Plagiarism of Some Thoughts on Race

There is an article that I ran across tonight while I was looking for some ideas on the internet about seeking racial harmony within the church, and I thought this would be beneficial to some of my readers, because it was for me. The article is a little dated, as it came out in 2000, but it is from John Piper, the pastor of Bethlehem Baptist Church since 1980. It is also pertaining to the upcoming MLK day of that year. Anyway, since he does a much better job of articulating things than I do, I figured it would be better to let him say it. Hope you enjoy it.
January 16, 2000; Ephesians 2:11-22
Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands - 12 remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity. 17 AND HE CAME AND PREACHED PEACE TO YOU WHO WERE FAR AWAY, AND PEACE TO THOSE WHO WERE NEAR; 18 for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.
Tomorrow is Martin Luther King Day. In 1983, the Congress established the third Monday of every January as a national holiday in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. and what he stood for. King's birthday is January 15 and, if he had not been assassinated in 1968 in Memphis, Tennessee, he would have been 71 years old yesterday. Imagine what our recent history might have been had Martin Luther King lived during the seventies and eighties and nineties and trumpeted his vision during all those years!
Why do I mark this day with a sermon on racial relations each year? - this is the fourth year. There are more reasons than I can tell you. But let me tell you some of them. The main reason is in today's text, Ephesians 2:11-22 and it has to do with the glory of the cross of Christ. I will come to that in a few minutes. But there are personal reasons that might help you understand why it is something I feel a burden to do.
Growing Up White in South Carolina
Start with my growing-up years. I grew up in Greenville, South Carolina. You need to know something of the psyche of this state where I spent the first eighteen years of my life. The population of South Carolina in 1860 was about 700,000. Sixty percent of these were African Americans (420,000) and all but 9,000 of these were slaves.1 That's a mere 140 years ago. On December 20, 1860, South Carolina was the first state to secede from the Union, largely in protest over Abraham Lincoln's election as an anti-slavery president. And it was in Charleston, South Carolina that the Civil War began. Ninety-five years later, when I was nine years old in Greenville, the segregation was absolute: drinking fountains, public rest rooms, public schools, bus seating, housing, restaurants, waiting rooms and - worst of all - churches, including mine.
And I can tell you from the inside that, for all the rationalized glosses, it was not "separate but equal," it was not respectful, and it was not Christian. It was ugly and demeaning. I have much to be sorry about, and I feel a burden to work against the mindset and the condition of heart that I was so much a part of in those years. And it goes on. South Carolina today will not give state workers a holiday tomorrow and many pride themselves on flying the Confederate flag.
Another Little Boy
Across town from where I grew up, in the same city, five years older than I, another little boy was growing up on the other side of the racial divide. His name was Jesse Jackson. I learned last summer that his mother loved the same radio station my mother did: WMUU, the voice of Bob Jones University. But there was a big difference. The very school that broadcast all that Bible truth would not admit blacks. And the large, white Baptist church not far from Jesse Jackson's home wouldn't either. This was my hometown. And as an aside I ask, should we be surprised that some of the strongest black leaders got their theological education at liberal institutions (like Chicago Theological Seminary, where Jackson went), when our fundamental and evangelical schools, especially in the south, were committed to segregation?
Waking Up
God had mercy on me. In the year that I started seminary in California -1968 - Martin Luther King was shot and killed. These were explosive days and I was fortunate to have professors who cared about the issues and were committed to finding the Biblical perspective on racial relations. One of those professors, Paul Jewett, compiled a 200-page syllabus of readings for us called "Readings in Racial Prejudice." These readings were absolutely shocking. You can't read about the crimes of vicious hatred toward blacks and come away without trembling. The Introduction of that syllabus ends like this:
And now let us listen to the groans of Frederick Douglass, feel the lash with Amy, endure the satire of DuBois, and measure the wrath of Malcolm X; let us contemplate the pathos of black childhood and the tragedy of black womanhood. And let us not forget that "he who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it." And let us also remember that if God has given us a revelation of the true nature of man, surely we will render account if we do not live in the light of that revelation, and especially so if we are called to the holy office of the Christian ministry.2
Those were powerful days in my life. And now, thirty years later, by God's amazing grace, I am called to "the holy office of the Christian ministry," and God has given us a revelation of the true nature of man, and I will render an account of my life and ministry to God as to whether I have lived and preached in the light of that revelation. Hence some of my passion for this weekend and this message.
As secular as the Civil Rights movement was in the sixties, there is no denying the profound Christian impulses that throbbed at the center of it, especially in the life and background of Martin Luther King, Jr. - as imperfect as he was. One little glimpse of it can be seen in the way his father responded to King's receiving the Nobel Peace prize in 1964. King and other dignitaries were gathered in Oslo, Sweden, and about to celebrate, when the elder King stepped in and said,
"Wait a minute before you start all your toasts to each other. We better not forget to toast the man who brought us here, and here's a toast to God." Then in a quavering voice, he told what his son's prize meant to him. "I always wanted to make a contribution, and all you got to do if you want to contribute, you got to ask the Lord, and let him know, and the Lord heard me and, in some special kind of way I don't even know, he came down through Georgia and he laid his hand on me and my wife and he gave us Martin Luther King, and our prayers were answered."3
Called to Be More than We Are
Well, I want "to make a contribution" too, as Dr. King, Sr. said. So I asked God's help, and he came up through Minnesota - I don't even know how - and laid his hand on me and Noel, and gave us Karsten and Benjamin and Abraham and Barnabas and Talitha Ruth, and he gave us a church at the middle of a racially diverse city, and he gave us a people, and he gave us a fresh mandate four years ago for our church in these words:
Against the rising spirit of indifference, alienation and hostility in our land, we will embrace the supremacy of God's love to take new steps personally and corporately toward racial reconciliation, expressed visibly in our community and in our church. (Fresh Initiative #3 in Bethlehem's Vision Statement booklet)
We are called as a church to be something more than we are in living out a manifest, visible racial harmony at the center of the city. To help you see this, and to call you to it, I turn with you now to listen to one clear word from God about racial harmony in our church. This is the ultimate reason for preaching on this issue: God has something to say about it and about how we live together as a church.
"No Longer Strangers and Aliens"
First, let's notice how this text begins and ends. In verses 11-12 it begins with a description of the alienation between Jews and Gentiles -specifically Jewish Christians and Gentiles. "Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called "Uncircumcision " by the so-called "Circumcision," which is performed in the flesh by human hands - remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world."
Then in verses 19-22 the text ends with a description of the reconciliation between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians. "So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit."
List the changes and the way Paul exults in the change in relationships. First in verse 19 two negatives and two positives: 1) No longer strangers, 2) no longer aliens, 3) fellow citizens with the saints, 4) part of the same household of God. Then in verse 20 he describes the one common foundation of this new unity: "the foundation of the apostles and prophets" with Christ Jesus as the cornerstone. Then in verses 21-22 he says that this new unity of Jew and Gentile built on Christ's saving work and his apostles' teachings is a single building built for the unspeakable privilege of housing God. Verse 21: the church (of reconciled Jew and Gentile) is a temple. And what is a temple? Verse 22 tells us: "a dwelling of God in the Spirit."
That is what God is aiming at in our salvation: a new people (one new man, verse 15) that is so free from enmity and so united in truth and peace that God himself is there for our joy and for his glory forever. That's the aim of reconciliation: a place for God to live among us and make himself known and enjoyed forever and ever.
Now keep in mind here that the divide between Jews and Gentiles was not small or simple or shallow. It was huge and complex and deep. It was, first, religious. The Jews knew the one true God, and Christian Jews knew his Son, the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Then the divide was cultural or social with lots of ceremonies and practices like circumcision and dietary regulations and rules of cleanliness and so on. These were all designed to set the Jews apart from the nations for a period of redemptive history to make clear the radical holiness of God. Then the divide was racial. This was a bloodline going back to Jacob, not Esau, and Isaac, not Ishmael, and Abraham, not any other father. So the divide here was as big or bigger than any divide that we face today between black and white or red and white, or Asian and African-American.
Reconciliation and Unity out of Alienation and Separation
So here is the question: What happened between verses 11-12 that describes the alienation and separation between Jews and Gentiles, and verses 19-22 that describes the full reconciliation and unity?
Here we could preach for days. These verses, 13-18, are so rich and thick with doctrine that it would take days to unpack it all. So I will leave many questions unanswered and make one main point that I think is the most essential thing.
What happened between the alienation of verses 11-12 and the reconciliation of verses 19-22? The answer is that Jesus Christ, the Son of God died - and he died by design. Yes, he rose and is alive. But the emphasis here falls on his death. Where do we see it? We see it in the word "blood" in verse 13b: "You who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ." We see it in the word "flesh" in verse 15, ". . . abolishing in His flesh the enmity." And we see it in the word "cross" in verse 16, ". .. and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross."
The rest of the text is Paul's explanation of how the blood of Christ - his death in the flesh on the cross - removes the enmity between God and Jew, God and Gentile and Jew and Gentile, and, therefore, by implication, between every ethnic group of Christians who are in Christ who has become our peace. I won't go into that, as profound and wonderful as it is.
A New Creation - One New People
Let me take this one point and draw things to a close with it and apply it to us as a church. The point is that God aims to create one new people in Christ who are reconciled to each other across racial lines. Not strangers. Not aliens. No enmity. Not far off. Fellow citizens of one Christian "city of God." One temple for a habitation of God. And he did this at the cost of his Son's life. We love to dwell on our reconciliation with God through the death of his Son. And well we should. It is precious beyond measure - to have peace with God (Romans 5:9-10).
But let us also dwell on this: that God ordained the death of his Son to reconcile alien people groups to each other in one body in Christ. This too was the design of the death of Christ. Think on this: Christ died to take enmity and anger and disgust and jealousy and self-pity and fear and envy and hatred and malice and indifference away from your heart toward all other persons who are in Christ by faith - whatever the race.
Now here is one concluding implication of this. Paul says in Galatians 6:14 - and I hope we say with him - "May it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ." Is this one of the great aims of our church - never to boast save in the cross of Jesus? Does this not mean, among other things, that week in and week out we want the meaning and the worth and the beauty and the power of the cross of Christ - the death of Christ, the shed blood of Christ - to be seen and loved in this place? Do we not want that? Is that not why we exist - to spread a passion for the supremacy of God in the death of his Son?
And if the design of the death of his Son is not only to reconcile us to God, but to reconcile alienated ethnic groups to each other in Christ, then will we not display and magnify the cross of Christ better by more and deeper and sweeter ethnic diversity and unity in our worship and life? If Christ died - mark this! DIED - to make the church a reconciled body of Jew and Gentile, "red and yellow, black and white" and every shade of brown, then to glory in the cross is to glory in the display of the fruit of that cross.
And So . . .
At the risk of sounding trite on such a great theme and a great goal, I will give you some very practical exhortations:
1) Welcome newcomers every week. Make a weekly aim to welcome someone you don't know. The loneliest place in the week is in the commons with two hundred bustling people. Talk to the people you don't know.2) Invite people of different ethnic backgrounds to church with you.3) Be glad when different ethnic elements are used in the service.4) Ponder the cross of our Lord Jesus and what it means. 5) Pray toward more wisdom and sensitivity.
©Desiring God
Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you do not make more than 1,000 physical copies. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by Desiring God.
Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: By John Piper. ©Desiring God. Website: http://www.desiringgod.org/. Email: mail@desiringGod.org. Toll Free: 888.346.4700.

Reflections On My Trip

Well, I admit that I have not blogged lately, and I am sure that ripple has been negatively felt throughout the world. I am now back, though, with a vengeance and desire to infect each of you with a passion for Christ. I did recently get back in town, having been away to a conference known as “the Together for the Gospel” Conference in Louisville, Kentucky. It was probably the best pastors’ conference I’ve ever been to, although I admittedly have not been to a lot in my short twenty-two months as a pastor. What was very interesting about the conference was the mixture of pastors who spoke, who were from all different perspectives, and yet together for the sake of the gospel.

There were quite a few benefits of the conference that I would love to share with each of you, but I know that most of us are more interested in watching reruns of Matlock (I hope I you’ll take that as a joke) than listening to these boring and mundane details. I would like to share with you a couple of things that were pressed home to me during the conference:

(1.) It is very essential in long-term pastoral ministry to build good friendships.
This was pressed home to me because of different things, but the most important was the fact that I went to Kentucky with my best friend who introduced me to several of his friends, and while I was there I saw an old friend from college that I haven’t seen in about eight years. Those times of companionship were the best parts of being there, although the preaching was really great, also. Being there was a reminder that we all need good friendships in the ministry. My friend and I who went to the conference have a very good friendship that I thank God for, because we can bounce ideas, thoughts, feelings, and doctrinal wrestles off of one another without being assassinated. I have truly been sharpened in my ministry by the “iron” of his friendship. What was also really breathtaking was the diverse group of men who hosted this conference: a Southern Baptist pastor, a Southern Baptist seminary president, a Presbyterian pastor, and a Charismatic Calvinist. The other speakers consisted of a non-denominational pastor, a General Baptist pastor, and a Presbyterian pastor. What was interesting about it was the fact that the four hosting men would sit down and have an open panel discussion about each “talk” with the one who had delivered it, and although they did not agree on a lot of things, they could come together with respect to the gospel. I really aspire to have good friends like that who can put peripheral differences aside and come together for the gospel. Unfortunately, I come from a movement where a lot of my friends would be prevented from being friends with me, because of their desire to fight battles that are unfortunately in the kingdom of Christ very trite.

(2.) While cultural sensitivity is always a concern in strategic ministry, it was important to be reminded that God is the one who blesses faithfulness to preaching the gospel and His Word.
I am sure some of you who might read this will now think I wasted a lot of money to go to Kentucky to find out this apparently simple concept. I, of course, did know it, but I most certainly needed to be reminded of God’s faithfulness to His Word and the message of Jesus Christ.


(3.) My Goal in preaching, life, and ministry is to unveil the glory of Christ.
If you know anything about me or the conference I went to, you can probably guess who preached this sermon, but it was exactly what I needed. In fact, the night he preached it, I felt like I was in the presence of the famous pastor Richard Baxter, who said, “to preach as a dying man to dying men.” I cried several times, feeling the overwhelming weight of conviction that God was putting on me. I also felt the enormous weight of the responsibility I have to show the people whom I have been entrusted with the glory of Christ. My great prayer is that I will be able to unveil the glory of Christ to my kids and the people with whom I come in contact.

(4.) My desire for sharing the gospel was renewed.
For those of you who might not know, the gospel is the good news about how God sent his Son (Jesus Christ) to save helpless sinners (like me) from their sin and hell so that He (God) could restore the glory of His name in having a relationship with us. My responsibility to talk about that was made more urgent to me this past week. I was reminded of how easy it is to ignore people who need to hear about Jesus Christ and how he wants to save them. I was convinced of my own neglect to share this with others, and my own responsibility to share this message as part of a pastoral mandate to “do the work of an evangelist.” Thanks for listening to my reflections on a good week in Kentucky.

Sports and Life

I really like sports. In fact, I have been known to be fanatical about them. My kids are afraid when I watch college football and they are in the room, and my wife and I typically do not get along during that time. There is something about watching sports (especially if one has a vested interest in one of the teams or players) that can bring out the wildest reaction in an observer. The only thing that can probably generate more fury is when one is actually playing the sport. I was watching the NCAA men’s basketball championship game the other night between Florida and UCLA, and I was thinking about how cool it will be to look back on this game years later and remember some of these players that perhaps have gone on to make it big in the NBA. Some of you might think I have already retired, but I am still just musing.

Last week, I sent a lot of my childhood basketball books to our church yard sale, but not without hesitation. Those books did bring back many memories for me as a kid who wanted to be a great athlete (never happened, by the way). In the pile were books about all kinds of basketball greats from the 1950’s all the way to the 1980’s. There was also a book about Magic Johnson, my basketball hero, as well as other books about the Los Angeles Lakers, my favorite team. I remember, though, going outside on our dirt court trying to envision that I was Magic Johnson. He could do it all. He is still in my estimation one of the greatest players to have ever played the game, and undoubtedly one of the most fun to watch in terms of entertainment.

I recall, though, that when Magic Johnson was diagnosed with H.I.V. how devastated I was. I was in high school at the time, but it had a very negative effect on me. I recall how disappointed I was at what had taken place. I remember how my really good Celtic fans gave me the third degree about it, like I’m the one who made him be sexually promiscuous. I did grow up a little in the days and weeks that followed that, however, because it introduced to me the reality of the world in which we live. It never discouraged me from having heroes; it rather taught me the importance of choosing the right ones. It taught me something else, though. It tutored me in the arena of human frailty, and brought me to the realization that money and fame and power are possessions of humanity that often do little but corrupt and corrode the moral fiber of the man inside. Don’t misunderstand me; there are exceptions. But the moral casualties of our sports world are too many to count.

I suppose what reminded me of all this were the recent reports about baseball now looking into the allegations of steroid use among its players, one in particular- Barry Bonds. Bonds will almost certainly break Babe Ruth’s career home run record, and is closing very rapidly on Hank Aaron’s all-time leading career home run record. The reason baseball is jumping through hoops now is because of the pressure congress has put on them to do something about the drug use (and rightfully so). It is also the recent book released that alleges Barry Bond has used steroids for some time. The truth is Bonds is an easy target, and the fact is not many people really like Bonds. He has always been somewhat of a rebel to the sport, in fact. As a Braves fan, I used to dislike him when he played for the Pittsburgh Pirates, because I just thought he was a dirty player, but that may have been just my biased opinion (which I am entitled to, since this is my blog). Bonds was never a friend to the media, or really anyone else in baseball. In fact, his own teammates have been know to dislike him. If you don’t think that is a fair treatment, just ask Jeff Kent who got into a dug out brawl with Bonds two or three years ago, before Kent was traded from San Francisco to Houston. But, as much as I dislike Bonds, I would not have minded his breaking the all-time homerun record. Why? Because, it is history, and I love to be an observer of good history (like when the Red Sox reversed the curse or when Tiger Woods won his first Masters as the youngest ever or when Lance Armstrong won his sixth Tour de France). Considering that none of us actually know whether Bonds used steroids or not at this point, it is still unfortunate that our sports have sunk to this level of moral value. We do know that some have used it, and my own suspicion is that once this can of worms begins to open, many of our favorite players, managers, and teams will be ravaged by the depravity of their own actions.

