Colonnade

What to say?

2010-04-06T14:01:00.001-07:00

This is my last week as the pastor of Dublin Bible Church. After 6 1/2 years of learning how to serve, the day has all-so-quickly approached. We believe firmly that it is time to accept the next assignment.

There are so many things that I wish I could have to do over again. Too many mistakes, too many careless words, too many selfish decisions. But ... that's why they call it "learning." We have learned so much in our time here - about ourselves, about ministry, about the Body of Christ. You have patiently endured that learning process, and we are forever grateful for that.

We have also seen amazing things happen - people come to faith in Christ, fruitful ministry here and in far-away Kenya, deepened relationships, and maturing faith. When we reflect back, the list is surprisingly long. And we are forever grateful for this, too.

Despite the heartbreak of goodbyes and the anxiety of facing unknown challenges (and the aggravation of moving!), we have a firm peace in the midst of all this. It's a deep sense that we are following the Lord's guidance, which steadies us against all the winds blowing about us. It is what allows us to make the tough decisions to say our goodbyes, to endure the financial setbacks, and to face the unknown with results beyond our control.

We pray that we will be able to see the folks of DBC again in the near future. We know we'll still be just a call or email or text message away, and we also know what we will one day be reunited forever. But we still pray for the chance to see your faces again soon.

After our farewell luncheon on Sunday, we will still see you here and there before we physically move (date to be determined). So, we'll likely say goodbye a few dozen times more. They don't get any easier for us, no matter how many times they are repeated.

We love you very much.

Anecdotal Theology

2010-03-30T14:10:00.001-07:00

As I continue to do research for my thesis, I am at the point where I need to read more from authors who disagree with my conclusions. It's only good scholarship, and it's actually very helpful. The authors I'm reading are not stupid - they have sound logic and intelligent points. I think they make some fatal logic errors here and there, but they are not blithering idiots.

The authors I'm now reading are arguing for egalitarianism with respect to gender, and against complementarianism (equal in Christ but different in role) and against patriarchy (or authoritarianism). Sadly, most of the authors throw complementarity into the same category as patriarchy, then attack patriarchy, and conclude that they've successfully argued against all of the views that oppose them. This is not always the case, but it is predominates these writings. Their underlying view is that all views other than their own prescribe only one thing: odious, overbearing male domination. They make it sound like they are the only ones who truly believe that men and women are equal in Christ.

The other thing I've noticed is how many of these authors use personal anecdotes to justify their conclusions. One will talk about a female friend who was dominated by an overbearing husband who claimed to be Christian. Another will talk about a woman she knew who was a strong leader, but pushed down by insecure men in authority. And so on. In almost every case, they use the anecdotes to explain how they came to their own conclusions, or at least how they began to question the more traditional views. The stories they cite are sad and compelling. They ask, "How could God's plan be like that?!?!?", and therefore assume that the only choice is to reject all views that recognize any significant difference in gender roles in Christ.

They do not cite anecdotes of abuses in the other direction, which would lead to a stalemate of bad stories. They never stop to ask if the anecdotes are fair examples of true complementarity or patriarchy. They don't acknowledge positive examples of the views they reject. They come across a bad story, and then paint an entire scholarly view with that negative image.

And then they begin the job of showing how Scripture supports their view. Rather than start with Scripture, they start with the worst possible examples which do not truly represent a particular view, then look at Scripture. Not every one of them in every case, but so frequently that they undermine their own scholarship.

(By the way, the view I espouse is complementarity, with an important nuanced difference from the standard names associated with this view.)

I see the exact same thing happening in politics, and in particular with the healthcare debate. Find a bad story, paint the entire "other" view with that unfair example, and then argue against the entire view based on that bad example. And I see both sides of the debate doing this. It is dishonest dialog.

And I see the same thing happen with a variety of Christian and moral issues. People can use anecdotal stories of bad consequences to justify all kinds of unbiblical behavior, from premarital sex to homosexuality to abusing one's spouse to gossip to greediness, and on down the line.

The Bible never uses anecdotes to draw conclusions. It uses anecdotes, and hundreds of them! But the conclusions of the Bible are all drawn from one place and one place only: the character of God. Everything, even the Old Testament Law, is based on the character of God. That's the only unchanging standard upon which we can base any important conclusions.

As you consider your moral decisions, your theological views, or even your politics, rely on God's character, not anecdotes, to draw your conclusions.

Angry?

2010-03-23T15:29:00.000-07:00

I'm not going to tell you how you should feel about the newly passed healthcare legislation. I'm not going to tell you which view you should hold. I'm not going to tell you what I think about it. Not here.

I just have two simple questions for self-examination.

If you are against the premise of the legislation, what have you been doing up until now to personally help those who can't get health insurance no matter how hard they try to earn their own keep?
If you are for the legislation, are you abdicating anything to the government that really should be the ministry of the Church or jurisdiction of God?

My point is simple: The entire issue can make us so insanely polarized and argumentative that we fail to examine ourselves against Christian principles on the issue. We are so sure "the other side" is wrong that we don't feel the need to take a deep look at ourselves.

The biggest issue is not really which healthcare plan we have or who's in control of it. As important as those issues are, the biggest issue is this: Are we, as the Church, helping the helpless in our society?

If you oppose this plan, you are not excused from personally helping the helpless.

If you favor this plan, you are not excused from personally helping the helpless.

(I prefer the word "helpless" rather than "needy," in order to reflect the biblical principle of not sharing much charity with those who are unwilling to work.)

Let this debate give you pause to reflect: Regardless of how I feel about this plan, am I personally fulfilling the biblical claim on my life regarding the helpless?

Changes Coming for the Kinsers

2010-03-12T14:13:00.000-08:00

As we announced Sunday morning, Lynne and I have made the difficult decision to move back to the Kansas City area. What makes this decision so difficult is all of the loving relationships we have here in Dublin. However, we still see the Lord's hand in this move, and as much as we are sad to say goodbyes, we eagerly await what He has in store both for us and for you in the coming years.

The reasons for the move are many - too numerous to mention here. There are, however, some reasons that stand out.

First, we have not lived near our parents for 21 years, and we now have a terrific opportunity to do so now. Both sets of parents are doing well, but we are seeing the need for us to be able to assist them more readily. By God's timing, both sets of parents have independently decided to move closer to the Kansas City area this year.

Second, we have had a long-time desire to return to the Evangelical Free Church of America. It is the denomination I first served in, and provides a great balance between the flexibility of local decision-making and the synergistic benefit of networking with like-minded churches. I still have many connections in the EFCA, and personally benefit from the resources they make available.

Third, we believe that the long-term health of Dublin Bible Church would be best served by a different pastor. We have no question at all that God brought us here and that He has done some great things in us and through us. We have no regrets moving here or doubts that we were supposed to be here for this time. But we see that my particular style of teaching and leadership is effective for some, but not as effective for others within our community. That limits the impact of DBC. We believe DBC can have deeper impact with a pastor who possesses a different mix of gifts. We believe that it's the best thing for DBC for me to step down at this time.

Fourth, I may have the possibility of sitting under the mentorship of a very godly man and experienced pastor with this move. I believe this will be very helpful in my personal, spiritual, and ministerial growth.

The elders of DBC have been fantastic during this decision-making process. We included them in our process when we began to seriously consider this new opportunity, and they have simultaneously shown us personal support and advocated for the best interests of DBC. We admire the way they have served both you and us.

There will be an opportunity for us to say goodbye properly and personally. When that is arranged, we will let everyone know.

We ask that you pray fervently both for DBC's transition and for our transition. Your church is going to need everyone pulling together in order to discern who the Lord will bring to take you into your next chapter.

We are not, however, severing our relationships with you. Communication today is so easy and affordable that we anticipate being able to be in regular contact with you. Of course, we would never use that privilege to undermine the relationships that you will be building with your new pastor.

Our plan is to remain on staff until April 11, and we anticipate moving sometime in May or June. We also plan on shedding many tears between now and then.

We love you, and we continue praying what we've been praying for years on DBC's behalf - that God would bring about His best for this church family. We firmly believe that He can do so through this time of transition.

Walk-in Promises

2010-03-10T10:16:00.001-08:00

It's not uncommon for us here in the church office to have people unrelated to our church just drop by and ask for financial assistance in some form or another. It's never an easy task to determine if we can help and for how much. We certainly cannot afford to meet every request, and there are some who are obviously just working the system. It's the real needs for those who will not squander our help that we try to help first.

But there's one interesting recurring theme among many of these requests. So many times I've heard the one making the request say that they will be sure to join us on the coming Sunday, or even attend regularly. Some will go so far as to say they've been meaning to try out our church for a long time. And not a single one has ever made good on that promise, whether we help them or not.

I'm not bothered by that, because 1) I've learned to pay no attention to such promises, and 2) our help for them is in no way related to whether or not they will visit us. Some think we'll be more likely to help them if they make that promise, but actually I'm a little less likely to help when they promise to attend because it makes me think they are trying to manipulate the situation. Rightly or wrongly, my skepticism kicks in. We will choose to help someone whether or not they show up the next Sunday.

We'd love to have people visit us, whether or not we've helped them financially. But I have no interest in someone attending in order to secure some financial assistance. Attending our church is not doing us a favor - but we pray that the opposite is true, that their attendance does them a big spiritual favor.

Which got me to thinking...

I wonder how many people in churches all across the country are attending churches merely in order to secure some form of assistance from the church, whether it is financial, emotional, or even spiritual. As if attending was doing the leadership a favor, they attend only to keep the handouts coming. They "purchase" their benefits by showing up. I know of no one (other than Christ) whose mere attendance is that valuable!

The church should be a place where people find help for physical, emotional, and spiritual needs. No question. But it is an organism, not a dispensary. All forms of help from the church come from the Body functioning as a body. Sometimes, people are not in a place where they can help others much, but ideally, the Body is an interactive set of relationships from which we find help from one another, and ultimately from the Lord.

Attendance in church should normally be an effort to be a functioning part of that body, not "payment for services rendered." You don't do me any favors by showing up - but you do me tremendous favors by praying for me and with me, comforting me when I'm sad or sick, speaking God's truth to me, and being my true friend.

If you ever find yourself attending a church as a mental bargain for services rendered, stop. Keep attending, but stop attending for that reason. Your mere presence, quite frankly, isn't that valuable. Attend for far more valuable reasons: To be part of a living body.

