i believe...

my last few posts, and a recurring theme here at the lowercase has been on the issue of orthodoxy.

webster's defines orthodox as "conforming to established doctrine especially in religion". when someone says they are a christian, what they should mean is that they believe and affirm the most basic tenents of the christian faith as historically recognized by christians. obviously there are differences among christians. baptists, methodists, presbyterians, anglicans, etc. can all legitimately be true christians, despite their differences in certain areas. (baptism, church structure, etc.)

but certain things are not negotiable. there are some things that one cannot deny, or must affirm in order to be a christian.

one such summary of non-negotiable christian beliefs is the nicene creed. affirmed by the council of nicea in 325 a.d. , this document affirmed the core beliefs of christianity in an effort to combat the heresies of that day. in doing so, the council has recorded for us a very succinct record of non-negotiable affirmations of the christian faith.

two quick notes.
1) creeds have no authority of their own. they are only accurate insofar as they accurately reflect the teachings of scripture. having said that, creeds and confessions of faith can be very helpful in helping us learn and retain what scripture teaches.

2) the nicene creed speaks of "one holy catholic and apostolic church". the use of the word "catholic" is not a reference to roman catholicism-but rather the church universal.

the nicene creed

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible;

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only begotten Son of
God,begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light,very God of very God,
begotten, not made,
being of one substance with the Father;
by whom all things were made;
who for us men and for our
salvation came down from heaven,
and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the
Virgin Mary,and was made man; and was
crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried;and the third day he rose again
according to the Scriptures,and ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of the Father;
and he shall come again, with glory,to judge both
the quick and the dead;whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost the Lord, and Giver of Life,
who proceedeth from the Father [and the Son];
who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified;
who spake by the Prophets.

And I believe one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church;
I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins;
and I look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. AMEN.

when the truth hurts...

i can't think of a better way to celebrate the 200th post at the lowercase than to post a sermon, that, the first time i heard it, ripped me to the core.

this video is a of a sermon given by paul washer at a 2002 youth conference. if you have ever been to a youth conference, you know how seriously most youth do *not* take what they hear. i was one of them. i went to one almost every year between 7th grade and my senior year of high school. i was the youth minister's son. i was a christian. but the sermons were my (and all of my friends) least favorite part... and a lot of ungodly behavior took place (secretly and in public)while on those trips. i know i never heard a sermon like this... but i sure wish i had.

incidentally, washer was not invited back. the truth will do that sometimes.

get an hour to yourself and watch this hour long sermon. if you do watch it, you will not be the same afterward.

"what do you mean by that?"

i hesitate to post the following because this blog has never been about pushing a political agenda.
that is not what this post is about either. it is about the mis-use of the label "christian".

jesus was not a "white middle class republican", so i do not think that "good christians" can only vote republican, or even that a candidate's religious beliefs should be the litmus test for their ability to lead. while i would hope that all politicians would accept the gospel and live lives of obedience to christ, i do not withhold my vote for them solely on the basis of their faith (or lack of).

because much is being made about senator barack obama's faith, and with his current campaign openly seeking to reach the "evangelical vote", information about his beliefs and his commentary on them is easily available... one could almost say it is constantly presenting itself.

i can honestly say that if (when?) similar contradictions between professed faith and actual beliefs present themselves about john mccain, i will address it with the same scrutiny. again, this post is *not* about why someone should or should not vote for obama, but rather it is about why we must be clear that christianity has specific beliefs that cannot be compromised and maintain the name "christian".

that being said.... consider the following from a 2004 chicago -sun times interview with senator barack obama.
i will present them without commentary. simply read his own words (the whole interview is linked for context) and see if his description of being a christian leaves wondering what he means by "christian".

"I am a Christian..."So, I have a deep faith," Obama continues.
"I'm rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are
many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there
is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.
...[t]hat there are values that transcend race or
culture, that move us forward, and there's an obligation for
all of us individually as well as collectively to take responsibility
to make those values lived."

........

"The difficult thing about any religion, including Christianity,
is that at some level there is a call to evangelize and proselytize.
There's the belief, certainly in some quarters, that if people
haven't embraced Jesus Christ as their personal savior,
they're going to hell."

