As I read this article on responses to the recent attempted terror attack on the flight to Detroit, I find myself bothered by a few matters.
One, this attacker had been turned away from Britain, reported to our embassy in Nigeria, and highlighted as a threat for nearly 2 years before this. So, we had warning about the person that was credible, but no action was taken.
Two, he had the same explosive on his body that the "shoe bomber," Richard Reid, used. That means either we have not found a way of finding such explosives when on the body short of a vigorous body search, or our system failed in Nigeria and Amsterdam, where he went through security.
Three, while it was alert passengers who subdued the would-be bomber (same as what happened with the shoe bomber), our proposed solution is to make all passengers remain seated with nothing on their laps for the last hour of flying. How would this have made the bomber's flight safer? The bomb was strapped on his body--his carry-on was cleared. I have a flight coming up in a few weeks. If security is tighter while getting on the plane, fine. But unless we are supposed to sit for an hour before landing staring at our flying companions to see if there is anything suspicious they do, I cannot imagine that taking away our pillows or laptops will make us safer. It will only prompt discomfort and the occasional subduing of a passenger with an itchy chest who is mistaken by someone in his row for a threat.
Interestingly enough, since 9/11, passengers have been alert enough to stop the only two attackers who have made it on the plane. Screening may need to be improved, and the questions of more stringent "no fly" lists and the use of profiling to increase security (let's not go through the whole "we have to treat grannies in wheelchairs just like young men from Yemen" argument again)must be addressed. But creating a flying environment that is even more uncomfortable seems like we're trying to tell people that "everything is under control" when it's not, and we all know it.
Finally, I'm bothered by the articles that quote FBI and other law enforcement saying that they are operating on the assumption he was "acting alone." The man was trained in Yemen, on a watch list, and said he was operating in conjunction with Al Qaeda. How in the world can this be "acting alone?" The same was said about the shoe bomber and the Ft. Hood shooter. Then we find out that each has been in touch with Al Qaeda types, have been encouraged or assisted by them, etc. This is not a criminal activity. It is terrorists waging war with individual agents. If we treat this phenomena as if it is crazed individuals alone, and not a larger attempt to attack the nation, we will face another 9/11 and then wonder how it could have happened. Get the military involved; increase the presence of armed sky marshals. And call it "war," not "crime fighting."
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Ten Stupid Things That Keep Churches from Growing.
This article is from a site I've discovered and like a lot--it's called Stuff Christians Like and offers an insightful look at our subculture. When I say "insightful" I sometimes mean "painful," because much that we have developed looks pretty lame when looked at more closely.
Anyway, you can take a look and see what you think. The article is an introduction to a book by church planter Geoff Surratt, and had some good insights that aren't even from the book. And once there, you can scan some of the other articles that are there, too.
Posted using ShareThis
Anyway, you can take a look and see what you think. The article is an introduction to a book by church planter Geoff Surratt, and had some good insights that aren't even from the book. And once there, you can scan some of the other articles that are there, too.
Posted using ShareThis
"Tiger Woods, meet A.C. Green" (from LATimes.com)
I really appreciated this article, by LA Times columnist Chris Erskine, for a number of reasons. First, I was, and am, a Lakers' fan, and remember the "Showtime" years with A.C. Green so clearly. Second, I'm a big A.C. Green fan--his talent was overshadowed by that of his teammates, but he made them better and was really good himself. Finally, he was and continues to be a consistent testimony, to the point that he continues to get a hearing from those who might not be prone to listen to his message from others.
Posted using ShareThis
Posted using ShareThis
Thursday, December 10, 2009
A Brief Review: "Just Courage" Just Misses
I decided to listen to the audiobook of Gary Haugen's Just Courage after hearing his message at The Master's College on a podcast--it was very good. I've followed the work of International Justice Mission, and have read many positive reports on their work. [Full disclosure: I actually met Gary when he was still a student at Harvard--his brother was living with me at the time--but we've had no contact since.]
As I listened, I recognized that Haugen is a good storyteller; his illustrations were engaging and certainly helped make his points. He is a thoughtful Christian who has seen an evil in this world that has become his passion, and he has lived out his concern through directing IJM in its work around the world. His thrust in this book was straightforward--just as the calling of Christians down through the ages has been to act with courage in overcoming the cultural evils of the day (African slavery, poverty, etc.), the call today is to seek justice, and specifically in the freeing of those sold into slavery (most often as laborers in factories or into the sex trade)and protection of the oppressed. This calling requires facing fear and danger, but this is why faith-inspired courage is necessary.
His passion and commitment to his cause his clear, and he believes that it's neglect cannot go on. He acknowledges that not everyone is called to this ministry, but presses a strong case that it must be embraced by all.
I applaud this concern and am thankful for the ministry of IJM. I praise God that our church is actively involved in a similar ministry that rescues and helps those enslaved in sex trafficking. A number of our members have traveled to Thailand to participate firsthand, and we will continue to increase our involvement in fighting this evil and bringing hope with the Gospel. It is the right thing for us to do in the name of Jesus.
That is the point at which the book left me with a question. I didn't hear much about the tie between the activity of setting captives free and an equal concern for seeing them set free from spiritual bondage. It may happen, and IJM may in fact be passionate about this, but it didn't come through clearly as I was listening to the book. There were appeals to the gospels concerning how believers were to live, and appropriate applications of that to seeking justice. But I didn't catch a direct link between seeking justice and freedom for slaves and bringing the gospel to recently freed but spiritually enslaved people. This has been the hallmark of Christian endeavors around the world throughout history. While Christians have often had their failures come back to haunt them, the successes of bringing the gospel and cultural change are most significant.
A related concern was a passage where Haugen argued that some are called to medical mission, some to alleviating poverty, some to evangelism and discipleship, and some to seeking justice (there may have been others in that list, but it was that kind of list, with those kind of elements). What bothered me a bit was the separation of evangelism and discipleship from the other activities. I don't think that evangelism is special activity that servants of Jesus can choose to do in the world, or choose instead to do justice ministry or poverty relief. And the servant of Jesus who chooses the others and leaves evangelism out of the picture because it isn't his calling is not acting faithfully in such a context, either. I'm not referring to preaching services, and there is plenty of need for culturally sensitive witnesses who may "go slow" to gain a hearing. But my resistance goes up when I see a dichotomy created where there should not be one.
Finally, I had the thought as I went through the book that if it were a person with a passion to feed the hungry, or end poverty, or provide medical care to those without, it would sound the same. Change the illustrations slightly and any "cause" could use this script. Again, that is not to say it isn't well written or a good cause; these causes, though, are ancillary to the great cause, however, of bringing God glory by leading the nations to worship Him. We bring good because we also bring the gospel. A story about a reunited family that gives no indication that they have even been exposed to the good news about Jesus doesn't inspire me. I'm guessing that they have been, but it's only a guess at this point.
Just Courage presents the argument for Christians to engage in the fight against the evils sin has brought into our world--in this case the injustices of slavery and oppression. It is a valid argument, but one that would resonate more strongly if it were more clearly anchored in a holistic approach that brings the opportunity for spiritual as well as physical freedom.
As I listened, I recognized that Haugen is a good storyteller; his illustrations were engaging and certainly helped make his points. He is a thoughtful Christian who has seen an evil in this world that has become his passion, and he has lived out his concern through directing IJM in its work around the world. His thrust in this book was straightforward--just as the calling of Christians down through the ages has been to act with courage in overcoming the cultural evils of the day (African slavery, poverty, etc.), the call today is to seek justice, and specifically in the freeing of those sold into slavery (most often as laborers in factories or into the sex trade)and protection of the oppressed. This calling requires facing fear and danger, but this is why faith-inspired courage is necessary.
His passion and commitment to his cause his clear, and he believes that it's neglect cannot go on. He acknowledges that not everyone is called to this ministry, but presses a strong case that it must be embraced by all.
I applaud this concern and am thankful for the ministry of IJM. I praise God that our church is actively involved in a similar ministry that rescues and helps those enslaved in sex trafficking. A number of our members have traveled to Thailand to participate firsthand, and we will continue to increase our involvement in fighting this evil and bringing hope with the Gospel. It is the right thing for us to do in the name of Jesus.
That is the point at which the book left me with a question. I didn't hear much about the tie between the activity of setting captives free and an equal concern for seeing them set free from spiritual bondage. It may happen, and IJM may in fact be passionate about this, but it didn't come through clearly as I was listening to the book. There were appeals to the gospels concerning how believers were to live, and appropriate applications of that to seeking justice. But I didn't catch a direct link between seeking justice and freedom for slaves and bringing the gospel to recently freed but spiritually enslaved people. This has been the hallmark of Christian endeavors around the world throughout history. While Christians have often had their failures come back to haunt them, the successes of bringing the gospel and cultural change are most significant.
A related concern was a passage where Haugen argued that some are called to medical mission, some to alleviating poverty, some to evangelism and discipleship, and some to seeking justice (there may have been others in that list, but it was that kind of list, with those kind of elements). What bothered me a bit was the separation of evangelism and discipleship from the other activities. I don't think that evangelism is special activity that servants of Jesus can choose to do in the world, or choose instead to do justice ministry or poverty relief. And the servant of Jesus who chooses the others and leaves evangelism out of the picture because it isn't his calling is not acting faithfully in such a context, either. I'm not referring to preaching services, and there is plenty of need for culturally sensitive witnesses who may "go slow" to gain a hearing. But my resistance goes up when I see a dichotomy created where there should not be one.
Finally, I had the thought as I went through the book that if it were a person with a passion to feed the hungry, or end poverty, or provide medical care to those without, it would sound the same. Change the illustrations slightly and any "cause" could use this script. Again, that is not to say it isn't well written or a good cause; these causes, though, are ancillary to the great cause, however, of bringing God glory by leading the nations to worship Him. We bring good because we also bring the gospel. A story about a reunited family that gives no indication that they have even been exposed to the good news about Jesus doesn't inspire me. I'm guessing that they have been, but it's only a guess at this point.
