SundaySchoolThoughts

ANGELS AND SATAN BECOME INVOLVED IN OKLAHOMA POLITICS

2008-07-18T23:06:00.003-05:00

The Oklahoman obtained a comic book that is being sent to supporters of Oklahoma County Commisioner Brent Rinehart.

The 16-page comic book makes fun of homosexuals and criticizes Rinehart's political opponents. It features a man and woman admiring Rinehart's often-controversial political career.

Other prominent characters are an angel, who supports Rinehart, and Satan, who supports Rinehart's critics.

"It's more or less a story of my experiences of the last four years of being the county commissioner of District 2,” Rinehart said.

Toga-wearing gays, political figures, trench coat-clad henchmen, concerned residents and Rinehart round out the comic's cast.

I'll try to obtain a copy and see what it's all about. It sounds a little messed up to me.

hat tip: Locusts and Honey via Ace of Spades HQ

SLAVERY, HOMOSEXUALITY, AND NOT BEING OF ONE MIND

2008-07-02T09:47:00.002-05:00

Interesting email from Riley Case, with the Confessing Movement Within the United Methodist Church.

The church is divided over the question of the practice of homosexuality. There is no question about that. While the church has stated that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching, many have disagreed. While some would like for the church to remove the restrictions and simply bless the practice of homosexuality, others, including many moderates, would like for the church to find a "middle way." One "middle way" would be simply to admit the church "is not of one mind" on the matter of the practice of homosexuality and so to state it in our Discipline. The "not of one mind" petition is what failed to pass at the General Conference.

At this point, it would be worth considering what happened the other time the church was so bitterly divided over a moral question, namely, on slavery in the mid-1800s.

There is no question about where Methodists stood on slavery in the early days. John Wesley, Thomas Coke, Francis Asbury were horrified at the idea that one human being could enslave another. The General Rules, the Disciplines, and early sermons made it clear that slaveholding was an abominable sin against God and human dignity and would not be tolerated among the people of God called Methodists.

Then Methodists got prosperous and, in the words of Orange Scott, the abolitionist, "aristocratic." Along with the secular world around them some Methodists, primarily in the South but in other places also, began to argue that it was not slavery as an institution that was so bad, but the mistreatment of slaves. Christian slaveholders had a responsibility to win their slaves to Christ, and maybe even offer a form of education, but were not under moral obligation to free slaves.

Soon Methodists (as well as the rest of the country) were divided into three groups. Abolitionists made up the first group. Slavery and whatever was associated with slavery was to be resisted and abolished, and as soon as possible. All the moral weight of the church was to be poured into this effort (including the Underground Railroad). At the very least slaveholders should not be church members. Abolitionists, moral heroes today, were not seen as such in the mid-1800s. They were troublemakers. Their critical remarks of the church were seen as divisive.

The next two groups were in the "we are not of one mind" category. One group supported slavery. This group argued that slavery was approved by Scripture, and insisted on "non-interference," the principle that groups from far off should not interfere in local affairs. Theirs was a form of modern multi-culturalism. Cultural circumstances determined what is right and wrong and persons in the church should respect the beliefs of others. What was sin for one group of persons was not necessary sin for others. They argued that slavery was a political issue more than a moral issue. This group claimed allegiance to the slave-permitting laws of the state rather than any moral law, especially if law was imposed by outsiders.

The third group might be called the moderates, although a better description might be, the "Compromised Middle." Included in this group were the people who either did not know much about slavery or, if they did know, did not desire to be greatly involved. Others in this group, including many church leaders, did know about slavery and were concerned (rightfully so) about slavery's potential for dividing the church. They deplored the "extremists" on either side. In the language of today, they believed the best way for the church to deal with slavery was through dialogue, understanding, hearing one another's stories, getting to know each other, and finding the center of their togetherness in love.

With the moderates, or Compromised Middle, the primary concern--ahead of faithfulness to the Scriptures, moral justice, or the tradition of the church--was unity. Many believed, or said they did, that slavery was a sin. But a greater sin, evidently, was intolerance and divisiveness, particularly the intolerance and divisiveness of the abolitionists. The Kentucky Conference in 1835 unanimously adopted a report condemning slavery as morally wrong while at the same time deploring "the interference of the abolitionists." It was compromise in the interest of avoiding conflict.

