Can you Eat on $42 a Month?

Oregon Governor Theodore Kulongoski and his wife Mary are. My family and I did it in seminary, and I don't care to relive it, but this is an incredible testimony of living where the people whom you serve are.

Gov. Theodore R. Kulongoski and his wife, Mary Oberst, are used to eating the best their state has to offer: salmon, huckleberries and mushrooms foraged from the Cascade mountains.

The coming week will be different. They will spend just $3 a day each on their meals, $42 in all, to match the amount spent by the average food stamp recipient in Oregon.

Mr. Kulongoski, a Democrat, and Ms. Oberst are the most prominent people yet to take part in a “food stamp challenge,” a trend sponsored by religious groups, community activists and food pantries across the country.

Those who have done the challenge say shopping on such a tight budget requires plenty of planning, a reliance on inexpensive staples like legumes, beans, rice and peanut butter and a lack of more expensive protein and fresh fruits and vegetables.

Meeting friends for a slice of pizza or a cup of coffee becomes a nearly unaffordable luxury.

This is an example pastors, and not just politicians, could stand to emulate. Get in the folks' shoes, walk around in them and see how they live for a while. You might find out they are a lot different than you are. Then you really will be equipped for service and ministry.

In a Fix...

I ducked out the door to the cries of "Daddy, you gotta help Noonie!" That is one of our nicknames for their youngest sister, who is two. And don't ask how nicknames evolve in our house, the explanation is too detailed. I went outside to discover this predicament.

Notice also that she obviously had been in there a while before one of her loving sisters came to get me to get her out; her sandals are right there beside her. Perhaps you can provide a clever caption. Mine...maybe they don't multiply like rabbits...

You will note, though, that the door is latched shut.

All Things New...

The tragedy last Monday has occupied a lot of my thoughts and prayers over the past week. I will continue to pray and seek God's face to help me process everything, particularly the content of the last post. However, I was gladdened to come across this story ran in the state Baptist rag. It represents in a way the next step needed to cope with the Tech tragedy.

Some carrying lunch pails, and all bundled against the cold, Amish children walked to their new school in Lancaster County on Monday [April 2, 2007], six months to the day after a gun-toting neighbor walked into their old schoolhouse and shot 10 students, killing five.

[...]

The Amish community demolished the old schoolhouse to erase a reminder of the horror experienced there. Four of the five girls who were shot Oct. 2 have returned to the new school, called New Hope Amish School.

Yes indeed, He makes all things new. I think the name of the new school is very appropriate and communicates much to the world about their faith in God and His ability to redeem any situation for His purposes and for good. May the victims' families of this past Monday's tragedy find the same hope, the same healing, as these dear people have. May the Virginia Tech community also be able to move past this tragedy and embrace hope, the hope that is only found in Jesus Christ.

But we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces
perseverance, and perseverance, character, and character, hope.
Now hope does not disappoint...
Romans 5:3-5

Can I Scream Now?

Currently there is a lot of right-wing entertainment of ridiculous what-ifs and theatricality in print over the tragedy of this past Monday at Virginia Tech. This article from The Conservative Voice is a farce, absolutely inappropriate and frankly, disturbing.

If five or ten unarmed students had rushed the shooter and mobbed him and beat him to a pulp, some would undoubtedly have been wounded or killed, but the rest of the students would have been saved. Charge! Throw textbooks, staplers, anything handy. Pick up pens, pencils. Jump the shooter, tackle him, pile on, crush him to the floor with massed bodies, stab him in the eyes or neck with pencils or pens. (Click the ballpoints out first--makes a better stabbing instrument that way.)

To run this article with the title "The Virginia Tech Massacre's Lessons" totally overlooks that those were people killed, a deranged young man, desperately seeking something (albeit clueless as to what that was), who, incidentally, also has a family who is utterly humiliated over their son's actions, and that there are families who need love and care right now; not macho posturing.

But what I find even more horrific is the comparison to the Flight 93 heroes of 9/11.

I am reminded of Flight 93: Todd Beamer, Jeremy Glick, and all the other passengers who were brave enough to charge the hijackers and prevent that plane's crash into the Capitol Building or the White House.

In my mind, there is no comparison. Regardless of what the Flight 93 heroes did, inaction would have guaranteed death; but the alternative also meant death. These were kids with a thread of hope that they might live, not men doomed to die whether they were successful in their plan of attack on the terrorists or not. At Virginia Tech, there was a potential way out; on Flight 93 there was no way out.