What does all of this mean? Does it mean that I am going to get mad at them and stop buying tickets and stop watching games? Not really. I will probably fuss and rant, but then I will be back at it again, yelling at the t.v. again to change pitchers or to bunt a guy over instead of trying to knock it out of the park. I do think I need to stop long enough, though, to point out to my kids how life is full of people just like sports figures who might just disappoint us, even people like their dad, i.e. me. I might also want to emphasize the fact that people who cheat to win actually lose in the ultimate game of life. And I may want to throw something in there about the only One who can forgive and fix a cheater is Jesus Christ, and He is the One who will never, ever disappoint them.

Answering Questions About Spiritually Gray Areas

When I started off at college in Jacksonville, Florida a few years ago, we were required to attend the chapel services. During one of the famous, chapel sermons, I heard a message that (at the time) was very important to me. It was delivered by our Executive Vice-President and was entitled “How to Deal with Spiritually Gray Areas.” The title itself struck me to be very relevant to what a lot of young guys were trying to discern was the best way to deal with issues about which the Bible just did not have a definitive answer. They were not black or white; they were just gray.

As I was scrolling the other day through old sermons I have kept through the years, I ran across this one, and couldn’t help but mentally enter that old dialogue about what in life is acceptable to do and what is not. For me, I know the issues that were important to me as an eighteen or nineteen year-old have since changed now that I am a thirty-one year-old. I felt, in those days, that I was highly isolated from reality. I was trying to fulfill the command “to be in the world, but not of the world.” I was trying to “come out from among them,” and striving to “be separate.” What is fascinating to me now, however, is that as I look back over the points of his sermon, that many of the things he said are still very compatible with my worldview, except that I look at it in a totally different light than I did then, and interpret his words much differently.

For the sake of anonymity (and boredom), I will conceal the outline of the sermon, but will jump right into the task of asking the more pressing question that confronts many Christians today, as it did for me then (although I am still grappling with many of these issues): How do we determine what things are right and wrong, in the event that the Scriptures (hopefully our primary rule of faith and practice) fail to deal explicitly with that issue. Well, let me state at the outset of this that I do agree with this speaker that there are larger Scriptural principles that speak indirectly to many of these “spiritually gray areas.” Nevertheless, I think it is dangerous as well as legalistic to define what those areas look like for every Christian. Moreover, to set up clearly defined rules based on one’s clearly defined interpretation based on what is not clear to Christianity at large is not only arrogant, but remarkably cultic.

In fact, Paul warned us about this in Romans 14, when he was trying to handle a disputation over some other minor matters and said, “Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.” In other words, figure out what is right for you. That might sound a little too post-modern for some of us, but the truth is that is exactly what Paul was communicating. In fact, in verse 25 he says, “So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves.” The issue, he goes on to state, should always be a matter of faith. If we fail to trust the Lord in what we are doing, then whatever it is we are doing is sin.

How does that translate, however, to a situation in which a believer might ruin his or her good Christian standing? Let me, first of all, say that there is not a “one size fits all” approach to this. The brutal reality of this discussion is that if you “offend” one type of Christian, you might “impress” another. In this vein is also the problem of what many well-meaning people have erroneously quoted in defense of not ever doing anything that is spiritually gray: 1 Thessalonians 5:22, which has been translated in the King James “Abstain from every appearance of evil.” In the NIV, however, it is translated “Avoid every kind of evil.” The difference, of course, is pretty sizable in meaning. One is what appears to be wrong; the other is in actuality wrong. The word for “kind” or “form” is the Greek word “morphe” which is also used in Philippians 2 to refer to Jesus’ being very God and very man. He did not merely appear to be God, but was in fact God, and He took on the “morphe” of a man.

I guess what all of that means is very simply that it is not that simple to pull that verse out of our spiritual wallets and use it at the first glance of something spiritually ambiguous. The truth is that our Christian lives are in the midst of an incredibly changing world that will stretch us far more than I believe any generation before us has been stretched. We will have to think through strategies and ways of ministry that will seem to many questionable and perhaps even crossing the line. But, this idea of risky ministry is no different than what Jesus did during His day. In fact, Jesus might have been cast out of some local fellowships, or gossiped about by some church gurus. Why? Because, to them, he would have crossed the line. When he met the prostitute at the well in Samaria, He was (by the standards of the day and of His own disciples) crossing the line. In addition, the Pharisees, of course, saw that Jesus was eating and drinking with sinners so much that they not only called him a “friend of sinners,” but “a winebibber and glutton” (for those who believe in a non-alcoholic bible, it would be a grape juice bibber). Think of that, Jesus did not, in fact, abstain from every appearance of evil, in seeking people to be saved (we, of course, know that He did abstain from every form or kind or evil, because He lived a sinless life).

So, how do we determine what is good and what is bad, if the Bible does not spell it out for us? Well, we could ask our nearest cult leader, but that might cause more damage than good. My opinion is that we filter what we do through two Scriptural questions: (1) Will this thing or course of action help me to treasure Christ as the most satisfying passion of my life? And (2) Will this help me to introduce others to the treasure of Christ? I think that is what Paul meant when he said, “So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.” He went on to say “For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.”

Divorce Really Sucks!

I have known quite a few people in my life (and family) who have been through divorce, or who are going through divorce. From all accounts of those who have given me their personal perspectives on it, it is without a doubt one of the hardest things anyone could possibly go through. From a practical vantage point, of course, there are many bad aspects, such as the division of properties (unless the person truly committed themselves by signing a prenuptial agreement), financial hardship from lawyers, alimony, child support, or just having to raise kids on your own. But there are also the tremendous emotional scars and difficulties that go along with situations like this. The spousal scars themselves are pretty devastating as it is. The pain of having lived with someone for an extended period of time and, in some cases, having even shared the mutual joy of parenting, and the agonizing memories of having to get over whatever attachment was at one time there with that spouse. These, of course, are normal casualties of marriage. They fail to include the more extreme instances in which there was abuse (emotional and/or physical), as well as instances where the kids are highly affected. The kids are always affected, sometimes more than others, depending on their ages and the set of circumstances and the support group surrounding them. I guess what I am trying to say is that divorce really sucks! I know that may offend some of my readers, but there is really no better way to describe what it is in our modern vernacular.

The truth is I am planning to write a paper on divorce and remarriage soon, because it is such an epidemic among our society today, including the church. I do not believe, of course, that divorce was God’s original intention, but I am also not ready to bless everyone who decides to get a divorce these days, like for one’s wife burning the toast (although temporary separation might be advisable). The issue I would like to point out, however, is the failure of the church to help people move on in their lives. The church has spent a lot of resources arguing about whether divorce is allowed (and I will throw my two cents in there with them, soon), but I would contend one of the greatest needs is for us to think through strategies to help people make the most of their lives NOW. None of us can do anything about the past. I was reading an article yesterday about divorce, and the guy very aptly brought up the story of the woman caught in adultery in John chapter 8. He pointed out some similarities between how we treat divorcees and how the Pharisees treated the woman taken in adultery. There was no debate on whether the woman had committed a sin; the issue at hand only concerned how to handle the situation, and where to go from there. The Pharisees, of course, had the really loving idea of killing her. They were also concerned about equal rights for women, because the man with whom she had committed the adultery was not among their mob, even though he was initially there (and, yes, I am using literary sarcasm).

The thing I think is noteworthy in this story is the fact that Jesus and the Pharisees had two different purposes in mind with respect to the woman. The Pharisees wanted to condemn her for what she did; Jesus wanted to save her. The Pharisees wanted to stone her; Jesus wanted to heal her. The Pharisees wanted to ruin her; Jesus wanted to restore her. The fact is that Jesus’ desire was to take a broken life and fix it, no matter what her past had been. Wow, it almost seems like we should be involved in doing stuff like that as His people. I have actually heard people criticizing churches for having divorce recovery classes or support groups for those who are hurting. If we don’t try to help people recover from a devastating loss such as this, why don’t we go to the quarry and grab some pebbles and start heaving them at the divorcee the next time we see them. But, if you take that approach, let me just say that you might want to observe first your own writing in the sand.

So, what is my conclusion? I will spare you my thoughts in regards to whether someone should get a divorce, and simply say that this is a really difficult subject. It is very difficult because we all know someone who is going through this, or maybe we ourselves are going through this. No normal person sets out to have a divorce. From the time of a small child, every one perceives their own story will result in a happy ending, but unfortunately we live in a real world. We experience not only our own sinfulness, but the sinfulness of others. The good news is that Jesus is glorified in our weakness, and will give us grace when we fail and falter and mess up. It doesn’t mean we downplay sin or its painful effects; it doesn’t mean we willfully sin; it doesn’t mean we promote divorce; it just means that it is okay to try to help people who are going through things like divorces, or who are still dealing with the effects of divorce. Divorce really sucks, but the grace of God is really awesome!

Boys Rule, Girls Drool

Last week, I talked with our group about the role of women in ministry, and it was pretty interesting. I got out without any blood being shed or my family being hurt, so that was good. This is sometimes a very unfriendly issue among some churches, and I just want to be clear that my position is the very historical one of complementarian (although, it has only been named this in recent years). My more chauvinistic (as well as elementary) friends might be more inclined to label this as the position where “Boys rule and girls drool.” Seriously, after I talked about my perspective of women in ministry, as well as the family, we did a Q and A session in which some good questions were asked. Although I answered those questions during that time, I would like to expand just a little to some of those specific thoughts.

Do you believe women can be deacons?
Answer: Yes, I believe women can and should be deacons. However, I do not believe that they should be deacons if a deacon is to be understood as a ruler or part of a decision-making body, such as is the case in a lot of Baptist churches today.
Expansion: Deaconesses are arguably referred to in 1Timothy 3:11, where it says, “In the same way, their wives…” When you look the term up for “their wives,” you find 2 interesting facts: (1) There is no “their” and (2) there is no “wives.” The actual Greek word for this is “the women.” If that is the case, then it seems that this is an effort by Paul to allow for women to be deacons. It has been objected by Wayne Grudem that it doesn’t make sense for Paul “to sandwich only one verse about women deacons in the middle of five verses (three preceding and two following) about men who are deacons.” Let me just say that it would make sense if Paul wanted to make a special point that women could be deacons. I would also add that this is the only passage in the entire Bible that gives us any hint about deacons, and it does not mention one thing they are supposed to do. That seems a little odd also, but we still hold that deacons should do something. I would also add that Phoebe is called literally a deaconess of the church in Cenchrea in Romans 16:1. The term “deaconess” or “deacon” means literally “servant” and can be used as such, but it doesn’t make sense to refer to her in such a formal way that it connects her to the church of Cenchrea, if she is just a Christian who serves. It seems more likely that she did hold the specific office of a deaconess in that church.

Can women serve as worship leaders or children’s ministers?
Answer: Yes, women can serve in these positions as long as you define what exactly their role is in relation to a pastor. If they are not ruling or teaching (in a public way), then there is nothing that prevents them from serving in that capacity, except maybe our sinful, male chauvinism.
Expansion: Women should be encouraged to seek ministry in any role possible. All believing women (as I talked about) are called to ministry. Paul assumed that women would be involved in public praying and speaking prophecy in the Church of Corinth, and he assumed that they would be involved in active learning within the Ephesian congregation, as well. I am also not opposed to women teaching men in private settings. The position of those who are against this is incredulous. Priscilla, of course, taught Apollos when he was a young preacher. Although her husband helped, it is probable that she was the more prominent teacher among them, since she is mentioned first. It is also very practical to assume that mothers and older ladies should be teaching not only their sons, but the younger men. If the extreme position is taken, however, at what age do they become men and do the mothers and older women stop teaching them? And what about the Beth Moore’s who have obviously helped so many with their teaching? Is it not also true that women missionaries have had to teach men who did not know the Scriptures, even after they were converted? What are they supposed to say, “Oh no, I can’t teach you the Bible, because you’re a man. Yeah, I know I am the only one who knows anything about this stuff, but you see, my preachers back home in America think that I should submit to males in every situation, regardless of how impractical that may seem. I guess you can just wait for a male missionary to come over here.” Gimme a break!

