and that is concern enough.

So, how has the Church failed during the challenges of 2020 to live up to its calling?

1. By not putting Truth above personal beliefs
There are two primary ways in which this has manifested itself: (1) Denial of the reality of the COVID-19 pandemic in favor of a variety of politically expedient counter-narratives and/or the embrace of conspiracy theories.  (2) A refusal to admit that racism remains a real issue in America, even within the Church.  While uniformity of opinion on these issue is NOT required by those who would value Truth with a capital 'T', for those who would claim to follow a God who does not lie, the willing, often gleeful, embrace of half-truths and self-serving narratives by many self-professed Christians is a stark warning sign that all is not well in our hearts.  As Christians, we must be servants of the Truth, we must be those unwilling to utilize lies even when they seemingly benefit us, and we must be those willing to confront uncomfortable Truths, even when they indict us.

See also: Faith is not anti-fact, at least it's not supposed to be.

Being a Habitually Accurate person

2. By not putting service/self-sacrifice above freedom/rights.
Lost among the cacophony of noise about COVID-19 restrictions has been the call placed upon all Christians by both Jesus' demonstration of a servant's heart, and Paul's call to respect governmental authorities in Romans 13.  The requirements of Romans 13 are not absolute, and immoral laws are not to be obeyed by a moral people, but the words of Jesus, “Anyone who wants to be first must be the very last, and the servant of all.” (Mark 9:35, repeated in various forms throughout the Gospels) have no limitation.  I previously wrote about dangers of a "You do you, I'll do me" attitude {"You do you, I'll do me" - Quintessentially American, but incompatible with the Judeo-Christian worldview}. As the pandemic's role in our lives continues, there has been a noteworthy lack of Christian voices saying in one accord that other people's lives ought to be rated far above our comfort or preferences.  Again, this is not a call for uniformity on the question of how best to combat the pandemic, but simply dismay that so many Christians seem to lack a servant's heart when considering these issues.
Likewise, when considering racism in America, too many Christian voices have expressed a, "I don't see any racism, therefore it doesn't exist." attitude.  A heart of compassion, one built upon imitating the servant-heart of Jesus Christ, would instead consider the experiences and testimonies of our minority brothers and sisters.  It would also readily admit that my own personal experience is insufficient, that my anecdotal evidence is not the final word on the matter.

See also: My rights are less important than doing what is right

Why are we free? Galatians 5:13-14

3. By not putting humility and repentance above pride and stubbornness. 
We were never going to get the pandemic response exactly right.  We were also never going to resolve something as complicated and deep seated as racism in one fell swoop.  Mistakes were inevitable, some medical advice was bound to be proven later to have been in error, and some demonstrations against racism were bound to devolve into looting.  How do we respond to these imperfections?  As Christians, what do we do when the situation becomes muddled?  Sadly, there has been far too much chest thumping, and far too little listening.  Too many cries of, "Stay the course!" and far too little openness to change when new facts (remember #1's issue of Truth) become available.
Aside from outright heresy, there are few things as dangerous to the future health of the Church as pride and stubbornness.  When God's people close their ears to the moving of the Holy Spirit toward repentance, they drift further and further away from the will of God.

2020 has held up a mirror to American politics, culture, and the Church.  The results have not been pretty.  Some have responded to one, or both, of the issues with a proper Christian worldview and a servant's heart inspired by Jesus.  Perhaps those doing so may even be a majority of those claiming to be Christians, but the ugly truth remains that a sizable minority, numbering millions, have embraced falsehoods over the Truth, rely upon their rights more than their obligations to their fellow man, and are pridefully unwilling to consider change.  What does this mean for the Church?  Only God knows.  I pray for repentance, for renewal, for change.

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.

Sermon Video: Start at the beginning - Love one another, 2 John 1-6

Abbreviating themes he developed further in 1 John, the Apostle writes to another church he founded of the need to "love in the truth", as he links the truth about Jesus Christ with the command from God that we "love one another".  How do we know that we're living in love?  We obey the commands of God.  This, in a nutshell, is John's message of the foundation of the Church, its core and functionality.  The linking of truth and love is no mere happenstance, but a deliberate emphasis.  Truth without love is sterile and dead, love without truth is purposeless; the people of the Church very much need both.

To watch the video, click on the link below: