Thursday, March 22, 2007

Two Soulforce Updates

First, my friend who forwarded the earlier Sojourners article let me know that APU's "Common Day of Learning" is a big all campus event, and their invitation to Soulforce to participate is a much higher presence than C.U. is planning. That is important to note.


Second, the following is the text of an email to those of us on C.U.'s staff and faculty (I'm adjunct faculty) about the Soulforce visit. It is a good explanation of their perspective in answer to questions raised.

Questions and Answers for March 21:



Q: Why did Cedarville University invite Soulforce to campus?
A: We want to assure you that Cedarville University did not invite Soulforce to come. We informed Soulforce that our position is based on biblical convictions and is not open for change or negotiation. We strongly encouraged them not to come if changing our position was their objective. Despite our request, we were informed by Soulforce that they had included Cedarville on their itinerary. The ride will include stops at 39 other universities as well. Even though it was not our decision for them to come, we intend to use their scheduled protest as an opportunity to present the biblical approach to homosexuality in a clear and loving way.



Q: Why doesn't Cedarville University just ban them from coming?
A: There are four main reasons why Cedarville University prayerfully and carefully chose not to ban Soulforce from campus:

· First, their protest gives us an opportunity to reinforce the importance of being able to present a biblical approach to homosexuality issues. Our prayer is that our students and our entire University family will become better equipped to respond to this critical social issue in truth and love.

· Second, the presence of the protestors will be an opportunity for us to share the gospel in a truthful and loving way.

· Third, logistically it would be virtually impossible to prevent them from coming. Our campus is not a "closed" campus in the sense that we have no walls around us and no gate to shut. If we were to ban Soulforce, they could easily walk onto campus unknown to us in small groups. We prefer to have the opportunity to know where they are at all times and to better manage their interactions.

· Fourth, banning them from campus would allow them to gain additional media attention. We do not want to help them create a media frenzy. We want to make the most of the situation for Christ's glory.



If you'd like to ask a general question about the protest, please e-mail us at discussionpoint@cedarville.edu. We may respond to your question privately or, if several of you have the same question, we may answer it in our weekly e-mail (with your name omitted).



Don't forget to visit the Speaking Truth site at www.cedarville.edu/speakingtruth/campus for more information about campus preparations. And keep praying!

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Dan Knudsen Needs our Prayers

Check in on Dan

Dan Knudsen is a student at Cedarville University who suffered a serious neck injury while on a missions trip during spring break. He currently has no sensation below his ears and is breathing with assistance--although he is also very alert and aware of what is going on. He and his brother have attended my church, but what really has impressed me is the number of students I know who speak so highly of his character to me. I want to encourage people to be praying for Dan's recovery, specifically that God might restore sensation and movement, and that he would begin to be able to breathe on his own before surgery this coming Tuesday.

Thursday, March 15, 2007

Soulforce and Sojourners

Mutual Grace, Sojourners Magazine/September/October 2006

A friend sent a copy of this article to me after my earlier posting on this controversy. If you read the article, it presents those schools accepting Soulforce visits in a very positive light, and the quotes from administrators of those schools sound very encouraged by the results of Soulforce's visits. While I agree that the visits could prompt Christians to think deeply about this issue, and perhaps develop much better approaches to reaching out to those trapped in homosexual sin, I didn't read statements also affirming that this has solidified the commitments of the institutions interviewed to a biblical view that rejects both homosexual practices and the acceptance of homosexual desires as normal.

I still trust that the cautious engagement policy adopted by C.U. will work out for the best, but I wonder how much of C.U.'s larger constituency would react if you substituted C.U. for A.P.U. in this Sojourners' article.

Joint Chiefs Chairman Goes Where Few Will Go Anymore

FOXNews.com - Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Calls Homosexuality 'Immoral' - Politics | Republican Party | Democratic Party | Political Spectrum

Gen. Pace has taken a lot of heat for this, but I am appreciative of his courage.

UPDATE: He has now said he regrets not focusing on military policy more than his personal views, but he has not renounced them--thankfully.

Monday, March 05, 2007

On Duty or AWOL?

(DISCLAIMER: This is a subject I am passionate about. While it may read like a rant, it is meant as a motivator. Sarcasm alert—look out!)

The global mission of the church is the most exciting endeavor in which a believer or a congregation can possibly engage. The more we are actively involved in missions, the more our lives reflect the life and heart of Jesus. The less involved, the more self-centered and empty our spiritual lives become. This is truly something to live for, and something to die for.

If what I wrote is true, then why are most evangelical churches, if not most Christians, disconnected from this mission, or only remotely interested? There are many answers, but only two that don’t reflect badly on us.

