The God of the Open Theist

A couple of years ago, I heard one of my friends tell me and my wife about a conversation he had with someone about the matter of God’s knowledge. The classic debate involved two opposing views within the realm of Christianity: Calvinism and Arminianism. Without boring some of you who have better things to do than to listen to theological squabbles, let me briefly state that Calvinism has to do with the belief that God has unconditionally elected to save some people from before the foundation of the world and those He elects will believe in Jesus Christ, and Arminianism sets forth the opposite conclusion that God has conditionally elected to save all people who believe in Jesus Christ. As you can imagine, it is a lot more complicated than that and each side of the equation has its own objections and problems, and there are also variations in each camp. But my purpose here is not to talk about Calvinism or Arminianism (at least at this point), but to bring to your attention something that was said (now back to the conversation).

My friend Jobob (whose name has only and thankfully been changed to protect his innocence) was arguing from the Calvinistic vantage point that God orchestrates the events of history to fit his ultimate purpose. The other person could not fully agree with this conclusion and in the course of the conversation began to purport the view that God does not in fact know the future. Well my friend and their spouse began to have spasms, realizing that this person had stepped pretty far outside the circle of what is biblically acceptable within historic Christianity. They began lovingly to pummel the person in the name of the all-knowing Christ, subjecting him to all manner of cruelty and suffering until he was willing to recant. Seriously, they did say that it appeared that he had just thought up the argument during the conversation to try to throw them for a loop. That it did.

The reason I bring this to your attention today is because as novel as that may have sounded (and it is fairly novel), there is a movement that is taking some of our Christian people by storm called “open theism.” Open theism stems from a lot of “free will” thinkers who believe that God has given all of us the ability to choose totally free from any divine coercion. That means basically that creatures can only be morally responsible if they are really free. Therefore, it involves not only the ability to choose to do what is actually done, but to have the ability to have chosen differently. Open theism takes a step further, and says that since God has given us totally free choices to make, then he is essentially a God who does not know the future, since all of those stupid, free choices we are yet to make are unknown to God, because He has nothing to do with planning the events of the future (I mean, how can He if He does not violate anybody’s free choices?).

Okay, then, I know this has been a mouthful. The truth is that this issue is not just another spat where people can just smile, pat people on the back, and say, “Well, shucks, brother, we are just not going to agree with one another.” This is a very serious threat to a right view of God, because it undermines His glory. This view has been spawned from a desire to make God more compatible with who we are. Since God has created us in His own image, they say, God must be like us. In actuality, the reverse is true: we are like God. As one writer says, “As the image in a pond depends entirely upon the object casting the image, so we depend completely upon God who casts the image we are. Likewise, the glory of the pond is but a shadow of the object’s glory, so whatever glory we bear as the image, only derives from the glory of God who cast the image.” He goes on to say that our relationship with God, therefore, is both similar and different.

The reason I wanted to talk about this is not to publish a bunch of arguments against open theism, but just to make some of you aware of the issue, because it is gathering steam, and has quite a few authors supporting its fallacy (probably the most popular book is called The Openness of God, by Clark Pinnock). I would also like to recommend a book critiquing the movement, called Beyond the Bounds, edited by John Piper, Justin Taylor, and Paul Kjoss Helseth. There are myriads of other books in favor of and against you can find for yourself on the web, but you can also check out desiringgod.org on the web and find some stuff, too. For now, you can wake up and turn off your computer, because my blog is done. As for the open theist, I think his God might still be asleep, too, since he is just like us.

Thinking About the Emerging Church Movement

As some of you may or may not know, I am currently in the midst of evaluating and critiquing the emerging church movement. To bring you up to speed with what this is, it is a movement that tries to take the cultural ideology of postmodernism and apply it to the way that church is done. In a sense, emerging churches believe in immersing themselves into the culture it is trying to reach. Postmodernism is a view of the world that is as much a world view as modernism or Christianity is a world view. Modernism is what most of us were, of course, raised up under, and its perspective of things is very objective. Postmodernism, on the other hand, invites people to view things more subjectively. Now, when I first came across this whole idea, I admit I was more than skeptical; in fact, I was against it, at least internally, because I was taught that anything to do with the word “postmodernism” is wrong, because all of life is objective (not the first time I have “jumped the gun” on something).

As I began to read and research this topic, however, I found out several things: (1) There are obviously some dangers to this philosophy, as there is in any extreme. (2) There are also some benefits to this viewpoint. (3) There are all kinds within this movement: extremists that could be considered “nuts,” and others that I would find myself in agreement with more than not. Now, I have just finished a book called Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church, by D.A. Carson, and I am almost through another one called Emerging Churches, by Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger. Nevertheless, I just read an article from the web from Misty Anne Winzenried, who is a former assistant editor of Children’s Ministry Magazine, and currently resides in Bothell, Washington. The article I read was written in Children’s Ministry Magazine’s January-February 2004 issue, and its title is called, “Postmodern Children’s Ministry.” I want to pull out her main outline, as well as some of her thoughts, because I think she did an outstanding job of summarizing the values of this movement. She is not recommending the movement as a whole (as I am not either), because she is careful to say that “Scripture should inform all of our thinking-these elements of postmodernism can only be evaluated and valued through the lens of Scripture.” She does, however, commend these values to us as ways that can help our own ministries if we understand it, but also cautions against its more radically hard positions. These are her thoughts, so I hope you will enjoy them:

Postmodernism Values Spirituality – “According to George Gallup Jr., 96 percent of Americans surveyed say they believe in God! And 82 percent of those surveyed say that they want to experience spiritual growth.” “Any openness to conversations of faith is an invitation for the gospel to come alive for people.”
Postmodernism Values Mystery – “Modernism, the precursor to postmodernism, was a staunch supporter of scientific evidence and rock-solid guarantees.” “…postmodernism encourages us to value what’s mysterious and uncertain-and certainly, God is mysterious.” “…it’s important to realize that our Scriptures contain elements of mystery and clear truth. Any adherence to only mystery (that is, everything in Scripture is unexplainable and mysterious, so there are no clear answers) or only fact (that is, the Scriptures give clear answers to every question we have about Christ, the Christian life, and the world) is walking in dangerous territory.” “Accept that God is a mystery.” “Allow for the mystery in life.”
Postmodernism Values Relationship and Community – “Though Scripture clearly tells us that we have a personal God who’s concerned with each person’s heart and Christian journey, the Bible highlights the truth that faith is a relational and communal activity.”
Postmodernism Values the Voice of the “Other” – “Postmodernism encourages us to value diversity, each person’s uniqueness is valid and important in a postmodern culture.”
Postmodernism Values Experience – “How can we value people’s experience and at the same time call people to experience God’s way for us to live? Certainly, the solution is neither to water down the gospel nor to dismiss the people we want to minister to. The struggle with this postmodern value will be to hold on to the truth of the gospel, struggle against our culture’s relativism, and still value individuals’ experiences.”
Postmodernism Values Paradox – “Whereas modernism encourages us to put ideas in rigid categories of either-or, postmodernism is more comfortable with the paradoxical both-and.” “Remember from a faith perspective there’s a big difference between paradox and contradiction!” “The Christian faith is full of paradox.” “…paradox isn’t an excuse to have a relativistic faith-many things in Scripture are clear!” “Invite questions, even if it makes you a little nervous.” “Don’t always have the answers.” “Try to help people (kids) understand the paradoxes of the Christian faith.”

Learning Anger Management

We watched a movie the other night called "The Upside of Anger." The movie's point was to pitch anger from the perspective of not having the right information about things in life. In other words, it was theorizing, anger comes about because we only possess partial knowledge of the full story. Although this was specifiying only a small part of anger, it was correct in assessing how we get angry over things a lot of times when we really don't have all of the appropriate facts. Yeah, we all know that the number of examples about people who do stupid stuff because of misguided anger are legion throughout the annals of history. The truth is I have done my own share of stupid stuff because of anger. King Solomon wrote "A quick-tempered man does foolish things..." Fortunately I have never gotten so angry that I have killed s0meone (like I would say it if I had), but there have been a number of dumb things that I have done or said.

Think with me for just a minute of all the meaningless, insignificant arguments that you have gotten into with someone that you are supposed to love very much. I can think of the many times I have wasted much of my life by venting painful comments towards my wife (she already knows by the way). And for what? So I could win an argument? So I could feel sinfully superior? It is all for nothing. I will admit that at times there are things that should upset us, but let's be honest. How many times do we really get mad over "the right thing?" And how many times have we done foolish things because of anger?