An idea to try for your Quiet Time

2010-03-03T12:04:00.000-08:00

If you have a Quiet Time (or "devotional", a time set aside everyday to be in the Word and in prayer), you might try a little variety and stretch the ways you look at Scripture according to the different learning styles. We tend to read Scripture according to our natural learning style, and miss out on how other learning styles can focus on aspects of truth that our own style might miss.

I'm not talking about a "reader response," where everyone determines "what Scripture means to me." Each passage of Scripture means one thing, but the depth and breadth of that one meaning cannot be contained in just one style.

I've tried doing this off and on, and have learned a lot about the Word that I would not have otherwise.

Verbal / linguistic: VL learners learn primarily through words in written form. They like to do word studies or see how the grammar conveys meaning. They need to read to learn best. Even if this is not your style, try taking a key word from a passage and studying it. Use a Bible dictionary, a concordance, or Bible software to see the range of meaning and how else it's used in Scripture.

Logical / mathematical: LM learners like numbers, patterns, and logic. They analyze the meaning and the structure of things. They like theological implications, and learn best when they see it all come together. Try looking for conceptual patterns in a passage, or look for how one thing is compared to another. Look for how the author logically develops his point.

Visual / spatial: VS learners have to see it in order to know it. They think more in pictures and images. Even if you're not artistic, try drawing the meaning of the passage, or one element of the passage. Visualize what the scene must have been like. Look for visual descriptions or items in the passage. Search the internet for pictures that convey the meaning of the text.

Rhythmic / musical: RM learners have to hear it, especially if it's music or poetry. Lots of kids' songs teach this way - and it's amazing to see how much kids can learn through a song. RM's get as much or more out of the worship music than the sermon. Find songs that are based on the passage you're looking at, or songs that convey the meaning. Then with the song, explore the passage. Look for auditory events in the passage - a voice, a sound. Imagine the sound effects if the scene were played out in a movie. Find a psalm that relates to the passage and read it through.

Body / kinesthetic: BK learners have to move or touch in order to learn. They learn by doing. They learn better when they are not forced to sit still while learning, even if it's just fiddling with a rubber band in their hand. Look in the passage for all the movement that occurs. Consider how to "do" what the passage says rather than intellectually inspect it. Sometimes, I'll use Playdough to fashion something from the passage just to engage my hands in the learning process.

Interpersonal: Interpersonal learners learn in groups and by discussing. How about doing part of your Quiet Time with someone else? Or, after having your QT, make it a habit to discuss what you're studying with someone else. When you read alone, imagine how you would discuss this passage with someone else. Also, look in the passage for relational elements - how the passage affects relationships.

Intrapersonal: Intrapersonal learners learn by being alone and having time to process. They don't say much when the teacher asks for an immediate response, but give them time to ponder and write out their thoughts, they usually have more to say. They reflect inward in order and see how the Word affects them personally, and learn when they see that connection. Take time to just be alone with the Word, not writing, not praying, but just contemplating the meaning, examining yourself against the word. This requires a distraction-free environment to be effective.

Don't try to do all things every time. Mix it up. In fact, I will take one passage and spend one day looking at it one way, and then another day looking at it another way, taking an entire week for just one passage. I find that to be a very rich exercise. Then, after a few months, I set that aside and go about Quiet Time in a different manner.

What I have found is that I understand God's Word more richly, more deeply, and more broadly than if I stick only with my natural learning styles (I'm a LM and VL). I've even had fresh ideas for teaching that connect more readily with those who have a different learning style than I do.

Jesus told us to love the Lord our God with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our mind, and with all our strength. I've found that using the different learning styles helps me do just that.

Also, if you scour 1 John 1:1-4, you can find all 7 learning styles. Look for them!

Don't Mind the Rules; Mind the Mind

2010-02-25T09:50:00.001-08:00

In our youth group Bible study in Romans we have recently covered chapters 12 and 13. Chapter 12 has one paragraph in it with 29 imperatives (verbs that tell us what to do). In chapter 13, we are told to submit to our governing authorities.

This can start to feel overwhelming - so many commands! So many rules! I thought we were set from the the law (Rom 6)!

And then throw in the mix that we should not submit to our governing authorities if doing so would cause us to violate God's will.

So we discussed with the youth how it is possible to take on all these commands and live them, plus how to know how to handle the "exceptions."

If we try to treat all of this as a list of commands like a law, we will end up in the exact same place as the Pharisees were in (and, sadly, it's a place where too many in the modern Christians find themselves today).

What Scripture really wants us to do is to understand God's mind on the matters of life, to know what He thinks about things, and to learn to think the same way. And then ... live according to God's mind on the matter. We don't obey rules - we obey a living God. If we try to accumulate rule after rule, then we'll eventually bog down and likely fall into legalism. The rules serve the purpose of revealing the mind of God. That's what we need to obey.

Learn the mind of God more than accumulating rules. Learning His mind means studying His revelation and developing a relationship with Him. But the more you learn the mind of God, the less you need to worry about rules and the more you can say, "The entire law of my life can be summed up in two commands: Love the Lord my God with all of my heart, mind, soul, and strength, and to love my neighbor as myself. In this, the entire law of my life is contained."

Olympic gods

2010-02-17T10:18:00.000-08:00

In 1 Corinthians 9:25, the Apostle Paul compares the fading crown of the athletes in his day with the imperishable crowns that believers receive in eternal life. The original readers of this letter knew exactly what he was referring to.

The city of Corinth was the location of the Isthmian Games, which were held the year before and the year after the Olympic Games in that era. The "perishable crown" was a wreath made of celery, of all things, which of course would fade away very quickly. That was the only tangible reward - no gold medal, no endorsement contract. A celery wreath. The athletes would train for months to compete at the highest levels, and one in each sport would earn this wreath that would fade and wither within days.

The Games were infused with paganism. Before each event, the athletes would dedicate themselves to the gods, or to a specific god, to seek their favor and give them honor.

Today, as we watch the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, I have been struck by how much more brazen athletes are becoming about praising themselves and lifting themselves up. Gone is the ethic of competing for country and the humility of amateur athletes. Now, there is no shame in grandstanding and applauding oneself.

In effect, the self-glorifying athletes are replacing the pagans gods with themselves. It's really no different - except that the pagan god they honor with their sport is not a mythical character. Rather, it is a creating being. Although different in form, the end result is basically the same.

Paul says in the previous verse of 1 Cor 9, "Do you not know that all the runners in a stadium compete, but only one receives the prize? So run to win. " But not for a perishable wreath or for one's own glory. Rather, for the crown that never fades - the glory of the Lord shared with us.

"Knowledge" and "epi-knowledge"

2010-02-10T12:06:00.000-08:00

In last week's message, I mentioned the difference in 2 Peter 1:3-11 between "knowledge" in terms of facts (v. 6) and "knowledge" in terms of deep, relational knowledge (vv. 2, 3, 8). In Greek, the first word is gnosis and the second is epignosis - "knowledge" and "epi-knowledge." ("Epi" is a Greek prefix that means "upon" or "over.) In English, we just have the one word "knowledge", but several other languages make a distinction. For example, in Spanish, the words are saber and conocer. It's the difference between knowing facts about Christ, and knowing Christ personally.

There are a few cases when the words are somewhat interchangeable in Scripture, but most of the time, there's an important difference.

For example, Rom 1:18 describes people who fail to have "epi-knowledge" of God - they failed to know Him personally as God, not just failed to know facts about God. In Rom 3:20, the Old Testament Law didn't just bring us the factual knowledge about sin, but the experiential knowledge of sin - a big difference!

Paul prays in Eph 1:17 that his readers would grow in their epi-knowledge of Christ (not just their book knowledge), and in Col 1:9, he prays that the Colossians would have epi-knowledge of God's will. How much more amazing is experiential knowledge of God's will compared to factual knowledge of God's will! In the next verse, he prays for epi-knowledge of God Himself.

Other passages that speak of this epi-knowledge are: Rom 10:2; Eph 4:13; Phi 1:9; Col 2:2; 3:10; 1 Tim 2:4; 2 Tim 2:25; 3:7; Titus 1:1; Phm 1:6; Heb 10:26; 2 Pet 1:2, 3, 8; 2:20.

When we open our Bibles to study, we can settle for less by just looking for knowledge - facts, names, theological ideas, events, and attributes of God. Those are good and important things to know. But you can't "epi-know" a theological idea! Far greater is for us to open our Bibles looking for epi-knowledge of the Author - to get to know Him at a deeper and deeper level. Bible Study is really God-study - getting to know Him relationally and experientially.

Peter calls for both kinds of knowledge in 2 Pet 1:3-11 because both are important. But clearly, epi-knowledge is the star of the show! He prays for it in v. 2, it's how our faith begins in v. 3, and it's the goal of our spiritual growth in v. 8.

Be What You Want the Church to Become

2010-02-03T11:37:00.001-08:00

I have been digging through my files and searching the web trying to find out who said this first: "Be what you want the church to become." I cannot find it, but I know at least that I'm not the one who made it up. I wish I had.

What a simple principle! Those in the church want the church to become something more, something greater, something better: purer, kinder, better at reaching out, more aware of those on the fringe, more involved, stronger at teaching. No matter if your present view of the church is strongly positive or strongly negative, we want the church to be better.

So, be that. That's pretty simple. You want the church to be better at meeting the needs of the poor, then meet the needs of the poor! You want the church to be more prayerful, then pray more!

Remember that the church is not a building or an organization - it is a gathering of people. Therefore, the only way for the gathering to become something more, the people need to become something more.

Don't wait for a program. Don't expect the leadership to be the only source of ideas and efforts. Be what you want the church to become. Certainly, there are certain things that should be checked with the leadership, first, but you don't need permission (or a program) to become more evangelistic, for example. You don't need permission (or a program) to become more familiar with what the Bible says.

It's easy to complain and find fault. It's hard to bring change. But the simplest, easiest, most effective way for the church to become something greater is for the people to choose to be what they want the church to become. (This goes for the leadership, too!)

Faith is not the Opposite of Knowledge

2010-01-27T11:19:00.000-08:00

One of the most common misunderstandings I see among skeptics of Christianity is the false dichotomy between faith and knowledge. Many people see that they are opposites - that the less knowledge we have means the more faith we need, and conversely, the more we learn, the less we need faith. That's a "false dichotomy" - an "either-or" situation that really isn't either-or.

