the worthlessness of infinite value

The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field,
which a man found and covered up. Then in his joy he
goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.

matt. 13:44

according to the national retail foundation, of an estimated 26.3 billion dollars will be spent on gift cards in 2007, 8 billion or more will never be used.

this is a great money maker for companies who offer the cards. everytime someone spends any amount of money on a gift card that is lost, forgotten, or just never used, that is 100% profit for that company. they already have the money -if no one ever buys any merchandise, all the better for them!

it seems foolish to think that someone would have in their possession something of value, yet never make use of it.

as christians, we have something of infinite value. we have the gospel- the good news of the life, death, and resurrection of jesus christ. but do we share it? i know that i dont as often as i should... and more often than not, its not that i choose *not* to share, its just that i dont pursue opportunities. many times i have walked a way from a conversation or encounter and moments later thought "why didnt i realize that that was a perfect opportunity to share with them?"

we dont want to make people out to be science projects or treat them as means to an end. but if we do care for them, then we should be compelled to give them the source of infinite value and joy!

if they do not accept the gospel, it does not devalue the gift. just as a $10 starbucks card is still worth $10 at starbucks whether or not it is used, the gospel of jesus christ is just as true and just as saving if it is rejected. but let us offer it in hopes that it will be received with joy!

as the new year approaches, may we be intentional about sharing the greatest thing we possess with those around us.

response to the mormon response...

in case you missed it, fox news sent a list of 21 questions about the beliefs of the mormon church to officials of the church of latter-day saints. they replied, question by question. (you can view the questions and responses here).

at first glance, the answers may seem satisfactory. but upon close inspection, it seems that the answers given by the mormon church are not complete.. or completely honest.

rob bowman, of the southern baptist convention's north america mission board examines the answers given by the mormon church and points out the need to "say what we mean, and mean what we say". read his eyebrow raising assessment of the latter day saints answers here.

rob's bio from www.reclaimingthemind.org begins...
Robert M. Bowman Jr. (M.A., Fuller Theological Seminary) is the manager of Apologetics and Interfaith Evangelism for the North American Mission Board. For five years he was a lecturer in the M.A. in Christian Apologetics program at Biola University. Rob has published over fifty articles in such periodicals as the Christian Research Journal, Moody Monthly, Pastoral Renewal, and Areopagus Journal. He has also authored or co-authored a dozen books, including two that won the Gold Medallion Award...

fresh prince gets it wrong...

i am closing in on my 30th birthday. but one of the things that keeps me from feeling "all grown up" is re-runs of shows that were popular when i was a teenager. one of those shows is "the fresh prince of bel-air". while it wasnt groundbreaking television (though the theme song may be!) it is still entertaining to watch all of these years later- if for nothing else but the clothing and hairstyles!

i like will smith's acting. i find most of his movies enjoyable. he seems like someone who would really be fun to know. but on one important issue, he is dreadfully and fearfully wrong.

recently he has been speaking of a growing interest in and study of scientology. through his wife's (jada pinkett-smith) work with well known scientologist, tom cruise, smith has become more vocal about his research into this false religion...

[smith] told [access hollywood]: "I was introduced [
to] [scientology] by Tom and I’m a student of world
religion. I was raised in a Baptist household, I went to
a Catholic school, but the ideas of the Bible are
98 percent the same ideas of Scientology, 98
percent the same ideas of Hinduism and Buddhism."

i hate to break it to you will, but any religion that denies that there is but one god who is creator of all things and exists as the father , son, and holy spirit, and denies that the only hope of salvation is faith in the life, death, and resurrection of jesus christ is not even close to christianity. if any other teaching does not have these things at its core, then it is 100% *not* like christianity.

this doesn't mean that we boycott anything having to do with will smith or any scientologist... but we can become more informed about what scientology is so that if we hear someone say " i heard will smith is looking into scientology and that it is not that different than christianity" that we would seize that opportunity to make the gospel clear. we can also pray for will smith and other celebrities that have been or perhaps are being seduced by this false religion. (tom crusie, john travolta, lisa marie presley, etc.)

i will do some research on sources pertaining to scientology and post them here so check back in the next few days...

milestones and talking with god..

this is the 150th post on "the lowercase" and as of last week, this site has received of 10,000 visits in the last 18 months. thanks to all who visit and participate. i know keeping this blog has helped me in thinking through issues and writing discipline, and i hope it has been beneficial to you as well.

as the new year wraps down, i thought i would share a challenge i saw over on said at southern, a website corralling many blogs of southern seminary students (like myself) and faculty.

tony kummer shares an opportunity to start a new years resolution early and complete it by february!

if you are like me, each year you may have good intentions of reading the bible all the way through, or at least reading it more. by mid february i am usually so far behind trying to keep up seems futile. well tony has provided a plan that if you can spare a little over an hr. a day (cumulative) we can read the entire bible by jan. 31st if we start on dec. 10th!

here is his plan...