Equally horrific is the writer's comparison to the war in Iraq.

I am reminded of our soldiers who have charged the terrorists, taking the fight to them overseas, rather than sitting passively at our desks waiting to be shot or bombed or gassed or nuked here in the USA.

No comparison. At all. Period.

A Ministry of Presence

I had considered entitling a post "Please Don't Blog About This," to plea with fellow bloggers to delay offering dry, theological sentiment in the wake of the tragedy at Virginia Tech, but I know the voice will not be heeded. Blog friend Streak has already addressed the ridiculousness of the media in covering mass tragedies and blathering on and on about, well, nothing.

But Pastor Chris, the Evangelism Coach, expressed my sentiment about this better than I could.

Questions about the sovereignty of God will come. Questions about the character of God will be asked. Question about evil and questions about human responsibility will be examined.

But now is not the time for theological discourse.

We have theolgoical answers. Scripture informs us, teaches us, and guides us. But it's not the time for logical and dry explanations.

People hurt.

It’s time for compassion and a ministry of presence.

Thanks, Chris.

A Note on the Sovereignty of God

I have been preaching revival at a small church this week. My profile says that the church I pastor is on the backside of nowhere. This little church, that averages about forty, is on the backside of the backside of nowhere.

Tonight after the service I had the opportunity to talk to a young man in the army, about my age, who will be deploying back to Iraq for a second tour in about a month. He has already spent eight months and will spend about that long again. I told him that my brother was doing advanced training and would soon be at Fort Hood in Texas (he is on leave for two weeks and at home right now). This sergeant said, "Really?"

I responded, "Yes sir."

"Get me all his information. When he deploys, which is highly likely, he will be in my division. I'll look out for him."

From his tone, the way he was holding his sleeping son, the way he gripped his wife's hand, told me that he was as serious as a heart attack. He wasn't just saying it to make conversation and then told me the best way to contact him. I nearly broke down and wept. I am about to now. Imagine that; I'm a little country preacher preaching a revival at a little insignificant church that no one on earth knows about but this little handful of saints. And my brother will be deployed in the same division as this man. Only God works out things like this.

And the even more amazing thing about it is he promised it after he heard me preach! ;)

VA Tech Tragedy--Update

Please remember to pray for the families of the ones who died yesterday in the tragic deaths of 33 students at Virginia Tech. The convocation today has been moved from the originally scheduled 12:00 to 2:00 this afternoon.

Many remain in area hospitals in critical condition and Tech administration is in the process of contacting next of kin.

Whom have I in heaven but You?
And there is none upon earth that I desire besides You.
My flesh and my heart fail;
But God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever.
Psalm 73:25-26

Virginia Tech Shootings Update

From WaPo:

Thirty-two people reportedly were killed and more than two dozen injured during a shooting rampage this morning at Virginia Tech, making it the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, law enforcement sources said this afternoon.

The unidentified shooter was among the dead, according to officials, at West Ambler Johnston, a dormitory, and Norris Hall, which houses the College of Engineering. Authorities said the first shooting was reported shortly after 7 a.m. at the dorm and the second about two hours later at Norris Hall. Law enforcement sources said a single shooter was responsible for both incidents.

Several area hospitals are caring for the injured and some are in surgery. A convocation is scheduled at noon tomorrow so the campus can begin healing. Continue to pray...

Virginia Tech Shootings

Some things strike too close to home. Please keep this situation in your thoughts and prayers. Think of the families affected and that God might redeem this for His glory. From CNN:

A lone gunman is dead after police said he killed at least 21 people Monday during twin shootings on the Virginia Tech campus -- the worst school shooting incident in U.S. history.

"Some victims were shot in a classroom," university police Chief Wendell Flinchum said during a news conference in Blacksburg.

Police believe there was only one gunman, Flinchum said.

"Today the university was struck with a tragedy that we consider of monumental proportions," said university President Charles Steger. "The university is shocked and indeed horrified."

The the shootings mark the deadliest school shooting incident in U.S. history, topping an incident at Columbine High School in 1999 and an incident at the University of Texas in 1966.

The Associated Press quoted officials saying more than 20 were wounded. A hospital spokeswoman told AP that 17 Virginia Tech students were being treated for gunshot wounds and other injuries.

Having just checked in with the local news, the number dead is up to 22. There were also shootings in dormitories as well as other classrooms.

What is this world coming to?

Tooling Around the Web...

...and found some of these articles; hope you find them as interesting as I did. I have a few posts swirling around in my head and will get those out fairly soon. Until then, hope these will satiate the appetite.

Chuck Baldwin knocks one into the cheap seats with this commentary on Duped Christians.

By simply claiming to be "Christians," today's politicians are making dupes out of multitudes of believers. They are trusted and revered in much the same way a faithful and beloved pastor would be trusted and revered. No! They are trusted and revered MORE than are their pastors.

Pastors would not be able to get by with the lying, deceit, and dishonesty that politicians routinely get by with. Many believers give politicians much more honor than they give to their pastors. How foolish!

By nature, most politicians are self-serving opportunists who cannot see past the next election. In fact, many (if not most) of them are downright dishonest. After all, only a dishonest man could raise his hand and take an oath to support and defend the Constitution and then proceed to ignore and violate it without so much as an afterthought.

In this case I see Chuck as absolutely correct. Somehow, right wing politicians, using God-speak and hymn snippets have deceitfully won the hearts of many conservatives but are simply broadening their power bases. (HT: Dave Black)

**********

Once again, Dan Edelen jars us from our materialistic slumber to bring to our attention 21st century indentured servants via, of all things, kids' meal toys and how they come into being. How ought the church to respond to this horrid social injustice?

At one time, middle-class Americans made those toys. Now they’re made by very young adults (and in most cases, children, as some estimates say up to 250 million children between five and fourteen-years-old slave away) in factories in countries many Americans can’t find on a map. The factory owners house them in barracks where they sleep head to toe. They work twelve to sixteen hour days, seven days a week, 365 days a year, and even on their limited breaks are typically not allowed to venture off the factory property without supervision. In truth, they have nowhere else to go. Worst of all, if we found the kind of coinage lying on the street that those workers make as their hourly rate, we’d think it not worth the risk to bend over.

Dan reminds us that our excess costs something. It may not be something we can see or even touch, but it costs--and it may be costing a little life that has no hope of a future. Ever. All for a happy meal toy that will bunker our landfills within minutes after purchase.

**********

And this from SBC 2nd VP Wiley Drake is just plain troubling. He has written a letter to Don Imus, after the uproar over his racist remarks, ready to offer absolution to the shock jock.

I certainly do not approve of what you said, and in retrospect it appears that neither do you.

Even though I am not your pastor I would be glad to meet with you and pray with you and witness your confession to God, and help you claim forgiveness, that indeed will be forgotten by God.

2nd VP Drake then cordially invites Mr. Imus to be on his radio show. Somehow this smacks of Jerry Falwell gushing over Newt Gingrich's "confession." Mr. Gingrich admitted to the affair in a two-part interview with Dr. James Dobson, during a “Focus on the Family” broadcast. Falwell said:

I was pleased to hear Mr. Gingrich state: “I’ve gotten on my knees and sought God’s forgiveness.”

He has admitted his moral shortcomings to me, as well, in private conversations. And he has also told me that he has, in recent years, come to grips with his personal failures and sought God’s forgiveness.

I have been very impressed with the spiritual maturity of this man and am convinced that he has been honest and forthright in clarifying his past failings and his quest, as a Christian, for God’s forgiveness.

It is just as Mr. Baldwin stated above...

I'm Back!

A partial blog fast is exactly what the Great Physician ordered. I had been needing one for some time, having seriously lost my perspective in blogging and particularly commenting. My desire is to edify my Lord in this enterprise and not my ego, so with your help, readers, I will do that.

My blog fast concluded yesterday with a wonderful meeting with an old friend--at least an old friend by blogging standards. One of the first bloggers I met out here was Steve Sensenig. Steve actually proposed the meeting, and honestly I felt kind of like Meg Ryan in You've Got Mail.

"Meet?!"

Having been blogging together now for quite some time, exchanging some high-spirited comments in the threads, we decided it was high time to talk face-to-face. And where do all good bloggers meet? Starbucks! The white chocolate mocha decaf was outstanding. After evaluating the streets and trips CD, we decided Greensboro was about half-way for both of us, and unlike Halifax County, which has NO Starbucks, :( Greensboro has three (so unfair), so then the real problem was deciding which one.

I found Steve to be just as he is in the threads; kind, generous, affable, and one of the most grace-seasoned men I have met. After having talked for over two hours, unfortunately I had to go. My wife had a homeschool moms' meeting to go to, so I had to be back. We probably would have talked until nightfall, or at least I would have, if Steve would have been willing to listen.

I am so thankful for all the friends I have met out here in the blogosphere, each one of you. Thank you for your reading and commenting here. Though Steve and I have some obvious points of disagreement, we agree more than we disagree. Well, that isn't an accurate statement. As he said, we are on the same team, partners in the glorious Gospel. Our passions are the same, that all people everywhere come to know the Lord and that the church come to her full maturity. That is more accurate. It is the risen Christ that unites us!

Well, two bloggers down, several more to go. Two weeks ago, I had the blessed privilege of meeting Les Puryear and I do hope that I get to meet some of you other bloggers and commenters this side of eternity.

Steve, thanks for taking the time to come out and for us to sit and chat. I was blessed by our interaction and look forward now more than ever to our interaction in blogging, now that I know not just you, but your heart.

God bless each one of you!

A Partial Blog Fast...

Maybe some of you have noticed (or maybe you haven't, I don't know) that I have not participated as much in the blogosphere lately. My posting has been sparse and I have not commented on many of the blogs I regularly participate in. I found it necessary to drop out for a brief time to pray, regain perspective, and reevaluate. I should be back at it soon, but until then, when you think about the "rambling prophet," ask God to help me regain my sense of purpose in blogging and commenting.

Much love and prayers.

Revival with Dave Black

This week our church has been blessed to have Dr. David Black with us for revival services. Dave was my professor of New Testament Greek while in seminary and I am still deeply indebted to him for the impact he had on me my first two semesters (even though some of those quizzes were horrible). One of the things I appreciated about Brother Dave was his ability to close that professor-student gap. There is a presupposed distance between professor and student but Dave works really hard to bridge that gap so students feel more at ease with a difficult subject, which he teaches with ease. He has even preached this week from his Greek New Testament (yes, Dr. Black, if you're reading, I noticed!).

It has been very difficult, however, not to think that at the end of services this week I am going to be receiving a grade...

Nevertheless, we have had a blessed week of teaching and worship among the body of Christ at our little church on the backside of nowhere. Sunday night, Dave taught on Jesus' missionary method from Matthew 9:35. Though it was not his primary point and was not intended to be, I could not help but think of how we have made the missionary endeavor too difficult for those called of God to go.

The simplicity of Jesus' missionary method overwhelmed me. I do not discount the necessity of our missionary sending organizations, funding programs, or the hoops we make a lot of would-be missionaries jump through, but I wonder if they are counter-productive to kingdom growth.

Monday evening was an intensely evangelistic message based on the genealogy of Christ from Matthew 1:3-6; the Gospel According to Four Women. That pricked some ears! Jewish genealogies are by their nature patriarchal, so the inclusion of four women in the genealogy of Christ must be significant.

Tuesday evening we heard primarily from Becky Lynn Black, Brother Dave's, lovely wife. She shared about their missionary experiences in Ethiopia, which regular readers of Dave's website will know that that is where their hearts are. We have received a love offering each night and 100% of it goes to the Blacks' work there. If you are interested in supporting the Blacks' work halfway across the world, I would encourage you to visit their website.

Tonight will prove to be a heart-stopper, I'm sure. Dave will be sharing from his book, The Myth of Adolescence. The church as well as parents have abdicated their roles and responsibilities of raising up godly kids and Dave is going to help the church understand this terrible problem tonight. I plan on blogging more about that later.

Meanwhile, may God bless us as we seek to do his will.

P.S. If you follow the link to Dave's site and go to his blog, there is a picture of my family. The girls are beautiful, but I cannot vouch for the short, ugly fellow on the right.

A Bittersweet Meeting

UPDATE: Brother Les' dad, Clifton Puryear, had his homegoing yesterday, Saturday, March 31st. Please drop by his blog and wish he and his family well during this time of sorrow. Brother Les, my prayers are with you.

******

Yesterday afternoon I had the wonderful privilege of meeting fellow pastor and blogging buddy, Les Puryear. I wish that it could have been under different circumstances that I could have met Les, but I had the privilege of shaking hands with him and hugging his neck nonetheless.