What about women working outside the home, as well as ruling over men in the work place?
Answer: I think that it is okay for women to work outside of the home, as long as it does not take away from her responsibility to cook for her husband (ha!ha! couldn’t resist). Seriously, I think her primary goal should be to be a “keeper of the home,” but working outside the home (especially as the kids get older and go to school) should not be ruled out. If women work outside the home, then they will probably in some cases get promoted and rule over men, and there is nothing wrong biblically with that.
Expansion: Very briefly, Deborah was a judge who ruled over Israel, and by all accounts did a great job. Once again, the issue is not ruling over men at all. A woman should always conduct herself in the virtuous stance of being a female image-bearer, as opposed to the equally valuable stance of being a hairy, image bearer. A woman should voluntarily submit to her husband’s headship in the same way that a member of the church voluntarily submits to Christ, and like Christ voluntarily submits to the Father. It is not a question of value, but roles. The role in the family is fixed; the role in the church is fixed; the role outside of those two areas should still reflect the womanhood of the female, but is not to be rigidly administered in the same sense as the other two, because of the Scriptures’ silence and the culture’s practical demands.

In terms of unity, how important is this issue?
Answer: This is not worth fighting over among the universal body of Christ. Moreover, I have fellowship regularly with those who do not agree with me on this. I am not going to slash their tires or throw a stink bomb at their house. However, I do think it is important for people to talk about and understand. If God has a design for something (as I obviously believe he does with respect to this), then I think it is important and beneficial for us to follow that design.
Expansion: None.

Let me just say that I love women. In fact, I am married to one, and have two others who are training to be women also. They are treasures. I can only imagine how Adam felt the first time he saw his “helper,” Eve. Eve completed him just like all wives are designed to complete their husbands. And women are the backbone of any church. And, did I say that I love women? Well, hope these thoughts make you flesh out your own beliefs and convictions about women in ministry. Until next time…

A Blog About the Journey

Well, just thought I would post some thoughts about what I feel is going on in my life. I have been personally consumed the past few weeks, trying to flesh out some of my thoughts about the emerging church movement, and have basically come to the conclusion that I agree with all of the major core values of this, and believe God would be most glorified in our implementing this strategy in my family’s life, as well as our church. I have also learned that there are a lot of different people within this movement that represent a lot of different ideas about theology, church life, and culture. Because of that, I have learned not to wave the banner of “I’m an emerging church guy,” since in some circles that would be as appropriate as a ruffian in a long, trench coat yelling to everyone in a crowded bank, “Can I have your attention, please?!”

On this journey, I have also been learning more about my kids and their needs. They obviously need Christ more than anything. But, I am seeking to understand how to convey the value of Christ to them in an attractive way. Being authentic is really fun to talk about with respect to church, but it is really difficult to do at home. It means being comfortable enough with your faith that you don’t feel a burden to explain everything. It also means that you need to be transparent with them in admitting that you are or were wrong about some things. From the masculinity of my family roots, I have learned how graciously to slay someone in the name of Jesus Christ. I would venture to say many of us take joy in getting the upper hand in an argument, or in arrogating our own position. But sometimes, we need to mirror the humility of Christ and empty ourselves for the benefit of those who observe us, especially our (my) kids.

I am also experiencing more of the futility of this life. As we plan for trips this year, and buy stuff, and eat out, and watch movies and our favorite t.v. show, and do fun stuff, I can never help but think that these things are so fleeting. They bring us to realize our own emptiness. And while they are to be enjoyed and used for the glory of God, when they stand on their own outside of that circle of purpose, they leave us feeling thirsty, like the after taste of a glass of coke. I am just reminded of how important a personal relationship with Christ is. I am also reminded that if this relationship stays personal, and does not overflow, then that, too, is tainted with ultimate futility.

Moreover, I am thankful for the experience of our worship gathering. When I first typed this, I had the words “at church” following the words worship gathering, but I deleted them to make the point that the church is not a building, but a people. Our people have been on a journey the last eighteen months, and we are a work in progress, but God continues to give us sweet times together as we seek to experience Him. We are doing some outward things to improve our ability to connect with people, but the most important thing is that we are learning that we must change, and allow more room for engaging our culture and building relationships.

Finally, I am thankful for the opportunity to do what I am doing. With all of the conflicts, uphill battles, and personal struggles that I have to measure up, I love being a pastor. It is my heart’s desire, and I can’t think of anything I would rather do (except maybe walk up to people in traffic and wash their windows). It has truly been an incredible journey, one which is just beginning, I hope. Thank all of you who have allowed me to be where I am doing what I love to do. Thank all of you who endure this boring blog just because you like me or want to send me props. I know I pale in comparison to the profile of a pastor and his biblical requirements, but I thank God for His forgiveness, grace, mercy, and love, because without Him I would truly be nothing. For now, talk at ya later.

Helps from Hannah

I have worked through the years with a lot of teenagers and young adults, and I have found that one of their most prominent questions involves the matter of what am I supposed to do with my life? Most of them, as believers, fortunately do understand that their ultimate goal is to display the glory of God in everything. But their more probing concern has to do with yeah, but where do I do that, or what am I supposed to do specifically, or how do I get there, or who am I supposed to marry, or which church am I supposed to attend (the one your parents tells you, too, right?), etc., etc., etc. As trite as these things may sound, they not only consume the thoughts of teenagers and young adults, but also the mind of many full-grown adults, as well as others (I guess that means like E.T., like is he supposed to travel back to Andromeda or stay on earth?).

When I moved to Jacksonville, after I graduated from high school, I started studying specific issues, so that I would know what I believed. And in doing that, I found quite an array of books and articles on “the will of God.” Unfortunately for me, one of the things I picked up on during that time from some of my reading was the very limiting idea that God does not normally work through our experiences, and that for our lives today, believers have no such thing as “an inner impression” or “still, small voice.” I became very negative towards experiences, and in fact spoke out against them. It has taken me quite a while to get back, but I am realizing that God works through our experiences, and we need to acknowledge that in our everyday lives. Don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying that our experience should be supreme, nor am I suggesting that it go unchecked. I am merely stating that it is a big part of our life, and it is time that Baptists stopped pretending like it doesn’t exist.