Just Courage presents the argument for Christians to engage in the fight against the evils sin has brought into our world--in this case the injustices of slavery and oppression. It is a valid argument, but one that would resonate more strongly if it were more clearly anchored in a holistic approach that brings the opportunity for spiritual as well as physical freedom.
Friday, December 04, 2009
Reflections on Facing Life-Altering Surgery
Matt Chandler, pastor of The Village in Highland Village, TX, is in surgery right now to remove a mass from his brain's right frontal lobe. The mass was discovered when Matt collapsed and was taken to the hospital on Thanksgiving.
I have a great appreciation for Matt's ministry--not just to the masses like me through his preaching and podcasts, but because he is my brother's family's pastor. My appreciation continues as I read his blog from this morning, "My Heart is full…I am Thankful" on the church's website. Read it and be encouraged. Then pray for Matt, his family, his church, and his ministry.
Posted using ShareThis
I have a great appreciation for Matt's ministry--not just to the masses like me through his preaching and podcasts, but because he is my brother's family's pastor. My appreciation continues as I read his blog from this morning, "My Heart is full…I am Thankful" on the church's website. Read it and be encouraged. Then pray for Matt, his family, his church, and his ministry.
Posted using ShareThis
Wednesday, December 02, 2009
Tiger's Transgressions
We've been inundated with the fast developing story of Tiger Woods' car accident and the follow up revelations of accusations that have, apparently, been substantiated concerning his unfaithfulness to his wife and family.
In a statement today, Tiger expressed sorrow over his "transgressions"--not a word you hear in popular culture. He says he has discussed them with his family, and that he hopes to do better in the future. He doesn't actually say what the transgressions are, and continues to assert his right to have a measure of privacy, even as someone who has earned his living as a very public figure.
I don't like the way he has been treated--especially that the National Enquirer and US Weekly have been leading the charge in printing accusations of immorality. I'm torn between two competing thoughts: the idea that those who use celebrity to enrich themselves must be ready to have the spotlight also reveal what is embarrassing, and the thought that I want his family to survive and the best place for healing for this family is outside the spotlight. The question of the the people's "right to know" is not easy to resolve.
What intrigues me is the word Tiger chose to describe what he did--transgression. It is more than a mistake. It is more than an error in judgment. It is violation of a moral law; one of the synonyms for "sin." And while I don't know if Tiger has any faith to speak of, I pray that he would not lose this sense of sin, of conviction, of failure--not just getting caught, but doing wrong. And I pray that such a sense will be the first step in his discovery of God's solution to both the guilt he feels and the evil he has done to himself and others--the mercy and grace and forgiveness to be found only in Jesus Christ.
In a statement today, Tiger expressed sorrow over his "transgressions"--not a word you hear in popular culture. He says he has discussed them with his family, and that he hopes to do better in the future. He doesn't actually say what the transgressions are, and continues to assert his right to have a measure of privacy, even as someone who has earned his living as a very public figure.
I don't like the way he has been treated--especially that the National Enquirer and US Weekly have been leading the charge in printing accusations of immorality. I'm torn between two competing thoughts: the idea that those who use celebrity to enrich themselves must be ready to have the spotlight also reveal what is embarrassing, and the thought that I want his family to survive and the best place for healing for this family is outside the spotlight. The question of the the people's "right to know" is not easy to resolve.
What intrigues me is the word Tiger chose to describe what he did--transgression. It is more than a mistake. It is more than an error in judgment. It is violation of a moral law; one of the synonyms for "sin." And while I don't know if Tiger has any faith to speak of, I pray that he would not lose this sense of sin, of conviction, of failure--not just getting caught, but doing wrong. And I pray that such a sense will be the first step in his discovery of God's solution to both the guilt he feels and the evil he has done to himself and others--the mercy and grace and forgiveness to be found only in Jesus Christ.
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
A Not-so-normal Dinner Conversation on Contextualization in Mission
Recently we had dinner at our home with long-term workers in a limited access country of central Asia. As we talked about the ministry in their setting, the conversation turned to the growing emphasis on "contextualization" in missions--the belief that success in penetrating Muslim and other strongly resistant cultures with the Gospel will involve allowing the creation of culturally appropriate forms of faith. Hence, "Jesus followers" may choose to create "Jesus mosques" in Islamic settings, choose to pray 5 times a day toward Jerusalem, choose not to call themselves "Christian," and in all other ways adhere as closely to the outward practices of Islam (this is a VERY abbreviated description of what is a complex approach).
While I have always felt that the church will look different in many ways in different cultures, I have been more uncomfortable with a contextualization that opts not only to be an "insider movement," but to be something other than a manifestation of the church that is linked to historic Christianity.
The husband/dinner guest became very animated in discussing this. He argued that in the areas of his world where the gospel is spreading most rapidly, there is not only an identifiable church in distinction to the majority culture, but the church is ready and willing to suffer for its open identity with and loyalty to Jesus. He says that the lack of an identifiable, visible church throughout his host nation's history has been a detriment to gospel witness, and that a heavily contextualized approach would continue that deficit.
Over two millennia, reception of the gospel and the establishment of the church has brought drastic change to cultures wherever it has gone. Western culture itself went from tribal violence to something very different. Look, for example, at the impact of the gospel on the Vikings: they gave up their violent ways and became a farming people. Yes, some elements have remained and been "redeemed," but core practices of other religions have not found a welcome in church life generally among evangelicals, and we have rightly labeled past Roman Catholic attempts to do so among tribal groups as "syncretistic."
Any thoughts?
While I have always felt that the church will look different in many ways in different cultures, I have been more uncomfortable with a contextualization that opts not only to be an "insider movement," but to be something other than a manifestation of the church that is linked to historic Christianity.
The husband/dinner guest became very animated in discussing this. He argued that in the areas of his world where the gospel is spreading most rapidly, there is not only an identifiable church in distinction to the majority culture, but the church is ready and willing to suffer for its open identity with and loyalty to Jesus. He says that the lack of an identifiable, visible church throughout his host nation's history has been a detriment to gospel witness, and that a heavily contextualized approach would continue that deficit.
Over two millennia, reception of the gospel and the establishment of the church has brought drastic change to cultures wherever it has gone. Western culture itself went from tribal violence to something very different. Look, for example, at the impact of the gospel on the Vikings: they gave up their violent ways and became a farming people. Yes, some elements have remained and been "redeemed," but core practices of other religions have not found a welcome in church life generally among evangelicals, and we have rightly labeled past Roman Catholic attempts to do so among tribal groups as "syncretistic."
Any thoughts?
Review of Donald Miller's "A Million Miles in a Thousand Years"
I read and reviewed Donald Miller's latest book. You can find the review on my other blog--follow this link.
Monday, November 23, 2009
The Ultimate New Christian Fiction Best-Seller
Tim Challies, a well respected Christian blogger, came up with what was the funniest idea and the best laugh I had last week: I share it with you here:
The Ultimate Christian Novel
Posted using ShareThis
The Ultimate Christian Novel
Posted using ShareThis
The Manhattan Declaration: A Must Read for Concerned Christians
The Manhattan Declaration, released last Friday, is a major statement of concern on three issues that unite professing Christians across a wide spectrum. That spectrum is made obvious when you see the signatories include Dr. Albert Mohler of Southern Seminary, James Dobson of Focus on the Family, and Ron Sider of Evangelicals for Social Actions, as well as Roman Catholic and Eastern Othodox representatives.
The three issues of concern are the sanctity of human life, the institution of traditional marriage, and the preservation of religious liberty--including the right to follow one's convictions on moral matters in spite of societal pressures against those convictions.
I would encourage you to read the statement, and I commend those who have drafted it and made it public.
You can follow this link to read the statement and see the original signatories.
Posted using ShareThis
The three issues of concern are the sanctity of human life, the institution of traditional marriage, and the preservation of religious liberty--including the right to follow one's convictions on moral matters in spite of societal pressures against those convictions.
I would encourage you to read the statement, and I commend those who have drafted it and made it public.
You can follow this link to read the statement and see the original signatories.
Posted using ShareThis
Monday, November 16, 2009
George Whitefield Comments on Jonathan Edwards’ Family Life (Lex Loizides' Blog)
Found this great article on the homelife of Jonathan Edwards, America's greatest preacher/theologian, observed by George Whitefield, the great preacher of the First Great Awakening. Good reading, and the blog looks good, too.
Posted using ShareThis
Posted using ShareThis
Saturday, October 31, 2009
A Strange Way to Return After an Absence
OK, I've been out of the country for a few weeks, as my Twitter feed has indicated, and been up to my eyeballs (as a dear mentor used to always say) in other stuff, so blogging has been a rare feat here. But I came across this survey, had a good laugh, and thought I'd share it with you on this Reformation Day!
You’re St. Melito of Sardis You have a great love of history and liturgy. You’re attached to the traditions of the ancients, yet you recognize that the old world — great as it was — is passing away. You are loyal to the customs of your family, though you do not hesitate to call family members to account for their sins. Find out which Church Father you are at The Way of the Fathers! |
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Ed Stetzer on Missional Churches' Lack of Missions Passion
Ed Stetzer is an incredibly valuable resource to the Church today. His passions for helping revitalize churches and for global missions make much that he writes essential reading. So when I saw his article entitled, Five Reasons Missional Churches Don't Do Global Missions-- and How to Fix It, I had to read it.
You see, I want us to be missional in focus--realizing that every aspect of our lives is to be purposefully engaged for God's glory and gospel penetration of the culture around us. I also want us to see global missions as the task before us as a church. Using both terms--missional and missions--is not always fashionable, but I believe both are important. This article was a great read, and I commend it to anyone who wants a quick introduction to the problem that has plagued many who emphasize missional church life--the loss of zeal for reaching the peoples of the world.
Posted using ShareThis
You see, I want us to be missional in focus--realizing that every aspect of our lives is to be purposefully engaged for God's glory and gospel penetration of the culture around us. I also want us to see global missions as the task before us as a church. Using both terms--missional and missions--is not always fashionable, but I believe both are important. This article was a great read, and I commend it to anyone who wants a quick introduction to the problem that has plagued many who emphasize missional church life--the loss of zeal for reaching the peoples of the world.
Posted using ShareThis
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Rob Bell's redefinition of ‘evangelical.' What do you think?
Rob Bell's interview with the Boston Globe during his current speaking tour (it is short; read it here) is rather disturbing, not just in what it includes, but what it leaves out. In the interview, he expressly repudiates efforts to convert others and only embraces the term "evangelical" if it involves environmental issues and poverty; Jesus and the gospel are not mentioned.
We often find evangelicals not caring enough about the pain and injustice in this world, but the solution is not to ignore the coming of the new heavens and earth, the judgment to be faced before then, the necessity of the coming of Jesus to change things, and the clear warning of the Bible that not everyone will enter that blessed state. Perhaps there is much more that Bell said that was not recorded, but this interview as presented is very disturbing. I hope Rob will issue a clarification and expansion.
Oh, and by the way, I came up the same way he did, but it didn't feel nearly as bad as he seems to feel about it. Perhaps my calling really is more akin to performance art than preaching, but I'm not convinced yet (read the article to see what I'm referring to).
I want to believe that Bell is being outrageous for effect, but I can't tell if he is, or if it is something more.
Posted using ShareThis
We often find evangelicals not caring enough about the pain and injustice in this world, but the solution is not to ignore the coming of the new heavens and earth, the judgment to be faced before then, the necessity of the coming of Jesus to change things, and the clear warning of the Bible that not everyone will enter that blessed state. Perhaps there is much more that Bell said that was not recorded, but this interview as presented is very disturbing. I hope Rob will issue a clarification and expansion.
Oh, and by the way, I came up the same way he did, but it didn't feel nearly as bad as he seems to feel about it. Perhaps my calling really is more akin to performance art than preaching, but I'm not convinced yet (read the article to see what I'm referring to).
I want to believe that Bell is being outrageous for effect, but I can't tell if he is, or if it is something more.
Posted using ShareThis
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Ignatius the Ultimate Youth Pastor
This has been around for a while, but it is both funny and a bit too realistic, unfortunately.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Amazing Video--Did You Know 4.0
This is pretty thought-provoking stuff! (ht Jeff Mooney @ www.socaltheologica.com )
Saturday, September 05, 2009
Thought Provoking Article on American Health Care
David Goldhill's How American Health Care Killed My Father in The Atlantic magazine is an article that highlights some of the reasons we are having a health care debate.
Posted using ShareThis
Posted using ShareThis
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Publishers Announce End of TNIV; overhaul of NIV
Christianity Today's Liveblog site has an article entitled, Correcting the 'Mistakes' of TNIV, Translators Will Overhaul NIV.
This is a major development that indicates the widespread dissatisfaction with the TNIV as a replacement for the NIV. Much of that dissatisfaction comes from significant stylistic changes, the most notable being "gender inclusive" language in many places (though never in reference to God). This change caused many conservative evangelicals to move away from the NIV, and may account for at least some of the popularity of the more recent ESV.
Posted using ShareThis
This is a major development that indicates the widespread dissatisfaction with the TNIV as a replacement for the NIV. Much of that dissatisfaction comes from significant stylistic changes, the most notable being "gender inclusive" language in many places (though never in reference to God). This change caused many conservative evangelicals to move away from the NIV, and may account for at least some of the popularity of the more recent ESV.
Posted using ShareThis
Monday, August 31, 2009
A good dramatized bio of C.S. Lewis
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Edward Kennedy: Heb. 9:27
Born into a family long on ambition and supplied with the money and power to fulfill it, Edward Kennedy might have been just another rich socialite had not his oldest brother died as a pilot in World War 2. Joseph Kennedy's untimely death meant the plans of his own father, Joseph, Sr., to make him the first Irish Catholic President had to be transferred to his second son, John. And when Senator John Kennedy became President Kennedy, and his younger brother Bobby became Attorney General, there was the matter of an open Senate seat in Massachusetts. Enter Edward "Ted" Kennedy, barely old enough to hold the office, as a candidate in the 1962 special election to fill the seat. Thus began a long, illustrious, and checkered political career that only ended in death. He was the second longest currently serving Senator, but his own actions ultimately kept him from the prize he had hoped to claim--the Presidency.
As a politician, he had few equals, acquiring power over time that made him a formidable enemy as well as a desirable ally. He led the campaign that stopped the nomination of Robert Bork to the U.S. Supreme Court and forever changed the confirmation process--many say for the worse. His 1964 immigration bill changed the way in which people were admitted to the U.S. It opened the door to a flood of people from poorer lands who prior to this did not qualify for entry, something that was both eminently compassionate and enormously aided his own political party. He moved his party ever leftward, arguing for federal power to be increased in education, economics, and most obviously, health care.
His personal problems never stayed personal, but he often managed to escape their normal consequences. The infamous drowning death of Mary Jo Kopechne, a young worker for his late brother Bobby's presidential campaign, stands as the prime example. He had taken her from a party after drinking heavily, drove off the road and into the water, left her to die, and went home, not calling the police until later the next day. That would have sent most offenders to jail. Instead, he was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor and continue as a senator and later as a candidate for President. Many believe that he lost the nomination to President Carter not because of his previous bad behavior, but because he ran such a poor campaign--making the most memorable of his speeches only after he had lost the contest at the Convention in 1980.
He experienced the tremendous pain of the violent death of three brothers, the failure of his first marriage, and various tragedies involving his children, nieces, and nephews. He became the father figure for the children of his slain brothers.
He was a very effective politician--of that there is no doubt. Many speaking from personal acquaintance are writing about his personal kindnesses, his friendliness, his love for his wife, and other good qualities.
But I cannot help but be sobered by the fact that he has now entered eternity, and all the power and political acumen means nothing. He will give account to the Lord for his deeds--and what will matter most is not whether he won a political battle, but whether his name is in the Lamb's book of life.
Cal Thomas, a strong evangelical newspaper columnist, befriended Sen. Kennedy a number of years ago. I am sure that he has shared the Gospel with him--in fact, I seem to recall reading something about that, but cannot be certain. Many say "rest in peace," but that is hard for me, for such peace is only found by those whose faith rests in Jesus alone. We know such faith is a gift, and Sen. Kennedy may have availed himself of the free offer of the gospel. We do not know. We have little to go by here.
Great men in this world still leave it, and must be ready for the next, as must we all.
As a politician, he had few equals, acquiring power over time that made him a formidable enemy as well as a desirable ally. He led the campaign that stopped the nomination of Robert Bork to the U.S. Supreme Court and forever changed the confirmation process--many say for the worse. His 1964 immigration bill changed the way in which people were admitted to the U.S. It opened the door to a flood of people from poorer lands who prior to this did not qualify for entry, something that was both eminently compassionate and enormously aided his own political party. He moved his party ever leftward, arguing for federal power to be increased in education, economics, and most obviously, health care.
His personal problems never stayed personal, but he often managed to escape their normal consequences. The infamous drowning death of Mary Jo Kopechne, a young worker for his late brother Bobby's presidential campaign, stands as the prime example. He had taken her from a party after drinking heavily, drove off the road and into the water, left her to die, and went home, not calling the police until later the next day. That would have sent most offenders to jail. Instead, he was allowed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor and continue as a senator and later as a candidate for President. Many believe that he lost the nomination to President Carter not because of his previous bad behavior, but because he ran such a poor campaign--making the most memorable of his speeches only after he had lost the contest at the Convention in 1980.
He experienced the tremendous pain of the violent death of three brothers, the failure of his first marriage, and various tragedies involving his children, nieces, and nephews. He became the father figure for the children of his slain brothers.
He was a very effective politician--of that there is no doubt. Many speaking from personal acquaintance are writing about his personal kindnesses, his friendliness, his love for his wife, and other good qualities.
But I cannot help but be sobered by the fact that he has now entered eternity, and all the power and political acumen means nothing. He will give account to the Lord for his deeds--and what will matter most is not whether he won a political battle, but whether his name is in the Lamb's book of life.
Cal Thomas, a strong evangelical newspaper columnist, befriended Sen. Kennedy a number of years ago. I am sure that he has shared the Gospel with him--in fact, I seem to recall reading something about that, but cannot be certain. Many say "rest in peace," but that is hard for me, for such peace is only found by those whose faith rests in Jesus alone. We know such faith is a gift, and Sen. Kennedy may have availed himself of the free offer of the gospel. We do not know. We have little to go by here.
Great men in this world still leave it, and must be ready for the next, as must we all.
Monday, August 24, 2009
A very significant essay on current political discontent
Just read: Fouad Ajami: Obama’s Summer of Discontent - WSJ.com
I tend to agree with Mr. Ajami's analysis, even though I would say that Republican opposition to the President has in many instances misread public concerns related to health care in America. And Republicans were responsible, through President Bush, for the biggest step toward national health care since Medicare/Medicaid with the Prescription Drug Benefit program, so as a party they lack credibility when now saying the government needs to stay out of health care.
The bigger issues that Mr. Ajami raises, though, are telling, and worth considering.
Posted using ShareThis
I tend to agree with Mr. Ajami's analysis, even though I would say that Republican opposition to the President has in many instances misread public concerns related to health care in America. And Republicans were responsible, through President Bush, for the biggest step toward national health care since Medicare/Medicaid with the Prescription Drug Benefit program, so as a party they lack credibility when now saying the government needs to stay out of health care.
The bigger issues that Mr. Ajami raises, though, are telling, and worth considering.
Posted using ShareThis
Another small encouragement for those who believe we are created, not evolved...
Read The Appendix: Useful and in Fact Promising - Yahoo! News.