Obama doesn't believe he, or anyone else, will go to hell.
But he's not sure if he'll be going to heaven, either.

"I don't presume to have knowledge of
what happens after I die," he says. "When I tuck in my
daughters at night, and I feel like I've been a good father
to them, and I see in them that I am transferring values
that I got from my mother and that they're kind people
and that they're honest people, and they're curious people,
that's a little piece of heaven."

obama reads my blog

hope and change: the lowercase for vice president!!

it would seem senator barack obama reads my blog!
from worldnet daily:

Some have been taking issue with largely unnoticed
comments made last year by Sen. Barack Obama
declaring the U.S. is "no longer a Christian
nation" but is also a nation of others, including Muslims and
nonbelievers.
...
"Whatever we once were, we're no longer a Christian
nation. At least not just. We are also a Jewish nation,
a Muslim nation, and a Buddhist nation, and a Hindu
nation, and a nation of nonbelievers," Obama said
during a June 2007 speech available on YouTube

see! i told you .. just go back and read yesterdays post! i said these words
"this notion of america being a christian has got to go. that label is not true."

so.. you heard it here first... "barack obama reads the lowercase and agrees with stephen cavness."


obviously i am joking. (among other reasons...his remarks were made last year) the senator's purpose for his remarks is not in the pursuit of religious truth, but rather political gain. (just as any politician of any
party is prone to do)
he goes on to say:

"Somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped
being used to bring us together and started being used
to drive us apart. It got hijacked. Part of it's because of
the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, who've been
all too eager to exploit what divides us," he said

now, many people who are lumped into the "christian right" i have little in common with, so my purpose is not to defend that label. my point is to show yet another example of tolerance being redefined as "do not say anyone is wrong, much less live as if your moral claims are absolutes".

i am all for being "together" with my fellow americans. we can and should be cordial and friendly with those with different beliefs. we can disagree without hating those we disagree with. but let us move past this silly notion that tolerating something or someone means we must validate those beliefs- and that anything less is "intolerable".

...but it does show god's love

to show the proverbial "other side of (the same) coin... "

i maintain everything i wrote in the last post... but i do want to emphasize that the gospel being about god's glory is not at odds with his love for us.
we are indeed loved by god-and we can't even fathom the extent of it. (ephesians 3:14-19)
one of my favorite hymns is "how deep the father's love fo rus" by stuart townend. if you arent familiar with him, or his often collabrative friends keith and kristyn getty, go ye therefore and educate thyself.
this song gives us a scriptural, and therefore god exalting reminder of the lord's love for us.

"how deep the father's love for us"
words and music by stuart townend

How deep the Father's love for us,
How vast beyond all measure
That He should give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure

How great the pain of searing loss,
The Father turns His face away
As wounds which mar the chosen One,
Bring many sons to glory

Behold the Man upon a cross,
My sin upon His shoulders
Ashamed I hear my mocking voice,
Call out among the scoffers

It was my sin that held Him there
Until it was accomplished
His dying breath has brought me life
I know that it is finished

I will not boast in anything
No gifts, no power, no wisdom
But I will boast in Jesus Christ
His death and resurrection

Why should I gain from His reward?
I cannot give an answer
But this I know with all my heart
His wounds have paid my ransom

the gospel is not all about you

as any pastor can tell you, the amount of weekly " preacher junk mail" can be staggering. i am convinced that catalogues full of merchandise guaranteed to "grow my church" that come to my church or my home address are the single largest cause of deforestation.

in a sad commentary on how much we are willing to compromise the gospel in order to get people in the pews, i present to you one such product.. meant to be mailed out close to easter to get the unchurched in to church on easter sunday.



even worse, here is the "suggested message" for the reverse side of the card:

discover a love that was all about you
the 'me' generation, myspace, ipods, internet
sites that instantly recognize your login and
preferences-in this day and age the focus
seems to be on self. and, sometimes we
question whether that is a good thing. but, on
easter long ago, even god made it all about you.
jesus came to earth out of a great love-for you.
join us this easter at (your church name)
as we make it all about you-in the very best of ways.

i am not at all opposed to missions and evangelism. how could i be? our lord commands it, and christian love compels it. i am not opposed to unbelievers coming to my church. i have visited many homes and written many letters in hopes that they would.