My point in bringing this idea of experience up is to include it in this discussion about knowing God’s will. So many of those books and articles led me down the wrong path, but my study of the Scriptures brought me back. I read a book this past year, though, that articulated very well a lot of what I think with respect to God’s will, and I would like to highlight some of those key elements. These are not my original thoughts. In fact, they are straight from this book that is considered by many to be a Christian classic, The Christian’s Secret of a Happy Life. The author is Hannah Whitall Smith, who was a 19th century Quaker, with whom I do not agree in every matter, but for the most part, wrote a fantastic book that gives us insight into how to live the Christian life. I have managed to summarize some of her thoughts from her chapter on “Difficulties Concerning Guidance.” Since I am too lazy to write this on my own, I thought you might enjoy her words about finding the will, or desire, of God for your life:

“There are four ways in which he (God) reveals His will to us, -through the Scriptures, through providential circumstances, through the convictions of our own higher judgment, and through the inward impressions of the Holy Spirit on our minds. Where these four harmonize, it is safe to say that God speaks. For I lay it down as a foundation principle, which no one can gainsay, that of course His voice will always be in harmony with itself, no matter in how many different ways He may speak. The voices may be many, the message can be but one. If God tells me in one voice to do or to leave undone anything, He cannot possibly tell me the opposite in another voice.”

The Scriptures: “The Scriptures come first. If you are in doubt upon any subject, you must, first of all, consult the Bible about it, and see whether there is any law there to direct you. Until you have found and obeyed God’s will as it is revealed, you must not ask nor expect a separate, direct, personal revelation. Where our Father has written out for us a plain direction about anything, He will not of course make an especial revelation to us about anything. The Bible, it is true, does not always give a rule for every particular course of action, and in these cases we need and must expect guidance in other ways, but no guidance will ever be contrary to the Scriptures either.
It is essential, however, in this connection to remember that the Bible is a book of principles, and not a book of disjointed aphorisms. Isolated texts may often be made to sanction things to which the principles of Scripture are totally opposed. I believe all fanaticism comes in this way.”

Our Higher Judgment: “It is not enough to have a ‘leading;’ we must find out the source of that leading before we give ourselves up to follow it. It is essential, therefore, that our ‘leadings’ should all be tested by the teachings of Scripture. But this alone is not enough. They must be tested as well by our own spiritually enlightened judgment, or what is familiarly called ‘common sense.’ God will speak to us through the faculties He has Himself given us, and not independently of them; so that just as we are to use our outward eyes in our outward walk, no matter how full of faith we may be, so also we are to use the interior ‘eyes of our understanding’ in our interior walk with God.”

Providential Circumstances: “If a ‘leading’ is of God, the way will always open for it (John 10:4). If the Lord ‘goes before’ us, He will open the door for us, and we shall not need to batter down doors for ourselves.

Inward Impressions of the Holy Spirit: The way in which the Holy Spirit, therefore, usually works, in a fully obedient soul, in regard to this direct guidance, is to impress upon the mind a wish or desire to do or to leave undone certain things.
The child of God when engaged in prayer feels, perhaps, a sudden suggestion made to his inmost consciousness in reference to a certain point of duty. ‘I would like to do this or that or the other,’ he thinks; ‘I wish I could.’ At once this matter should be committed to the Lord, with an instant consent of the will to obey Him. And then the tests I have mentioned should be intelligently applied, namely, as to whether the suggestion is in accordance with the teaching of Scripture, with a sanctified judgment, and with providential circumstances.”

“In all doubtful things you must stand still and refrain from action until God gives you light to know more clearly His mind concerning them.”

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.

Being Real in Life

As some of you may know, I have been talking a lot lately about authentic relationships. About being real in life. When I mention these things, however, I am not just saying these things in the context of a church setting. I am talking about life. Genuineness should permeate every part and parcel of our life. For too long has the modern church delineated between the secular and the sacred. Every part of our life should be sacred. That is part of the problem of why so many people have abandoned the church, because their real life looks nothing like the church. But that is no slam on the unchurched people; our real life doesn't resemble our church setting either. But where do we take this? Am I saying that our church should resemble every part of real life? If that means members of the church hanging out in each other's homes, sharing struggles with one another, eating together, encouraging one another, and talking about Scriptures, then yes, that is what I mean! If it means that we should tear down every ritual or tradition that is not present in real life, then no, that is not what I mean. Nevertheless, there are some things that the church does that perhaps needs to be looked at. Not for the sake of novelty. But for the sake of relevance and freshness. I openly confess that I do not have all of this figured out, but I am enjoying the journey. That is because I know that it will only take me deeper into the world of effectiveness for the cause of Christ. I want to be effective in my ministry for Christ, so I must always be asking myself if I am authentic in my relationship with God. If that is the case, then I am not afraid to ask if I am authentic in my relationships with others also.

A Moment of Life

It seems that today was just a hodge podge of different issues all running together. My mind was very slow to respond (I know by saying this I am opening myself up to an untold number of juvenile "cut downs"). Maybe it was the fact that my two-year old son wanted to get an early start on the day, by rising at 4:45 AM! I don't guess it is really good parenting if you spank your kid when you are half asleep, but I seriously considered it. Maybe it was the acid reflux I had through the night from my supper the night before (I guess I have now offically turned into my dad and brother). Or maybe it was the sub-par machiatto (have no idea if you spell it that way) that I was eagerly anticipating. Perhaps it was the fact that I have been looking for my Bible and calendar since yesterday. And maybe it was my wife who told me the real reason I was aggravated was because it was my calendar that was lost. Not sure if any of these things had to do with how my day began, but I am sure they all had their part. However, despite these happenings, they were mere ripples on the water compared with the day at large.