This false dichotomy becomes a roadblock between someone and faith in Christ. If faith and knowledge are opposites, they reason, then eventually we'll learn enough that we won't need any faith at all.

First, there is no dichotomy here. Faith and knowledge are not opposites. Take an airplane, for example. You can know absolutely nothing about airplanes, and yet still put your trust in one in order to fly to another city. Or, you can know all that there is to know airplanes and still put your trust in one to make that exact same flight to that exact same city. Faith and knowledge are not opposites. As we learn more about how airplanes work, we don't need to decrease the amount of faith we must put in one in order to reach our destination.

Second, more knowledge can actually increase faith. The person who knows all about airplanes has even more reasons to put his faith in one. Someone who knows very little about airplanes may hesitate to put his faith in one because of unfounded fear. The more I learn about the Bible, the more my faith in Christ grows, not less. Likewise, the more I learn about the world around me, the more my faith in Christ grows, not less. The more scientific discoveries I learn about, the more I'm convinced that God designed and created this universe, and so my faith in Him grows ... by gaining knowledge, not by the absence of it.

Third, we will never exhaust the body of knowledge that can be learned. No matter how much we learn, we will not know all there is to know, and we will always have a need to trust God with the unknown. Critics accuse the faithful of having a "God of the gaps" - that if we can't explain something yet, we just assign it to God. Then we learn about it, and reduce our view of God accordingly. True, some people do that sometimes, but that does not explain all of faith, by any stretch of the imagination. Furthermore, secular humanists have a "science of the gaps" - that if they can't explain something yet, they just assign it to a godless scientific process. Granted that the scientific process will inevitable explain more and more, but to assume that there cannot be any activity of God to account for Creation is a science of the gaps as a working assumption.

Finally, God wants us to have an informed faith. He does not expect us to just believe for no reason ("blind faith"). He reveals all kinds of reasons to believe in Him. He invites us to consider the universe to see that He has created everything. He reveals why He has done certain things in human history. He explains how the Christ was the centerpiece of His plan from Day One. Jesus shows the scars in His wrists and side in order to use more knowledge to promote more faith. Jesus appeared to scores of people after the resurrection to offer knowledge to build faith in something very "unscientific."

"Informed faith" is not an oxymoron. It's a divine expectation.

We Don't Know, but We Do

2010-01-20T11:07:00.000-08:00

When tragedies like the earthquake in Haiti strike, we invariably deal with the same questions about why God would allow such a thing, is He really sovereign, is He really good, and so on. When there is nothing traumatic going, we settle for some understanding that of course, God is good and sovereign. Then tragedy strikes, and we re-ask the questions - apparently the answers that come when things are going well do not really satisfy us. We wrestle with the questions, then the angst dies down over time, but as soon as the next tragedy strikes, we ask those same questions yet again.

It seems like we can never find an answer that satisfies us enough to carry us through in the midst of trauma.

And apparently, we won't be satisfied until we know why these things happen in God's universe. Are we destined to re-ask and re-ask these questions without end and without satisfaction?

This dissatisfaction can lead to two opposite reactions: On the one hand, we can develop a growing skepticism about God. On the other hand, we can presume to know God's purpose and declare it with false confidence, despite the lack of any direct knowledge. (I believe Pat Robertson fell into this trap in the past week when he declared the cause of the earthquake to be a supposed pact Haiti had made with the devil - accurate or inaccurate, he has no way of knowing this to the degree that he proclaimed it to be true. Plus his gaping lack of genuine compassion was very unlike Christ. Besides, how an entire country could make a pact with the devil is beyond me.)

Can we find an answer that will satisfy us?

I make the following observations:

The man Job, who suffered such tremendous personal tragedy, never got an explanation as to why he had suffered so much. And yet, he found himself clinging ever tighter to God (Job 42:1-6).
In God's speeches to Job (Job 38-41), God basically shows Job that God, being God, does not need to check His reasons with us before acting. But also, being God, everything He does is good, even the things that are hidden from our counsel.
God never promised us that He'd explain everything to us here. He promised us that He is working all things together toward His great and good purposes for His children (Rom 8:28).
We don't know always why God allows tragedies to occur, but we do know how He wants us to respond to them. He wants us to aid the afflicted, even at personal cost. He wants us to share the love of Christ. He wants us to intercede on their behalf. He wants us to work in advance of tragedies in order to avert them or to be prepared to respond to them.

We struggle because we don't know all the "why's." But when we consider what we do know, we realize that He's given us more than enough knowledge to respond in the way He desires us to, and to trust that He does in fact know what He's doing.

The "why's" will be answered eventually. We already know what He wants us to do now.

Please pray for your Elders

2010-01-12T12:03:00.001-08:00

This weekend is the annual Elder retreat. We sequester at Cypress Creek for prayer and fasting, sharing the Lord's Supper together, studying a book together (this year's choice: "The Master Plan of Discipleship"), conducting church business, and visioning for the following year. And for full disclosure: yes, there is some recreation time, too.

There have been a lot of ups and downs in 2009. Some great things happening, and some difficult things, as well. The Elders need wisdom on how to assess all of that, and how to set the direction for the coming year. There will be important decisions made, and so we need the Spirit's guidance.

We ask that the family of DBC be praying for us each day (Thursday, Friday, and Saturday). We can accomplish nothing without the Lord's work in us and through us.

Also, we encourage you to attend the annual meeting on Jan 31 after the worship service. There will be a covered dish lunch, and then our meeting. This is the venue for us to discuss with you the state of the church and the future plans. We welcome your thoughts and input. The quarterly "Fireside Chats" have been productive for building better communication, and we hope that the annual meeting will provide even more communication. The meeting is two-way - the various ministries get to share their highlights and plans, but also they want to hear from you, as well.

This is the Lord's church, first and foremost. After that, it is your church. This is not the Elders' church. This is not my church. It is our church. And our church needs your prayers and your input. We invite you to aid your church especially with praying for the Elder retreat and being a part of the congregational meeting.

Class Report

2010-01-06T10:55:00.000-08:00

Thanks to the entire DBC family for once again graciously allowing me to spend a week away to continue my studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. Every time I go, it's the same pattern - by Tuesday, I'm convinced that I'm doing everything wrong in ministry, but by Friday, I feel like I can now do it a little better. This last week was no exception.

The class was taught by perhaps the most celebrated preaching professor in evangelical circles in the U.S. - Haddon Robinson, who currently teaches at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary. Dr. Robinson is a former DTS student, and was on faculty with them years ago before he left to become the president of Denver Seminary, and then later to Gordon Conwell to teach preaching ("homiletics").

Dr. Robinson conducted the class in a very different manner than I expected, but in a much better way. We had students from all over the U.S., and one from India, and we had a great time working together on properly analyzing passages and developing meaningful sermon outlines. Dr. Robinson spent the last two days just spouting all kinds of preaching wisdom.

I told the class on Friday that my next sermon will likely be my worst! That's because I'll be adjusting, trying to incorporate what we've learned into my own preaching. That will take some time to assimilate and make my own. Lord willing, I'll become a much better teacher of God's Word.

Thanks again for allowing me the time to pursue my studies. This was my last class. All that's left is the hard part: developing my thesis project and writing it up. Piece of cake!

Putting on the New Man

2009-12-29T15:16:00.000-08:00

The New Year – the time that we typically talk about resolutions and turning over new leaves. We set goals for weight loss, exercise, spiritual disciplines, and spending time with family and friends. Setting goals is always good, even if many resolutions are dropped by February.
For our next worship service, we’re going to have a slightly different focus to bring in the New Year. Instead of focusing on turning a new leave, we’re going to focus on putting on the new man. And we’re going to hear a lot from our church family during this time.
Please plan on joining us promptly at 10:30. Instead of our normal praise and worship and time, we will have an opportunity to discuss in small groups ideas about putting on the new man. Then at 11, we’ll enjoy the benefit of each group’s discussion as we worship God together.

Christmas Through the Eyes of Little Munchkins

2009-12-25T14:29:00.000-08:00

In our sermon series, we've been looking at Christmas through the eyes of various characters in the original Christmas story. We ended the series as a church on Christmas Eve with "Christmas Through the Eyes of Dublin Bible Church." Although we were out of town for this event, all reports I've had are that it was a great way to cap off our series.

Instead of being with my church family, Lynne and I were with her family in Kansas City (I'm in the KC airport as I write, waiting for my flight to Atlanta so that I can then drive to Dallas for a week of class). We brought Lynne's parents from St. Louis to her brother's family north of KC. We even got the treat of the most snow on Christmas Day in KC since before I was born.

The delight of our trip was being with our nieces, Elise (6) and Megan (4). We got to see Christmas through the eyes of these two munchkin bundles of fun. Of course they were excited about the presents (happily, they enjoyed giving as much as receiving). But at several turns throughout the week, we asked them in different ways what Christmas means. Without fail, they responded that we're celebrating the birth of Jesus, who came in order to pay for our sins on the Cross.

We thought we were teaching them.

After a wonderful Christmas dinner of prime rib, Elise asked if we were going to have some sort of party for Jesus' birthday. Quickly, their mother (Talli) said, "Sure!" I could tell that nothing was already planned, but that we couldn't miss this opportunity. So, we took the Christmas cake, put candles in it, and the girls led us in singing "Happy Birthday" to Jesus.

How simply logical. If the holiday is really about celebrating His birth, we should do what we do for birthdays. You can't help but appreciate how their way of "Jesus is the Reason for the Season" is more immediate and rational than all the theologically didactic ways we can construct. We absolutely must teach them, and their request was born out of the more didactic moments. But Christmas through their eyes also means we should sing "Happy Birthday" to Jesus.

They were teaching us.

May this be a wonderful birthday party for Jesus in your home this year.

Q of the Day: Which OT event is very similar to the exchange between the angel and Mary, including dialog?

2009-12-17T11:07:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:9-21.

Third, answer the following question: Let's see who has OT chops - which Old Testament event is very similar to the exchange between the angel and Mary, including dialog?

Q of the Day: Considering all the prophecies, what kinds of emotions would angels likely be having as the birth of Christ approaches?

2009-12-16T08:42:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 1 - click here.

Second, read Luke 1:11-38; 2:9-21. Then read Matthew 1:20-24; 2:13-19.