Just because it's taken us thousands of years to figure out what the appendix may be good for doesn't mean we can't rely on human intellect and supposition to base our views on how we came into being, does it?
Posted using ShareThis
Just because it's taken us thousands of years to figure out what the appendix may be good for doesn't mean we can't rely on human intellect and supposition to base our views on how we came into being, does it?
Posted using ShareThis
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Honest Bible Reading
Why is it that when I read many of the great stories of the Bible, I identify with the "hero?" The stories of Jacob's 12 sons leave me thinking about myself in Joseph's sandals, even though I'm a firstborn with only one brother and one sister. David fighting Goliath? Yes, that's me winning battles for my Lord!But this morning, as I was reading the story of Abram and Lot in Genesis 13, I became very uncomfortable as I slowed down and thought about the story. Abram doesn't want friction between himself and his nephew. He suggests that they separate, and even though he is older and entitled to a first decision, he offers Lot the choice of any direction he wants to go. Lot spies the fertile Jordan valley and especially its southern grasslands extending southward toward (and apparently beyond) what is now the Dead Sea. The other direction is mountains and hills prone to long dry spells (they had just gotten back from Egypt due to famine, which may have been a result of drought). For Lot, this is a "no-brainer," maybe even a "God provided" moment where he is given the chance to have what he believes he needs and certainly wants. So, he takes the choice and takes the fertile pastures of the valley.
What would I have done?
I'm afraid I know. I don't like hard things, and it is very easy to see an easy way ahead open up and believe that "God is in this." In the moment, I could easily have said, "Well, if you really don't care, I'll take the valley, Uncle. Thanks so much for your graciousness!"
Of course, life in the valley meant life around the cities of the valley, including Sodom. Lot gravitated the direction everybody else did, and soon found himself pitching his tent there. If you haven't read the rest of his story--it ends badly, with the only good news coming in 2 Peter 2. There we are told that as bad as things got, his heart was constantly bothered by the sin around him, because deep down he was a righteous man. Just not a very good nephew. Or family man. Or example. Or...
Abram was told by God not to fear that he had lost the best land, and that everything he saw--north, south, east, west--would belong to his descendants. He trusted, even though he didn't see it happen in his lifetime. There was something of greater value to him than immediate gratification, or easy and quick solutions, or guaranteed wealth protection. It was to hear and respond to God's voice. He wasn't perfect, either, but where Lot's slide into ignominy began with an easy choice, Abram's faithfulness was confirmed by his confidence in God's promises.
I pray that I'll keep reading honestly, letting the Word reveal my sins, not just inspire my fantasies.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Funny Clip from "Auto-Tune the News"
WARNING: John Boehner, on the House floor does say "Hell" in a non-theological context, in this clip.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Crazy Deacon Bob's Christian Discount Emporium
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Why Inerrancy Matters
A few years ago, I served on my denomination’s local ordination council, and was part of a particularly painful meeting. It was painful because I helped make a judgment that ended a person’s then-current career in ministry. He had what appeared to be a good track record in a ministry and was undergoing our theological examination to determine whether or not we would recommend he receive a ministry credential (in the EFCA, ordination and licensing are acknowledged by the giving of a credential for ministry from the denomination). After three hours of questioning, the council unanimously, but with great regret, had to conclude that we could not recommend the candidate.
What led to this unhappy (and thankfully, rare) conclusion? While the candidate clearly was willing to place himself under the authority of the denomination, he could not personally and without reservation affirm a number of points in our doctrinal statement. The most problematic, it seemed, was the first point: “We believe the Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments, to be the inspired Word of God, without error in the original writings, the complete revelation of His will for the salvation of men and the Divine and final authority for Christian faith and life.”
Now, you might wonder where the disagreement might come. There were more than one, but the main one had to do with the phrase, “without error in the original writings.” This means that when the human authors wrote the various books of the Bible, the Holy Spirit was superintending and directing the process to the extent that what was written was a perfect record of what God wanted to communicate. The objections that were raised were,
1) We can’t define “error” easily, since in the Bible there are references to things that are not exactly correct. For example, when the Bible uses measures of approximation or figures of speech, those expressions are not technically correct. So, are those errors?
2) We don’t have the original manuscripts, so how can we affirm that they were inerrant, or even be sure of what they say?
3) The need for an inerrant scripture assumes that truth is propositional and objective (that means factual statements and existing independently of other factors). Jesus said “…I am the truth,” so truth is a person, not a proposition. The written word becomes the truth as it is indwelt by the Living Word (what this means is the Bible in a sense only comes alive when the presence of Jesus is powerfully present in it, and that presence is realized by the reader).
Before I go on, let me briefly answer these three objections.
1) This shows a faulty understanding of the use of language and of proper biblical interpretation. We interpret the Bible in light of the style and usage of the writer. If approximations and figures of speech are a part of normal, meaningful conversation, their presence in the Scriptures do not constitute error. Further, while some point to existing errors in our available manuscripts, this does not mean the error was present in the original. Wrestling with issues of the text or uncertainty of meanings doesn’t undermine inerrancy; it only shows our imperfect grasp of history and language.
2) To borrow an illustration from Dr. Roger Nicole: if there was a fire at the National Bureau of Standards in Washington, D.C., and the standard yard stick from which all yard sticks were measured were destroyed, would we have to say we have no idea how long a yard is? Of course not. We could take the millions of copies that exist and recreate with great accuracy the original. That is the same thing that goes on with Biblical textual criticism. We may not have the original texts, but we do have the evidence to tell us what they said with an accuracy that allows us to have full confidence in the Scriptures.
3) If truth is not “propositional” and “objective,” then the objection raised against the concept would have no meaning, for you must have propositions to make statements! We would confess that the Holy Spirit must open the eyes of men and women so that they will believe and understand the truth of Scripture, but that is a work within the person, not within the written Word. The Bible is true whether or not it is believed or received as true in a “powerful” way.
Does all of this really matter? Well, if you are asking if a person who does not believe what I have said above can be a Christian, the answer is “yes, he can,” just as many true believers can have faulty theology on any number of issues. The problem comes when we start talking about the authority of the Word of God and the character of the God who has revealed Himself.
The authority problem comes if the Scriptures contain error. Some try to admit error, but limit its scope. They will affirm “The Scriptures are without error in all matters of faith and practice.” This means that “spiritual truth” is without error, but history and science (most notably the creation account), and issues where culture has changed (roles of men and women, family relationships, governmental authority, and other areas) can be mistaken. If, as is maintained by many, Genesis 1-11 is simply the best “creation myth” among many creation myths out there, its authority when it comes to the sanctity of life (“the image of God”), the fall of all mankind into sin, capital punishment for murder, etc., is significantly diminished. If Paul was simply wrong in saying that women should not teach or exercise authority over men (I Timothy 2: 14) due to a cultural bias he possessed, then what else was he wrong about? Should elders not need to meet the qualifications of I Timothy 3 and Titus 1 because those were culturally derived? Should church discipline be set aside as too much of a carry over from Paul’s pharasaical judgmentalism? Once the horse is out of the barn, where can you draw a firm line and say, “there can be no errors past this point?”
The character of God issue has to do with the objections that come when it is argued that fallen man could not produce a perfect revelation. That is agreed by everyone. The real question is, can a perfect God who is omnipotent give a perfect revelation in such a way that imperfect tools (in this case, men), could not mar its original perfection? If He can, then the question is simply, do you believe He could do it but chose to include error? This would make God the author of error, which would violate His character. If He cannot provide a perfect revelation, then He is not truly omnipotent, and cannot overcome our weakness and imperfection. That is extremely bad news.
Thus the question of inerrancy is not ultimately only a question about the reliability of Scripture, but a question about the nature and character of God. That makes it crucial to our faith, and worth taking a stand. It may lead to unpleasant circumstances, but the alternative would be immeasurably worse.
What led to this unhappy (and thankfully, rare) conclusion? While the candidate clearly was willing to place himself under the authority of the denomination, he could not personally and without reservation affirm a number of points in our doctrinal statement. The most problematic, it seemed, was the first point: “We believe the Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments, to be the inspired Word of God, without error in the original writings, the complete revelation of His will for the salvation of men and the Divine and final authority for Christian faith and life.”
Now, you might wonder where the disagreement might come. There were more than one, but the main one had to do with the phrase, “without error in the original writings.” This means that when the human authors wrote the various books of the Bible, the Holy Spirit was superintending and directing the process to the extent that what was written was a perfect record of what God wanted to communicate. The objections that were raised were,
1) We can’t define “error” easily, since in the Bible there are references to things that are not exactly correct. For example, when the Bible uses measures of approximation or figures of speech, those expressions are not technically correct. So, are those errors?
2) We don’t have the original manuscripts, so how can we affirm that they were inerrant, or even be sure of what they say?
3) The need for an inerrant scripture assumes that truth is propositional and objective (that means factual statements and existing independently of other factors). Jesus said “…I am the truth,” so truth is a person, not a proposition. The written word becomes the truth as it is indwelt by the Living Word (what this means is the Bible in a sense only comes alive when the presence of Jesus is powerfully present in it, and that presence is realized by the reader).
Before I go on, let me briefly answer these three objections.
1) This shows a faulty understanding of the use of language and of proper biblical interpretation. We interpret the Bible in light of the style and usage of the writer. If approximations and figures of speech are a part of normal, meaningful conversation, their presence in the Scriptures do not constitute error. Further, while some point to existing errors in our available manuscripts, this does not mean the error was present in the original. Wrestling with issues of the text or uncertainty of meanings doesn’t undermine inerrancy; it only shows our imperfect grasp of history and language.
2) To borrow an illustration from Dr. Roger Nicole: if there was a fire at the National Bureau of Standards in Washington, D.C., and the standard yard stick from which all yard sticks were measured were destroyed, would we have to say we have no idea how long a yard is? Of course not. We could take the millions of copies that exist and recreate with great accuracy the original. That is the same thing that goes on with Biblical textual criticism. We may not have the original texts, but we do have the evidence to tell us what they said with an accuracy that allows us to have full confidence in the Scriptures.