The bishops, for their part, were the most compromised of all. Not able to agree among themselves, they condemned extremists, deplored the controversy, and talked unity. The bishops were particularly loath to criticize each other even when one of their own, Bishop James Andrew, was revealed to be a slaveholder. When the issue could be avoided no longer and the General Conference of 1844 was prepared to pass a resolution suggesting that Bishop Andrew desist from exercising his office as long as he continued to be a slaveholder (which was itself a compromised resolution for the sake of harmony), the bishops proposed a resolution that the matter be tabled for four more years.

As with slavery then so with homosexuality today. The church today is divided into three groups. The first group declares that the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching. According to this group, this stand is consistent with Scripture, with the tradition of the church through the years, and is supported in large part by Christians around the world. Even as slavery struck at the moral fabric of what Christian faith was all about, so with homosexual practice. This group speaks of accountability and upholding the Discipline.

The second group believes homosexuality is a gift of God, or at least, is not inconsistent with Scripture. This group appeals to a number of different arguments: God has revealed new truth (a new revelation which evidently they alone have received) which informs them that the practice of homosexuality is not a sin after all; or, what may be considered wrong in some parts of the world (like Africa) is not necessarily wrong in some other part of the world (like California); or, loving, committed relationships and personal experience trump Scripture and tradition. This group sees the first group as hateful and intolerant.

A third group, which one might call the "moderates," want us all simply to get along. They deplore the rigid approaches. Much of their effort is spent speaking about dialogue, understanding, hearing one another's stories, getting along, and finding the center of our unity in love. They find attraction in the idea that perhaps it is best that we just admit we "are not of one mind" and let people do what is right in their own eyes.

The bishops, like the bishops during the years of slavery, are themselves conflicted. A number do not personally believe in the church's stance, and their bias shows. In some annual conferences, candidates for ministry are denied membership for being "rigid," that is for holding with conviction what the church has always taught about homosexuality. Regardless of what they might say among themselves, publicly they do not engage in debate with one another. When the bishops speak as a Council of Bishops, it is to acknowledge that there is much pain over homosexuality, but the church should be loving in all things, show restraint, and move on to other more important matters.

Very few people are satisfied with the present situation facing the United Methodist Church. Those who would affirm the practice of homosexuality believe the church is rigid, intolerant, and hate-filled and has been manipulated by hate-mongers and right-wingers. Those who support the Biblical view of homosexuality believe the church is on the edge of apostasy. Those in the middle, like a mother whose children are out of control but who doesn't know what to do, tell us we should all be nice to each other. They appear to be, in the words to the church at Laodicea, "neither hot nor cold."

The Methodist Episcopal Church had many things to be proud of in the nineteenth century. How it dealt with slavery, however, was not one of them. The resolution on Bishop Andrew led to a Plan of Separation, which was a form of amiable separation. It was the northern conferences who, in the name of unity, passed resolutions against the plan. Thus, when separation came, it was not amiable. Battles over property and encroachment represent an ugly chapter in the church's history. The Methodist Protestants, who did work out an amiable separation, were able to reunite in 1877.

What will happen to the United Methodist Church in the coming years over the issue of homosexuality? There is not much encouragement in thinking that things will probably progress just as they have been: continual political maneuvering, announced strategies to undermine the Discipline, ugly words spoken against brothers and sisters, more rounds of dialogue that don't solve anything, a compromised moral witness, resolutions on unity that provide no help in bringing about that unity, conflicted bishops. Those on the evangelical side of the issue are alarmed that some of our best families, our best prospective pastors, and even some churches, are simply opting out of the denomination. Despite the church's announced position, the church's ambiguity has the effect of permission-giving to the acceptance of homosexual practice.

One must always hold out the hope that God will do some new thing. If so, it will probably come through the moderates in the denomination. But for the moderates, as well as all of us, it can no longer be business as usual. The church's response to slavery should teach us that.