After checking in on Les' blog yesterday morning, I discovered that his dad, Clifton, whom I have been diligently praying for, was in the hospital, potentially not going home, but rather home to heaven. Given that Les and his family were only going to be about forty-five minutes away at Person Memorial Hospital in Roxboro, NC, I made arrangements to see them that afternoon.

Les was exactly what I expected. He was kind, gentle, humble, and compassionate. His attitude and demeanor revealed his great love for Christ, which I knew anyway. Les is the type of guy that when he smiles, his whole face smiles. We had a blessed time talking shop and we concluded our terribly brief time together with a sweet time of prayer for his father. One thing about meeting Les I found rather humorous was I was expecting someone taller...I am short, but I am still curious how Les sees over the pulpit. He must have a brick to stand on. :)

His family were equally a privilege to meet. My prayers, and I would also request that yours as well, dear readers, would be with Clifton Puryear's family during this time of crisis in their lives. May the sweet love of Christ envelop them.

A Case of Homeschool Discrimination

Homeschoolers have not been allowed to participate in public school activities, such as sports teams, literature clubs, and science activities simply because they have no association with the schools. However, this particular case seems to be pure discrimination.

State chess officials allowed the homeschool students to play as teams for two years because of changing or unclear national rules on the subject, but this year, they ruled team members must come from the same school.

"The tournaments were created and designed for school teams," said Will Wharton, president of the Arizona Chess Federation board. "The problem is their connection is just chess, they're not doing any schooling together."

The justification of this ruling is curious, in that a homeschooling dad made the disingenuous statement, "If homeschool students were allowed to form teams, he said, it would be like allowing sport teams to take students from any geographical area." This argument seems to be a red herring of the worst kind in that private schools already do this, and their student population tends to be even more exclusive than the number of homeschool kids.

The point is that the state chess committee felt that homeschoolers were stacking the deck in their favor. Perhaps they are making the same assumption that this particular group of homeschoolers doesn't do anything but sit around and play chess all day, much like a group of homeschoolers that swept the Scripps Spelling Bee about ten years ago.

The bee has come under fire in recent years as a number of students allegedly hired special coaches to help them prepare for the bee, a luxury many spellers cannot afford. Some suggest homeschooled students have an advantage, that they can forgo their studies to prepare for the bee. Homeschoolers respond that, while they do have extra time to devote to spelling practice, such extra time does not come at the expense of their other studies...

It seems the homeschooling movement is gaining a full head of steam and is drawing more and more attention.

(HT: Janine Cate)

The Three R's: Reading Writing, and Revelation?

Should the Bible be included in America's classrooms? At least this is what one professor thinks. Stephen Prothero, chair of the religion department at Boston University, writes in an interesting piece, originally written for the LA Times. His take on this issue is from a purely practical standpoint, and honestly, a view I have yet to hear, yet one I fear. He claims that because biblical references saturate political speech, Americans need to bone up on their Bibles.

Biblical illiteracy is not just a religious problem. It is a civic problem with political consequences. How can citizens participate in biblically inflected debates on abortion, capital punishment or the environment without knowing something about the Bible? Because they lack biblical literacy, Americans are easily swayed by demagogues on the left or the right who claim — often incorrectly — that the Bible says this about war or that about homosexuality.

Prothero's solution to this societal ill is to begin teaching biblical literacy in the classroom. He claims that since the Bible is of foundational importance to Western civilization, that it would serve America well to have it taught from a neutral stance, simply as a cultural document. Because biblical references are commonly used in everyday speech in the public square, with little knowledge of why they are used or their origin, that:

What makes sense is one Bible course for every public high-school student in the U.S. This is not a Christian proposal. It does not serve the political left or the political right. It serves our young people and our public life.

So what do I fear? Fretfully, this: should (or could) the Bible be taught simply as a cultural document, for biblical literacy's sake, in public schools? Is that even possible? One thing Mr. Prothero does get right is this:

Yet U.S. citizens know almost nothing about the Bible. Although most regard it as the word of God, few read it anymore. Even evangelicals from the Bible Belt seem more focused on loving Jesus than on learning what he had to say.

Weekend Prayer Request Thread

Do you have a prayer need? Please feel free to submit a comment with your prayer request and rest assured I will pray for your need. If you stop by and see another's need, please feel free to comment, offer a word of encouragement, but most of all, pray for that person!