The real day started with my continued journey in the Book of Acts, and I got some really great insight into witnessing and bridging relationships (it is amazing how the Bible does that). I usually try to read for about an hour during the first part of my morning, so I was able to dive back into my current study of "the emerging church." It is a movement that I am studying right now by reading two books about it, one in favor of it and one in opposition to it, although both of them say positive and negative things about it. I also made some phone calls and ran some errands (such as visiting the window shop, the post office, our treasurer's house, and a sign shop). After I did all that I ran to get my kids from school, and then did some newsletter and periodical readings about things going on in our town, which is more than a blog site can hold. I am also trying to keep up with this story about the Georgia Baptist Convention voting to oust Mercer University in Macon. I also read from this one Catholic paper how the problem with a lot of Christianity today is St. Augustine, the Apostle's Creed, and Martin Luther's contaminated doctrine of justification by faith alone. Since those things have been pretty important to my faith, I was interested to read someone else shred it apart. After picking myself up off the floor in the style of Switchfoot's "Dare You to Move" hit, I began to do some planning about the church and set a tentative date for me and Melissa to host another Family and Fun Fellowship at our house, since I talked about "Authentic Relationships" from Romans 12 yesterday, and hit on hospitality a great deal. I guess it is pretty important to not just preach the truth, but to do it as well (seems like I may have read that somewhere before). And then I finally studied for my Wednesday devotion (I try not to call it a sermon, since it is more of a sharing time, than preaching, and since it is more abbreviated as a result of our prayer time). And then I got ready for supper and took out the trash and talked with my kids (which I try to do at least twice a month). It was all in all a great day. And the truth is, I love my family. I was sitting at the supper table tonight thinking how great my wife is to put up with a jerk like me. And my kids are just great. I don't mean that in an artificial sense, either. They are far from perfect, of course, as we all are. For all of their irritating imperfections, they are kids. And kids can take the most pointless day and turn it into a moment of laughter or meaning where you are glad you're alive. Thanks God for your goodness to me in giving me my family.

Being a Witness in a Post-Modern Culture

I want to be brutally honest with you in what I am about to say. I really struggle with the methodologies of traditional witnessing or evangelism. The truth is that all believers (if they are honest) get nervous when they go to tell a complete stranger about Jesus Christ. That fact, however, does not mean that cold-call witnessing can't work. I have certainly seen it work. I am speaking from the vantage point of someone who has been involved in evangelism or witnessing for almost eighteen years. And most of the methods that were employed by me or the ones involved with me were traditional methods. Now, it might be helpful to clarify what I mean by "traditional" at this point. Because traditional for me may not be traditional for someone else. Traditional, to me, means going up to complete strangers and talking with them about Jesus Christ. This, of course, can take a number of different forms. The gamut runs from the most extreme form of street preaching to conventional door-knocking. Am I saying these methods can never be used again in any culture? No, I am emphatically not saying that. The truth is that I have used some of these quite a few times in the last year. However, I am just not sold on their effectiveness.

Let me continue to clarify what I mean here. We are not debating the message of the gospel. Jesus
Christ is the gospel. He is what must be proclaimed for people to be saved from themselves. I am debating the method that is to be used in this endeavor. As I have mentioned previously, the culture I am in has unique challenges that will undoubtedly widen my perspective on things, as well as open up my thinking to new ways of doing ministry. I am not bound by any denominational tag or doctrinal statement. I am committed to Jesus Christ and His Word and His kingdom and I want to see people's lives transformed by that.

Seeing people converted, moreover, is my desire but not my responsibility. "I have planted (Paul said); Apollos watered; but God gave the increase." Jesus Christ is the "Lord of the harvest" and He is calling out a redeemed people for Himself. What it does mean is that I must be committed to Christ's leadership in my situations in day-to-day life to affect the relationships around me. I must "launch out into the deep" with an eye of faith and ask Christ to show me what is an acceptable method and what is not. I have looked in vain for a book of the bible that strictly discusses these methods. If there is not one, then I may have to lean on Christ for the answer. Paul made a statement that leaves the door pretty wide open, howeve, for suggestions: "I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some." Knocking on doors might work in the outer suburbs of metro Atlanta, but I am not sure if it is really effective in yuppie, eccentric, post-modern Grant Park, East Atlanta, or Little Five Points. Street preaching may also work in Jamaica or Nicuragaua, but I am not sure if it is the best method to Americans.

So, what is my point? I am learning that an honest, respectful, and open dialogue might be the best way to go with a lot of the culture. What that really boils down to is authentic relationships. In most cases it is a rude assumption on my part to go up and ask someone about their eternal destiny. First of all, I have not earned that right, and for me to pretend that I have a listening audience is the worst form of arrogance. I must attempt to build friendships with those I love. Certainly, we are commanded to love those who are not Christians. So, I guess that would mean them. What? That can't be, because it says "friendship with the world is enmity with God." That is actually the "kosmos", or world system, which is in compliance with Satan. It means we shouldn't give ourselves over to the philosophy or wisdom of the world that contradicts God. Entering the culture and becoming friends with people for the sake of loving them I think is what Jesus did. He was even criticized for that by the religious people calling him such bad names as a "friend of sinners." Our relationship, however, must be genuine and not conditional. In other words, if they are not interested in the gospel I must not abandon them, but continue to try to be God's epistle to them through my life and actions. Jesus certainly did not betray Judas although He knew what was in his heart, and even extended love and compassion to him till the very end.

I will admit that this form of evangelism requires a level of commitment not typically seen in many Christians today, but that doesn't mean it is not essential to our being an effective witness for Christ. For some, this will cause them to say that I am promoting life-style evangelism, or even the social gospel, but never have I negated the absolute necessity of the gospel to be prolaimed. I am just submitting that it is time that we take a look at our culture and see what is needed in our approach to sharing the gospel.

Someone may ask the question, "how far do we go in this?" I am not totally sure, to be honest. I am still finding my way, to be sure. We obviously do not sin in our trying to be friends or build bridges. But, let us also be careful in discriminating what is sin and what is a cultural preference. There are a lot of things in our culture that we are not comfortable with that are not outright sins. And our problem is that we desire to clean them up before (or even when) they get converted. I won't go into all the specifics at this time, but I am suggesting that we go into the Word of God and into the depths of our heart, and see what God would have us to do to more effectively witness of Jesus Christ.