I remember when I was growing up, I used to wrestle with anger quite a bit (still do at times). When my parents or siblings or someone else would make me really mad and I didn't want to get over it, I would write down the offense and set it out on my dresser so I would rememer to be mad the next morning! Talk about a moment of foolishness! But, that is how much our life is wasted when we give in to anger. Just think of the bitterness, the ulcers, the wasted time, and the potential damage of an eternally valuable relationship.

Speaking of relationships, when I was about ten or twelve years old (not sure exactly when), my Mom and Dad and I stayed with my Mom's first cousin in South Georgia. We were two totally opposite families with a lot of different beliefs and philosophies and politics, but we were always able to put differences aside and enjoy each other's company. Nevertheless, things often change, as they did during this one trip when we were staying with them. I remember that my Mom's cousins' husband had been unusually fiesty the entire trip wanting to "discuss" things without getting upset, and so he and my Dad did. Until one night, something happened in the middle of what appeared to be a friendly disagreement, and the man stood to his feet and started yelling something to my Dad about "insulting him." I could barely believe what was happening: this guy looked like he was about to punch my Dad, or have a heart attack trying. To make a long story short, the situation finally calmed down and we were soon sleeping safe and sound that night with the bedroom doors locked, the dressers firmly planted against the door, and our hands on the phone to call the police. The unfortunate thing is that the relationship was never the same after that. That is the product of anger. Anger hurts and its pain is felt long after the argument has dissipated. Let us firmly plant in our minds the thinking that can aid us in our understanding of how to defeat anger: "The heart of the righteous weighs its answers, but the mouth of the wicked gushes evil (Proverbs 15:28)." And "Better a patient man than a warrior, a man who controls his temper than one who takes a city (Pv. 16:32)." And also check out Proverbs 15:1-4, as well as James chapters 1 and 3 and perhaps we can all learn more about how to manage our anger by managing our egos.

Let's Talk Music

I really like music. Can you imagine life without it? God was really smart to create it. Think of your favorite movie with no music. It could then become your least favorite movie. Think of church without it. Churches have been singing throughout history, but instruments have only entered the picture during the past few centuries. If some of our young people think church music is bad now, just think if we could zap them with a time machine and cause them to show up on the back pew of a European abbey in the middle of the Gregorian chant during the 1200's. Assuming that we could reverse the time machine and get the bewildered individual back, there would be two results from this: (1) They would certainly think that their church service is not so bad, and (2) they would be thankful for how far music and/or worship services have come.

The truth is we can't really do that with anyone (sorry for stating the hopefully obvious). However, it does make one think about music. If you were to take a poll in my church, you might get all kind of different answers as to what kind of music people like (or any church for that matter). The truth is opinions are like...well, I think you get the point: there are many different opinions on music or preferences concerning musical styles. Some people like Southern Gospel; some people like blue grass, some people like contemporary, alternative, blues, country, rock n' roll, jazz, gospel, rap, opera, pop, Christian rock...the list goes on and on, along with the opinions. Although I have heard exceptions to this rule, if I were being tortured by terrorists to give away all of our nation's secret intelligence, and they played typical Southern Gospel non-stop in the room I was tied up in, then I would probably commit treason and soon give into their demands. Nevertheless, there are many people who like it, and I say, "good for them." Different strokes for different folks, right? The problem enters the issue when people start demonizing an entire genre of music, or more appropriately a type of music. For example, a lot of secular rap music today contains nothing but filth and vulgarity in its lyrics. The lyrics and messages of these songs are to be condemned. The style of music itself, however, I do not believe should be condemned. The same is true of rock n' roll or pop music. Just because something does not have a Christian label on it does not mean that it should be condemned. If that were the case, then we should get upset about secular books, or magazines, or secular establishments. There are unquestionably immoral examples in each of these, but is someone really going to suggest that we feasibly omit going to all secular establishments, or that we omit reading all secular books. Now, it is true that we could try to be only quasi-radical, and merely cut out the establishments with bad stuff in it, but then we would eventually find ourselves sitting at home watching TBN and eating tomatoes from our own garden (although I think that is gross). I think one can see that it is hard to be consistent with any wholesale generalizing. That is why it is important to teach people to think for themselves and discern what should be rejected, and what should not be.