If you feel the need to submit your request privately, my email is on the sidebar.

Country Funeral

I admit, I have made a lot of mistakes in ministry, but this is not one of them.

As a young minister, I was asked by a funeral director to hold a graveside service in a new cemetery for a derelict man (with no family or friends) who had died while traveling through the area. The cemetery was way back in the country. This man would be the first to be laid to rest at this new cemetery.

As I was not familiar with the backwoods area, I became lost. Being the typical man I didn't stop for directions. And when I finally arrived an hour late, I saw a crew and a backhoe, but the hearse was nowhere in sight.

The workmen were eating lunch. I apologized for my tardiness, but the workers just looked puzzled. I stepped to the side of the open grave, to find the vault lid already in place. I assured the workers I would not hold them long, but this was the proper thing to do. As the workers gathered around, still eating their lunch, I poured out my heart and soul. As I preached, the workers began to say "Amen," "Praise the Lord," and "Preach it, brother!" (They must have all been Baptists.)

I preached and I preached, like I'd never preached before. I began in Genesis and worked all the way to Revelation. I preached for 45 minutes. Finally, I closed in prayer and it was finished. As I was walking to my car, I felt that I had done my duty and I would leave with a renewed sense of purpose and dedication, in spite of my tardiness.

As I was opening the door and taking off my coat, I overheard one of the workers saying to another, "Ya know, I've been putting in septic tanks for 20 years, but I ain't never seen anything like that before."

Should this Matter for Election '08?

Streak points us to an article highlighting multiple marriages in presidential candidates. Its quite interesting. Right out of the Horse's Mouth, the entire field of democratic candidates has gotten fewer divorces than Rudy alone. Should multiple marriages be a cause for concern among presidential candidates, particularly among republicans who consistently tout "family values"?

Then again, the Republicans are fielding a motley crew right now: if you count Newt Gingrich, who'll probably join the fray in the fall, the four leading candidates have had nine marriages among them: Giuliani three, Gingrich three, McCain two and Romney one.

Greg Sargent draws an interesting point:

If you think about it, the entire field of Dems deemed credible boasts fewer divorces than Rudy Giuliani alone!

[...]

The top four GOP candidates have divorced a total of five times, while the top four liberal candidates have a total of zero divorces among them. And the whole field of Dems seen to have a credible shot at winning has gotten fewer total divorces than the current GOP frontrunner.

Among the Democratic hopefuls, Obama has been married to the same woman for fifteen years, Edwards faithfully to Elizabeth since 1977, Richardson, thirty-three years to the same woman, and Biden's first wife was killed in a car accident in 1972. He has been married to his second wife for nearly thirty years.

Some claim that a candidate's family life, as well as a nationally elected leader's, is none of the public's business. I am of the opinion however that a nationally elected leader's home life is of substantial importance. I do not think they should be forced into a fish bowl, but if a leader has multiple marriages or is practicing "serial monogamy," then that is a cause for concern. As conservatives who typically vote Republican, should we take this issue into account and if so, to what degree?

Quote of the Day

"We cannot keep God's commandments perfectly, but we can keep them purposefully. We can rise each day with longing in our heart to do what is in accordance with God's will. We can pray, 'Lord, not my will but thy will be done. Shape me today by the Word that thou hast spoken, even in a world that repudiates thee.'"

-Dr. Joel Beeke

Stiff-arming God

"Tony, I stopped by to talk with you about my marriage. I am divorcing my husband. We just wanted you to know."

And so it ends. Spurning an offer for prayer and without even a backward glance she left my office and overturned her marriage vows. The reason? Irreconcilable differences.

This has got to be the most heartbreaking few moments of a pastor's life when a congregant stiff-arms God, rejecting the free offer of divine grace. Grace cannot speak to my need. Grace cannot help in my circumstances. Grace cannot undo what has been done. Grace cannot...grace cannot...grace cannot...

It almost causes me to fall to pieces when in the lives of born-again Christians that the same grace that miraculously saves cannot providentially sustain. Why is it so many Christians have no difficulty at all whatsoever trusting their eternal soul to God for salvation but cannot turn over to Him a relationship? Or a marriage? Or a job? Or a financial responsibility? Or an unruly child? Or anything of any temporal significance?