Dr. Riley B. Case is a retired member of the North Indiana Conference. He is a graduate of Taylor University and Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, with a graduate degree from Northwestern University and an honorary degree from Taylor University. Dr. Case’s appointment before retiring was St. Luke’s United Methodist Church Kokomo. Before that he was the district superintendent of the Marion District of the North Indiana Conference. He represented the conference five different times at the General Conference and seven times at the North Central Jurisdictional Conference. At the general church level he served as a consultant on the Hymnal Revision Committee (1984-1988) and was a member of the Curriculum Resources Committee of the Board of Discipleship.

WHEN SHOULD YOU DIE?

2008-06-20T16:00:00.002-05:00

I came across this Australian website that asks questions about how much energy you use, then tells you how many years it will take for you to use up your share of the earths resources. I should have died when I was 2 1/2 years old.

You are represented on the website as a pig, because you are an energy hog. When you use up your share of the earth's resources, your pig explodes. My concern is that the website is geared towards children. What kind of message is this sending? Is it sending the message to young people that they should die if they use too much energy? Or am I just being paranoid?

BLOG AUTHORS WANTED

2008-06-18T13:55:00.004-05:00

To be blunt, I am not available to keep up with blogging on a regular basis anymore. I can't be a regular contributor, and I can't keep up with the long list of blogroll posts that I used to. I haven't been blogging for several weeks now, and I haven't read a single post from any other blog for about the same length of time. And I honestly don't miss it like I thought I would.

That being said, I do want to contribute periodically, and don't want to give up blogging altogether. I would like to take this opportunity to invite anyone who has an interest in blogging (especially those who don't have a blog) to let me know. It is so easy, and if several people make the occasional post this blog will be successful. You can post as frequently or infrequently as you wish.

This has been a fun hobby for me, and it would mean a lot to me to see this blog continue with at least 3 to 4 posts per week.

HOW DEEP SHOULD SUNDAY SCHOOL BE?

2008-05-29T07:30:00.000-05:00

I've been teaching a young adult Sunday School class for a few months now. The material is pretty deep, and I sometimes wonder if it's too much. But as I begin to ponder the purpose of teaching a Sunday School class, I tend to think it's not deep enough. If all I teach is Jesus Loves You and ask questions where the answer is alwas "God" or "Jesus", that is a disservice. Where are young people who aren't going to seminary going to learn doctrine and theology if not in a Sunday School class? The answer is probably "nowhere", and I don't think that's right. Every Christian is called to learn and grow, and every Christian should be a theologian, regardless of formal training.

TEN MOST ANNOYING PROGRAMS ON THE INTERNET

2008-05-28T07:30:00.000-05:00

It's off topic, but important. If these give the experienced computer user grief, think of the frustration of the average home user who buys a nice new computer with this garbage preinstalled.

Here is a list of the ten most annoying programs on the internet. I'll have to say that I agree with about all of them.

Adobe Reader

Apple

Windows Update

Real Player

Java

Yahoo Toolbar

Norton Antivirus

Preinstalled Software Bundles

Outlook and Exchange

Flash

WHY THE INNOCENT SUFFER

2008-05-23T15:44:00.003-05:00

I hate trying to answer this question, because normally when it is asked, it is by someone in the midst of terrible grief. "Why did God let this happen to me?" The answer to this question cannot be learned or comprehended while in the midst of anger or grief. It must be learned and comprehended before tragedy strikes.

The tragic death of the daughter of Steven Curtis Chapman has gained a lot of attention the past few days. I also had a friend email me this morning to share some terrible things that he is having to endure. I want to give answers and give comfort, but at this time everything is just words.

So if you are grieving, you may continue reading, but know that the answer will anger you and frustrate you even more. You will say that I just don't understand how it feels, and until I've put myself in your shoes I don't know what I'm talking about. And you will be right.

So I want to be held accountable for the answer I am going to give. Whenever I hit a rough spot emotionally, I want someone to remind me of what I'm about to reveal. I will roll my eyes and cry and become frustrated because I don't know what I was talking about. However, it doesn't make what I'm about to reveal as untrue, but only very difficult to accept.