but i draw the line at compromising the gospel in order to convince someone to come to church. the church does not exist to make much of man, but to make much of the glory of god.

yes, i believe john 3:16, as well as the many, many other verses that speak of god's love for us are 100% true. the lord has a greater love for his children than we could ever imagine. but the cross was not first and foremost about me or you. it was and is about god.

you see, the gospel is not "jesus loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life". the gospel is not "come to jesus and he will take away all of your troubles". you will not find those presentations of the gospel anywhere in scripture. we need to stop getting our theology from cheesey christian music lyrics and bumper stickers and get the gospel from the bible.

every person who has ever been born, has been born a sinner, an enemy of god and an object of god's wrath deserving of hell by virtue of their being a sinner. that is biblical fact. (rom. 3:10-12;6:23; john 3:36; eph. 2:3)

gospel means "good news". the good news is not that we were so lovable that god saved us from bad circumstances. the good news is that "... while we were yet sinners, christ died for us." (rom. 5:8) we deserved the wrath of god, but jesus went to the cross to appease that wrath, to endure the punishment, so that "whosoever would believe in him" would have eternal life. (rom. 3:21-25 ; john 3:16) jesus took on the consequences of sin, and his righteousness is credited to the believer.(1 peter 3:18)

so what happens when we tell the unbeliever that easter and the cross is all about them? they come to our church and find that we sing songs about, pray to, give money to, and (hopefully) preach about christ, *not* them. we have given them false advertisement. we promised to make much of them, then fell through on our end of the deal. then we scratch our heads and wonder why they don't come back.

yes, salvation is a sign of the love god has for us, but the cross is not about *us*. the cross makes much of god's justice and mercy and glory and grace. god gets the glory, and we get the benefit. the cross is about the wonder of an infinitely holy god providing salvation for unworthy sinners who deserve nothing but justice-hell.

so let us be honest about the gospel. by all means, we should evangelize. but the good news is not "its all about you".
the good news is that:

"though we are all sinners who deserve nothing but hell, christ has died so that if anyone will repent of their sins and believe that he is the lord of lords, who lived a perfect life, was crucified, died, and was buried, and on the third day rose again, having satisfied the wrath of god for their sins and having his righteousness applied to them, then they can be saved". (rom. 5:18;10:9)

*that* is the gospel. it needs to be shared indiscrimmantly with everyone. it is a matter of life and death, and we dare not get it wrong.

give me christ or else i die...

on the heels of the last couple of posts.. i think this hymn will make a nice book end..

Christ, Or Else I Die
Taken from the Gadsby Hymnal # 737
Words - William Hammond, 1719-1783
Music - Drew Holcomb, 2004

Gracious Lord, incline thy ear;
My requests vouchsafe to hear;
Hear my never-ceasing cry;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Wealth and honor I disdain,
Earthly comforts, Lord are vain;
These can never satisfy:
Give me Christ, or else I die.

All unholy and unclean,
I am nothing else but sin;
On thy mercy I rely;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Thou dost freely save the lost;
In thy grace alone I trust.
With my earnest suit comply;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

Thou dost promise to forgive
All who in thy Son believe;
Lord, I know thou canst not lie;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

All unholy and unclean,
I am nothing else but sin;
On thy mercy I rely;
Give me Christ, or else I die.

© 2005 Red Mountain Music
www.redmountainmusic.com

for more amazing hymns set to more modern,[but not "contemporary"] music, check out the good folks at indelible grace and red mountain music.

america is deathly sick... and we are spreading the germs

***warning, the following is the 2nd half of a long word document ramble that i have been writing for over 2 weeks...part I was posted before this one...it is unedited and not at all *tidied up*, but i do hope you will join in conversation with me in the comments...