Third, answer the following question: Considering all the prophecies already given in the Old Testament about the Christ, what kinds of emotions would angels likely be having as the birth of Christ approaches?

Q of the Day: How do Zechariah, Mary, and Joseph respond differently to the angel?

2009-12-15T12:38:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 1 - click here.

Second, read Luke 1. Then read Matthew 1.

Third, answer the following question: How do Zechariah, Mary, and Joseph respond differently to the angel?

Q of the Day: What is the significance of the angels "leaving" when they did in Luke 2 v 15?

2009-12-14T11:16:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:1-15.

Third, answer the following question: What is the significance of the angels "leaving" when they did in 2:15?

Q of the Day: How do we oppose Jesus like his enemies did?

2009-12-10T10:46:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to John 1 - click here.

Second, read John 1:1-18.

Third, answer the following question: Herod opposed Jesus politically. The Pharisees opposed him religiously. Satan opposed him spiritually. The world opposed him personally. Are there ways that we do each of these, too?

A Silent Ministry Within the Church

2009-12-09T11:56:00.000-08:00

For those in the DBC family, I want to make sure you're aware of something that our youth and children are doing this Christmas season.

You are aware that church-wide, we are "reverse decorating" our Christmas tree to raise funds for the Friends of Christ orphanage in Kenya. This has been a successful project every year to raise much-needed support for the many needs for our Kenyan orphans.

The youth and children have a project of their own this year. They have selected a family in Dublin (a mother with four young children) to help with their financial needs. They are collecting food items and small Christmas gifts to wrap and present to this family after the youth and children's Christmas party on Dec 20.

They want to be careful to not interfere with the Angel Tree project, but I'm sure they would also appreciate any help you can provide - some canned goods, a small toy, anything that a young family might need.

Mainly, though, I want to make sure that you are aware of one of the "silent" projects that the youth and children's ministries have taken on.

I'm grateful for that entire team. I pray that their leadership will instill a habit of giving and generosity in our young people, so that they learn these habits from the start (rather than having to "unlearn" them as adults in order to be generous).

Q of the Day: How did the "world" react to the event of Christmas? Why?

2009-12-09T08:25:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to John 1 - click here.

Second, read John 1:1-18.

Third, answer the following question: How did the "world" react to the event of Christmas? Why?

Q of the Day: If Satan knows he's defeated, why does he keep trying?

2009-12-08T12:18:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 4 - click here.

Second, read Luke 4:1-13.

Third, answer the following question: If Satan knows he's defeated, why does he keep trying?

Q of the Day: It's easy to bash Herod, but in what ways do you identify with him?

2009-12-07T12:20:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:1-20.

Third, answer the following question: It's easy to bash Herod, but in what ways do you identify with him?

Q of the Day: How do the magi and the shepherds both specifically represent what Jesus will become?

2009-12-03T08:05:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 2 - click here, and Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Matthew 2:1-12 and Luke 1:1-20.

Third, answer the following question: How do the magi and the shepherds both specifically represent what Jesus will become?

Q of the Day: What elements does the account of the Magi add to the Christmas story?

2009-12-02T08:51:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 2 - click here.

Second, read Matthew 2:1-12.

Third, answer the following question: What elements does the account of the Magi add to the Christmas story?

Q of the Day: Does it bother you that pagan spiritists are so prominent in Christ's birth narrative?

2009-12-01T11:05:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 2 - click here.

Second, read Matthew 2:1-12.

Third, answer the following question: Does it bother you that pagan spiritists are so prominent in Christ's birth narrative?

Q of the Day: What the particular value of including the shepherds?

2009-11-30T10:42:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:1-20.

Third, answer the following question: In God's complex scheme of how the Christ child was announced, what's the particular value of including these shepherds?

Can we witness to someone we're boycotting?

2009-11-25T08:38:00.000-08:00

Ahhh, the Christmas season - the lights, the sounds, the songs, ..., and the bickering about whether businesses are or are not using the word "Christmas" in their advertising.

Many Christians are moved to boycott businesses that avoid the word "Christmas" when advertising for their biggest selling season of the year. (Indeed, many businesses get half of their annual revenue during this season.) The point the boycotters make is that there are still plenty of people in this country who are not ashamed of the Christian angle to Christmas. There have been several advertising reversals lately because of these boycotts.

If that's your reaction, you are free to do so. But please consider two things:

How can we witness to someone we're boycotting? Or, perhaps I should say, "What kind of witness do we have to those we boycott?" Clearly, the boycotts pressure companies into a response, and a response they don't make willingly. So, their interaction with Christians is adversarial. How receptive would they then be to the real message of Christmas?
By boycotting, aren't we just reinforcing the false idea that Christmas is all about money? Boycotting "works" because it hits businesses in the pocketbooks. A boycott says that one party will financially pressure another party until they take the desired action - using money to coerce a response. Suddenly, the debate over Christmas is about revenue, not Christ. And the boycott helped make it that way. A boycott threatens to "take away" Christmas (financially) from a business, and in the process takes away Christmas spiritually.

There are times for boycotts - I'm not against them in principle. However, I question the overall effect of these particular boycotts. They may "work" in the short-term, but do they really advance the Kingdom of God?

For me, Christmas will be Christmas whether or not Acme Clothing Company uses the word "Christmas" in their commercials. I don't think forcing them to use the word will draw anyone closer to Christ. In fact, it may only help to promote the idea that Christmas is just about shopping. Maybe it's better they don't use the word Christmas for luring shoppers in.

Jesus condemned false religion, where people worshiped Him with their lips, but their hearts were far from Him. When an advertiser is forced to use the word "Christmas" (not even the word "Christ"!), he has "honored" Christmas with his lips, not his heart. We're promoting false homage (and not even to a Person, but to a holiday).

The message of Christmas is our responsibility to get out - not the advertisers.

Q of the Day: What is the temple experiencing in Luke 2 that it hasn't experienced since Ezekiel 10?

2009-11-25T08:35:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:22-40.

Third, answer the following question: What is the temple experiencing that it hasn't experienced since Ezekiel 10?

Q of the Day: What is ironic about "presenting" the baby Jesus to the Lord?

2009-11-24T11:42:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:22-40

Third, answer the following question: What is ironic about "presenting" the baby Jesus to the Lord?

Q of the Day: What other episodes do you remember that involve Jesus and the temple?

2009-11-23T09:11:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 2:22-40

Third, answer the following question: What other episodes do you remember that involve Jesus and the temple?

Q of the Day: What do you think it must have been like to be Joseph?

2009-11-19T10:28:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 1:18-25 - click here.

Second, read Matthew 1:18-25.

Third, answer the following question: What do you think it must have been like to be Joseph?

Q of the Day: What do you think it must have been like to be Mary?

2009-11-18T09:56:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 1-2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 1:26-2:52

Third, answer the following question: What do you think it must have been like to be Mary?

Q of the Day: What do you think it must have been like to be Elizabeth?

2009-11-17T13:46:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 1-2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 1:5-17, 39-45.

Third, answer the following question: What do you think it must have been like to be Elizabeth?

Q of the Day: What do you think it must have been like to be Zechariah?

2009-11-16T10:21:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 1-2 - click here.

Second, read Luke 1:5-25.

Third, answer the following question: What do you think it must have been like to be Zechariah?

Q of the Day: How is Psalm 67 Messianic?

2009-11-11T10:25:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Psalm 67- click here.

Second, read Psalm 67.

Third, answer the following question: How is Psalm 67 Messianic?

Q of the Day: What is the expected result of being blessed (Psa 67)?

2009-11-10T10:56:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Psalm 67- click here.

Second, read Psalm 67.

Third, answer the following question: What is the expected result of being blessed?

Q of the Day: What does the Psalmist request from God in Psalm 67?

2009-11-09T13:16:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Psalm 67- click here.

Second, read Psalm 67.

Third, answer the following question: What does the Psalmist request from God?

Q of the Day: Who else is blessed in Eph 1:3-14?

2009-11-05T10:20:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Ephesians 1- click here.

Second, read Ephesians 1:3-14.

Third, answer the following question: Who else is blessed in this passage?

Q of the Day: What is the one main thing Paul prays for in Eph 1:15-23?

2009-11-04T10:28:00.000-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Ephesians 1- click here.

Second, read Ephesians 1:15-23.

Third, answer the following question: What is the one main thing Paul prays for? Why is that significant?

Q of the Day: What is the significance of the verb tense for "blessed" in Eph 1:3?

2009-11-03T13:10:00.001-08:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Ephesians 1 - click here.

Second, read Ephesians 1:3-14.

Third, answer the following question: What is the significance of the verb tense for "blessed" in verse 3?

Q of the Day: Find the Trinity in Eph 1:3-14. What is said about each Member?

2009-11-02T10:30:00.000-08:00

irst, open the following link in a new window to get to Ephesians 1 - click here.

Second, read Ephesians 1:3-14.

Third, answer the following question: Find the Trinity in this passage. What is said about each Member?

Q of the Day: Is Luke 12:35-48 talking about unready Christians or non-Christians?

2009-10-29T10:42:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 12 - click here.

Second, read Luke 12:35-48.

Third, answer the following question: Is Jesus talking about unready Christians or non-Christians?

Soup Kitchen??? Me???

2009-10-28T10:44:00.000-07:00

It's coming up on DBC's turn to serve the Soup Kitchen this weekend. We do this every month that has 5 Saturdays, and we take that last Saturday. Other churches are helping out on the other Saturdays.

I'm grateful for those who are involved in the Soup Kitchen frequently, including our youth, who do a great job of ministering to the kids at the Soup Kitchen. I want to especially thank Cynthia Mickler and Janice Stevens for the leadership they have provided over the last few years we've been involved.

I also want to encourage those of you who have not helped with the Soup Kitchen to help out. There are many ways to get involved, depending on your giftedness and availability. None of the jobs are all that demanding. We need shoppers to buy the groceries (at the church's expense), sandwich makers, food servers, people to play with the kids, and people willing to share Christ. The sandwich making is something that can happen in your own home or at DBC.

If you can help, please contact Cynthia.