If you are not grieving, continue reading and learn this truth. God does not owe you anything. You are the one that has the debt that you can never repay. The real question should not be "Why do the innocent suffer?" but rather "Why am I spared suffering?" If you get this into your head now, when calamities come and you feel abandoned by God, you will know that you are not.

Bob Hayton has some quotes on his blog from R.C. Sproul's book The Holiness of God. Read Luke 13:1-5 for the background.

"The question is raised, 'What about… the innocent people killed by the falling of the tower? Where was God in these events?' The question under discussion was: 'How could God allow these things to happen?' The question is actually a thinly veiled accusation. The issue was, as always, how can God allow innocent people to suffer?

We can hear the implied protest in the question. The eighteen innocent people were walking down the street minding their own business. They were not engaged in playing 'sidewalk superintendent.' They were not heckling the construction workers. They were not running away after robbing a bank. They just were 'there,' at the wrong time and tin the wrong place. They suffered the consequences of a fatal accident.

We might have expected Jesus to explain it like this: 'I am very sorry to hear about this tragedy. These things happen and there is not much we can do about it. It was fate. An accident. As good Christians you have to learn to accept the bad with the good. Keep a stiff upper lip. Be good Stoics! I know I taught you that the One who keeps Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps. But that was a poetic statement, a bit of hyperbole. Do you realize what a difficult task it is for My Father to run the universe? It gets tiring. Every now and then He must take a nap. On the afternoon in question He was very weary and grabbed forty winks. While He was nodding the tower fell. I am sorry about that and I will report your grievance to Him. I will ask Him to be a bit more careful in the future.'

Jesus might have said: 'I know I told you that My Father notices the landing of every sparrow and that He numbers the hairs on your head. Do you realize how many sparrows there are flying around? And the hairs on the heads! The afternoon the tower fell my Father was busy counting the hairs on the head of a particularly bushy-haired fellow. He was concentrating so hard on the fellow’s head that He overlooked the falling tower. I will suggest that he get His priorities in order and not spend so much time with sparrows and hair.'

That is not what Jesus said. What He said was, 'Unless you repent, you too will all perish.' In effect what Jesus was saying was this: 'You people are asking the wrong question. you should be asking me, ‘Why didn’t that tower fall on my head?’ Jesus rebuked the people for putting their amazement in the wrong place. In two decades of teaching theology I have had countless students ask me why God doesn’t save everybody. Only once did a student come to me and say, “There is something I just can’t figure out. Why did God redeem me?'

We are not really surprised that God has redeemed us. Somewhere deep inside, in the secret chambers of our hearts we harbor the notion that God owes us His mercy…. What amazes us is justice, not grace….

…We have come to expect God to be merciful. From there the next step is easy: we demand it. When it is not forthcoming, our first response is anger against God, coupled with the protest: “It isn’t fair.” We soon forget that with our first sin we have forfeited all rights to the gift of life. That I am drawing breath this morning is an act of divine mercy. God owes me nothing. I owe Him everything. If He allows a tower to fall on my head this afternoon I cannot claim injustice….

…We must not take His grace for granted. We must never lose our capacity to be amazed by grace…." [The Holiness of God, by R.C. Sproul [Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1985], quoted from pages 159-161, 164, 167]

Don't get mad, just learn this truth now and remind me of it later when I suffer. There is not much comfort in this answer, but I am convinced that it is correct.

A PLACE TO SHARE CONDOLENSCES FOR THE CHAPMAN FAMILY

2008-05-22T13:40:00.002-05:00

You can express your condolenses to Steven Curtis Chapman and his family here. Below is a video that was published to show off their daughter, Maria, who was killed last night.

hat tip

STEVEN CURTIS CHAPMAN TRAGEDY

2008-05-22T08:14:00.003-05:00

May God grant peace and comfort to the family of christian singer and songwriter Steven Curtis Chapman.

From the Tennessean:

Steven Curtis Chapman's youngest child died Wednesday evening after being struck by a car driven by her teenage brother in the driveway of the family's Williamson County home.