Perhaps we do not get involved because we believe that mission activity is the responsibility of a select few. God deploys the spiritual equivalent of the Marines, the Army Rangers, or Navy SEALs—a special volunteer force that storms, on behalf of the cause of Christ, the unreached corners of the world. Meanwhile, back home, the civilian Christian population works hard to make better Christian music, create a new Christian diet program, or find new ways to cope with our preschoolers, our dating teenagers, our adult children moving home again, our midlife crisis, or to make our wardrobe reflect the color palette of our spiritual temperament. The spiritual military does its part while, thankfully, we carry on with normal life.

We show little concern because it seems, well, boring. We hear talk about missions at church and see a picture labeled Missionary of the Week but we don’t know those people, don’t know what they do, and sometimes when they do visit the church and present their work, we have no idea what they are talking about. Besides, we only hear about them once in a blue moon, so how are we supposed to connect with them?

We may think we are very connected, but only on our terms. We go on missions trips so we can see new places, do new things. We want to appreciate what “real” missionaries face, so we ask others to help pay for it. For some it’s a chance to stand up for Jesus, but in a place where nobody knows us, making it easy to come back home to our “silent saint” routine. No life change results: no change in priorities, witness, spending, or prayer. We do not intend to figure out how or if God wants us to live away from home, but it sure makes us appreciate home even more. Sure, we have friends who are missionaries; we really love them and want to make sure they are taken care of because they deserve it. Yet, while we appreciate them, we do not share their God-directed calling; we just want them to know we care.

Perhaps missions isn’t our interest because we’re skeptical. It doesn’t seem to yield the results we expect from our investments. People labor for years, but little, if anything seems to happen. Missionaries write about slow progress, and we wonder why they spend their lives doing something that doesn’t seem to be working. Perhaps they are lazy.

For some, the cost of missions just seems too high. After all, our children might contract some disease or even die. We won’t share in normal family times. Our kids will rarely see their grandparents. They will face educational and cultural challenges. The food may be disgusting. Shouldn’t missions begin at home?

Before giving two legitimate reasons why a believer is disconnected from our global mission, let me remind us of some basic Bible facts.

1. The Bible tells us that all believers are engaged in a spiritual warfare, yet called to glorify God and manifest godliness through the spread of the Gospel. All Christians battle spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places, and thus must take up the armor of God (Ephesians 6:11-18). If you think you aren’t in the battle, then you are already a casualty.

2. The Great Commission texts lay the responsibility for reaching all nations upon all believers, not just a select few. Christ spoke the words recorded in Matthew 28:19-20, not to the eleven disciples, but to a large group of followers. His charge in Acts 1:8 was shared with the eleven, but the directive was put into motion when hundreds of believers were scattered while the apostles stayed in Jerusalem (Acts 8:1). Local churches sent out missionaries from among their own number (Barnabas and Saul from Antioch, Epaphroditus from Philippi, Epaphras from Colossae, Timothy from Derbe).

3. Jesus said believers can know “I am with you always” (Matthew 28:20) when they make disciples of all the nations. The presence of Jesus, the experience of the filling of the Spirit, and demonstrations of spiritual power are all most visible in the Scriptures where believers are proclaiming the gospel (Acts 2:4, 14, 4:31, 7:56, 9:17-20, 13:52, 18:9; 1 Cor. 2:4).

4. Self-proclaimed servants of Jesus who fail to do their Master’s will call into question their relationship to Him (Matt. 25:26-30; Luke 12:45-47). Jesus himself asks at the judgment why some would call him “Lord” and not do what he says.

The first legitimate reason we disconnect from missions? Ignorance. We just do not know that much about it. The second? Accepted disqualification. Our “ordinary” giftedness just does not seem to fit global Christianity.

To such people I say, “Take a look and see what God is doing…”

Want to see the power of the Gospel manifested through Spirit-filled preaching, even miraculous occurrences, and evangelistic dreams given to unbelievers? Care to witness new Christians possessing abilities similar to the miraculous gifts of the New Testament, and those who show a readiness to die for the faith? Look no further than the Muslim areas of the 10-40 window, China, India, and animistic cultures around the world. Visible harvests are occurring in many places that will shake the complacency out of us. Iraqi brothers speak of seeing Christianity sweep their nation. Indian believers are recording faster growth in their churches than at any time in history. China? Well, imagine 100 million believers—Chinese believers taking the Gospel wherever they can. Now, all of this is accompanied by hard work, persecution, and spiritual opposition, making the battle even more real.

