on the need to read...

i often reference books and authors on this site and to members of my church and others who i come into contact with.

often i get a response of "i don't like to read" or some variation of it.

while i understand the sentiment of not doing things that one doesn't enjoy, i am becoming more and more convinced as i get older that reading is in a category that is exempt from "i don't like it so i don't do it".

i am tempted to compare it to eating vegetables even when you don't like them, but that is too negative of a comparison. i think a lot of times we say we don't like something without knowing if we do or not. (again.. the food comparison).

how do we continually grow in our faith if we don't read? we can listen to sermons and participate in dialogue, but those are, for the most part, passive interactions and where they are more active, they are dependent on information we already have.

how are we continuing to learn and grow and sharpen our minds?

at least one answer is "by reading."

i came across this excellent article over at the desiring god blog. here are some excerpts:

Christians are people of the book: God purposely chose
the medium of typography to deliver his revelation to us.
In that book, we are commanded to love God with our
hearts and our minds (Matthew 22:34-40). This gives
Christians a clear command to use their intellects —
to be, in other words, a kind of intellectual.

Reading is one of the best ways to develop our minds.
It can help us to know God and ourselves, gain vicarious
experience, increase our perception and imagination,
train our minds to think critically and logically, and
teach us self-discipline. (For more on this, see Neil
Postman's excellent Amusing Ourselves to Death.)

But we have a problem: our culture is becoming aliterate.
We have the ability to read but not the desire.
Or maybe some of us have the desire but not the time.
We make time to watch television and surf
the Internet for the latest triviality, but we
can't seem to make the time to sit down and read for an hour.

Christians should be readers. We should read and meditate
on the Bible, of course, but we should also read theology.
Good theology systematizes and explains the Bible in ways
we would be pressed to come up with on our own. Few of us
are a Jonathan Edwards, John Owen, J. I. Packer or John Piper,
and we would be wise to learn from them.

...

to be a reader doesn't mean you have to read only large books with hundreds of pages full of words that you don't understand. there are many books written specifically for those who want to grow in their understanding without demanding a degree in literature or theology.

if you were to only read 20 pages a day, a great number of books could be read in less than 2 weeks.

here are a few that contain a wealth of information good for the heart and mind that are easily accessible. (click titles for links)

the dangerous duty of delight by john piper

knowing god by j.i. packer

the holiness of god by r.c. sproul

what is a healthy church? by mark dever

according to plan by graeme goldsworthy

christian beliefs:20 basics every christian should know by wayne grudem

the pope says my church is not a church...

this is some old news, but i have been having a battle with my back the past two weeks and haven't been at the computer often.

in case you missed it, in the last week or so, pope benedict made the declaration (or, more accurately, reaffirmed the catholic churches teaching) that the only true church is the roman catholic church.

read news article here[HT:brandon hall]

the argument is that the catholic church is the true church based, at least in part, on its misinterpretation of matthew 16:16-19.

this is another instance where as christians who are not roman catholic need to learn our church history! why aren't we catholic? what events led to the split? who were the key figures and why? what were the major doctrines that were in question? what has happened since then?

for answers and very intriguing reading, i suggest stephen j. nichols' book, the reformation:how a monk and a mallet changed the world , and timothy george's theology of the reformers.

these are things we need to know in order to discuss these issues. if someone were to ask you why you are not roman catholic, could you answer them coherently?

i will say this for the pope (as others have), i admire his unflinching fist wave in the face of the postmodern thought of "accept everyone as they are!!" if only we as protestants would have such firm conviction.

here's the church, here's the steeple, open it up, where's the gospel?

less than 200 yards from my house is a large church building. i have nothing against large church buildings. no matter what the size, as long as the gospel is proclaimed and the god who is worshipped is the one true god, it matters little if the building seats thousands or barely 100, as my own does.

the size of this church is not what bothers me. what does bother me is that this past sunday, they cancelled their morning "worship services" and instead showed the movie "evan almighty". if thats not enough, you had to pay to get in.