Maria, one of the Christian singer's six children, was taken by LifeFlight to Vanderbilt Hospital, which confirmed the death, according to Laura McPherson, a spokeswoman for the Tennessee Highway Patrol.

The 5-year-old was hit by an SUV driven by her teenage brother, she said. Police did not give the driver's name.

The teen was driving a Toyota Land Cruiser down the driveway of the rural home about 5:30 p.m. and several children were playing in the area, McPherson said. He did not see Maria in the driveway before the vehicle struck her, she said

.

hat tip: Keith Plummer

THE CHRISTIAN BILL OF RIGHTS

2008-05-05T07:30:00.000-05:00

Hat Tip: Steve Camp

As believers in the Lord Jesus Christ we have only one right: and that is to give up all rights to ourselves (2 Cor. 5:14-16; Romans 14:7-9).

We have the right to deny ourselves, take up our cross and follow Him (Mt. 16:24-26).

We have the right to esteem others more highly than ourselves; and love our neighbor as ourselves (Mt. 22:39; Phil. 2:1-5).

We have the right to fulfill the law of Christ in bearing one another's burdens of sin (Gal. 6:1-3).

We have the right to be wronged and to maintain a faithful testimony (1 Cor. 6:1-8).

We have the right to live in unreciprocated self-sacrificial love (Eph. 5:1-2).

We have the right to forgive others the smaller debt, as God in Christ has forgiven us the larger debt (Eph. 4:31-32; Matthew 18:12-35).

We have the right to suffer for the gospel and to take the blows for the One who took the blows for us (1 Peter 2:21-24)

We have the right to be "subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed, to malign no one, to be uncontentious, gentle, showing every consideration for all men" (Titus 3:1-2).

We have the right to not be political agitators trading the truth of His Word to play politics with men's souls; thinking that true spiritual change occurs through legislation rather than the transforming power of the gospel of grace. (1 Peter 4:10-16).

We have the right to turn the other cheek (Matthew 5:39).

We have the right to be stripped of all earthly things (Matthew 5:40-42).

We have the right to not repay evil for evil and to be at peace with all men as much as it depends on you (Romans 12:17-18).

We have the right to love our enemies, do good to them that hate us, bless those who curse us and pray for those that despitefully use us (Matthew 5:44-45).

We have the right to pursue holiness-not personal happiness (1 Peter 1:13-16).

We have the right not to be ashamed of the gospel (2 Tim. 1:6-18).

We have the right not to harbor revenge, anger, bitterness, clamoring, wrath, malice and slander (Ephesians 4:31).

We have the right not to quench or grieve the Holy Spirit. (Eph. 4:30; 1 Thess. 5:19).

We have the right to repent of and not cherish our sins (Psalm 66:18).

We have the right to guard the trust; and to contend for the once for all delivered to the saints faith (1 Timothy 6:20; Jude 1:3).

We have the right to train our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:1-3).

We have the right to reflect God's covenantal relationship with us by honoring our vows in the covenant of marriage with our spouse Mt. 19:6).

We have the right to worship Christ Jesus as God of very God; Creator; Redeemer; Sovereign Lord and Ruler of all (Col. 1:15-19; Hebrews 1:8; Phil. 2:5-11).

We have the right to present our bodies as living sacrifices, holy, acceptable pleasing unto God (Roms. 12:1-2).

We have the right to live in the expectancy and hope of the Lord's return by which we purify ourselves (Roms. 12:1-2).

We have the right to march daily on our knees in prayer; praying for our leaders in government; our church leaders; our fellow believers; our families; and the lost (1 Timothy 2:1-3; Ephesians 6:18-21).

We have the right to praise and glorify God according to how He has revealed Himself through the pages of His Word (Col. 3:16-17).

We have the right to the accountability of the local church; to obey our leaders and submit to them, for they keep watch over our souls, as those who will give an account (Hebrews 13:17).

We have the right to go into all the world and make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:18-20).

We have the right to have no rights apart from Christ Himself; "for whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake shall find it" (Matt. 16:25: John 15:5).

KICKED OUT OF SUNDAY SCHOOL

2008-05-01T15:00:00.003-05:00

I received the following email this afternoon and was asked if I would put it on my blog.