I encourage participation in the Soup Kitchen for several reasons:

There is a clear need in our community.
Christ instructs us to help those in need.
We have a sinful racial barrier in our town, and serving the Soup Kitchen is a chance for DBC to help break down that barrier. The Soup Kitchen happens in a part of town that's primarily African American, hosted by a predominantly African American church. By crossing this bridge, we are doing a part to tear down sinful walls in our city.
Helping those in need, some of whom never thank us, helps us to get outside of ourselves and our self-serving pursuits. It requires us to take on Christ's humility (Philippians 2:1-11).
We have seen spiritual ministry opportunities open up to young and old. Because someone made a sandwich and someone else served it, another person got to share Christ with someone who didn't know Him. That's happened several times.
People know DBC as a teaching church. I want us to also be known as a doing church.

If you have never been involved, would you please make it your goal to be involved at least one time in the next 3 opportunities we have (Oct 31, Jan 30, May 29)?

# # #

I want to thank all those who have prayed and contributed to help Calvin from the youth group get the help he needs at Teen Challenge. All of the money has been raised, and he should enter this week. Now that his faith is in Christ, he has access to the power he needs to be freed from the bondage he's had in his life. I'm grateful he has been so willing to share his needs with us. The Youth Group will visit Calvin on visitation day on occasion.

Q of the Day: How can we be blessed if we're being mistreated?

2009-10-28T09:16:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 6 - click here.

Second, read Luke 6:22-23.

Third, answer the following question: How can we be blessed if we're being mistreated?

Q of the Day: What is the blessing for those who remain alert?

2009-10-27T10:31:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 12:35-40 - click here.

Second, read Luke 12:35-40.

Third, answer the following question: What is the awesome blessing for those who remain alert? What does it mean?

Q of the Day: What can we do specifically to "be alert"?

2009-10-26T11:51:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 12:35-40 - click here.

Second, read Luke 12:35-40.

Third, answer the following question: What can we do specifically to "be alert"?

Q of the Day: "Am I avoiding or embracing God's discipline?"

2009-10-22T09:44:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Hebrews 12- click here.

Second, read Hebrews 12:4-13.

Third, answer the following question: Are there ways I'm avoiding God's discipline? How can I embrace it more?

Q of the Day: "Which errors to avoid in Heb 12:5-6?"

2009-10-21T09:23:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Hebrews 12- click here.

Second, read Hebrews 12:4-13.

Third, answer the following question: What two errors does the proverb in vv. 5-6 seek to avoid?

Feel free to leave comments to discuss this question with others.

Q of the Day: "What is 'discipline'?"

2009-10-20T10:59:00.000-07:00

(The video portion of the Question of the Day is being laid aside for a while.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Hebrews 12- click here.

Second, read Hebrews 12:4-13.

Third, answer the following question: What does "discipline" refer to in this passage?

Feel free to leave comments to discuss this question with others.

Q of the Day: "Which battle?"

2009-10-19T12:20:00.000-07:00

(The video portion of the Question of the Day is being laid aside for a while.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Hebrews 12 - click here.

Second, read Hebrews 12:4-13.

Third, answer the following question: This entire passage is designed to help believers fight which particular battle? (And which verse reveals this?)

Feel free to leave comments to discuss this question with others.

Video Question of the Day, 10/15/09

2009-10-15T08:16:00.001-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Psalm 1 - click here.

Second, read Psalm 1.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What are the three blessings for those who walk in God's wisdom?"

God Will Get Holiness

2009-10-14T13:03:00.000-07:00

The Christian life would have quite a few less bumps and bruises if we would realize just one simple truth: God will get holiness from us. It is an undeniable biblical truth. He will get it, and He will get it from us.

When we are born from above into new life, God commits Himself to the process of making us perfectly holy (as C.S. Lewis points out in Mere Christianity). Whether we bargain for it or now, whether we are aware of it or not, whether we want it or not, God obligates Himself to the task of making us perfectly holy. We are declared holy when we are born from above, but we are made holy through this process over the rest of our lives on earth. (This is the classic distinction between justification and sanctification.)

That means that God, being God, will get what He wants. And what He wants from us is perfect holiness. So, that's exactly what He's going to get. Since He commits Himself to the process, we know it will not fail.

When we work against this process, we get the bumps and bruises. When we make decisions that are contrary to the process God has unfailingly committed Himself to, we are going to get bruised up, because we will be constantly banging into the unshakable process of God.

It's not a question of if God will get holiness from you, but how. He gives us choices on the how part of the process. If we welcome God's work in our lives to identify, raise, expose, and make us face our sin so that He can work it out of us, then we are cooperating with His process. If we deny our sin, or resist God's process of showing us our sin, or refuse to let Him work freely to work that sin out of us, we are working against the process. But the process will succeed, with our without our help.

Whenever someone discovers something ugly about themselves that they want to ignore, I say that they are blessed, because God has chosen this particular time to bring up this issue that has been part of that sinful mess for years. Right then is the time that God wants to work that out of us. God is at work! It may be uncomfortable, but it's more comfortable than constantly banging up against God's unstoppable process!

Give God free reign. When He exposes your sin, don't try to hide or pretend it's not there. Thank God for showing it to you so that it can be dealt with. And then work alongside God in dealing with it.

You'll have a whole lot fewer bruises that way.

Video Question of the Day, 10/14/09

2009-10-14T12:34:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 11 - click here.

Second, read Luke 11:27-28.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How is it that Mary is truly blessed?"

Video Question of the Day, 10/13/09

2009-10-13T08:15:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Ecclesiastes 10 - click here.

Second, read Ecclesiastes 10:8-20.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What does verse 17 tells us about how we should vote?"

Question of the Day, 10/12/09

2009-10-12T10:49:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 11.

Matthew 11.

Second, read Matthew 11:2-6.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What does it mean to be blessed for not stumbling over Christ (sometimes translated, "takes no offense at Me")?"

Question of the Day, 10/8/09

2009-10-08T09:18:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Isaiah 30.

Isaiah 30.

Second, read Isaiah 30:18-23.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Those who wait on the Lord will be blessed. But who else in this passage is waiting for something? For what?"

The YGRV

2009-10-07T18:43:00.001-07:00

What is the YGRV? The "Youth Group Revised Version." Heretical? Not at all.

The youth were studying Romans 2:17-29, which was is written to Jews who treat the externals of their religion as if they were sufficient for true faith. Paul soundly criticizes an "externals only" attitude. But how they studied it is actually a great technique to understand Scripture for anyone at any age.

The youth broke off into two teams and rewrote this passage to an audience of modern-day teenage Christians. It was a difficult exercise, but the results were excellent. Both teams clearly understood the passage because they so clearly reiterated the main ideas in modern language and circumstances. (You might even ask one of them about what they wrote.)

Here's the best part - I didn't have to teach a thing! They taught the passage to themselves. That's exactly what we want to create in all believers - the ability to study and understand Scripture on your own. Without it being an exercise "to learn how to study Scripture on your own," that's exactly what they did.

The lesson for us: One way to understand a passage is to try to rewrite it with modern trappings and language, without losing the meaning. If you can do with some level of accuracy, then you're obviously understanding the passage.

Question of the Day, 10/7/09

2009-10-07T10:28:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Isaiah 30.

Isaiah 30.

Second, read Isaiah 30:18-23.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What are the blessings in this passage for those who wait on the Lord?"

2009-10-06T13:41:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Isaiah 30.

Isaiah 30.

Second, read Isaiah 30:18-23.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How can the Lord of justice be the one who wants to have compassion on us?"

Question of the Day, 10/5/09

2009-10-05T11:07:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Isaiah 30.

Isaiah 30.

Second, read Isaiah 30:18-23.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What does it mean to wait on the Lord?"

2009-10-01T09:33:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 5.

Matthew 5.

Second, read Matthew 5:1-12.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Are the blessings described rewards or the natural consequences of being that kind of person?"

Question of the Day, 9/30/09

2009-09-30T10:26:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 5.

Matthew 5.

Second, read Matthew 5:1-12.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How do the Beatitudes fit in with the overall purpose of the Sermon on the Mount?"

Question of the Day, 9/29/09

2009-09-29T11:37:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 5, and another for Luke 6.

Matthew 5.

Luke 6.

Second, Matthew 5:1-12 with Luke 6:17-36.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How are the Sermon on the Mount and the Sermon on the Plain different?"

Question of the Day, 9/28/09

2009-09-28T11:27:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 5.

Matthew 5.

Second, read Matthew 5:1-12.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Are these blessings for actions or attributes?"

What about those who have never heard, part 2

2009-09-23T11:52:00.000-07:00

Last week, we began discussing the question about those who have never heard the Gospel - do they have any chance to be saved? There were some really good comments and ideas, both on the blog (http://colbykinser.blogspot.com) and the mirror blog on Facebook.

Those discussions mentioned that God is in charge of who is born where and when, that no one (not even Old Testament saints) will be with Christ forever except for His atoning blood, and the fact that God has not left any people group without a witness. God clearly holds people accountable for the amount of revelation that He gives them, but does not hold them accountable for revelation He has not yet given them.

These are all valid points, but don't definitively answer the question. I'm not sure any argument can answer the question once and for all.

However, if God does not hold people accountable for more revelation than He gives them, why then is it so imperative that we bring the Gospel to those who have not heard? Aren't we just making them more accountable for more revelation?

What do you think?

Question of the Day, 9/23/09

2009-09-23T11:42:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 13.

Matthew 13.

Second, read Matthew 5:1-12.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How is the small group different than the larger group? Than the prophets and saints?"

Question of the Day, 9/24/09

2009-09-23T11:40:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to John 20.

John 20.

Second, read John 20:24-31.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How are the people more blessed than Thomas?"

Question of the Day, 9/22/09

2009-09-23T11:03:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 5.

Matthew 5.

Second, read Matthew 5:1-12.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Can we do something in order to be blessed?"

Question of the Day, 9/21/09

2009-09-23T10:59:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 5.

Matthew 5.

Second, read Matthew 5:1-12.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What does it mean to be blessed?"

What about those who have never heard?

2009-09-16T11:20:00.000-07:00

A perennial question, and one that can be a barrier for some to completely embrace Christ. If salvation is through Christ alone, what about those who live in a place and a time where they can't hear about Christ? Are they to be eternally judged because they don't embrace Him, even though there's no news of Him where they are?

This is an enormous question, and we can't answer it all in one blog, obviously. But I'd like to take a few blogs to explore the question.

The first is to consider the following truth: God never reveals too little for us to be able to accomplish His will for us. In other words, God does not expect us to respond to revelation that He has not given us.