To those who wonder if God has a place for non-preachers, look no further than Paul’s missionary companions. Many never preached, but, nevertheless, helped in the venture. More than that, a quick survey of current missionary tactics shows people of various “careers” using their training as an entrance into hard to reach places. Agronomists, hydrologists, community health workers, literacy workers, theologians willing to teach in foreign seminaries, English teachers, relief workers, and economic development experts (heard of micro-loans to the poor?) are just some who now take their place alongside the traditional missionary church planters. Some go where “church planters” are prohibited.

If you question its value, remember—this is a task where the results are measured by eternity. The “well done” passages speak to this, as does the promise of the crowns of rejoicing and life. We are called to be faithful witnesses, and to resist sin and persecution to the point of shedding our blood (Heb. 12:4; Rev. 2:10). The history of the church is filled with those who did so and did not count it too much. The fact that we don’t think it could come to that says more about us than we should like.

If you wonder if you are “called,” you are. The question is not one of calling to serve this cause, but simply one of deployment—where in the effort do you belong? Are you willing to use your gifts wherever God wants you? Talk with your spiritual leaders and consider together your fit in the global mission of the church.

For those who think the only role to fill is that of a front-line missionary, know that every army has its front lines and its support troops. God will place you where you most fit. Kathy and I thought we would be overseas. Instead, God kept us in pastoral work, and has allowed us to work with about a dozen others who came through our ministries and took up frontline roles. We partner with national missionaries overseas who often reach areas we cannot touch, for a fraction of what it costs to send a Western missionary. We occasionally go and help those on the front lines, and continue to support financially and in prayer some who are there representing us.

Remember, those in the army are IN THE ARMY. There are no “civilian Christians” on earth. So, if you are living like one, you may simply be AWOL!

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Of Soulforce, Strategies, and Slippery Slopes

Cedarville U., my church family’s single largest employer, our town’s biggest entity, and my alma mater, has been selected for a visit by Soulforce, a gay rights group begun by Mel White, a former evangelical and now prominent gay rights activist. Mounting what is called Equality Ride, White and Soulforce are sending two buses around the country with about 20-25 riders to challenge Christian colleges and universities to alter their policies restricting the freedom of homosexuals to publicly acknowledge their “orientation.”

This visit has been the source of no little controversy, beginning with what was viewed by some as a too positive response to the possibility of this visit by the administration of C.U. That stance has been disputed, and in several conversations I have had with those in leadership at the university, they state that they did NOT want a visit, but knew they would be targeted, and have simply tried to be proactive in being ready for the visit.

Cedarville’s position and plan can be digested in full on their website.

Basically the position is, the campus is open space, C.U. cannot physically keep them off, so they will strictly limit their activities through an agreed contract. Apparently when this has been done, Soulforce has honored the terms agreed upon.

Other schools have varying approaches, from banning them and threatening their arrest (there were arrests last year), to open invitations and free access to campus. The moderating position being taken by C.U. and some others is meant to avoid looking like the stereotypical “bigoted fundamentalist” who shows no love to people, but at the same time keep Soulforce in check.

To be honest, I’m not sure which approach would yield the best results. Those who banned them last year were usually portrayed negatively in whatever media coverage was given—and this is definitely Soulforce’s desire—media attention. I have my doubts as to how well the moderate approach can work, given Soulforce’s track record of spinning events in the media. The harm from such spin to a school’s reputation could be significant. Below is an example of how Soulforce spins its visits to schools that allow them on campus. I know that APU took a position similar to that which Cedarville is trying to hold. The quote is from the the Soulforce website.

Eight of the 2007 riders are current or former students from schools on the 2006 ride, including Vince Cervantes and Vince Pancucci, a young couple who experienced Equality Ride 2006 as students at Azusa Pacific University. This evangelical Christian school welcomed the riders and hosted a public forum; more than 1,200 Azusa students listened, cried, and prayed for healing as Equality Riders shared their experiences of anti-gay violence. Inspired by that event, Cervantes and Pancucci have come out to the campus and become activists in their communities.


I am not saying that this is what will result, but simply that when one reads that APU “welcomed” them, “hosted a public forum” for Equality Riders to share with students who “listened, cried, and prayed” with them, it certainly sounds different than saying that they were polite to protesters who showed up on campus. The possibility of over a thousand students attending a Soulforce presentation makes one wonder if some of that number might prove to be as impressionable as the APU students mentioned if they struggle with same sex attraction.

There is also an issue related to the welcoming of representatives of a non-Christian religious/spiritual movement, especially one headed by someone who has purposely rejected biblical teaching to embrace heretical understandings of Scripture. Does such a welcome fall under the prohibitions of 2 John on welcoming false teachers? This would not be a question if Soulforce were not religious in character or led by Mel White. Their website makes clear that they are on a mission to convert others to their views, not to dialogue in a search for the truth. Knowing that C.U. is not a local church, it may be that they see their position here differently.