Today I was in the lounge eating lunch with some other co-workers, and the subject turned to church. There was a woman that teaches a Sunday School class going on about how there was a kid in her class that was disruptive. She said that she wished that they would kick him out of church or at least her class. I was amazed. The thing that I was more amazed about is that most of the people in the room agreed with her.

I am the mom of a child that was diagnosed with ADHD at the beginning of his 2nd grade year. Until our diagnosis I thought that being a mom meant that you constantly had to fight for people to see your child the way you did. There was no aspect of my son's life that I did not have a battle for him. Family, school, and yes sometimes even church. I felt like my son couldn't do the activities at church because people would realize that he was different than the rest of the kids. DIFFERENT, but not bad. He is a sweet, loving, child, that has the biggest heart. Yes, he did
not sit quietly, yes he wanted to hug other kids till their eyes popped out, yes he wanted to play instead of have a lesson, but he loved being at church just as much as the rest of the kids.

One time at vacation bible school, his teacher came to me and told me how awful he was that day and wanted to know if I could talk to him about the "proper" way to act at church. I was horrified. They had found out my son's secret. For mom's that have children like this, WE KNOW that there is a problem! You don't have to tell us. I didn't want to go back to church for a long time. I didn't want to go back to church because I didn't need one more place that I had to fight for my son. Church of all places should be a place that you are accepted warts and all. You should be able to lean on each other.

I guess my point is, that we should all realize that even those disruptive kids need salvation too. My son has the same right to be at church as everyone else. He loves it. He should not be shunned because of his behavior. We should all embrace our differences. Give that kid that tests our patience an extra hug. It is all in your attitude. Remember that that mom has fought for her child everywhere in her life, and there should be at least one place in her life that there is no fighting.

The argument in the lounge was that WHAT IF that one child that is disruptive impedes another child from getting saved. Well, if you kick this child out of church, HE WILL DEFINITELY not get it! There is no doubt that walking back into a church will be at least a long time coming. The argument should be that you have to deal with what you have been given. You get what you get and you don't throw a fit, as my son would say. We have to adapt to what our church family is. We open those doors, and we don't shut them. Who are we to decide who can come into God's
house? It is His house and we are all His children. We are all equally welcome. When we baptized my son, the church made a vow to try to help raise him to be a good christian. The congregation as a whole says:

With God’s help we will proclaim the good news (of the baptism)
and live according to the example of Christ.
We will surround these persons
with a community of love and forgiveness,
that they may grow in their trust of God,
and be found faithful in their service to others.
We will pray for them,
that they may be true disciples
who walk in the way that leads to life.

I don't know what other churches do when they dedicate a child, or baptize them if they do. I am pretty sure that most churches say something similar. That about says it all.

THE IRONMAN CONTROVERSY

2008-04-23T07:30:00.000-05:00

I haven't had much time to devote to the blog lately, but want to give everyone a heads up. Apparently they are going to take the trailer for Iron Man and turn it into a motion picture. They really should quit while they're ahead.

ht: JollyBlogger

FULFILLING THE GREAT COMMISSION

2008-04-22T07:30:00.001-05:00

SUNDAY SCHOOL WRAPUP #4

2008-04-21T11:30:00.001-05:00

I am excited to see new people each week. In order to help keep everyone current and get some of the new people caught up, we will have frequent reviews of each of our lessons. I am not as concerened with doing a lesson each week as I am about being thorough in each area. Some lessons may go on for a few weeks, and we will undoubtedly have weeks where we simply review previous lessons.

These reviews have several benefits, both for new people and for those who have been there from the beginning. Of course it is stating the obvious that new people will have the opportunity to get caught up. When we get to the more difficult concepts, this will be important, because the lessons build on each other.
Repetititon is also good for those who have been attending regularly. This is a great way to really learn a concept, and not forget it 20 minutes after Sunday School is over. We already have some very smart people in the class who will not forget what perspicuity means, or that the greek word theopneus is interpreted God breathed. Start brining those words into your every day conversation and see what kind of looks you'll get.