Romans 1:18-23 says that God's invisible attributes are made evident through everyone through Creation. Acts 14:17 says that God did not leave any people group without a witness based on His acts of provision. So, God does give a responsible amount of revelation to everyone, and in both of these passages in context, He holds people accountable for how they respond to the amount of revelation they have received.

This does not fully answer this amazing question, but it does lay down one very important principle that we must remember: God never reveals too little for us to be able to respond to Him in a way that He expects.

Question of the Day, 9/17/09

2009-09-14T18:31:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 15.

Luke 15

Second, read Luke 15:11-32.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What is the one main point of the parable?"

Question of the Day, 9/16/09

2009-09-14T18:21:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 15.

Luke 15

Second, read Luke 15:11-32.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Is the parable in Luke 15.11-32 about the prodigal son, the father, or the older brother?"

Question of the Day, 9/15/09

2009-09-14T18:16:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 15.

Luke 15

Second, read Luke 15.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How are the three parables in Luke 15 different?"

Question of the Day, 9/14/09

2009-09-14T18:08:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 15.

Luke 15

Second, read Luke 15.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How are the three parables in Luke 15 related?"

Question of the Day, 9/10/09

2009-09-09T12:50:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Psalm 7.

Psalm 7

Second, read Psalm 7:6.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Where would we be without God's anger?"

Question of the Day, 9/9/09

2009-09-09T12:47:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to James 1.

James 1

Second, read James 1:19-20.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Is anger a choice?"

What is the Gospel?

2009-09-09T10:39:00.000-07:00

We have just begun a series with the Youth in Romans, and as we look at chapter 1:1-17, we see that Paul is anxious to preach the Gospel to those in Rome. But wait ... he's writing to Christians. Why would he want to preach the Gospel to Christians?

That depends on what the Gospel is in the first place.

If we take the somewhat common approach that the Gospel is the message of "how to get saved," then Paul isn't making any sense. And based on all that Paul wrote, especially the book of Romans, Paul doesn't seem like the kind of guy who rambles nonsensical platitudes.

Clearly, the Gospel is more than just the message of salvation.

One way to approach the question of "what is the Gospel?" is to just read the entire book of Romans. That's the Gospel! More than just the message of guilt ("for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," 3:23) and justification (being declared righteous before God, 5:1), the Gospel includes sanctification (the lifelong process of being conformed into the image of Christ, 8:29). The Gospel includes walking by the Spirit (8:1-11). The Gospel includes exercising the giftedness God has given us for the purpose of building up His Church (12:3-8). The Gospel includes being transformed by the renewing of our minds (12:1-2).

In other words, the "Gospel" is the message of the entire Christian life. The whole package. Not just "getting in" but also the whole journey that ensues. The Gospel is the message of an entire life yielded to God for His glory.

Paul was anxious to preach the Gospel to people who were already saved because the Gospel includes so much more than just getting saved.

If you claim the Gospel, I encourage you to remember the fullness of the Gospel you are claiming.

Question of the Day, 9/8/09

2009-09-08T11:06:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to John 2.

John 2

Second, read John 2:12-17.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Did Jesus react out of anger?"

Question of the Day, 9/7/09

2009-09-07T12:24:00.000-07:00

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Ephesians 4.

Ephesians 4

Second, read Ephesians 4:25-32.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What is Paul telling us to do about anger?"

Question of the Day, 9/3/09

2009-09-03T11:58:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to John 2.

John 2

Second, read John 2:23-25.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What do Jesus' doubts teach us about our doubts?"

A good use for Twitter?

2009-09-02T11:13:00.000-07:00

For a long time, I've failed to see the value of the microblogging service Twitter (http://twitter.com). People have used it to chronicle their day, but I'm not necessarily interested in what you are buying at the grocery store, thank you very much. Athletes and stars have used it to communicate with their fans, but I don't find what stars are buying at the grocery store particularly interesting, either.

But then I came across a statement from Rick Warren, who was in turn referring to a comment by John Piper. These well-respected pastors have been using Twitter not to record what happens during their day, but the various thoughts they have on Scripture, theology, and good Christian literature. Now that sounded interesting and valuable to me.

My only problem is that my thoughts are usually not all that deep!

What I've decided to do is "tweet" various thoughts that come to mind as I prepare for the upcoming sermon, or prepare for the youth Bible study, or even ideas that come to mind during my Quiet Time. I figure that even if no one else benefits from it, it does me some good to put the thoughts into writing and find a concise way to say it. I've enjoyed some benefit from it already, and hardly anyone is "following" me on Twitter.

If you want to follow, you can do it two ways - with a Twitter account and without. With a Twitter account, just search for "ColbyKinser" and start following. You can then follow those tweets online or on your mobile phone. Without a Twitter account, use a browser to visit http://twitter.com/ColbyKinser.

You can also follow other people, like Piper and Warren. Just search for people that might be tweeting interesting ideas. I'm just beginning to start my collection of interesting tweeters.

The tweeting also relates to what I blogged about last week, creating the video "Question of the Day." See the blog for Aug 26 for information about the QOD.

Question of the Day, 9/2/09

2009-09-02T11:06:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 24.

Luke 24

Second, read Luke 24:36-53.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"How does Jesus respond to His disciples when they doubt?"

Question of the Day, 9/1/09

2009-09-01T13:43:00.001-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Luke 24.

Luke 24

Second, read Luke 24:36-53.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"Why would the disciples assume that Jesus was a ghost rather than the resurrected Christ?"

Question of the Day, 8/31/09

2009-08-31T10:56:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Romans 14.

http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Rom&chapter=14

Second, read Romans 14:13-23.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

"What is the benefit of doubt in Romans 14:23?"

Question of the Day, 8/27/09

2009-08-27T12:18:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 4.

http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Mat&chapter=4

Second, do the same thing to also bring up Deuteronomy 6.

http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Deu&chapter=6

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

Question of the Day, 8/26/09

2009-08-26T13:52:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Exodus 20.

http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Exo&chapter=20

Second, look at verse 20.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

An Experiment for You to be Involved with Sermon Preparation

2009-08-26T10:14:00.000-07:00

I'm just toying with an idea, and I welcome your feedback.

The idea is simple. Three or four times a week, I would post a video question on this blog related to passages and topics that have to do with the upcoming sermon. You can click on the passage to get the relevant Scripture handy, then click "Play," and then get a question that will be addressed in the sermon coming up on Sunday.

There is a place for you to add your own comments and thoughts on the blog, and discuss together online what you think the answer to the question might be.

I will not give the answer on the blog! I don't want to pre-empt your discussion.

There are a few questions posted already for you to check out and experiment with along with me. Just look at other recent posts on this blog. (Sadly, the thumbnail picture that the blog randomly chooses from the video feed is not always a flattering shot of me!)

If you are reading this blog through Facebook, the video won't carry over into the Facebook blog mirror. So, just go to http://colbykinser.blogspot.com and help yourself.

Again, this is just an idea I'm toying with. I'm curious to see what happens if you have a running dialog with my sermon preparation process.

As always, I'm open to constructive criticism.

Question of the Day, 8/25/09

2009-08-25T13:50:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to Matthew 10.

http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Mat&chapter=10

Second, look at verse 28.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day. (If you're looking at this through Facebook, there will be no video - instead, click here to go to the full blog.)

Question of the Day, 8/24/09

2009-08-24T12:23:00.000-07:00

(The following is just an experiment - don't know if I want to commit to doing this, but I'm toying with the idea.)

First, open the following link in a new window to get to 1 John 4.

http://net.bible.org/bible.php?book=1Jo&chapter=4

Second, look at verse 14.

Third, click play on the following video to get the question of the day.

Health Plan

2009-08-19T09:09:00.000-07:00

I think it's official. I believe I have now received more emails about the healthcare plan that's being debated across the nation than about any other topic. I receive emails for this and against that, fearful of this, reassuring of that - a non-stop parade of emails. What's a person to think about the whole mess?

By no means will I suggest to you how you should feel about the plan itself. I would not take away the responsibility from you to learn about this and think it through for yourself. But there are some thoughts about the manner in which we should consider this whole mess.

God does not belong to a particular political party. He is not partisan in that regard. He does not reveal to us any directive on whether the government should be big or small, should deal with healthcare or not, hold the power at the federal level or at the state level. There are no biblical directives on these questions per se.
God does reveal that governments do have specific responsibilities and should operate in certain ways. Governments should promote the good and deter the bad. They should treat citizens with fairness, and especially protect the vulnerable. They should protect civil order. Basic guidelines, but nothing specific along the political spectrum. Theoretically, those basic goals could be achieved by government doing something or getting out of the way (not to suggest that either is better than the other).
God's people have successfully served under the worse kinds of governments. See Joseph, Daniel, and Paul for prime examples. No matter what government does, Christians can serve faithfully.
God wants us to be salt and light for our communities and societies.
God wants us to always act in a Christlike manner as we go about this business. He wants us to always speak in a Christlike manner. Some of the emails I've seen from Christians have been very un-Christlike.
There is a tremendous amount of misinformation coming out from both sides of this debate. No side is vastly more accurate than the other, based on my observation. Therefore, in order for us to hold Christ-honoring opinions, we must do the best we can to sift through the misinformation, to examine the source of each piece information we get (whether or not it reflects our own opinion), and to hear both sides in order to try to discern where the truth is. You can even read the text of the bill yourself (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text).
The Church has a biblical responsibility to help the poor and vulnerable, especially those who are willing to work. Now, this may or may not include providing healthcare insurance through business or government, but it is a truth that we must deal with before forming our opinions. The position that we each hold must in all honesty consider our biblical obligations.
We should let our congressmen know what we think and why. If a Christian does not communicate his or her views to the ones who are charged with representing them, then he or she is forfeiting one of the best tools available to have the law reflect the will of the people.
There are other ways to make your views known: letters to the editor, blogs, call-in shows, public meetings, and so on. But, whenever we take these public avenues, our words and actions should reflect Christ in content and in manner. In other words, what we say and how we say it must be Christlike.
We must separate what parts of our views are based on biblical standards and which are political preferences. It's OK to have political preferences, but they must be consistent with Scripture and they must not be confused with Scripture.

I have good, respectable, Christian friends who differ widely on this issue. Each of them has some good reasons for the view that he or she holds. I have my opinions, but I do want to sort through and make sure my views are formed by biblical truth, and I want to sift out the portions of my views that are just political preference.