I took the page numbers from my ESV
Reference Bible and the time required from
my Max McLean ESV audio Bible.
You can modify these numbers for your favorite
Bible translation.

Start Now ( dec. 10) and Read It All by January
31st
...start on December 10th for a total of 53 days.
* Read 21 minutes or 5 ½ pages of NT per day
* Read 54 ½ minutes or 18 ½ pages of OT per day

So, by spending only 1 hour and 16 minutes per day,
24 pages, you can read through the entire ESV Bible
between now and February. Just over 1 hour a day!

you may think, " i don't have an hour a day!!!" well.. maybe you do.
think of your whole day.

• what else do you do while you eat your meals that you cant put off for 53 days?
• what if you get to work 15 minutes early to read for 15 minutes, spend the first or last 15 minutes of your lunch break reading, and watch one less program on television?
• carry a bible to read while waiting in line christmas shopping, grocery shopping, etc.

i'm sure if we think about it, we can find 60 minutes throughout the day to spend time in god's word.. to hear him speak to us.
i'm going to give it a try. maybe ill get it done by jan. 31st, maybe not, but it is worth it to me to try. if you want to join me, leave me a comment (no need to sign up for anything) and let me know, and we can pray for and encourage one another.

jesus and satan; sibling rivalry?

they have "feel good" commercials.

they have nice looking buildings

they are exemplary citizens

but are mormons christians?

this has been a hot topic of conversation since former massachusetts governor mitt romney announced that he was running for presidency of the united states.

yesterday, romney made a speech in which he addressed the concerns of those who were worried that his loyalty to his faith may play too large of a role in his presidency if elected. (which can be read here)

in it he references jesus christ, god as creator, and so forth. in a recent debate, when the canidates were asked " do you believe the bible is literally true" he answered:

"I believe it's the Word of God...I mean, I might
interpret the Word differently than you interpret the Word,
but I read the Bible and I believe the Bible is the Word of God.
I don't disagree with the Bible. I try and live by it."

again, this sounds like a safe christian answer.

but what is it that mormons believe? are they just another denomination like the baptists, methodists or presbyterians? or are they another branch of christianity like the roman catholic church or the anglicans?

here are some examples of the teachings and beliefs of the church of jesus christ of latter days saints, the mormons:

• there are many gods, and the head of them rules the universe along with his council
  (joseph smith teachings of the prophet joseph smith pp.348-49)
• god has wives ("a mother in heaven,") and they live on a planet near a star named kolab.
• through endless sexual encounters, "elohim" and his wives produce billions of spirit children
• god has and is limited by a physical body. he is not omnipresent, in fact, it is impossible for him to be in more than one place at once
• adam is identified as michael the archangel
• jesus and satan are brothers
• jesus was given savior status of earth, enraging lucifer, who revolted.
• jesus was not born of a virgin, because god had sex with mary, which produced jesus
• jesus was married
• humans can acheive god status
• the bible (unless it is the mormon approved version) is incomplete and contains errors, and is only one of four holy books
• all churches except LDS (mormon) churches are false churches
• the final judgment is in the presence of jospeh smith, the mormon jesus, and "elohim".
  [sources: book of mormon; mormonism: what you need to know by ed decker; fast facts on false teachings by ron carlson and ed decker; mormonism unmasked by r. phillip roberts, and mormons answered verse by verse by david a. reed and john r. farkas]

at the bare minimum, to be a christian one has to confess that:

• there is but one god, who exists in three persons (father, son, and holy spirit)
• jesus was/is god incarnate-born of a virgin
• there is no salvation outside of faith in jesus christ- and only those who place their faith in him will be saved

mormonism denies all three of these. there is obviously much more to the mormon faith than outlined above, but just from scratching the surface we can see that mormonism is not a part, branch, or denomination of christianity.

does that mean we cant be friends with mormons? of course not. i have had and currently do have mormon friends who are genuinely nice, caring, and wonderful friends.

does that mean christians cannot vote for mitt romney for president. i dont think so. [*however, this post or its content should not be viewed as an endorsement for or against voting for romney]

what it does mean is that when we have conversations with people who are discussing mr. romney or any mormon, that we do not let it slide when people equate mormonism with christianity. we should do so in love and with gentleness, but we should make sure that there is no confusion. mormons-the church of jesus christ of latter day saints are no more christian than muslims, buddhists, or jehovah's witnesses.
so let us be compelled to love them by sharing the true gospel with them.