"america is deathly sick..."
our country celebrates a culture that embraces promiscuity, convenient divorces and remarriages, children outside of marriage, cohabitation, and sexual promiscuity. television, movies and even music are filled with images/imagery that contain language and /or images that would have caused outrage just twenty years ago (that would be 1988- not quite ozzie and harriet territory).

whether one thinks of these as positive, negative, or neutral indicators of our society, it cannot be denied that the rate at which our culture changes and becomes comfortable with those changes is remarkably fast. it has taken roughly two generations for our country to embrace what once repulsed it.

then there is the spiritual element. last month a report came out that included the following information:

** the number of people who say they are unaffiliated
with any particular faith today (16.1%) is more than
double the number who say they were not affiliated with
any particular religion as children

**Among Americans ages 18-29, one-in-four say they are
not currently affiliated with any particular religion.

**the United States is on the verge of becoming a minority
Protestant country

**one-quarter of [those calling themselves unaffiliated with
any religion] consists of those who describe themselves as
either atheist or agnostic
(1.6% and 2.4% of the adult population overall, respectively)

**the majority of the unaffiliated population (12.1% of
the adult population overall) is made up of people who
simply describe their religion as "nothing in particular."

even by our own admission, within southern baptist churches,
less than 40% of those on the church roll actually attend that church
where they are listed as a "member".

this is the "state of the union".

jeremiah wright's recent comments sparked a still raging outcry due to their anti-american and racially charged content- yet where is the outrage that the gospel was virtually absent from these sermons?

wright is by far not the only one. when we have "christian" preachers preaching everything else but the gospel, then we should spend little time wondering why the country is in such moral and spiritual decline.

"... and we are spreading the germs"
lest we, lest * i * place all of the blame at the feet of others... lets look inwardly...

how often do we spend even five minutes a day contemplating the state of our
own souls? (per 2 cor. 13:5; philippians 2:12;1 tim. 6:20-21)
how often do we take inventory of our lives and evaluate how our lives stand
up to what scriptures says a genuine believer looks like.
(see rom. 12, gal. 5, col. 3, james, etc.)
how much of what we knowingly do or don't do is contrary to the lord's will?

how often do we wait for someone in public office, on the school board, or at church to address those things that are wrong with other people - all the while being perfectly comfortable with our own hypocrisy? how much stock and emotional zeal do we exert convincing ourselves and others that candidate _______ or if only certain legislation would pass - that will restore america?

the only hope for america is jesus christ. and he is not on the ballot. but he is available to change and save lives if we would show less excitement for who won what ball game and more zeal for seeing our relatives care more about christ and holiness than seeing the next "must see" televison show or movie.

if you are sick of the direction america is taking... make a stand. don't be the friend or family member that excuses the spiritual laziness of the believers in your life. do not be the one who would rather feel accepted than plead with your friends or family to embrace christ every day of the week, not just those sundays that they make it to church. join with me in refusing to laugh at the inappropriate jokes and remarks made at family or friend gatherings and instead initiating conversations about those things of the lord.

and when the objections come- and they will... simply remind yourself and your hearers that one day, unless the lord comes first, we will die. our bodies will fail and we will stop breathing be but into a box and placed into a hole in the ground. and our souls -and the souls of those we care about - will go to either to heaven or hell.

if we , or they are believers, our souls will enter into the presence of the one true holy and mighty god... and he will not want to talk about last night's ball game or the scene in the movie that was pretty bad, but you just "had to laugh".

if we, or they, are not believers, there will be an eternity of deserved wrath, which may include an eternal replaying of all of the times we chose to amuse ourselves with finite mindless drivel rather than have a conversation about god or the gospel.

symptoms of a lifelong "madness"

***warning, the following is only half of a long word document ramble i have been writing for over 2 weeks...it is unedited and not at all *tidied up*, but i do hope you will join in conversation with me in the comments...


i am a lifelong sports fan. as far back as i can remember, i have played sports of some sort, whether it be for recreation, exercise, or for a team. my three favorites are baseball, basketball, and football.

i love sports. i love to play them. and i love to watch them. (except golf ).

i have attended a couple of nba games, one including the all time greatest player in basketball history, michael jordan. i have watched nfl teams from nosebleed seats in the end zone.
i have been to knoxville to see the mighty tennessee volunteers dominate lesser teams (i even endured watching peyton manning before he was on every other commercial on t.v.)

but my all-time favorite team is the st. louis cardinals. i can distinctly remember watching them on t.v. and collecting the baseball cards when i was a boy. my first major league game was in st. louis between my 4th and 5th grade years in elementary school. i was able to meet my life long baseball hero, ozzie smith, when i was in 7th grade. my gracious wife even lets me hang all of my st. louis cardinal memorabilia in a hallway in our house. i literally shed tears when the cardinals won the world series in 2006.

so i truly do understand the love and loyalty millions of people in our country and others have for sports and specific teams.