Errors?

2009-08-12T11:57:00.000-07:00

One of the common charges leveled against the Bible is that we don't have the original documents (technically called the "manuscripts" or "autographs"), and therefore many errors from the originals have been introduced through generations of copies of copies. This charge tries to undermine the reliability of the Bibles we hold in our hands, and therefore give an excuse to discount the entire Bible, and therefore all of Christianity.

Believe it or not, the charge got part of it right.

It is true that we have not (yet) uncovered any of the original documents penned by Paul, James, Peter, Matthew, John, and so on. It is also true that what we do have are copies and copies of copies. It is also true that in the process of copying, changes have been introduced. It's not that hard to demonstrate that some copyists did not do a perfect job. Some find that fact unnerving; others claim that this undermines the reliability of our Bibles.

So how can we rely on the Bible at all?

Here are the facts:

We have over 5000 ancient copies and fragments of the Bible. This is orders of magnitudes more copies than any other ancient document (which we also consider to be accurate to the originals). Just a few copies are enough to demonstrate authenticity, but we have an embarrassing wealth of manuscript evidence for the Bible.
The copies we have are much closer in age to the originals than other ancient documents. The earliest copies we have are just a generation or two removed from the original, whereas for most other important ancient documents, the copies we possess are hundreds of years removed from the originals.
We also have a wealth of ancient Christian writings that allude to or even quote the early copies of the Bible. This means that we have early, separate testimony to the content of the original texts.
We have early copies in a few different languages. Through backward translation, we get yet another angle on the content of the early manuscripts.
These copies and fragments can be collected into "families." This means that we can group most texts into categories that help us trace back the history of copying the texts (a process called "transmission").
Variations ("variants") do exist. When comparing copies and families, there are some differences.
The differences are minor. Almost all of the differences are so minor as to cause no concern whatsoever. For example, one copy may say "the Lord Jesus Christ" where another copy may say "Jesus Christ our Lord." The differences do not affect the meaning at all, or in a very insignificant way. Another example is "our Lord" compared to "your Lord" (just one letter different in Greek as well as in English). They mean slightly different things, but both options are true, and in context, the difference doesn't change the meaning of the sentence.
No major doctrine is in question. For those differences that are a little more significant, we still have zero doctrinal issues in question. In other words, the variants don't threaten to undermine any important plank of our belief system.
The variants are well-documented. No one is trying to hide anything! All the known variants are documented, including which manuscripts contain which variant. All the data is there for everyone who wants to examine.
There are methods and procedures for determining which variant is most likely original. There are several different considerations that scholars use to make educated conclusions on which variant is most likely to be correct. Scholars often also have a "confidence" rating for their choices, and give reasons why their confidence is high or low on a particular choice.
The criteria for choosing are not theological, but linguistic. Scholars don't prefer variants just because they favor a particular view. They look at things like context, how the author uses similar phrases in other locations, what explanation best explains how all the variants for a word could have arisen, and other literary markers. The only theological considerations would be comparing a word to the theological points that the same author makes elsewhere, but that's only one of many factors considered.
Using purely linguistic criteria, scholars conclude that we have more than 99% of the original texts reproduced. As you can see, the impact of the variants is on less than 1% of the texts, and in a majority of those cases, the difference in meaning is negligible or non-existent.
We have every reason to believe that we have 100% in hand. The preponderance of evidence suggests that somewhere in all our copies, we possess 100% of the originals. The only question is which variant is original in a given case - the question is not whether or not we have a copy of the original.
For every verse, we know where the variants are. The importance of this is that when we study a particular word or verse, we don't have to wonder whether or not this word is reliable. If there are no variants, we're set. If there is, then we can turn to the scholars to see their reasons for choosing one variant over another, and then see what the other possibilities are. I've yet to see any case where any of the options would affect what I believe or the theology I hold.

So, the critics got part of the facts right, but not all the facts, and therefore they drew the wrong conclusions. The right conclusions are that we can in fact rely on our Bibles that we have today. We do not possess copies of copies that are irretrievably changed from the originals - we have gotten extremely close to the exact originals. On any given word in the Bible, we know if a variant exists and what the possible options are. No doctrine is at risk. We have bankable copies of God's Word!

We need not be afraid of any accusation leveled against God's Word. Rather than pretend like variations don't exist, we just simply need to learn more facts. More truth always leads us to more reliability of God's Word.

So Where Does the Desire to Sin Come From?

2009-08-06T10:00:00.001-07:00

We asked this question last week and invited you to respond. There were several brave souls who pondered aloud, with not a few differences in opinions. See last week's post and see the comments (either on my "Notes" in Facebook or on http://colbykinser.blogspot.com).

Many noted that God created us with the freedom to choose. Certainly, without the freedom to choose, then our glorification of God is empty, the praise of mere automatons. But with the freedom to choose also comes the ability to sin - the ability to do something against God's will. Without freedom to choose, sin is impossible. True, but freedom to choose brings the ability to sin, not necessarily the desire to sin. Freedom does not explain the origin of the desire to sin.

Also, many noted that the desire to sin came from the desire to be independent from God or to be equal to God. These are, in fact, root issues with sin. Certainly, if we did not desire to be independent from God, a vast majority of sin would never occur (if not all of it - just playing it cautious, here). But this does not explain the origin of the desire to sin - it merely describes it in more detail. The desire to be independent from God is itself the desire to sin, so we can't explain the origin of something by describing it in better detail. Where did the original desire come from?

One mentioned a lust for power, which is similar to a desire to be independent from God. Likewise, it describes sin, but doesn't describe it's origin.

Another argued that man invented sin - that it does not exist as an objective reality, but is merely culturally defined. However, I have asked this particular contributor a number of times to answer the question, "It is always wrong to torture babies for fun?" To date, that contributor has not answered this question. I find it untenable to suggest that this particular example is only sinful if a particular society says so (as if any society ever agreed on right and wrong in the first place).

A few noted the very human habit of wanting something merely because it is forbidden. That is certainly the case with us today, in many cases. But I'm not sure that this is a universal attribute of humanity, and it's also not clear if that was a factor in Eden. Yes, Eve wanted the fruit, but it's not necessarily the case that she wanted it because it was forbidden. So, this remains a viable answer, but hard to establish definitively.

A tandem team offered the idea that the desire to sin comes from a longing for God. This is most intriguing - explaining sin by means of the goodness of creation. This would mean that man was created without sin and without a pure desire to sin. Rather, he was, as Scripture states, created pure and uniquely fashioned in the image of God. That imago Dei (image of God) makes us uniquely capable of a relationship with God and uniquely capable of worshiping Him (we are the only creatures to have theology and doxology, which I cannot fully attribute to mere higher brain function). We were created with a unique capacity and longing for God. We are also uniquely capable of sin. Is there a connection?

It has been argued, and I tend to agree, that all sin can be boiled down to fulfilling God-given desires with God-forbidden means. For example, the sin of acting on one's lust is a misguided effort to fulfill the God-given need for love and companionship. The sin of theft is a misguided attempt to fill the need for the security that is only really found in God. Is it possible, then, that the desire to sin originates from a godly desire, and more specifically, a desire for God?

Eve wanted good things: food, attractive things, and wisdom. That was her desire, and they were godly things to desire. However, she was deceived into pursuing them in ways God had forbidden. Her desire was not a desire to defy God or drive Him away. But she pursued her longing for God in a way that He had prescribed against.

And let's not let Adam off the hook - it's not all Eve's fault. Romans 5 gives the blame to Adam, not Eve, because of his failure in his duties as husband (which is an entirely different topic, discussed in earlier posts).

And it all went downhill from there. Once Man had fallen, his desires fell, too. Now, his desires were as vandalized as the imago Dei he bore. Now the desire to sin would be inherent - human desire was corrupt (except for the Sinless One, who bore human flesh but was without sin).

But, you might observe that Satan fell before Man. How do we explain his desire to sin? We do not have any real, detailed description of these events (despite our over-reliance on Dante for theology). So, we can't really know, but I would venture a guess that we would find a similar origin.

Now ... this is my opinion. Please don't take this as indisputable theology. Actually, once the question came up, I've been shocked by the fact that I've yet to find any scholarly work on this particular question. It may be out there, and I've not spent a lot of time hunting, but it's not readily available in the standard works I refer to. But short of saying that the desire to sin preceded the Fall, which would conflict with all kinds of orthodox doctrine, this is about the only way that I've seen that makes any sense.

Feel free to comment, disagree, propose alternate theories. It's an interesting question, in my opinion. (I would be particularly curious to hear what the tandem team has to say - does this summarize what you were thinking, or does your point go in a different direction?)

Where Did the Desire to Sin Come From?

2009-07-29T10:40:00.000-07:00

One of our own was asked this question by a skeptic on an airplane recently, and the answer was not immediately obvious. It's actually a profound question.

We know that sin, as such, does not exist as its own substance. Sin is the absence of something, the vandalization of something, but not its own something. Sin is the absence of good, the act of taking something good and twisting it, profaning it, or otherwise rendering it imperfect. Satan was created completely good, but then twisted himself by trying to make himself equal with God. Adam and Eve were created good, bearing the image of God, but violated God's express will and damaged (but not destroyed) the image of God they bore. Everything that departs from God's perfection is sin.

But this doesn't address the question that was asked. Where did the desire to sin come from?

If Satan was good before sinning, then desiring to sin would be sinful, wouldn't it? If Adam and Eve were really created good, then why would they ever desire to depart from God's express will? Jesus was tempted in every way we are, and yet was without sin - but did He desire to sin?

They were all given the freedom to make choices, and sin was inevitable for mankind, but that doesn't explain where the desire to sin came from. The mere existence of choice does not create desire.

So what I'm going to do with this post is to throw it out there and see what you think. Please feel free to add your own comments as to where you think the desire to sin came from in beings that were sinless at one time.

(All I ask is that you show respect for everyone, that you not become argumentative, that you not criticize anyone else's idea, and that you post only one time. Consider this a survey, not a debate.)

If you'd rather not post your idea publicly, then send me an email.

I'll let this run a week or two, and then summarize my thoughts on the matter.

Showing that Christianity is Authentic

2009-07-23T05:16:00.000-07:00

I had a great time with the youth last night probing the authenticity of Christianity.