3) If truth is not “propositional” and “objective,” then the objection raised against the concept would have no meaning, for you must have propositions to make statements! We would confess that the Holy Spirit must open the eyes of men and women so that they will believe and understand the truth of Scripture, but that is a work within the person, not within the written Word. The Bible is true whether or not it is believed or received as true in a “powerful” way.
Does all of this really matter? Well, if you are asking if a person who does not believe what I have said above can be a Christian, the answer is “yes, he can,” just as many true believers can have faulty theology on any number of issues. The problem comes when we start talking about the authority of the Word of God and the character of the God who has revealed Himself.
The authority problem comes if the Scriptures contain error. Some try to admit error, but limit its scope. They will affirm “The Scriptures are without error in all matters of faith and practice.” This means that “spiritual truth” is without error, but history and science (most notably the creation account), and issues where culture has changed (roles of men and women, family relationships, governmental authority, and other areas) can be mistaken. If, as is maintained by many, Genesis 1-11 is simply the best “creation myth” among many creation myths out there, its authority when it comes to the sanctity of life (“the image of God”), the fall of all mankind into sin, capital punishment for murder, etc., is significantly diminished. If Paul was simply wrong in saying that women should not teach or exercise authority over men (I Timothy 2: 14) due to a cultural bias he possessed, then what else was he wrong about? Should elders not need to meet the qualifications of I Timothy 3 and Titus 1 because those were culturally derived? Should church discipline be set aside as too much of a carry over from Paul’s pharasaical judgmentalism? Once the horse is out of the barn, where can you draw a firm line and say, “there can be no errors past this point?”
The character of God issue has to do with the objections that come when it is argued that fallen man could not produce a perfect revelation. That is agreed by everyone. The real question is, can a perfect God who is omnipotent give a perfect revelation in such a way that imperfect tools (in this case, men), could not mar its original perfection? If He can, then the question is simply, do you believe He could do it but chose to include error? This would make God the author of error, which would violate His character. If He cannot provide a perfect revelation, then He is not truly omnipotent, and cannot overcome our weakness and imperfection. That is extremely bad news.
Thus the question of inerrancy is not ultimately only a question about the reliability of Scripture, but a question about the nature and character of God. That makes it crucial to our faith, and worth taking a stand. It may lead to unpleasant circumstances, but the alternative would be immeasurably worse.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The Sorrows of Fathers and Sons :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library
This article by John Piper was so powerful, especially for dads, that I've posted the link everywhere I comment.
The Sorrows of Fathers and Sons :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library
Posted using ShareThis
The Sorrows of Fathers and Sons :: Desiring God Christian Resource Library
Posted using ShareThis
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
Coming Back to "Reality"
I just returned yesterday from leading a group tour to Israel. It was an amazing experience, and even though this was my seventh time, I never cease to learn and to experience wonder while there. One thing we all commented on was the chance to take it in, to study our Bibles along the way, and to talk about so much without the intrusions of pop culture or the news.
Then we flew home.
On our flight, we had our choice of a few hundred movies, TV shows, video games, or a moving map of our plane's route on our personal screens.
At the Atlanta airport, we watched a tearful governor confess that he may have run on family values, but he didn't live them. Surprise--a national profile, plus stupid (not to mention immoral) behavior, will indeed destroy your career aspirations, at least if you are trying to appeal to those who believe in morality. If not, don't worry (think Bill Clinton)unless you break the law (think Eliot Spitzer).
Getting home, I checked my email and my home page news was in mourning over the death of Farrah Fawcett. Her ubiquitous poster and once universal hairstyle notwithstanding, she was not one of our great actresses, she was a celebrity.
Then last night, Michael Jackson's death shocked us all--especially those who, like me, remember his trifecta of hits that dominated pop music--Billie Jean, Thriller, and Beat It, all from the Thriller album of 1982. They were the soundtrack of the early 80s, and that doesn't seem so long ago to me. The media is going into the same hagiographic mode it did when another musical king, Elvis Presley, died (I remember that, too). Both were stars whose time had passed and were trying to recapture their lost glory. In death, Presley became bigger than he was when he died. Jackson will probably do the same.
But as I think about this today, I wonder if life was better during those days when we were in Israel thinking about the flow of God's plan through history, instead of being inundated with commentary about people and events at a level that far exceed their importance. I don't want to get caught up in all the "drama" people seem intent on creating about these things, or acting as if I am overly connected to them (look at all the Twitter and Facebook postings of people who never saw "Charlie's Angels" about Farrah, or those who go on and on about Michael Jackson but never paid much attention to his music, only his rather strange and malleable public persona over the years).
Politicians' failures should be a reminder (and an encouragement) that our trust is not in people, but in God who rules the affairs (no pun intended) of men. The death of celebrities reminds us that the applause of people does not make anyone immortal, and whatever is achieved in this life will be measured by an eternal standard. And when someone whose life has been so much larger than life passes away, we should remember that he, she, and all of us will stand before the righteous judge, and either be vindicated by the righteousness of Jesus Christ, or condemned by our own unrighteousness.
Let current events be reminders, or signposts, pointing us to the paths of biblical truth.
"Finally brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things (Phil. 4:8)."
Then we flew home.
On our flight, we had our choice of a few hundred movies, TV shows, video games, or a moving map of our plane's route on our personal screens.
At the Atlanta airport, we watched a tearful governor confess that he may have run on family values, but he didn't live them. Surprise--a national profile, plus stupid (not to mention immoral) behavior, will indeed destroy your career aspirations, at least if you are trying to appeal to those who believe in morality. If not, don't worry (think Bill Clinton)unless you break the law (think Eliot Spitzer).
Getting home, I checked my email and my home page news was in mourning over the death of Farrah Fawcett. Her ubiquitous poster and once universal hairstyle notwithstanding, she was not one of our great actresses, she was a celebrity.
Then last night, Michael Jackson's death shocked us all--especially those who, like me, remember his trifecta of hits that dominated pop music--Billie Jean, Thriller, and Beat It, all from the Thriller album of 1982. They were the soundtrack of the early 80s, and that doesn't seem so long ago to me. The media is going into the same hagiographic mode it did when another musical king, Elvis Presley, died (I remember that, too). Both were stars whose time had passed and were trying to recapture their lost glory. In death, Presley became bigger than he was when he died. Jackson will probably do the same.
But as I think about this today, I wonder if life was better during those days when we were in Israel thinking about the flow of God's plan through history, instead of being inundated with commentary about people and events at a level that far exceed their importance. I don't want to get caught up in all the "drama" people seem intent on creating about these things, or acting as if I am overly connected to them (look at all the Twitter and Facebook postings of people who never saw "Charlie's Angels" about Farrah, or those who go on and on about Michael Jackson but never paid much attention to his music, only his rather strange and malleable public persona over the years).
Politicians' failures should be a reminder (and an encouragement) that our trust is not in people, but in God who rules the affairs (no pun intended) of men. The death of celebrities reminds us that the applause of people does not make anyone immortal, and whatever is achieved in this life will be measured by an eternal standard. And when someone whose life has been so much larger than life passes away, we should remember that he, she, and all of us will stand before the righteous judge, and either be vindicated by the righteousness of Jesus Christ, or condemned by our own unrighteousness.
Let current events be reminders, or signposts, pointing us to the paths of biblical truth.
"Finally brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things (Phil. 4:8)."
Article on "The Science of Sex"
A good brother forwarded this article to me about new research on the physiological impact of sexual activity on the brain, and how that impact, when added into the lives of teens and others engaging in "casual sex," will have devastating emotional and physical consequences. It is very thought-provoking.
While our God's commands are enough to let us know his will, once again we see that what he commands is always for our good, as well as for his glory.
Posted using ShareThis
While our God's commands are enough to let us know his will, once again we see that what he commands is always for our good, as well as for his glory.
Posted using ShareThis
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Piper, Wright, and Justification
The HUGE debate among evangelicals over justification continues. N.T. Wright, a British Anglican bishop and evangelical scholar, is the leading popular proponent of what has been called the "New Perspective" on Paul. Among other points, this view redefines justification as the ground whereby we claim our place among God's people. Present justification is by faith in Jesus and in the Holy Spirit's power to transform us and produce a life of good works. Future justification before God at the end of the age is based on our good works, not on faith alone. Wright uses Romans 2 to establish this--instead of being an argument against works righteousness, Wright says "the doers of the law will be justified" is a true statement of what will happen in the end.
John Piper has been the most popular (and gracious) opponent of this view, arguing for the historic Reformational idea that justification was, is, and will be the act of God declaring the sinner righteous by faith in the finished work of God in Jesus Christ. He says Wright is wrong, but not heretical. His book, The Future of Justification is his summary critique.
Wright has answered with Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision. I am going to be reading this soon, after skimming its contents already, and having some strong questions arise in my mind about Wright's view.
Part of my concern stems from a summary critique of the content in Wright's book, found in two parts here and here. If these summary statements are true, I'm in for a bumpy ride while reading Wright.
I'll keep you posted (pun intended).
John Piper has been the most popular (and gracious) opponent of this view, arguing for the historic Reformational idea that justification was, is, and will be the act of God declaring the sinner righteous by faith in the finished work of God in Jesus Christ. He says Wright is wrong, but not heretical. His book, The Future of Justification is his summary critique.
Wright has answered with Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision. I am going to be reading this soon, after skimming its contents already, and having some strong questions arise in my mind about Wright's view.
Part of my concern stems from a summary critique of the content in Wright's book, found in two parts here and here. If these summary statements are true, I'm in for a bumpy ride while reading Wright.
I'll keep you posted (pun intended).
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Advance 2009 Media and Photos
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Jon & Kate, Plus the California Supreme Court, Plus Other Stuff
The following have warranted a paragraph or two because they keep popping up in my world, or on my computer, or on Facebook, or in discussions...