set aside for a moment whether or not the movie itself is worth seeing. i have no idea, i haven't seen it, though i have said i would like to. whether or not the movie is good or not isn't the point.

the point is this. what in the world does it say about our view of god and his deservingness of our worship when we cancel services said aside to corporately proclaim his glory and majesty and to spend time in his word in order to show a movie?

what does it tell church members about the priority of the leadership? what does it tell visitors about the god the church claims to worship and his holiness? what does it say to the lost about the need for christ? what does it say to the community about the value of this church's worship?

i am not anti-hollywood. i am not anti "evan almighty". but i am anti trivialization of the worship of the holy and mighty god of the universe who demands that we worship him in spirit and in truth - not in technicolor, surround sound and high definition.

here is another blogpost concerning the same event

HT: ron kinzel

baptist press with a log in its eye...

i have posted several times about the large contrast between the southern baptist convention's reported membership of over 16 million, and the actual reported attendance of just over 6 million. [see here] and here]

the past two years at the annual sbc meeting, the executive committee has decided *not* to allow a vote calling the churches to integrity in church membership.

if almost 2/3 of our "members" on the rolls do not attend, why do we count them as members?

yet when mentioned in national media reports the SBC, is always described with the "16 million member" designation.

for an example, see this article written june 16 of this month, note the "16.3 million-strong" designation in the second paragraph.

16.3 million strong? how is it "strong" when over 10 million out of 16 do not go to church?

where do these media outlets get this number?

from the SBC.

with this in mind, i find it interesting that the SBC's own media outlet, baptist press, chose to run an article on the lack of honesty in the reporting of numbers in another baptist denomination [read story here]

hello, pot?
meet kettle.

when i read this article, i couldn't help but think of jesus' words in matthew 7:2-5 :

For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by
your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.
Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye,
but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how
can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of
your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye? You
hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then
you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

may the lord grant our denomination the integrity to be honest about our own numbers, and humility when seeing the same lack of in others.

[HT: tom ascol/founder's blog]

exposed in public

what if we all had to wear signs listing our sins?

A Tennessee mother fed up with her daughter's misbehavior
took an unusual tack in for latest punishment, making her
stand on a busy street corner with an attention-getting sign.
Tashara Wilkins, 13, held a sign Sunday reading, "I don't obey
my parents, I'm a liar. I steal from my mom. I
have a bad attitude."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286676,00.html

those who have grown up in church have heard it said a million times that god sees everything, even what we do in private.

but why is it that we cringe at the thought of publicly displaying our sins but knowing that the lord sees all doesnt phase us?
we go through our day so care free when no one else knows of the hatred, resentment, jealousy, lust, in our hearts. how do we get through our day without feeling mortified?
we shudder and feel sick at the shame we would feel if anyone knew *everything* we have done, still do, think and feel.

yet someone does know.

why do *i* do these things?

it is because we fear what other finite people think of us. we want to protect our reputation. we want to be liked. we want to be thought well of. and as long as we can keep these things secret, we can have them.

its not the shame of the actions, attitude, or thought.. its the shame of being caught. as long as we can keep them hidden, we are ok with doing these things.

so what does that say about how much we value god ?

do we fear god because of his holiness or are we simply scared of being caught and being punished?

do we hate sin because it makes us feel guilty, or because god calls us to be holy and sin keeps us from that?

o that the lord (who sees what is done in secret [matt.6]) would grant me a hatred for sin, and that i would be more humiliated for sinning once against my god than a thousand evil deeds exposed before men.

kirk cameron and the sbc's "growing pains"

the following was a video taped message to pastors at a booth during last week's annual meeting of the southern baptist convention:

Can I speak to you from my heart for a moment?
I realize that, theologically, I’m not worthy to wash
your socks. But imagine this scenario with me, if you will:

Imagine I’m a “seeker”- I’m a non-Christian, sitting in
your church week after week after week listening to you.
Am I ever going to hear the message that will save my
soul from Hell? Will you ever tell me the truth clearly
enough so that I realize that my sin has made me an
enemy of God: that I am currently on the path that leads
to destruction, with the wrath of God dwelling upon me,
and that unless I repent and put my faith in the Savior,
I will perish?