"march madness" is a time of year unlike any other in sports. starting with 64 teams, countless brackets are filled out after time spent agonizing over who the upsets will be and how far the greatest "cinderella" story of the year will make it. it is fascinating to see people root hard for other teams just so their bracket will be more accurate. some people will even root for teams they ordinarily loathe. it really is a fascinating time in american culture.

i say all of this for a reason. the thought struck me earlier last week as i was rooting for tennessee to not wait until the final 10 minutes of a game to start playing - my emotions, my adrenaline, my whole life was consumed for a whole weekend by basketball.

facts, figures, stats, highlights came to me easily. discussions over every meal and with most people from thursday until sunday somehow found their way to basketball.

thursday past. friday. until late saturday afternoon, i had no conversations about the gospel, christ, or the glory of god.

did i mention that last weekend was easter? lthat ast weekend marked the celebration of the most victorious moment in all of history?

and what did all of my conversations revolve around from thursday afternoon to saturday night?
basketball.

and *i* am a pastor.

oh i studied for my sermon. i read the bible. i even paused and reflected on good friday. but everytime i got around anyone else... all basketball.

there is nothing wrong with enjoying sports. but we have to ask ourselves, "do i ever get as excited about the lord and his work, his glory, his grace, as i get about what teams beats who or wins what game?"

those who say that they aren't very emotional win it comes to matters of faith can be seen screaming like their rear end is on fire at a television that cant hear them come playoff time.

why is that?

we all deserve the eternal wrath of god in an eternity spent in hell. all of us without distinction.
yet those who have placed their faith in the life and work of christ have been redeemed and have been given eternal life... yet we get uncomfortable when someone turns the conversation over family dinner to what the lord is doing/has done.
we would rather be able to laugh at inappropriate jokes or movie quotes than reflect on the majesty of god with those we love.
we get irritated when someone doesn't find it funny when, to get a laugh, we say words or phrases that we would never dare say if we were in public and first had to announce "i am a christian...".

i guess what has been bothering me is my own lack of consistency. and as i have been dealing with it in my own life i have been noticing how prevalent it is all around me...

what if we kept a record of how much we compromise in one week? how many times we do, say, or think things that we make a conscious decision *not* to do what we know we should do?

and for what? a laugh? to fit in at work. to be thought of as "relevant" or "fun". or to prove that we are not "too religious" or unable to be fun?

where does it stop- and why doesnt it bother me more?

to be continued....

he is risen, death is defetaed..

from easter weekend last year... may these same truths move us every easter and every day...
___________________________________________
i received my bachelor's degree in music. i also have a philosophy minor, and now i am in the school of theology in seminary [and a pastor.] but still, music holds a special place in my heart.

over my years of study in music (which is more than most) i performed hundreds of pieces of music as a soloist, member of several ensembles, and with opera companies and combined orchestras and choirs. one of my favorites is the brahms requiem. it is by far one of the most beautiful pieces of music i have ever performed. we performed it in 1999, about two weeks after the columbine shootings. i remember singing the sixth movement and being blown away, almost unable to sing from choking back tears as we sang:

Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting?
O grave, where is thy victory? (text from1 Corinthians 15 )

just thinking about the victory over death that believers can take comfort in gave me chills as we sang that text over such beautiful music that was so powerful and deliberate...defiant music. i remember feeling like i was staring satan in the face with my eyes squinted, shaking my fist in his face! how did we get this boldness, the comfort, this confidence?

as andrew peterson put it so powerfully in his song "high noon":
And the demons, they danced in the darkness
When that last ragged breath left his lungs
And they reveled and howled at the
war that they thought they had won

But then, in the dark of the grave
The stone rolled away
In the still of the dawn on the greatest of days
It was high noon in the valley of the shadow
When the shadows were shot through with light
When Jesus took in that breath
And shattered all death with his life

Be gone, you wages of sin
Go on, don't you come back again
I've been raised and redeemed
You've lost all your sting...