To Jon & Kate...
Jon & Kate Gosselin, of "Jon & Kate Plus 8" fame, need good pastoral counseling. Could I ask if those Christian publishers who gave them their book deal would use some of the wealth generated by the project to bring some sort of pastoral counseling intervention into their lives before we have a much more public and painful tragedy? I don't know if Jon and/or Kate have been unfaithful to their vows, and we don't need to know. But they need help. They need prayer. And they need someone to do more than profit from their lives. Their TV network is milking this for all the publicity that they can get. Maybe the Gosselins (or one of the Gosselins) is, too. Isn't there anyone who can speak truth, grace, love, and perhaps a call to repentance into their lives? Jon & Kate, save your marriage by putting it and each other ahead of yourselves. Give your eight children the example of parents strong enough to do what is both good and right. Call me if there is no pastor available to you.
A Temporary Sanity
The California Supreme Court, by at 6-1 decision, has upheld the voter approved Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in the state. This came after that same court unanimously ruled that California's earlier ban on same sex marriage was unconstitutional. I honestly am surprised, not on the merits of the decision, but given the flow of events lately and the seeming momentum such a reversal would have followed. This does not settle matters, but it is an encouragement nonetheless.
It Might Be Worse
That may not be too encouraging, but that was my thought in hearing about Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to be our newest Supreme Court justice. I knew it would be a minority pick, and I also was guessing it would be a woman, but the "tokenism" factor was exacerbated by the President's making such a point of her status as a female Hispanic, a Puerto Rican raised in public housing, etc. Early reports on her decisions and reversals are not encouraging to many conservatives. However, I keep thinking it could have been worse. After all, the most liberal (based on voting record and publicly voiced positions) president with a near unstoppable 59 votes in the Senate has suggested someone first made a federal judge by George H. W. Bush. Yes, he also gave us David Souter, but if all that happens is we get a Souter-like nominee, we've escaped a far worse fate. Imagine giving the position to the liberal equivalent of an Antonin Scalia!
To Jon & Kate...
Jon & Kate Gosselin, of "Jon & Kate Plus 8" fame, need good pastoral counseling. Could I ask if those Christian publishers who gave them their book deal would use some of the wealth generated by the project to bring some sort of pastoral counseling intervention into their lives before we have a much more public and painful tragedy? I don't know if Jon and/or Kate have been unfaithful to their vows, and we don't need to know. But they need help. They need prayer. And they need someone to do more than profit from their lives. Their TV network is milking this for all the publicity that they can get. Maybe the Gosselins (or one of the Gosselins) is, too. Isn't there anyone who can speak truth, grace, love, and perhaps a call to repentance into their lives? Jon & Kate, save your marriage by putting it and each other ahead of yourselves. Give your eight children the example of parents strong enough to do what is both good and right. Call me if there is no pastor available to you.
A Temporary Sanity
The California Supreme Court, by at 6-1 decision, has upheld the voter approved Proposition 8, which banned gay marriage in the state. This came after that same court unanimously ruled that California's earlier ban on same sex marriage was unconstitutional. I honestly am surprised, not on the merits of the decision, but given the flow of events lately and the seeming momentum such a reversal would have followed. This does not settle matters, but it is an encouragement nonetheless.
It Might Be Worse
That may not be too encouraging, but that was my thought in hearing about Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to be our newest Supreme Court justice. I knew it would be a minority pick, and I also was guessing it would be a woman, but the "tokenism" factor was exacerbated by the President's making such a point of her status as a female Hispanic, a Puerto Rican raised in public housing, etc. Early reports on her decisions and reversals are not encouraging to many conservatives. However, I keep thinking it could have been worse. After all, the most liberal (based on voting record and publicly voiced positions) president with a near unstoppable 59 votes in the Senate has suggested someone first made a federal judge by George H. W. Bush. Yes, he also gave us David Souter, but if all that happens is we get a Souter-like nominee, we've escaped a far worse fate. Imagine giving the position to the liberal equivalent of an Antonin Scalia!
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Ralph D. Winter, Influential Missiologist and Founder of U.S. Center for World Mission, Dies
Just read this article in the Christian Post on the passing of Dr. Ralph Winter. Dr. Winter's work at the U.S. Center for World Missions, along with his insightful and sometimes controversial editorials in the Center's Mission Frontiers journal,was monumental in reshaping the cause of global missions. He was at the forefront of the shift from thinking solely about going to countries, and instead targeting people groups.
His leading role in popularizing ideas like "hidden peoples" and the 10/40 Window have led many churches and individuals to rethink their strategies and approaches.
I personally heard Dr. Winter speak a number of times, and was always impressed with how "unimpressive" he was--never trying to be more than a straightforward, passionate advocate for doing ministry in a smart and strategic way. Sometimes I disagreed with his conclusions, but could not fault his spirit.
I rejoice that he is resting from his labors and rejoicing in the Lord's presence. And I think those of us left behind can honor his memory by looking for new ways to complete that final task over which he labored for his Savior--getting the gospel to all peoples.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Muslim Demographics
This was sent to me by a friend. It paints a sobering portrait of the future, but also reminds us of the need to redouble our efforts to reach Muslims with the Gospel--not for the sake of a culture, but for the glory of God.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Follow up on Creation Care
Thursday, May 14, 2009
How High a Priority is Creation Care For Pastors?
Right now the "Flourish Conference 2009" for pastors is going on in Duluth, GA, at Cross Pointe Church. It features a number of quality speakers and events (Their web site is here). Its defines itself in this way:
I believe that humanity was given a mandate to care for the creation; this work was both made more difficult and corrupted by the Fall, but continues as a responsibility of all people. Christians can and should exercise this mandate under the authority of the Word of God.
Having said that, I'm beginning to wonder how many pastors in local congregations, who really shepherd people throughout their week, have time to devote to "creation care," or other issues that may be biblically based but not the highest priority. Elders were to devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word. Paul sets an example in Acts 20 of going personal involvement in discipleship. Peter calls upon us in 1 Peter 5 to shepherd (guide) the flock. Encouragement to recycle and "go green" may be culturally interesting today and deserving of mention when dealing with texts that relate to our creation mandate, but there seem to be a whole range of more important issues my people are dealing with than whether they should consider buying a hybrid car. I'm walking my flock through moral failures, unemployment, life-threatening illness, broken relationships, not to mention the many who need to know the power of the Gospel to save or to heal brokenness. I am teaching, counseling, and praying. I'm trying to watch my own life and walk, even as I seek to lead others.
I would suggest that it might be appropriate for others in the church to become advocates for creation care, but I'm not sure this is central, or even near the center, of the pastoral call. It's a conversation I'm not inclined to take time to participate in.
Flourish is a national conference for pastors and church leaders, is an invitation to one of culture's most exciting conversations: creation care. Our goal is to explore the biblical call to care for God's creation through the teachings of today's most insightful church leaders.
I believe that humanity was given a mandate to care for the creation; this work was both made more difficult and corrupted by the Fall, but continues as a responsibility of all people. Christians can and should exercise this mandate under the authority of the Word of God.
Having said that, I'm beginning to wonder how many pastors in local congregations, who really shepherd people throughout their week, have time to devote to "creation care," or other issues that may be biblically based but not the highest priority. Elders were to devote themselves to prayer and the ministry of the Word. Paul sets an example in Acts 20 of going personal involvement in discipleship. Peter calls upon us in 1 Peter 5 to shepherd (guide) the flock. Encouragement to recycle and "go green" may be culturally interesting today and deserving of mention when dealing with texts that relate to our creation mandate, but there seem to be a whole range of more important issues my people are dealing with than whether they should consider buying a hybrid car. I'm walking my flock through moral failures, unemployment, life-threatening illness, broken relationships, not to mention the many who need to know the power of the Gospel to save or to heal brokenness. I am teaching, counseling, and praying. I'm trying to watch my own life and walk, even as I seek to lead others.
I would suggest that it might be appropriate for others in the church to become advocates for creation care, but I'm not sure this is central, or even near the center, of the pastoral call. It's a conversation I'm not inclined to take time to participate in.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
'We Are the Forgotten Church,' Say Palestinian Pastors
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Monday, May 11, 2009
Driscoll & Mars Hill Go National
I was surprised to come across this blog notice that Mars Hill is establishing a campus in Albuquerque, NM. A little far from the Seattle area, Mars Hill becomes the latest multi-site church to move into multi-state status. What do you think about this move? I'm not sure what I think, myself.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
Indian Christians in Orissa Still Struggling (from Desiring God)
This article updates the situation in the Indian state of Orissa for Christians.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
An Ivy Leaguer's Life at Liberty University
This article recounts the story of a student from Brown University transferring to Liberty University to study the subculture of conservative Christianity and write a book about it.
Practical atheism | Tony Woodlief, in World Magazine.
Great essay here warning of the real danger to Christian faith's influence.
Baby Preacher
This did NOT happen at my church! After watching this, you'll see that some aspects of being a Pentecostal style preacher must be genetic!
Monday, April 20, 2009
Will the West Only Watch as China Experiences Recovery?
OK I haven't been blogging in a while, but saw this fascinating take on Susan Boyle, Western attitudes toward achievement, and the economic recovery. Read it here, from the Asia Times Online.
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Pearls Before Breakfast (from the Washington Post)
One of the world's greatest violinists, Joshua Bell, played anonymously in a D.C. Metro station as a street musician. He went virtually unnoticed.
This amazing story reminds us all of what we may not see or hear if we are not expecting it.
This amazing story reminds us all of what we may not see or hear if we are not expecting it.
Piper reflects on the anniversary of Dietrich Bonhoeffer's execution
It was sixty four years ago that Bonhoeffer was killed for his role in a plot against Hitler. His most famous quote, and its context, is reproduced here.
It might encourage you to read or reread The Cost of Discipleship as we approach Easter.