One other question in my mind is what the response will be if advocate groups for other behaviors and views incompatible with biblical teaching ask Cedarville for time on campus. Will such groups also be allowed to come and in some form interact with students? If NAMBLA or NARAL send busloads of student volunteers, will they be given a chance to be heard? Is PETA acceptable? Is this a true case of the “slippery slope” we always hear about? I wonder.

I am praying for the leadership of C.U. and its students, faculty, and staff as they face this challenge. They have chosen their strategy and believe it is the best decision for the school. I pray that they will be proven right.

What would I do? I’ve been asked this question more than I would have guessed. I do not profess that this is the correct stance, but I think I would have told Soulforce…
1. Our position is no more changeable than the Bible.
2. If they want to come to town and meet in a neutral setting with some of our representatives to challenge our view and hear our response, we would be willing to do so.
3. They are not welcome to come onto campus as “Soulforce,” nor may they distribute literature, attend classes, solicit private or group conversations with students, faculty, or staff. Cedarville University is a private institution and has the right to limit who can represent themselves on campus.
4. Local law enforcement would be notified and asked to take action if “Soulforce” chose to disregard our clear prohibition of their activities on campus.

Why would I go this direction? This is my rationale…
1. They represent themselves as a quasi-Christian/ecumenical religious group, and as such are not to be viewed as simply misguided, but as promoters of false teaching.
2. Their leader (Mel White)is someone who would have to be classified as an active, proselytizing, apostate. These first two points are an attempt to honor the spirit of 2 John’s warning against polite acceptance when false teachers seek a hearing.
3. There are certainly those on campus (a small number to be sure) who struggle with same sex attraction. Exposure to articulate spokesmen and spokeswomen who teach that homosexuality can be practiced within Christian faith may be a negative factor in their battle against this temptation.
4. There is a larger (though still small, I hope) number of students who are, to put it mildly, lacking in good judgment and discernment (that is why we do not recognize them as “mature adults” yet, even though most can vote). Some could manifest unchristian behavior and attitudes. Others could become unwitting accomplices in this publicity hunt by Soulforce, voicing solidarity in an attempt to “hate the sin but love the sinner” that won’t come out right. Still others will seek to show their ability to be open-minded and “affirming” to the Equality Riders, but in the kind of overblown rhetoric that is endemic on a college campus, leading to the wrong kinds of debates.
5. There is the watching eye of the larger C.U. constituency, upon whom the nuanced approach being taken may well be lost. What they will hear is that “a gay activist group was hosted on campus.” Many won’t take the time to investigate the situation, they will just chalk it up as another piece of evidence that the school is abandoning its moorings. That issue is already on the radar (and seems to reappear every few years with each new campus controversy), and this won’t help. Dr. Ruby shared with pastors who attended a luncheon to hear about this visit that he has received overwhelmingly positive feedback from the constituency (parents, alumni) who have heard about this issue. That is encouraging, but my concern is with what I would guess is the much larger group who are not paying close attention yet.

It isn’t my call, ultimately, and I do believe that God will work in this situation as those who love Him seek to do their best to honor Him. I pray that every hope that the C.U. administration has for their response comes to fruition. I pray that hearts are changed and turned toward God.

But I’m just a little uncomfortable with where things stand right now.

Exam Ecstasy

Well, I am thrilled to report that 70% of my students received an A or B on my midterm! That might sound wrong to the academics out there (if any actually ever read this), but since it is my job to make sure that students learn material, then if they reach this level, then I must be on the way to my goal. Now, I am still troubled that there were 2 Ds and 1 F in the mix, but as I looked at it, there was a direct correlation between class attendance and how students did--which also is somewhat comforting. I have a very good class, and I enjoy them as students. I pray that this will be an early help toward both success in school, and more importantly, true spiritual formation.

Thursday, March 01, 2007

What Kind of Evangelical Are You?

Ok, so I took this test, and can't believe how I scored. I don't agree with it all, but it was fun.


You scored as Baptist. If you've landed here, then you are probably a well-informed Baptist. You know what separates you from other Evangelicals and why it is important to divide at certain points. You see the church as a missionary organization whose job it is to preach the gospel to a lost world.


What Kind of Evangelical Are You
created with QuizFarm.com

Baptist

95%

Conservative Evangelical

70%

High Church Nomad

55%

Fightin' Fundy

50%

Evangelical Presbyterian

40%

Moderate Evangelical

40%

Reformed Baptist

35%

Presby - Old School

10%



So, I guess you can see that, at heart I am a Baptist, and still having to overcome my "fundy" roots, but have got some "high church nomad" in there, too. Interesting! But, here's my archetype, I guess...

<

But I think I'd rather it be...