for further reading see sources cited above as well as:
1) solving the mormon puzzle dvd by the north american mission board
2) john devito, former mormon, has a blog here

more on the "compass.."

dr. albert mohler, president of the southern baptist theological seminary writes on the controversial movie, "the golden compass" on his blog.

it is well worth the read and is an example of how to handle "controversy" without adding to it.

separation anxiety...

here is a great article written about the issue/abuse of "separation of church and state". it is very well written and informative without getting overly technical.

from the writings of congressman and presidential canidate ron paul: (FYI:this post does not necessairily mean an endorsement)

The entire nation seemed to condemn [the] federal court
ruling that the pledge of allegiance cannot be recited in schools.
The notion that the phrase "one nation under God" renders the
pledge unconstitutional is ridiculous to most Americans, who
strongly believe that expressions of religious belief should be
an integral part of public life. Yet although the public outcry
against this terrible ruling is understandable, the real issue
of religious freedom has not been addressed by Congress or
the media.

The judges who made this unfortunate ruling simply do not
understand the First amendment. It does not bar religious
expression in public settings or anywhere else. In fact, it
expressly prohibits federal interference in the free expression
of religion.

Far from mandating strict secularism in schools, it instead bars
the federal government from prohibiting the pledge of allegiance,
school prayer, or any other religious expression. The politicians
and judges pushing the removal of religion from public life are
violating the First amendment, not upholding it.

It’s important to recognize that the First amendment applies
only to Congress. Remember, the first sentence starts with
"Congress shall make no law..." This means that matters of
religious freedom and expression should be decided by the
states, with disputes settled in state courts. The First amendment
acts as a simple check on federal power, ensuring that the federal
government has no jurisdiction or authority whatsoever over religious
issues.

The phony "incorporation" doctrine, dreamed up by activist
judges to pervert the plain meaning of the Constitution, was
used once again by a federal court to assume jurisdiction over a
case that constitutionally was none of its business.
Similarly, the mythical separation of church and state doctrine
has no historical or constitutional basis.

Neither the language of the Constitution itself nor the legislative
history reveals any mention of such separation. In fact, the
authors of the First amendment- Fisher Ames and Elbridge
Gerry- and the rest of the founders routinely referred to
"Almighty God" in their writings, including the Declaration of
Independence. It is only in the last 50 years that federal courts
have perverted the meaning of the amendment and sought to
unlawfully restrict religious expression. We cannot continue
to permit our Constitution and our rich religious institutions
to be degraded by profound misinterpretations of the Bill of Rights.

behold...

here in 2007, i am the pastor of a baptist church, but it has only been in the last 4 years that being a pastor has even been on my radar.

i grew up the son of a music minister. i sang in *every* church musical from the time i was in elementary school through college. i received my undergraduate degree in music (classical voice).

aside from all of that, i sang and played guitar in different settings in front of countless people over the course of 5 years, including a stint in the nasvhille area playing music "for a living" (a meager one!) i even opened for derek webb a couple of times in 2004. i have played in churches, in bars, on college campuses, coffee houses, and outdoor events and concert series galore.

i say all of that only to make the point that as much music as i have been exposed to (classical, instrumental, christian, and "music not sold in christian stores" music), andrew peterson's "behold the lamb of god" is by far one of the most amazing albums i have ever heard in my life and would be on my desert island list without hesitation. (a list including the beatles, nirvana, U2, r.e.m., andrew osenga and caedmons call among others...its a long list...)

it is not a collection of old christmas 'favorites", it is all original material written by andrew himself, including the best song you have never heard - "labor of love".

the theology is sharp, the music is heart wrenching, and the lyrics themselves are some of the best songwriting i have ever heard. and not just a few of the songs.. the whole album is a work of literary art.(appearing on the album with peterson are such artists as derek webb, sandra mccracken, andrew osenga, randall goodgame, jill phillips, among others)

every music loving believer needs this album. it will make you listen to "christmas music" all year long because you can't get enough of it.
you will listen to it throughout the year because your heart will become so attached to it, you will find yourself *needing* to hear it -much like i did shortly after my son was born and my back went out. i was exhausted emotionally and mentally, so i would put my ipod on and gain much comfort from this album as i fell asleep each night.

i have written about this album here before, and i "implore" you again , go to andrew peterson's website and buy this album. it has had a profound impact on my life and many others. so much in fact, that 3 out of the last 4 years i have made the trip to nashville for the "behold the lamb of god" concert at the ryman auditorium in nashville to meet up with friends from north carolina, alabama, south carolina, kentucky, georgia, missouri, pennsylvania, delaware, texas, mississippi, arkansas, and even *MORE* places just to experience this music in person.