It might encourage you to read or reread The Cost of Discipleship as we approach Easter.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Silly News of the Day: Get a Master's Degree in Facebook Studies--Really!
This report from England tells of a new degree available for the low, low price of $9,000.00. Birmingham City College will grant a a master's degree in Facebook, Twitter, and MySpace. If they offer experience or life credits, some people I know could go straight to a doctorate.
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Shocking News: Guantanamo Detainee Lied; Actually Hates America
The Weekly Standard carries this report, first filed in the NY Times, that Mullah Zakir, aka Abdullah Ghulam Rasoul, is leading a unified Pakistani/Afghani Taliban against the US and other forces in Afghanistan. This same Mr. Rasoul was detained at Guantanamo, but was released as one of many who testified that he was forced to fight, actually loved what the US was doing in his country, and was a peaceful man. Now it turns out he was not telling the truth, that we actually had a major commander in custody, and now we have returned him to the field to attack and kill our military personnel.
We have been told over and over again that Guantanamo was a bad place, mistreating innocent people. Strangely, our new leaders in Washington can't figure out what to do with those still in our custody, and may even wish that we still had some in hand that have been let go. Mr. Rasoul would be one of those.
We have been told over and over again that Guantanamo was a bad place, mistreating innocent people. Strangely, our new leaders in Washington can't figure out what to do with those still in our custody, and may even wish that we still had some in hand that have been let go. Mr. Rasoul would be one of those.
Sec. of State Clinton's Religous Gaffe
This article recounts Sec. of State Clinton's visit to the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadaloupe in Mexico. She brought flowers, then asked who painted the picture of the virgin Mary.
Wrong question.
You see, Roman Catholics believe that the image miraculously appeared, hence the shrine.
Good research, Mrs. Clinton.
Do you think that this would not be news if it had happened under the past administration? Of course, I don't think former Sec. of State Rice would have made such a mistake to begin with.
BTW, it's not that I believe the story told, only that if you are going to act as if someone's traditions matter to you, you ought to make an effort to understand them.
Wrong question.
You see, Roman Catholics believe that the image miraculously appeared, hence the shrine.
Good research, Mrs. Clinton.
Do you think that this would not be news if it had happened under the past administration? Of course, I don't think former Sec. of State Rice would have made such a mistake to begin with.
BTW, it's not that I believe the story told, only that if you are going to act as if someone's traditions matter to you, you ought to make an effort to understand them.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
This is funny if you have read Kafka...and maybe if you haven't.
I tried to post this earlier, but it didn't take.
Prague's Franz Kafka International Named World's Most Alienating Airport
Prague's Franz Kafka International Named World's Most Alienating Airport
What a day!
Well, today has offered interesting/encouraging developments along the way (and it isn't over yet!).
First, I had a great time with the class I teach, talking about the concept of being filled with the Spirit, and getting at least some to think about the real possibility that the command of Eph. 5:18-19 holds before them. Kept them all awake, I think.
Then I read two updates from missionaries that were raised up in and sent out by our church in California. One was from a single lady in one of the -stans of Central Asia. As she wrote of the challenges of life in a hostile political environment, she had more to say about the joys of reaching out to people and the embarrassing moments of cross-cultural work than she did about struggle and the hardness of it all (though she has been honest about those matters as well). The other was from a couple laboring in Spain--a post-Christian culture with a Catholic veneer. They have organized a house church and are reaching out in many creative ways to their neighbors. Just reading about a talk J. is giving in a public setting, "Catholic Without Catholicism? Reflections of a 'Separated Brother,'" makes me wish I could be there, and understand Spanish. They are inviting those who come to follow ups in the local coffee house on Sunday afternoon. How cool is that?
Then I got a good dose of encouragement from taking lunch to Dan Knudsen, a student at CU who suffered a spinal injury on a short term missions trip that left him paralyzed, yet still strong in his faith. Ladies from our church prepare lunch for him every Tuesday and Thursday, and while my wife did the preparing, babysitting for our grandson meant I did the taking. Dan isn't feeling great today, but just seeing him, and being around someone facing such challenges with an amazingly positive spirit and trust in God--I am blessed again just thinking about it.
And now I just got a call from a missionary of ours in Peru, telling of the latest ways God has answered prayers to provide for their family in unexpected ways.
A day in the life of a believer looking toward the Lord is never dull!
First, I had a great time with the class I teach, talking about the concept of being filled with the Spirit, and getting at least some to think about the real possibility that the command of Eph. 5:18-19 holds before them. Kept them all awake, I think.
Then I read two updates from missionaries that were raised up in and sent out by our church in California. One was from a single lady in one of the -stans of Central Asia. As she wrote of the challenges of life in a hostile political environment, she had more to say about the joys of reaching out to people and the embarrassing moments of cross-cultural work than she did about struggle and the hardness of it all (though she has been honest about those matters as well). The other was from a couple laboring in Spain--a post-Christian culture with a Catholic veneer. They have organized a house church and are reaching out in many creative ways to their neighbors. Just reading about a talk J. is giving in a public setting, "Catholic Without Catholicism? Reflections of a 'Separated Brother,'" makes me wish I could be there, and understand Spanish. They are inviting those who come to follow ups in the local coffee house on Sunday afternoon. How cool is that?
Then I got a good dose of encouragement from taking lunch to Dan Knudsen, a student at CU who suffered a spinal injury on a short term missions trip that left him paralyzed, yet still strong in his faith. Ladies from our church prepare lunch for him every Tuesday and Thursday, and while my wife did the preparing, babysitting for our grandson meant I did the taking. Dan isn't feeling great today, but just seeing him, and being around someone facing such challenges with an amazingly positive spirit and trust in God--I am blessed again just thinking about it.
And now I just got a call from a missionary of ours in Peru, telling of the latest ways God has answered prayers to provide for their family in unexpected ways.
A day in the life of a believer looking toward the Lord is never dull!
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
A "Shocker" for those who follow Israeli Politics
Breaking News: Israeli Labor Party votes to join Netanyahu gov't
What makes this interesting is that Prime Minister designate Netanyahu is a hardliner, believing circumstances are not right for peace with the Palestinians since they have no true spokesmen (Gaza is in the hands of Hamas, but the U.N. and others have kept Fatah's Abu Mazen in power in the West Bank, even though Hamas has been, until recently, more popular there as well). His natural allies are the more hawkish parties, and he has already made alliances with two of them.
In getting Labor to join his government, Netanyahu bypassed the more centrist (and largest) party in Israel's Knesset, Kadima, which was founded by the late Prime Minister and former head of Netanyahu's Likud party, Ariel Sharon. Kadima wanted greater power in a coalition, including half of the Prime Minister's term for its leader, Tzipi Livni.
Labor is much more "pro-peace," favoring negotiations and territorial concessions. How they will work in this government is anybody's guess, but Netanyahu counts on the fact that that even if not in government, hawkish parties will support him; and Labor, decimated in the last election, may be seeking to stay relevant by being in government rather than in an opposition dominated by Kadima.
What makes this interesting is that Prime Minister designate Netanyahu is a hardliner, believing circumstances are not right for peace with the Palestinians since they have no true spokesmen (Gaza is in the hands of Hamas, but the U.N. and others have kept Fatah's Abu Mazen in power in the West Bank, even though Hamas has been, until recently, more popular there as well). His natural allies are the more hawkish parties, and he has already made alliances with two of them.
In getting Labor to join his government, Netanyahu bypassed the more centrist (and largest) party in Israel's Knesset, Kadima, which was founded by the late Prime Minister and former head of Netanyahu's Likud party, Ariel Sharon. Kadima wanted greater power in a coalition, including half of the Prime Minister's term for its leader, Tzipi Livni.
Labor is much more "pro-peace," favoring negotiations and territorial concessions. How they will work in this government is anybody's guess, but Netanyahu counts on the fact that that even if not in government, hawkish parties will support him; and Labor, decimated in the last election, may be seeking to stay relevant by being in government rather than in an opposition dominated by Kadima.
The Christian Book of the Year for 2009 is...
...a Bible! Specifically, the ESV Study Bible, published by Crossway, and setting records for sales of a new Study Bible--it actually sold out in its first printing. I have one, and it is a great, though massive, volume (carrying is advised for the healthy, people with equilibrium problems will fall over trying to walk with it). The notes are very well done, as are the maps, illustrations, and general articles throughout and at the end.
It is an excellent choice, and according the the Christian Book Awards site, the first time they have honored a study Bible, or any Bible, as the Christian Book of the Year--somewhat ironic, don't you think?
It is an excellent choice, and according the the Christian Book Awards site, the first time they have honored a study Bible, or any Bible, as the Christian Book of the Year--somewhat ironic, don't you think?
Playing with Words...Sigh
I just read The Weekly Standard's blog article about the new name for what was the "Global War on Terror." Now, it's "The Overseas Contingency Operation." Does anybody know what that means? It sounds like plans for a possible trip to Bermuda.
Of course, our new Secretary of Homeland Security set the stage for this by referring to terrorism as "man caused disasters." That might apply to this season's "Celebrity Apprentice."
And our Treasury Secretary renamed the assets that no bank wants to carry--they are not "toxic" anymore, they are "legacy." Yep, just what you and I want to leave our kids.
Read 1984 by George Orwell, and see if the brazen practice of "doublespeak" there doesn't look familiar.
Of course, it's one thing to rename a war; it's quite another to wage it successfully. The same is true with recognizing evil and ending a recession. We'll see if our government is as clever at overcoming challenges as it is in renaming them.
Of course, our new Secretary of Homeland Security set the stage for this by referring to terrorism as "man caused disasters." That might apply to this season's "Celebrity Apprentice."
And our Treasury Secretary renamed the assets that no bank wants to carry--they are not "toxic" anymore, they are "legacy." Yep, just what you and I want to leave our kids.
Read 1984 by George Orwell, and see if the brazen practice of "doublespeak" there doesn't look familiar.