More often than not I have found among God's people that grace is insufficient. We hear a lot about trouble, but little about victories. We see much selfishness, but precious little sacrifice. We readily accept defeat but practically never celebrate having conquered through Christ. My conjecture is that we fail to see things that are temporal as having eternal significance.

"Tony, God wants me to be happy." I have heard that stated so matter-of-factly that even I am almost brought to believe it. Each time I have gently and lovingly responded, "No, God wants you to be obedient."

And this is the crux of the matter. Obedience costs. It crimps style. It gets in the way. It denies you of what you may want. However, it always gives you what you need. Rather than choose obedience, we would stiff-arm God. As He stands open-armed, ready to receive, we race by with arm out-stretched, side-stepping His free offer of grace and mercy to help in our time of need. Why? Because grace cannot...

Being brought to the place of obedience is not easy. King David attempted to stiff-arm God, but a prophet got in the way. We are all familiar with King David's sin, but forgive a preacher a few moments of Scriptural reflection.

So David's anger was greatly aroused against the man, and he said to Nathan, "As the Lord lives, the man who has done this shall surely die!" Then Nathan said to David, "You are the man!"

So David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." 2 Samuel 11:5, 7, 13

God was not concerned one iota about David's happiness. God wanted him in the place of obedience. If anyone had seen the marvelous hand of God's grace move it was David. The unfavored son, small and insignificant, was chosen by a sovereign God to rule all Israel. When he was but a boy, he took up a sling and amidst the taunts of those whom he loved but with the power of God, he slew a giant. Pursued relentlessly by a crazed lunatic, he overcame and was anointed king; his adversary dead by his own sword. Yet in the heat of the moment, having given way to the lusts of passion, he stiff-armed God. David's happiness became his ultimate goal. In his heart, he conceded, "Grace cannot..." David, having been the recipient of grace unmatched except only in the life of the Lord Jesus Himself, was unable to allow grace to help him overcome a moment's temptation.

But isn't that what grace is all about? To overcome in life moment by moment? The temporal things do matter. My smile is vaguely temporary; but the smile of God is eternal.

Therefore, we do not lose heart. Even though our outward man is perishing, yet the inward man is being renewed day by day. For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, is working for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory...2 Corinthians 4:16-17

Ann Coulter: Servant of Mammon

Ann Coulter has really lost her way. Its hard to believe any conservative takes her inflammatory rhetoric seriously. But yet, this is where most conservatives find their talking points. She refers to herself as a born-again Christian and claims that her favorite book is the Bible. I am not going to take issue with that, but her conduct as of late has been woefully unbecoming of one who claims to be born-again and loves God's Word. I have read multiple sources who report that she is paid between $25,001-$50,000 per engagement in which she speaks. The HeraldNet reports:

It's hard to imagine why a single conservative would still cling to this "political pundit." She stopped talking real politics long ago. She had true qualifications for political commentary, having graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review. She practiced law in New York, worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee and later became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, D.C., a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights and the free exercise of religion.

But then she was seduced by her own celebrity and being famous became more important than saying anything of substance.

It is amazing that someone with that much clout could abandon that to become a political pundit essentially known for hate speech, but the last sentence is key; its all about celebrity status and wealth. Jesus said, "No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will by loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and mammon" (Matthew 6:24).

What I find even more disturbing is shallow Christians who still prescribe to her type of rhetoric and endorse her vitriolic views. Coulter is certainly within her right to spew her bromides and to be amply paid for them. But I also have the right to plug my ears.

Thus far, eight newspapers and fifteen advertisers have abandoned her column, up from the three from my last post. My fear though, like a pastor fired from his bully pulpit, such will only embolden her to spew more venom. Until those whom she claims to represent make their true and sincere views known, she will continue to be as one reporter aptly put it, "like a teenage child running rampant. Somebody’s got to give her serious consequences to deal with — serious economic consequences.”

This Is Refreshing

Coulter crossed the line in Edwards homosexual reference:

Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, the world’s largest ministry to people recovering from homosexual behavior, said Coulter’s type of political and social discourse is hurtful and should not be tolerated by conservatives.

“Used in any context, this hurtful word is used to demean an individual who is valuable to God,” Chambers said in a March 7 news release. “There is nothing to be gained by denigrating others with crude slurs. In doing so, we disgrace ourselves and discredit the truths we seek to publicly elevate.”