We'll finsih up our discussion on Private Interpreatation next week. Hopefully you already understand that the owning a Bible and being able to study it in your own language is a privilege that many people paid for with their lives. It is not a matter to be taken lightly.

IN CHRIST ALONE

2008-04-21T07:30:00.000-05:00

This gave me chills

THE GOD OF ATROCITIES

2008-04-16T11:30:00.000-05:00

John has an interesting link to a post by Dan Trabue. I got a little worked up when posting comments on these posts, and that is not like me at all. I can normally take some criticism online. Anyway, be sure to check out the comments on both of these links. I'll have a follow up post at some point after I get a chance to study further.

Here's a sample from the post:

"Now, I don’t think that God is atrocious. I think those OT passages that have God committing or commanding acts that are elsewhere condemned in the Bible (and indeed, are condemned by our own conscience – I think that it is within our own reasoning and soul that SOME acts are just wrong – killing children, kidnapping girls/young women to make them your wives – some actions are just wrong. Period.) need to be understood as a representation of God as the author understood God. NOT as a perfect understanding of God to be taken literally."

"Clearly, I think, God is not in the atrocity business. I find it amazing that some would defend such actions. How can you do so?"

I should have let it go, but decided to try and defend it. I bit off more than I can chew, I think. It is difficult to have a debate or a discussion when there is such a vast difference in views on the authority and interpretation of scripture. That is what this discussion boils down to. If you don't read anything else on this post, READ THE COMMENTS on these links (ignore mine). They are very interesting and thought provoking.

REVIEW OF ROB BELL'S VELVET ELVIS

2008-04-15T07:30:00.000-05:00

Rob Bell's book Velvet Elvis makes some people very angry. I know there are some Rob Bell lovers out there who will note that this post is from the the Irish Calvinist. Of course a Calvinist is going to disagree.

However, it's not a post about Limited Atonement. It is a defense of orthodoxy.

CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS AND ORTHODOXY

2008-04-14T11:30:00.000-05:00

Alan now has his fifth post on christian apologists available. This post deals with the issue of orthodoxy, which I learned from his post, is greek for right belief. I use the word quite often, and had a vague sense of what it means, but never knew exactly.

He nails this post.

"..when we begin to examine the history of the church, we discover that the concern for right belief is crucial in maintaining proper Christian identity. Christians have always believed that the gospel can transform the world and change lives. When someone was encountered who proclaimed a different message in the name of Jesus, the church responded, 'No, that is really not Christianity.'"

Alan also has some thoughts on orthodoxy vs. diversity.

CHARACTER AND NATURE OF GOD REVEALED

2008-04-14T07:30:00.003-05:00

I am going to begin looking at reasons that we should study the Bible. While brainstorming, the first reason I came up with is that it reveals God's character and nature. I wrote an earlier post about this, but don't feel like I did an adequate job on that post. So consider this my mulligan.

We do not have to speculate or guess about who God is or what He values. He reveals Himself in the Bible. If I want to know about a specific person, there are many ways to get information, especially on the internet. However, there is a difference in knowledge about someone and having an intimate knowledge of and relationship with someone. To have an intimate knowledge of someone, that person must choose to communicate with us. Nobody can be more accurate about what a person feels or thinks than the actual person.

This is what we have in the Bible. The Bible is the tool that God uses to intimately reveal Himself to us.

One thing that some may say is that God reveals Himself in many ways. One of the ways that scripture says that God reveals Himself is through nature (Romans 1:20). However, His revelation through nature merely points to His existence. It does not reveal to us how He views our sin, or how much He loves us. It does not reveal His holiness. It does not tell us how we can have a relationship with Him. This is the type of intimate knowledge only revealed in scripture.

If one truly wants to know about God in a personal and fulfilling way, it is only found in scripture. Everyting else is secondhand.

AMERICAN IDOL: SHOUT TO THE LORD

2008-04-11T07:30:00.001-05:00

Wednesday night I'm sitting in the Kansas City Airport hoping to get back to Oklahoma City from Florida after my American Airlines flight was cancelled. I heard some praise and worship music coming from somewhere. I saw that it was coming from American Idol. My friend looked at me wondering where it was coming from. I told her that it was American Idol, and I thought it was the Idol Gives Back episode. This meant nothing to her, and we really didn't pay that much more attention.