I guess I don't really have a grand purpose here except to clarify a few things I believe about music, and then maybe invite some of your thoughts about this as well. (1) I believe that all music can bring glory to God, no matter what genre it is. Now, that does not mean that the song is going to include the name God, Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit. In fact, the song might be about how much this person loves another person (oh no, this can't possibly be true). We might go so far as to say the song is just silly, or about the nothingness in life. It might even talk about the transience of human relationships. That would actually be a valid message for a lot of people to get. But the more valid question posed to me is how can something secular bring glory to God? Well, that is where the problem lies. There is no such thing as a secular-sacred divide. Modern Christianity has created that on its own. All of life should be sacred. When I watch a movie or a television show, I may not agree with every component or lesson in the movie (I am not so naive as to believe that our culture does not teach things), but I can still obtain insight, pleasure, and even discernment by becoming part of the culture. This same thought is true when it comes to music. I might not agree with every component of a secular song, but I can gain some insights and perspectives from the culture. I also know that there are Christians who have formed secular bands and are in the mainstream. How does that work as far as their witnessing for Christ? The same way it might work for a secular doctor working in the hospital, or a clothing designer working at their store. They are also getting an audience that a Christian band wouldn't be able to get. God has a purpose. I don't know everything about how this works, but I do believe in God and His sovereignty.

(2) I also believe that worship music can and should involve our physical bodies. Here is a news bulletin: Music is a physical entity. If it was all about the words, then why wouldn't we just say them, rather than sing them? But what about getting "in the flesh?" Could someone please tell me how someone in Christ gets in the flesh? Not sure it is possible. But maybe that person means that the song will be all about the movements or the body's sensation. Then we are probably going to have to sit down and explain this to our African brothers and sisters who dance with all of their physical might and beat on drums at their worship gatherings. I am certain that when David danced before the Lord with all of his physical might he was not in the flesh, but giving glory to God. It, however, was not without its criticism. His wife Michal was stricken by God with barrenness for her harsh and hasty words. One does not have to look very hard in Scripture to see all of the verses (especially written by the Psalmist himself) that describe how physical our worship should be. "Shout to the LORD, all you nations!" Clap your hands, all you people." "Make a joyful noise to the LORD..." "Lift up your hands..." "Sing joyfully to the LORD..." "...play skillfully, and shout for joy..." "shout to God with cries of joy..."

(3) Finally, I believe that music can be used to reach people for Christ. How? Human beings like music that sounds good. I know that is really profound, but if the music contains the gospel then it will eventually affect them. But, even if it doesn't contain the gospel, it might be a tool to attract an audience to hear the gospel. Is this a gimmick? It could be, but it doesn't have to be. Gimmicks are based on deception. This is a bridge to build a relationship with someone who might not otherwise listen. What if I like a secular band and my neighbor likes a secular band? If I invite him over to listen to my secular band's music, what would be deceptive about my doing that, if he knows I am a Christian? Then perhaps God could work in his heart. I have heard of stranger things happening.

So, what are some of your thoughts? I look forward to hearing from all of you. I am sure you will all be in full agreement with me, right? That is okay, too, if you're not, because that is what this is all about. Catch ya later.