First, we made up our own religion. I asked several questions about what they wanted their religion to have - from how many gods to whether or not we'd have idols to features of our holy book and what the religion would require of its members. There were two full pages of questions, which were geared toward creating a religion that would attract as many people as possible, and to be the most palatable to us. Plus we just wanted the religion to be a humanly logical as possible.

This may sound like heresy, but first, our students are sharp enough to know what I'm getting at, and second, they were quick to note when what they said wasn't really theologically true.

Then we compared their answers to the features of Christianity, and of course, we came up with a radically different religion than Christianity. We ended up with three "gods" - but they were not complete in themselves. We rejected having any hard-to-fathom realities (like a Trinity, losing your life to save it, a leader who is fully God and fully man), and salvation was based on the whims of the gods, who had to be placated and pleased (especially the "god" who was insecure!). We allowed sin, because that would attract more members. We only had 9 authors of the holy book, and they had to collaborate together in order to get their story straight, and still they had to run their writings past the gods. We would promise potential new members an easy life, not a hard life. There were many more features especially geared toward trying to make our religion popular. (By the way, all infidels are to be burned if they don't accept this religion.)

The point of the exercise was to show that no one would ever make up Christianity. If you were to make up a religion, the chances are incredibly small that you make up something that resembles Christianity. No one would make up a Trinity (a key doctrine that we can't even fully comprehend), no one would write about the first followers of the religion as a bunch of dunderheads (like the apostles are in the Gospels), no one would say you have to die to yourself as part of membership, no one could have a completely consistent holy book written by over 40 different authors over 1500 years from different languages and cultures (and some writing without the knowledge of what the others were writing), and so on down the line. We didn't ground our religion in historical events, because they could be proven wrong. Our "gods" wanted glory because they don't already have all glory. The list goes on. (We say "no one" - theoretically someone could do one or two, but the point is that if you were going to make up a religion, you wouldn't make up all the things Christianity is.)

It was also important to note that the group couldn't agree on the features of the religion. They were all in the same room at the same time from the same culture speaking the same language, and they could not agree on the features of their religion, even when they were told to. Furthermore, not even the three "gods" could agree! Each had their own ego, and they each advocated for the features they wanted, especially those that would benefit the self most.

Christianity is not something that man would make up for himself. It demands too much of the self, it defies our ability to comprehend, it does not allow us to earn anything, it has a holy book that could never be created by a committee but simultaneously bears the marks being written both by God and by men. Christianity is not geared to become as large as possible, but as pure as possible, which automatically means that most people will reject it. It paints its first leaders not as saints but as societal nobodies who get it wrong more than they get it right. You don't make this stuff up.

I found it particularly fascinating that the main leader of this new religion had to be attractive, charismatic, and have a good voice. Scripture is clear that Jesus was plain in appearance. Scripture is also clear that the Antichrist will be particularly good looking and charismatic.

What we did end up with was a religion that resembles every other religion in the world except Christianity. That's no accident.

Prof

2009-07-15T15:26:00.001-07:00

I'm mid-week through my class at Dallas Theological Seminary (thanks again for letting me go!). And it's yet another great experience.

The saga of getting here is a very long, complicated, frustrating story that involves very bad weather, some measure of incompetence, some every helpful people, and extra expenses. I won't bore you with the details, but I got to Dallas 24 hours later than scheduled, missing the first full day of class, and the process at times became so frustrating that I was very tempted to just give up and come back to Dublin. However, I'm grateful that the Lord carried me through to enduring.

I've been most excited about taking this class because it is co-taught by one of the most beloved professors at DTS, Dr. Howard Hendricks. Everyone calls him "Prof." All the professors here are "profs," but only Hendricks is universally called "Prof." If you say, "I learned that in Prof's class," everyone knows you're talking about Hendricks' class.

The impact from Prof's ministry over the last several decades is impossible to calculate - he is quoted by hundreds (or thousands) of former students, he's traveled the world many times over teaching, and most likely, he has indirectly impacted your life through one of your pastors who has been directly or indirectly impacted by Prof. He has a building named after him because some generous families wanted to honor his contribution.

Prof is the first to admit that age is starting to overtake him. Well into his 80s, one eye has gone completely bad, his body is slowing down, and even his brilliant mind doesn't have the same razor sharpness it once had - although he still remains sharper than most people you'll ever meet.

I had never met Prof before. We had a reception Tuesday night, and we took turns sitting next to Prof to talk with him one-on-one. One fellow student suddenly turned to me and said, "It's your turn!" I had no idea what to say - I didn't want to treat him like a rock star, I did want to say something meaningful, and I didn't want the conversation to be about me. He immediately asked me to share my story and then I spent the rest of our time finding out about his family.

Today in class, Prof shared an interesting story. When he was a senior at Moody Bible Institute, he was paired with a freshman to mentor (our class this week is on mentoring). This freshman was Jim Eliot, the missionary that became a household name when he was killed at age 28 in 1956 while trying to reach an unreached people group in Ecuador. Prof said that in this pairing of mentor and mentoree, it was the mentoree who mentored the mentor. Even as a college freshman, Eliot was a deeply spiritual, amazingly mature believer - the more senior man, who eventually became one of the most influential seminary professors in our age, was awed by this younger man.

Prof's humility in this way is inspiring. Another one of our students (who also is a professor at my alma mater, Talbot School of Theology) mentioned to Prof that they both teach the same courses. Prof genuinely said, "I wish I could take your class." What a memorable moment for my fellow student.

But it was a simple comment to me in the short time I sat next to him at the reception that was my memorable moment. This man, who has taught and mentored so many fantastic pastors and theologians, looked me in the eye and said, "If there's any way at all that I can help you, just ask." He clearly sees himself as a servant-leader. That is was ministry is all about. With all of his influence, impact, and accomplishments, after helping hundreds of the truly impactful Christian leaders, he hurries to offer his help to a student barely qualified to be in the program.

I'm beginning to learn why so many people love Prof.

A Review of the Circus

2009-07-08T09:31:00.000-07:00

The following post is not a critique on Michael Jackson, his music, or his life. Let me make that clear from the start. I am not concerned here about evaluating anything about him. My comments are strictly related to the circus that has surrounded his death. For example, I just read that the memorial service that the city of Los Angeles put on was so expensive that they've set up a website to receive donations to help pay for it.

I've (unsuccessfully) tried to avoid the whole mess, but you can't turn anywhere without hearing about it. (In fact, you're reading about it right now! Ugh - I'm a carrier!) You sit in a restaurant with a TV on, and there it is. You listen to sports radio (sports radio!!!), and there it is. You overhear someone at work, and there it is. You buy anything from the grocery store, and there it is all over.

I'm amazed that anyone's death would generate so much attention (but I'm not surprised). No offense, but the man sang songs and danced. He sang songs, and he danced. But there something inside a whole lot of people (perhaps some of you reading this) that has been deeply affected by his singing and dancing. For some, that resonance is so strong that they are highly motivated to be a part of the funeral event. Somehow, Jackson was that important to them.

Some have expressed anger that a man accused (but acquitted) of heinous acts would receive such adulation. Like the recent death of former NFL star Steve McNair, I've also read those who advocate that we completely ignore any moral indiscretions because the performance on stage (or on the football field) was so good. Apparently, talent is of higher value than ethics.

But, there's a certain logic to all of this circus, at least in a non-Christian environment. In a society that rejects Christ, or God in any way, must venerate societal icons. If all we have is what people accomplish during their short lifetimes, then those who achieve in even one particular area logically must be celebrated, regardless of other aspects of their lives. That's all we have to lift up, if there is no Christ to lift up.

So, my anger (I'll admit it) gives way to pity. Rather than seeing the circus and getting mad, my emotional response is becoming pity more and more. How sad it is that instead of venerating Christ, people worldwide are lifting up a mere man. Not that we shouldn't properly grieve the passing of individuals, but the iconic adulation is misplaced. We should grieve the Cross more than we grieve the loss of an entertainer. We should celebrate the resurrected Christ more than we should give our devotion to a quarterback or a singer or a politician.

We are witnessing misplaced devotion. And it is profoundly sad - more sad than the loss of a mere man.

What a Week

2009-07-02T10:21:00.000-07:00

In one week's time, we saw the passing of Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett, Ed McMahon, and Billy Mays: the "King of Pop," the queen of pin-up girls, the longtime sidekick to the king of late night television, and the king of informercials. They had world-wide fame, had millions of dollars, and were the most achieved in their fields during their day. And what I'm about to say is in no way intended to say anything negative about any of them.

My point is simply this - are any of the things that we know them for (fame, wealth, success) providing them with any satisfaction now? I don't know their spiritual states, I have no idea of their relationship with God, and I won't speculate on what each of their eternal destinies are. Whether their present states are good or bad, the question is the same: Are of the things we know them by giving them any satisfaction now? If any of them are satisfied now, it's not because of those things. If any of them are not satisfied now, these things are obviously not fulfilling them. (I sincerely hope that each of them are fully satisfied now.)

What do people know you for? By what means do people know of your name, know you exist, even interact with you? By what means do you want people to know you? If I were to ask people around you to describe you, what attributes would they focus on?

We have every temptation possible to want to be known by things that will not bring us one bit of satisfaction after we shed these mortal coils. We want to be known as having X or doing Y or being Z, and the temptations are to pursue the XYZ's that will not benefit our eternal satisfaction one bit. If the kings and queens of XYZ are not satisfied by them, how can mere citizens of those kingdoms be satisfied?

Satisfaction can be had - satisfaction now as well as satisfaction after we pass on. The Christian life is not only about delayed satisfaction, but true satisfaction now (otherwise, the Gospel would say, "Grab fleshly satisfaction now while you can"). In fact, it only stands to reason that the same things that will satisfy us after death are the same things that can most satisfy us before death.

Let the ridiculously overblown coverage of these deaths prompt you to ask yourself where you are really seeking to find satisfaction. Ask if your pursuit is something that will be satisfying you 2 seconds after you die ... or 500 million years after you die.

Our deepest satisfaction now and forever is found in a person - The Person. Pursue Him. Chase after Him with the same fervor as the world pursues satisfaction in XYZ. Make knowing God through Christ your life's career goal. Do not be satisfied with only being saved - be satisfied by walking with Him closely on a daily basis.

Only what will satisfy you after death can truly satisfy you before death.