(peterson does tour this show, you can see if it is coming close to you here, including a free show in memphis tn. at bellvue!)

just trust me, buy this album. it will profoundly affect (and effect) the way you view not just christmas, but "the author of the faith that could make the mountains move".

the outrage of religous intolerance

those crazy christians. more cries of "intolerance" are surely swirling over those texas skies in recent days.

a church in texas is taking some heat because it refused to allow an "interfaith" thanksgiving meal and prayer service involving christians, muslims, hindus, jews and other religions.
the gathering was scheduled to be on the property of hyde park baptist church, but upon receiving information that the event was to contain prayers of other religions (thereby to gods that would be considered false gods to the church who owned the property), the church pulled out of the event. (read the whole story here)

"They notified us four days before to say that we
could not have the Thanksgiving service on their
property," said [AAIM Interim Executive
Director]".They said they did not realize
that we'd have non-Christians at the service."
Church officials told her they thought "interfaith"
meant different sects of Christianity.

we cannot know what was said and the exact circumstances that went on that led to the churches decision to not allow the service to be held on their church property.

the wording in the above paragraph is crucial, and we must remember that the events being described are being interpreted by the person writing the article.

to say "they did not realize there would be non-christians at the service" sounds very bigoted and just plain mean. but i think it is safe to say that the concern was that there would be non-christian religions using a christian church property to pray to false gods-not just that "non-christians" would be there.
i would dare say that no true christian church refuses non-christians...in fact any true christian church that is behaving in a scriptural way would welcome non-believers into their midst every week and celebrate the fact that they came.

another phrase worth examining is "Church officials told her they thought "interfaith" meant different sects of Christianity."

when i was in college, there was a student center called "interfaith student center". it was a religious organization (like b.s.u./b.c.m. or r.u.f.) that did not have a denominational affiliation. the students that made up that organization were catholic, methodist, pentecostal, etc. but all of the groups represented were christian groups.
in addition, often times "interfaith worship services' or "bible studies" were advertised around campus. these, too, were made up of many denominations within christianity.

so it is not a stretch to say that when the church initially received a request for an interfaith thanksgiving prayer service on their property, that they assumed it was a group made up of different christian denominations.

should they have found out exactly who was in charge and what the event was before giving the ok? most definitely. but to simply state "the church thought interfaith meant different christian groups" is misleading and can come off as a condescending comment.

now.. what actually happened at the service?

The Interreligious Ministries service blended traditions
from the Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Baha'i, Sikh
and Buddhist faiths, among others. It began with a procession
of leaders of a variety of religions, followed by customary
Muslim and Jewish calls to prayer, and a Christian bell
choir signaling the start of worship. There were offers of
gratitude to God in the Christian, Muslim and Hindu
traditions. A Buddhist ritual closed the hour-and-
15-minute celebration.

i am all for dialogue with other faiths. in fact, as christians we are called to share our faith with unbelievers. to do this well takes more than just handing someone a "tract and a weak-faced smile", but that we actually are able to talk *with* the person, not *at* them.

we should not be scared of people of otehr faiths. i have friends of ther faiths who have been great friends. so we should not close ourselves off from anyone who is "different".

so i am not at all against the idea of discussion and conversation, and even understanding with other religions.

but the line is drawn when anything resembling an act of worship or honor is given to another god. the muslim god is not the christian god. jews are not christians. hinduism and buddhism are false religions. this doesn't mean we cannot get along with people of other faiths, but to worship with them as other/false gods are given homage and prayed to is wrong.

we do nothing but muddy the gospel when we blur the lines of christianity in this way. we need to be clear that there is no god except the god of the bible (old and new testaments), that there is no salvation outside of faith in jesus christ, and that while we can get along with people of other faiths, we will not dishonor our god by participating in services where people worship false gods, and in doing so dishonor the one true god.

rather than join in on an inter-religious(a better term i think) service, perhaps we should take the time to befriend those of other faiths around us and share with them the good news of jesus christ so that they may spend an eternity in the presence of the glory of god. we may hurt their feelings by not joining in their worship, but perhaps the lord will save their soul because we don't.

"friends of god" his worst enemies?

[this is part 3 of a discussion started here]

"friends of god" is a documentary aired on HBO that explores some of the more visible, as well as lesser known "evangelicals" in america and their message.

HBO describes the show as follows: (its worth reading to get a feel for what the content was)

The estimated 50 to 80 million evangelical Christians
living in America today have become a formidable force
in our culture and democracy.