Ramblings About Women in Ministry

I am currently working on a series of messages that have to do with church life. It is an application-based study through the Pastoral Epistles of First and Second Timothy and Titus in the New Testament. It is not exactly a traditional expository study, but rather arbitrary in a sense. In other words, I am going to take the Bible and submit it to our own contextual situation. What that means is that we are not going to spend all day breaking down the nuances of a word, but rather dive right into the issues that would be relevant to our church. One of the issues that we will address during this study is the gender debate, and specifically how that applies to women serving in the church. In order to prepare for this part of the study, I read a book a few months back entitled Two Views on Women in Ministry, which is a Counter point book, that gives several different arguments or perspectives, and then submits each respective view point to objections from the other authors. I enjoyed the book thoroughly, and it gave me tremendous insight into the debate and the Scriptural as well as the cultural implications for both views. Having read the book, however, did not change my belief, and I still maintain a complementarian position, which believes that there is no difference in value between men and women, but believes that there is a difference in functionality within the body of Christ. Let me clarify, though, that I am not opposed to female deacons, as long as the term "deacon" is understood to be a servant that ministers under the oversight of pastoral leadership. I do, in fact, believe that Phoebe held the office of a deacon. I also believe that women can teach men (as one does at our own church), but not in a pastoral or authoritative role. I am very confident that Priscilla taught the Scriptures to Apollos, but was undoubtedly not a pastor or authority over him within the church. I want to also say that the Scriptural argument that I would used to defend my position has nothing to do with a woman serving in government. Deborah served as a judge over Israel, and I see nothing that would preclude a woman from being able to serve even as the President of the United States.

One thing I did gain from the book is a larger appreciation for those with whom I disagree. There were two basic views presented in the book, with each position having an extreme representative, as well as a less extreme representative ( although I found out that I am one of the extremes). I felt that each view was ably presented and some of the arguments made good points. I will also say that I came away with the realization that there are good, sound people on both sides 0f the aisle in this. There are several pastors in our specific area with whom I disagree about this, but I am by no means going to go to the mat over this. This is not a fundamental of the faith, and there is nothing that should prevent me from working with them for the benefit of the universal body of Christ.

I sincerely hope that we can all find common ground with our brothers and sisters in Christ for the sake of His name.

A Lady of Legacy

Today, I listened for a while to the funeral of Coretta Scott King (widow of Martin Luther King, Jr.). I turned it on with the expectation of listening for just a moment, and instantly I became captivated by the service. I listened to Patricia Lattimore, who was the personal assistant to Mrs. King, and then to Mrs. King's sister, and then to former presidents Carter, Bush, and Clinton. Each of them had some very interesting accounts of the life of this woman, and during some of their stories I couldn't help but wonder what it was like to grow up during the Civil Rights Movement. I was especially moved and brought to tears when listening to the struggles of her husband who was thrown into jail for a trumped-up, secondary charge after being awarded only a few days before the Nobel Peace Prize. I was moved to think of a time when racism and prejudice and hatred for one's fellow image-bearer was so prevalent in our society. My heart grew the heaviest in thinking of how Dr. King was finally struck down in his prime of life by an assassin's bullet, and how his widow would continue the struggle for equal rights in the midst of her deepest mourning.
As I listened intently to these testimonies about Mrs. King and her husband, I also found myself wondering what the world would be like without the Kings. I also reflected on how much the world has changed since the Kings, and how their impact has been felt around the world. Has prejudice been thwarted? By no means. It is still rampant in so many forms today. But I believe that the America I live in today is better than in the era in which Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. lived. The words that I am saying are not wholesale endorsements of everything that the Kings stood for or believed, but I believe that their legacy has changed America for the good. It is often incredible to think that although the Emancipation Proclamation was signed by Abraham Lincoln in the 1860's, its spirit was not fully realized until the culmination of the Civil Rights Movement beyond the 1960's .

As a caucasian Christian, I am often ashamed of my ancestors and the way they have treated my African-American brother. I observe in horror, at times, the same old forms of prejudice and racism rear their ugly heads. It is hard to believe that there still exist in our country today remnants of the Klu Klux Klan and Neo-Nazi, white supremacists. Nevertheless, I enjoy stories of courage and struggle, in which our country has evolved from its depraved beginnings. As an avid movie fan, I have enjoyed watching movies such as "Glory" and "Remember the Titans," because they portray seminal points in our country's history, where men stood up for human equality .

I guess the ceremonies for Coretta Scott King will soon pass, but her memory and the legacy that she and her husband have left behind will reverberate through the corridors of time. Thank you, Mr. and Mrs. King, for fighting for the freedom of every person in this country, regardless of the color of their skin. I am sure you are realizing at this very moment that you are truly "free at last."