Steve Camp explains that they changed a word. Watch and see if you can spot it. Does it make a difference? I think it does. Thanks for pointing it out to me.

I think more people will be mad about the reference in the post to Mars Hill Church than about removing the name of Jesus. How sad.

IMPORTANT UPDATE:
I didn't get this one quite right. I don't want to remove the post or edit, but Idol got it right last night. I was watching with my wife, and they opened with the same song. I began to tell my wife how they took out the name of Jesus. I can't find it on youtube yet, but the opened with "My Jesus My Saviour."

Being the cynic that I am, I then wondered if putting the name of Jesus back in made a difference. Did that make it worship? Is it ok to take a song meant for worship and sing it on American Idol? I complain that they take out the name of Jesus, then complain after they sing it right the next night that they shouldn't be singing the song at all. Is this wrong?

I guess go ahead and get mad about the Mars Hill Church comment.

ANONYMOUS BLOGGING

2008-04-10T11:30:00.000-05:00

If you keep a blog or comment on them, you should read this post.

And so this is my challenge to bloggers and to those who comment on blogs: make yourself accountable through visibility. Commit yourself to purity of heart and to only speaking or writing what is honoring to God. And then ensure that there are people who know you, who read your words, who will lovingly exhort and correct you when you do not keep this commitment. In this way we can honor God and maintain a focus on the gospel of Jesus Christ.

NEW FEATURES NOT WORKING

2008-04-09T16:42:00.003-05:00

I've been travelling the last few days, and had my Blogger account set to post some delayed post. It's a new feature in beta that they offer. Unfortunately, they didn't post, and I can't find them anywhere. Has anyone had success with the new beta version of Blogger?

HOW TO TELL IF YOU'RE EMERGENT

2008-04-08T11:30:00.001-05:00

hat tip Crossroads via Tim Challes

"You might be an emergent Christian: if you listen to U2, Moby, and Johnny Cash’s Hurt (sometimes in church), use sermon illustrations from The Sopranos, drink lattes in the afternoon and Guinness in the evenings, and always use a Mac; if your reading list consists primarily of Stanley Hauerwas, Henri Nouwen, N. T. Wright, Stan Grenz, Dallas Willard, Brennan Manning, Jim Wallis, Frederick Buechner, David Bosch, John Howard Yoder, Wendell Berry, Nancy Murphy, John Franke, Walter Winks and Lesslie Newbigin (not to mention McLaren, Pagitt, Bell, etc.) and your sparring partners include D. A. Carson, John Calvin, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and Wayne Grudem; if your idea of quintessential Christian discipleship is Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, or Desmond Tutu; if you don’t like George W. Bush or institutions or big business or capitalism or Left Behind Christianity; if your political concerns are poverty, AIDS, imperialism, war-mongering, CEO salaries, consumerism, global warming, racism, and oppression and not so much abortion and gay marriage;"

Read the rest here.

TEN WAYS TO MAKE GUEST FEEL UNWELCOME

2008-04-08T07:30:00.000-05:00

"Too many people visiting your church? Need to do some things to discourage them from coming back a second time? Be careful: If you do the opposite of even six or seven of the items on this list, you might discover that guests are returning for a second visit. Some will even enroll in your Sunday School or join the church. To keep that from happening, try a few of these ideas:"

hat tip Kingdom People

COMING UP ON 10000 VISITS

2008-04-07T11:30:00.000-05:00

Sitemeter has my visits listed at 9,951. It on took 2 years and 9 months to get here. Please click on the blog and help me get over the 10,000 hump. Please?

I made the mistake of going back and reading my first posts. Part of me wants to delete them. They are horrible. Do you delete old posts on your blog?

I see several mistakes I made early on that are avoided by second nature now. I also see that my target audience has changed. It's interesting that most of the people who read blogs (not all, mom) also keep them. Asking the question about deleting old posts makes this assumption. I don't know if this is wise or not, but that's just how it is. What do you think, bloggers?