Or have you decided that it’s better to simply entertain
me, and on Sundays I can come to have my “felt needs”
met with good music and good advice? Pastor, while I
would appreciate that, it’s the ultimate betrayal of my
trust in you if you don’t tell me the truth. Will I ever hear
the words “repent,” “surrender,” “turn to the Savior,”
“be born again”?

If you don’t tell me those things, how will I ever know
to do it?
Please don’t leave it up to the Wednesday night
small-group leader. They’re taking their cues from you.
You’re leading the flock.

And now I speak to you as a Christian.
If you and I fail to teach the whole counsel of God,
and we don’t warn sinners to flee from the wrath to come,
and run to the love of Christ on the Cross to save their soul,
we make a terrible mistake. It doesn’t matter how happy a
person is- how much a sinner is enjoying the pleasures of sin
for a season- without the righteousness of Christ, he’ll perish on
the Day of Judgment. The Bible says, “Riches profit not on the
Day of Wrath, but righteousness delivers from death.”

You see, that’s how Kirk Cameron realized he needed a
Savior. I had riches, but I knew that it was the righteousness
of God that I needed in order to be saved from my sin.

HT:strangebaptistfire.com

ill admit it. if i see a "growing pains" marathon on t.v., i will be glued to it until it is over. i watched it faithfully when it was on prime time. so years later when i heard that kirk cameron had become a very outspoken christian i was glad to hear it.

[i choose to pretend that those awful "left behind" movies never happened, and i do not hold them against kirk.]

his work that i have been pleasantly surprised about is his work with "the way of the master" evangelistic ministries. i don't know a tremendous amount about them,(and because of my lack of in depth research i am not endorsing the ministry, per se) but what i have seen and read is encouraging. their approach to evangelism is a much needed break from the "how jesus can make you healthier, wealthier and have a better quality of life" approach that is so prevalent.

cameron's point is well made if it isn't missed. i do **not** think he is saying that every sermon should be delivered as if everyone were a non believer and has never heard teh gospel. what i think he means is that the content of the sermons preached each week need to show us our need for christ. we don't just need a series on the gospel, the whole bible is about the gospel!
from cover to cover we read about the holiness of god, the sinfulness of man, the punishment for sin and disobedience, and the possibility of forgiveness and atonement.

so whether the sunday morning sermon is from one of teh gospels or from leviticus, we should come away knowing that we are people in need of a great savior, and even as christians we need him every day.

we need pastors who faithfully preach the word of god, not straining their minds trying to have the most culturally relevant sermon with the best jokes and wittiest one liners.

we need preachers who are willing to set aside what we want and give us what we need.

it looks like mike seaver finally got it right.

dont cry persecution just yet...

some of you may have heard about the bills running through congress right now, HR1592 and S. 1105. and may have seen the websites like this and this that predict the near future full of pastors being put in prison for preaching about things such as homosexuality.

i have had my eye on this for several months since i first heard about it, but my friend brandon emailed me about it, so i figured now was as good of a time as any to discuss it.

i understand the concern, and as a pastor am sympathetic to it. but we must be careful to not over exaggerate the actual wording to gain an emotional appeal . unfortunately, the right wing media has this down to a science. it seems that they believe if enough panic can be created with as few facts as possible, then there might be some change.

we don't want change if we have to misrepresent the truth to get it.

the wording in the two separate bills are referencing acts of physical violence. there is nothing that restricts the right to speak against what is found to be contrary to one's religious beliefs.

in fact, the HR 1952 bill includes the following:

"Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act,
shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected
from legal prohibition by or any activities protected by the
free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment
to the Constitution."

and the senate bill concludes with:

"any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act,
or the application of such provision or amendment to any
person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the
remainder of this Act, the amendments made by this Act,
and the application of the provisions of such to any person
or circumstance shall not be affected thereby."

we do well to keep our eye on these things. we never know when there may be a day when there may be persecution for speaking teh truths of scripture. may we fight that with all of our abilities as provided by our current legal system.

but let us remember that even if our government fails, we do not need permission from anyone to speak the truths of god's word. and let us not act as if having our perceived "rights" revoked is the end of the world. people have been and are being beaten, killed, their families raped, tortured and killed for spreading the gospel. let us be wary of having a martyr complex over what we may be fined or put in a jail for saying.

may we remember that whether or not the country in which we lives grants us "freedom" of speech, we will always be free to spread the gospel. the apostles, early believers, and current believers in other countries did not and do not let any government keep them from obeying their god, who is the only bestower of "rights".

caught in the act...

here is a link to the video of the discussion and rejection of the resolution mentioned in my previous post
HT: sbc voices

lying to ourselves and the world...but that's ok

a resolution was submitted for this years southern baptist convention annual meeting calling for churches and the convention as a whole to be honest about our membership numbers, as well as calling our churches to return to the biblical model for church membership- namely, that only genuine believers (as evidenced by profession of faith, baptism, and visible signs of regeneration - bearing fruit) be counted as members. (read the full resolution here)

why this need?

in 2006, the southern baptist convention reported its membership of all southern baptist churches at 16,306,246.

actual attendance at these same churches with nearly 16 and a half million?
6,138,776.

of over 16 million reported members, only 6 million are actually coming. thats only 37% of the "members" who actually come to even one service per week.

if more than ten million of our reported members don't even bother to show up, what does that say about our standard for membership?

quite honestly, it appears that the sbc doesn't care what scripture says about church membership. as long as we get a card signed and someone walks an aisle, we will count them as a member, even if they never walk through the doors again.

so, such a motion probably passed right?

well...no.

it actually wasn't even given a chance to be voted on. the executive committee refused to allow a vote for the second straight year.

why?

the reason given was that the committee thought it inappropriate to bring the resolution for fear that it would infringe on the "autonomy of local churches."

to be quite honest, that is a ridiculous reason. the resolution didn't ask for anything to be forced on the churches. no sbc resolutions are binding. issues of abstaining from alcohol are easily passed. what is the difference? oh, and good thing we have a definitive stance on global warming now.

i am saddened by the sbc's willingness to ignore the bible's teachings in favor of cultural views or practices each year. but it doesnt end there. there is a lack of honesty that goes back home at the end of the convention.

if our seminaries are sincere about what they teach us is important to bring to the church (namely, teaching and practicing the word of god without compromise), then perhaps the leadership should speak up instead of becoming silent on these same issues when the spotlight is on the convention.
quite frankly, they are just as much to blame for waving the bible at us telling us to "preach the word" and "be courageous, die to self !" in our own chapel services, but when on a bigger stage, there is nothing but silence when such an opportunity for the teacher to model his own lesson is available.

this is double talk and political game playing and it is maddening. i cant hear what you are saying because i see what you are (not) doing.

either speak up on the grand stage and say the same things to the churches that you tell us to tell them, or stop grandstanding at home with a captive audience that agrees with you anyway.

how did we get to the point where we publicly acknowledge that our reported membership numbers are a lie, but we wont even allow a vote on a resolution encouraging churches to be honest and biblical about the matter?

when did it get to the point that today's teachers teach tomorrow's leaders to stand for things that they wont speak out for themselves when it might cost them a position, a job, or a title?

praise god that our hope lies in him and not ourselves.

worthless gospel

i try not to post back to back within minutes of eachother, but i just found this and was stunned.

may you be as well....