An Idea For Bridging Gaps For the Gospel

A lot of times during the course of my week, I try to set time aside for planning, and even brainstorming some ideas about the future. Today was a day like that. One of the things I am trying to think more openly about is how to bridge relationships between people of different perspectives. One of the things I have been wanting to do for some time is to have a seeker class. Now, when I use both of those words (seeker and class), I know that automatically something comes to one's mind. But what I mean may not look like any of those things. That is just what I am calling it for right now. It is not a class where Christians bombard non-Christians with a rote plan of salvation. What it will be geared to do is to foster an open dialogue between those two groups, and hopefully promote understanding, for the sake of the kingdom. Now for those of us who have grown up in the church, that may sound like a waste of time, as well as a dangerous undertaking. Not at all. For one thing, if we have authentic faith in Christ we have nothing to fear, and our faith is able to stand up under the most intense scrutiny. Moreover, I obviously have an agenda to glorify God and win people to Jesus Christ. But, as Stephen Covey (a Mormon by the way), said, "Seek first to understand, and then to be understood." It is unfortunate that so many people that I have talked to about Christ do not want to hear, because they have been spiritually abused at some point in their past. It is also unfortunate that they assume that everybody is like the dopes in their bad experience. But we have all been guilty of stereotyping at one time or another (see, I just did it).

My goal in this is to invite anyone interested in finding answers to their life or in their carrying on a friendly dialogue with those who want to help, but do not have all the answers themselves, and are also on a journey to make sense out of life. Although I use the term class, the format will actually resemble a discussion group more than anything, with a facilitator guiding it very loosely with poignant and relevant questions about God and life and faith struggles.

In doing this, there are many things that have to be done on our end to prepare for this. But, I think this is one of the things we are going to try this year. Please pray that God will use this as a great opportunity to introduce people to Christ, as well as to develop non-threatening, authentic relationships with others that don't know him, but are searching.

God Doesn't Give State of the Unions

Well, what do you know? Another year of the governmental calendar has been ripped off, and another boring state of the union address has taken place. I must say that I try to keep up with what's going pretty well, but I could not bring myself to watch a speech where I know in advance that the clapping will exceed the actual words. I must say that I do on occasion enjoy a well-put -together speech. When I was a kid, I would sit captivated with my parents to hear Ronald Reagan deliver a speech. I have also enjoyed watching footage of JFK and Martin Luther King, Jr. Those guys really knew how to deliver a speech! Nevertheles, as I was speed-reading the transcript this morning of President Bush's speech, I couldn't help but think how a lot of these speeches don't really have a lot of substance to them. They are just uttering more fancy rhetoric about what they have already stated (which I guess is kinda like preaching, sometimes). I will try to stay out of the politics of his speech for now, except to say there were things I agreed with and things with which I did not agree. The thing that is important for anyone to remember, whether they agree with the president on everything or not: He is our president. What does that mean? Well, for followers of Christ, it means a couple of things. It means, first of all, that we pray for him. The Apostle Paul wrote that "requests, prayers, and intercession" "be made for everyone-for kings and all those in authority..." God also tells us that "the King's heart is in the hand of the LORD's; he turns it wherever he wants it, like the rivers of water." God is the King of the universe, so if we don't like the way things are going, we need to tell him, and trust him with it. Because, after all...I think that is why He's God. He is bigger than a band of terrorists, or a country with a nuclear bomb, or high taxes, or layoffs, or natural disasters, or a bankrupt social security system, or illegal aliens (I don't mean E.T.), or poor schools, or expensive gas. We should do all we can politically to be involved with the democratic system of our government (which is really a republic), but mainly we should be praying for our leader to make the right decisions, no matter what political party he represents. And then we should swallow an even tougher pill- we should thank God for our president. Some will probably imagine that I am clinically insane at this point, but Paul spells it out for us. Not only are "requests, prayers, and intercessions" offered up to God on behalf of the king and those in authority, but also "thanksgiving." If you're an avid "Bush-hater," I admit this might be difficult, but it is nonetheless your obligation. This, as well as any moral obligation, is not fulfilled through self determination or individual resolve. It must be done through submission to Christ and the power that is yours in the power of the Holy Spirit. So, I hope that your politics and your spiritual life are complementary with one another. If we regularly offered prayers and thanksgivings on behalf of our leadership in Washington, how might our world be different? Well, let's all be thankful that God does not give us a yearly update of how things are going, not that his control would ever be compromised, but that He would shred me and a lot of others for not doing our part on this terrestial ball.