Let the people rejoice
Let the heavens resound
Let the name of Jesus,
who sought us and freed us f
orever ring out
All praise to the fighter of the night
who rides on the light
Whose gun is the grace of the God of the sky!

...in the valley of the shadow
When the shadows were shot through with light
When the mouth of the tomb shouted,
"Glory, the Groom is alive"
Be gone, you wages of sin
Go on, don't you come back again
I've been raised and redeemed,
all praise to the king
The victor of the battle...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
can you feel that? "when jesus took in that breath and shattered all death with his life"
there was a cold, dead, lifeless body on a slab of stone from friday until sunday. and then it breathed! jesus took in a big breath and defeated the sting of death!
"the mouth of the tomb shouted glory, the groom is alive!!!!"
can't you just picture satan and his angels... standing with mouths open... thinking that they had won, celebrating! when all at once jesus stands up and walks out of the tomb and ruins their party!

i have written, taught and preached a lot about the death of christ. why he died. what he accomplished when he died. and those things are so very important. but we often neglect *why* they are important. how glorious that it does not end with death, but jesus christ who died in our place overcame the power of death and walked out of that grave victorious! the father's wrath against the sins that killed his son was fully exhausted, totally satisfied. and jesus rose from the grave. may you have a blessed weekend where you think often about the risen lord and savior, who lives and reigns yesterday, today, and forever.

a tale of two gospels...

i have linked to both of these short videos before on this blog, (justin taylor linked to the 2nd one today) but because we cannot be reminded enough...

love/ hate relationships...

this past sunday i preached from john 15. in verses 18 - 20a jesus says:

"If the world hates you,
know that it has hated mebefore it hated you.
If you were of the world, theworld would love
you as its own; but because youare not of the world,
but I chose you out of the world,therefore the world
hates you. Remember the word thatI said to you:'A servant
is not greater than his master.'If they persecuted me,
they will also persecute you"

in a time when our churches are scrambling to find the best way to
reach out to our culture,these words from jesus serve as a sharp
reminder that as we seek the lost we need not revert to becoming l
ike the world to do so.

jesus doesnt say that we seek to be hated, but rather if we are living
the life of a follower of christ, the differences will be noticed. and
where we refuse to compromise there will be division and dissention.

we would do well as individuals and as churches to frequently
self-examine ourselves.
do i look so much like the world that they do not notice a difference?
am i trying harder to be loved and accepted by the world than i am to be fully devoted to christ?

this applies in regards to how we *do* church as well. do we seek to be culturally relevant at the expense of fidelity to our message?

this quote from the great (some say greatest) baptist preacher, charles spurgeon rings true:

"I believe that one reason why the church of God at this present moment
has so little influence over the world is because the world has so much
influence over the church."

if the only difference the world sees between themselves and believers is our sunday schedules then we will have little headway in convincing them of their need for the gospel.

may the lord grant us hearts that burn to love and serve him in a way that does not leave to us the option to seek the love (or approval) of the world at the gospels expense.

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...

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

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.

no life in the best life now

[this is a continuation of a discussion started here]

the first program i saw that made me wonder why anyone in our country, let alone the world, would take american evangelical christians seriously was the episode of 60 minutes that aired sunday night, october 14th.
one of the segments was devoted to joel osteen. now i can hear some of you saying "ok stephen, we know, you hate joel osteen... give the guy a break."

while i have discussed joel osteen in the past on this blog, it is not true that i hate him. in fact, i honestly believe that he is sincere in what he is doing and what he teaches. i also believe that he means no harm and has all of the best intentions in the world. i do not believe that he would deliberately lead people astray.

but sincerity can be sincerely wrong.

the fact that he has a large church is not the primary reason that i am so wary of him. some of my greatest influences(spurgeon, piper, etc.) pastor or pastored churches with thousands in attendance.

large crowds do not an evil preacher make.

the fact is, i do not hate joel osteen. i fear him. more accurately, i fear the effect he has on the thousands who are given a hopeless hope.

why?
for starters, here is how 60 minutes started their program:

Joel Osteen's positive, upbeat can-do message has turned
him into America's most popular preacher and earned him
the title of most influential Christian in the country.
He pastors the biggest and fastest growing
American church and his services are the most watched
religious broadcast in the country

so what is it that america's "most popular preacher" and the "most influential christian in the country" teaches?