Of course, it's one thing to rename a war; it's quite another to wage it successfully. The same is true with recognizing evil and ending a recession. We'll see if our government is as clever at overcoming challenges as it is in renaming them.
Saturday, March 07, 2009
"It's A Wonderful Tithe"
Click on the box below to go to a very humorous movie on giving, using "It's a Wonderful Life" as a basis. It's very clever!
Thursday, March 05, 2009
How Much is $1 Trillion?
Go here to see a helpful visualization of just how much $1 trillion is. Then realize that this is less than the proposed new budget put before Congress by the President.
Monday, March 02, 2009
A Powerful Video on Suffering from Joni Eareckson Tada
The video below is a talk Joni gave at Dallas Seminary about suffering. I found it at Justin Taylor's blog. It is insightful, but then Joni has been someone I have admired for many years. She has been battling increased pain of late, and certainly could use our prayers.
Sunday, March 01, 2009
Woman Cited for Breastfeeding While Driving
This story was in our newspapaper today, and made me wonder about some of the drivers I may meet driving around our area.
Oh, and she was talking on her cell phone, too.
Oh, and she was talking on her cell phone, too.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
"Losing Faith in the Stimulus"--Liveblog (Christianity Today)
This article recounts the reactions of economics professors at various Chrstian institutions to the proposed stimulus.
Posted using ShareThis
Posted using ShareThis
Monday, February 09, 2009
Matt Chandler on "A Shepherd and His Unregenerate Sheep"
Matt Chandler is my brother's pastor at The Village Church in Highland Village, TX. I am continually blessed by his preaching, and after hearing this message from the recent Pastor's Conference at Bethlehem Baptist Church in Minneapolis, I wanted to share it Go here to see it.
Thursday, February 05, 2009
50 De-Stimulating Facts by Stephen Spruiell & Kevin Williamson on National Review Online
This article from National Review Online gives the lowdown on aspects of the current economic stimulus bill that should give any taxpayer a moment of concern. Will these projects actually help the flow of credit and "stimulate" the economy? That, of course is the offered solution to the current problems. But aside from economists' hopes that we will spend our way to prosperity, we still need to question whether such spending is in the consumer's best interest--should individuals be excited to increase their debt? My post below gives my perspective on this.
Monday, February 02, 2009
Mark Driscoll on Nightline
This appeared recently, and shows how a mainstream media interviewer understands (an sometimes doesn't) Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle (I listen to Driscoll's podcasts). In one of America's least churched cities, Mars Hill is standing strong for orthodox theology and a biblical gospel.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Should the Government Fix The Economy? A Case for Saying "No."
I really appreciate this article at politico.com arguing against the soon to be passed (it seems) government stimulus bill. I have been thinking more and more that the move just doesn't make sense for long term economic health. Here are some reasons I have.
1. The premise of all the stimulus is that we need consumers to borrow and spend so that the economy can run well. However, the billions of dollars of credit debt racked up by the average American household are not a sign of economic health in the affected households, and encouraging people toward more debt is the last thing they need. Whether we give people a check to spend, or give it to banks to loan, we are not addressing the fundamental problem of having an economy that relies on overspending.
2. The idea that investing in the nation's infrastructure is a good stimulus is ridiculous. How much of this money will get spent in the next few weeks and months? Estimates are that it will take at least 2 years to see half of it spent. How will that lead to economic recovery in the near term? Infrastructure improvements are a good idea, but they are not an economic stimulus.
3. Back to back trillion dollar deficits (expected if this plan passes, and certain if more "stimulus" is called for) will make long term economic health for the national economy unlikely.
4. Government money will lead to greater government control and regulation of banking, of investment, and of those contractors and businesses seeking to do the infrastructure improvements. Already some are objecting that the stimulus bill requires that only companies who verify the legal status of all employees may receive stimulus money. That may be a very good idea for all businesses, but why tie it to the stimulus? And who will enforce this? Will there be an "Office of Stimulus Regulation Compliance?"
5. The rush to pass this will lead to even more waste and mismanagement than most government spending plans. We haven't really thought this through, but various departments and offices will get millions and be told--"spend this now!" It will be a lot of fun for a few people for a little while, but can you imagine all the investigative reports that will be coming out on stimulus waste and how negatively that will affect the credibility of the program, not to mention the government?
This is a moment where people are slowing spending, and even thinking about saving. That is a good thing--a VERY good thing. Will it hurt banks and some businesses in the short and medium term? Yes, it will. But it might just change the fundamentals of our economic planning and policies to encourage living within your means, buying less on credit, and rewarding savings rather than debt. These would be good moves for the families of America.
1. The premise of all the stimulus is that we need consumers to borrow and spend so that the economy can run well. However, the billions of dollars of credit debt racked up by the average American household are not a sign of economic health in the affected households, and encouraging people toward more debt is the last thing they need. Whether we give people a check to spend, or give it to banks to loan, we are not addressing the fundamental problem of having an economy that relies on overspending.
2. The idea that investing in the nation's infrastructure is a good stimulus is ridiculous. How much of this money will get spent in the next few weeks and months? Estimates are that it will take at least 2 years to see half of it spent. How will that lead to economic recovery in the near term? Infrastructure improvements are a good idea, but they are not an economic stimulus.
3. Back to back trillion dollar deficits (expected if this plan passes, and certain if more "stimulus" is called for) will make long term economic health for the national economy unlikely.
4. Government money will lead to greater government control and regulation of banking, of investment, and of those contractors and businesses seeking to do the infrastructure improvements. Already some are objecting that the stimulus bill requires that only companies who verify the legal status of all employees may receive stimulus money. That may be a very good idea for all businesses, but why tie it to the stimulus? And who will enforce this? Will there be an "Office of Stimulus Regulation Compliance?"
5. The rush to pass this will lead to even more waste and mismanagement than most government spending plans. We haven't really thought this through, but various departments and offices will get millions and be told--"spend this now!" It will be a lot of fun for a few people for a little while, but can you imagine all the investigative reports that will be coming out on stimulus waste and how negatively that will affect the credibility of the program, not to mention the government?
This is a moment where people are slowing spending, and even thinking about saving. That is a good thing--a VERY good thing. Will it hurt banks and some businesses in the short and medium term? Yes, it will. But it might just change the fundamentals of our economic planning and policies to encourage living within your means, buying less on credit, and rewarding savings rather than debt. These would be good moves for the families of America.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Tim Tebow Video on ESPN
The Florida Gator's QB is much more than a talented athlete. He is a committed follower of Jesus who spends much of his time in missionary ministry in the Philippines. Watch this video to see a slice of his life.
Follow Up on the Last Post
This article in the New York Times is a report on the ministry of Tim Keller and Redeemer Prebyterian Church. Note that they rent space in three buildings to meet--one of them is First Baptist Church on the Upper West Side (A side note--Dr. Arthur Williams once pastored this GARBC affiliated church; a rather sad report about the congregation's current needs is found here).
One of my favorite quotes in the story is about the church's approach to having an impact on its culture.
One of my favorite quotes in the story is about the church's approach to having an impact on its culture.
"If you seek power before service, you'll neither get power, nor serve," he said. "If you seek to serve people more than to gain power, you will not only serve people, you will gain influence. That's very much the way Jesus did it."
As a result, one of Redeemer's hallmarks has always been its focus on charity, something it emphasizes in its training of urban pastors. It operates a program called Hope for New York that arranges volunteer opportunities for people from Redeemer with 35 different partner organizations. Last year, 3,300 people from the church volunteered their time.
Read this book!
The Reason for God by Tim Keller is a refreshing and challenging book on speaking to a skeptical world about God. It is thoroughly engaging, and makes the reader want to know more about the very unique ministry Pastor Keller has in Manhattan--a growing and vibrant tradition PCA church in the midst of one of the most liberal and diverse cultures in the country. Go ahead--read it and let it make you think. You can also visit the website for the book here.
Thursday, January 01, 2009
Beginning 2009 with the Glories of Jesus
A new year begins, but the focus of this year--as well as of our entire lives--ought to be the magnificence of Jesus Christ. I read Hebrews 1 this morning, and there in the first four verses the author gives us nine beautiful glories that make God's revealing himself to us in Jesus so amazing.
- Jesus is the Son of God. No one else can claim this exalted role, nor has the love of the Father poured out upon him as Jesus does. Our Savior reconciles us not to a stranger, but to his Father.
- Jesus is God's appointed heir of all things. There is nothing in his universe that is not given to Jesus to save or to judge. It is all his, and for his joy.
- Jesus is the creator of the world. He made everything and holds it together according to the Father's plan (Col. 1:15-17). He owns all, including us, by virtue of creation.
- Jesus is the radiance of the glory of God. If we ever want to understand how glorious the God is, we simply must look upon and meditate on Jesus as he is revealed in the Bible.
- Jesus is the exact imprint of God's nature. The invisible God is fully manifested to us in the visible, incarnate Son.
- Jesus upholds the universe by the word of his power. Not only does he make us and everything else, he sustains it with all that is necessary to continue to exist, to know, to love, to relate--everything.
- Jesus is the one who made purification for sins. My sins and yours do not await purification. By faith the purifying sacrifice of Jesus is applied to us. And it is done--our past is truly past.
- Jesus is enthroned in Heaven. We long for his coming to reign on earth, but he reigns now. He has completed the central work of history in his redeeming death and resurrection, and now he is enthroned next to the Father. He is not a coming, future King, but a King who is rules now from Heaven and will rule fully on earth.
- Jesus is superior to all angelic beings due to his identity. His name, given to signify his work, identifies him as greater than beings so great that even apostles can't keep from wanting to worship them (see Rev. 22:8-9).
Such a Savior can and will have all people and angels worship him--even those who are compelled at the end of the age to do so against their rebellious wills (Phil. 2:9-11, Heb. 1:6). How amazing that he invites us to worship him freely and to experience the joys that come from belonging to him! No better start to a year exists than to choose to glory, to revel, to marvel in Jesus.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