But the evangelical movement is a big tent. To try and
get a better understanding of the range and diversity
of this community, intrepid filmmaker Alexandra Pelosi
hit the road to meet some evangelicals and learn about
what their influence may mean for the future of the country

Pelosi ventures out over a year-long period for up-close and
personal encounters with some influential members of the
evangelical community, from Joel Osteen, the most-watched
TV minister in America, to pastor Ron Luce, the founder of
"Battle Cry," a concert tour that has drawn more than two
million young people to its events nationwide.

Pelosi also visits with a spectrum of others who embody a
wide range of evangelical experiences, among them visitors at
religion-themed parks, a Christian comic, creationist educators,
Liberty University students and activists in Washington, D.C.

...Pelosi travels to the red states and beyond to meet an array
of open and forthright evangelicals who represent a broad
sampling of the community. Many are pro-life and against
gay marriage, and believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible,
rebuking Darwinism.

Among them is Pastor Ted Haggard, who recently stepped down
as president of the 30-million strong National Association of
Evangelicals - the largest evangelical group in the U.S. - following
allegations that he had sex with a male prostitute and bought illegal
drugs...
...
During her journey, Pelosi also visits with Rev. Jerry Falwell,
leader of The Moral Majority and chancellor and founder of
Liberty University in Lynchburg, Va., who articulates a
commitment to change the country and urges his congregation
to "vote your values" in elections.
"Evangelicals are the largest minority block in this country," he says.
"It's not a majority, but I don't think you can win without them.
John Kerry learned that. Al Gore learned that. And Hillary will learn
that in 2008."

i happened to have the t.v. on while i was reading a book (i know.. i need background noise to concentrate..weird but true) and i heard the intro the program. i happened to have a blank tape in the v.c.r so i recorded as i watched. i sat in disbelief at how foolish it was.
my initial reaction was shock and disbelief, then frustration, then border line anger.

i watched it again about two weeks later after it had a chance to simmer and my reaction was similar, albeit with several audible laughs. it seemed it was better to laugh than throw a perfectly good television through a perfectly good window. fruits of the spirit and all.

you may be thinking that my anger was directed at the filmamker, alexandra pelosi (and yes, she is related to speaker of the house nancy pelosi, alexandra is her daughter-though i must point out that i did not know who the filmmaker was until after the second time i watched the program)

but in truth, all she did was ask people questions about what they believe and filmed them doing what they do. it wasn't the filmmaker that made evangelicals look so closed minded, ignorant, and absurd- it was [a lot of but not all of] the "evangelicals" that were interviewed.

i won't hit (much) on ted haggard as his downfall has been very public and it couldn't be ignored as he was interviewed for the film before the scandal broke (but unfortunately not before it was released with comment).

some of the"highlights" were
* the flagrant mixture of the gospel and "church" with american patriotism to the point where the two could not be distinguished. (this shameful aspect was the most prevalent theme in the film)

* laughable if it weren't so pathetic and shameful "gimmicks" such as a drive through bank window converted into a "drive through church".

* a christian "comic" who bemoans the fact that christians aren't allowed to perform in the broader media while pontificating and stomping his soap box about politics and patriotism and christianity - but not doing what stand up comedians do -namely doing stand-up comedy.

* a pastor, when confronted with a chance to explain the gospel to an unbelieving film crew instead unbelievably chooses to "explain" that christians have better sex lives than non-christians, and takes a random survey about the intimate details of some of his congregants bed room lives.

there are more and perhaps i'll cover them in more detail another time.

lest i be leveled with the charge that i cannot see anything positive, there were some neutral and even enduring moments in the documentary. but overall, if i were an unbeliever and saw this documentary, i would be stupefied that anyone would care what an evangelical thought or believed.

and i say this in light of the fact that scripture clearly teaches that the gospel is foolishness to the unbeliever and is not discerned by the darkened mind. (1Cor. 1:23; eph. 4:18)

but if i were an unbeliever, it wouldn't be the gospel i would reject, because amazingly enough, after an hour of examining what evangelicals believe, what comes across loudly is not that we as a human race are fallen creatures in need of a savior who calls all to accept the gift of eternal life and freely gives it to all who come.

unfortunately and sadly, the message that comes across loud and clear is that "evangelical christians" are mad that the liberals, homosexuals, and pro-choicers have taken over god's chosen country and we want it back.

this is a tragedy and i fear the repercussions could be severe. not because of a 60 minute HBO special, but because if this is really the prevailing view of "evangelicals" in our country...we are in big trouble... and we are failing in our mission as christians.