Osteen preaches his own version of what is known as the
"prosperity gospel" -- that God is a loving, forgiving
God who will reward believers with health, wealth and
happiness. It's the centerpiece of every sermon

as stated before on this blog, it is hard to reconcile this with the scores of passages that promise suffering and for some, torture and death for the sake of the gospel. what would the believers in third world countries who go to bed hungry or are persecuted by their government for their faith think of osteen's message that god will reward believers with health, wealth and prosperity?

quoting osteen, the interviewer notices what i hope you have noticed by now..

" [quoting osteen]
'To become a better you, you must be positive towards
yourself, develop better relationships, embrace the place
where you are.'[end quote]

Not one mention of God in that. Not one mention of
Jesus Christ in that," [the interviewer] remarks. "

"That's just my message. There is scripture in there
that backs it all up. But I feel like, Byron, I'm called
to help people…how do we walk out the Christian life?
How do we live it? And these are principles that can
help you. I mean, there’s a lot better people qualified
to say, 'Here’s a book that going to explain the scriptures
to you.' I don’t think that’s my gifting," Osteen says.

the problem is, pastors and preachers in the new testament are called to use scripture, to teach their hearers the word of god.
paul told timothy "preach the word" jesus commanded to "teach them to observe all things i have commanded". the new testament is full of passages speaking of "preaching" being the proclamation of the gospel to unbelievers and the reiterating of the need for the gospel in the lives of the believers. the new testament is a collection of books written to believers with its emphasis being the glory of god in the gospel of jesus christ. our need for the gospel isn't over after conversion!

so i guess therein lies the root of my problem with joel osteen. what he does is not preaching.
now you may ask... why does that matter?

here is why it matters.

"I like to see myself as a life coach, a motivator to
help them experience the life of God that God has
for them. People don’t like to be beat down and told '
You’ve done wrong... think that most people already
know what they’re doing wrong. And for me to get in
here and just beat ‘em down and talk down to ‘em,
I just don’t think that inspires anybody to rise higher.
But I want to motivate. I wanna motivate every person
to leave here to be a better father, a better husband, to
break addictions to come up higher in their walk with the Lord "

if joel were simply on the speaking circuit doing motivational speeches, with teh same content, at conferences, business luncheons and trainings, self help groups, etc., for the most part, i wouldn't bother being worried about the content of what he teaches.

but the rub comes in here. people don't go to motivational speakers with an idea that what they are hearing will make them right with god. the preacher doesn't have to "beat people down" with what they have done wrong. but he is called to make people aware that their sin separates them from god and nothing they can do will ever be enough to earn his favor or mercy. this opens the door for teaching of grace and mercy!

osteen's message is that we are good people who haven't reached the goodness of our internal potential because of external problems.
the bible's message is that the problem is internal and the remedy is external.. in christ.

these are two different messages.

the gospel as presented by jesus and his disciples is this "repent and believe".
yet osteen himself in this 60 minute special and in an interview with larry king has explicitly stated that he tries to steer clear of speaking of sin or guilt.
how can one in need of the gospel "repent" if they have never been told they are in need of it and what it *means* to be a sinner in need of repentance?

so how is it that those who need the gospel can hear it at one of osteen's services?

these verses from romans are quite troubling in light of what osteen *isn't* saying:

rom. 10:13-15
For "everyone who calls on the name of
the Lord will be saved." How then will they
call on him in whom they have not believed?
And how are they to believe in him of
whom they have never heard? And how are they to
hear without someone preaching? And how are
they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written,
"How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the
good news!"

suppose someone goes to osteen's church. the are motivated by what they hear. they may even take great steps in improving their lifestyle. that is a credit to the way osteen seeks to encourage his hearers to take responsibility for their lives.

but what if they are lost?

will they ever hear the call to "repent and believe"? do they even know their need for the gospel? or is what they hear convincing them that the secret to happiness lies within themselves and their own efforts? hopefully you can see how dangerous this is.

osteen is not unaware of his critics. he responds to the charge that his teaching is dangerous by saying:

"I don’t know what can be so dangerous about giving
people hope...Causing people to have better relationships.
I'm not leading them to some false God or something like that."

osteen may not be preaching a "false god", but is he building up the "self" to the detriment of the realization for the need for the gospel?

i occasionally will watch osteen's services late on sunday nights. its true that he will hold up his bible and say (with those in attendance repeating after him):

This is my Bible.
I am what it says I am.
I have what it says I have.
I can do what it says I can do.
Today I will be taught the Word of
God.
I boldly confess my mind is alert, my heart is receptive.
I will never be the same.
I am about to receive the incorruptible, indestructible,
ever-living seed of the Word of God.
I will never be the same. Never, never, never.
I will never be the same. In Jesus name.
Amen

after reciting this (notice the power of what "i" can do), osteen goes on to give clever jokes, some anecdotes, and some encouraging comments after having read a passage of scripture. but he never preaches the word of god.

i am scared for the lost persons (perhaps in the hundreds or thousands) who attend lakewood's services or watch on television and think that because they have heard and sincerely believe what osteen has said, that their attendance or assent to the "message" makes them right with god.

so what you have is a 20 or 30 minute motivational talk that encourages people to try hard and not give up, that god wants good things for them, then says "if you want to become a christian say this..."

this is terrifying.

certainly the bible does speak to what are called "practical matters" of life; love, finances, work, relationships, etc. but from genesis to revelation the emphasis of scripture is living life for the glory of god. (1 cor. 10:31 for example). when the emphasis is always on "me", how can we expect anyone to know that the greatest joy in life is joy in christ?

john piper asks a great question in his book, god is the gospel

"Would you be happy to go to heaven... to have all
your family there, to be free from all diseases, to
have every kind of pleasure you desire, etc....
would you be happy to go to heaven... if God were not there?"

if the message heard week end and week out is absent of the call for finding fulfillment in joy in christ, how can the heaer answer yes to that question.. or even know that they should?

to be sure, christians are to have blessings and pleasure. but if at the root of our blessings and pleasure the joy is in the gifts and not the giver, then we are idolaters.

having our best life now is recognizing that any and all good things in our lives are the result of the grace and mercy of god, the chief of which is the salvation of undeserving sinners offered freely by god through the life, death, burial and resurrection of jesus christ. this is teh message of christianity. we can be better husbands and wives, better parents, better employees, have better relationships with our friends and families, even put in a lot of hard work and effort to improve our lifestyles. but if the foundation of our joy is not rooted in joy in christ, then how will we view our lives if all the "stuff" goes away? when thieves steal and moth and rust destroy?

our best life is the gospel- and the benefit comes not from our trying harder, but from our recognition of our inability to satisfy our deepest desires and the utter ability of christ to do just that. but not because of the lifestyle he can give us- but because of the life he gives.

so no, i do not think joel osteen is evil, or the anti-christ, or even a mean person. i mean no disrespect of his person and i do not call in to question his character.
but the message of joel osteen makes me fear for those who hear it and assume it is the gospel. rather than getting their "best life now.." they may be missing any chance of life at all.

(for previous discussions and further concerns regarding this matter see here and here)

are we serious?

in the 3 weeks since i had back surgery, i have spent a lot of time doing 2 things. reading and watching television. i have been able to read more than usual since i am at home 24/7 and i have enjoyed that. but the major difference is the amount of t.v. i have watched.

normally, my schedule is such that if i watch television at all, it is either early morning sportscenter and/or news, or late at night (around 11:30 pm) when i get home from work before i go to bed. before my back went out, i had, besides news and sports, 2 shows that i intentionally tried to watch (or at least record) each week. over the last three weeks i have been amazed at how easy it is to get sucked into television habits.

bare with me, this is not going to be a rant against television...(though i suppose that wouldnt be entirley bad)

there were two programs that i came across recently that made me wonder why anyone in this country would take evangelical christians seriously at all.

it wasn't due to an unfair summary of a biased news anchor, it wasn't because a reporter mis-represented the views of the estimated 50-80 million american evangelicals.

nope. what made evangelicals look so ridiculous were the evangelicals that did all of the talking.

the two programs were the october 14th edition of 60 minutes and a documentary on HBO called ""friends of god".

over the next few posts, i will review and explore what it means if the evangelicalism presented by these two programs are representative of the actual substance .