Three newspapers -- The Mountain Press in Sevierville, Tenn., The Oakland Press in Mich., and the Lancaster New Era in Penn. -- said they would stop running Coulter’s syndicated column because of the Edwards comment, Reuters reported March 7.

Its about time someone blew the whistle on her irreverent behavior. Read the entire story here.

The Church Today

Sometimes the lampoonists get it better than we do...

An Impoverished Gospel

When you think of someone as having been changed by Christ, what does this call to mind? In our self-centered, egocentric, the world-revolves-around-me culture, change almost always involves a reversal of financial status as indication that God has radically changed a person's life. Unfortunately, the evils of the prosperity Gospel are subtly and insidiously infiltrating every corner of Christendom, morphing the Gospel of repentance into a Gospel of success.

Consider this illustration from LifeWay's Spring 2007 Life Answers Sunday School quarterly:

In high school I had a friend named Brock. He was what we called back then a "motorhead." All Brock talked about was working on cars and dirt bikes. He would show up for school in grease-stained clothes, long unkempt hair, and usually was bumming money for lunch. His grades were poor and his wallet was poorer. If there had been a "most likely to be a failure" category in the yearbook, he would have won by unanimous vote.

I didn't see Brock again until our 20th class reunion. When I saw him, I couldn't believe my eyes. Standing before me was a successful businessman, straight out of GQ. His expensive suit and well-groomed appearance were such a departure from the last time I saw him that it was hard to believe. I learned later that he had started his own company, and it had assets above one million dollars.

At the very heart of the Gospel is the concept of change. When Jesus enters into your heart and begins changing you into His likeness, the change is so dramatic that the people around you can't help but say, "You're a different person." And this is how it should be. radical change can serve as a signpost to us that our experience with Christ is real and valid (p. 15).

OK, what was wrong with Brock? Why did he need to change? How does Brock serve as an illustration of radical change, a real and valid experience with Christ? He was bedraggled, poor, obviously didn't own a comb, and enjoyed tinkering on cars. This makes him a viable candidate not for the transforming power of the Gospel, but rather Extreme Makeover. The implication here is that being transformed into the likeness of Christ means you have a bulging wallet, a fat bank account, and you walk in the upper echelon of society. Evolving from welfare to faring well is the essence of the Gospel.

Perhaps I am nit-picking this Sunday School quarterly, but sowing seeds such as these can only bear bitter fruit. The prosperity message is the single greatest heresy plaguing American Christianity right now and such errant teaching should not even be entertained. Too many believers are led astray thinking that God wants them to prosper financially when the Word of God teaches purely contradictory to the prosperity message.

The prosperity teachings rob churches of their evangelistic effectiveness, squelches missionary endeavor, and mints shallow believers, believers more concerned with their wardrobes than the plight of the poor. I do not consider this a wholesale endorsement by LifeWay of the health and wealth teachings, but to sow the wind reaps a whirlwind. Taking baby steps like these can still move you in the general direction of disaster.

Because you say, "I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing, you do not know that you are wretched, miserable, blind, and naked." Revelation 3:17

The Importance of Death Ministry

Rural church ministry does not lend itself to much proactive ministry. However, one thing is certain; funerals are going to come. There is no greater opportunity for the rural church pastor to show love and care for his folks than during a death. At the church I serve, I have officiated at nearly thirty funerals and have attended twice that number.

Morbidity aside, death ministry is very significant, not just in the life of a rural church, but at any church. After having been at the current church I serve less than three weeks, I was called upon to do a funeral. The lady was slightly mentally deficient, lived in a nursing home, and only had a sister surviving her. However, probably half the church turned out for the funeral. Looking back, I know why.

Funerals are important in the life of the church and mean a great deal to God's people. A minister who handles a funeral and the ministry that follows well, cements his relationship with his people and opens significant opportunities to later serve.

People are especially open and vulnerable during the loss of a loved one. The heart is fertile soil, receptive to the Gospel and the love of Christ. One valuable lesson I have learned during death ministry is not necessarily what you say but that you are there. Presence means more than anything; it is more tangible than any words that could be spoken. Later, folks will remember and say something like, "Well, my pastor was there when my husband died."

Follow-up is also key. I tend to make personal contact every day for at least three days, depending on the severity of the situation. From that point, I go once a week for a month and then once a month after that. I know it sounds overly practical and I don't always follow that simple plan. I tend to see the family of a deceased loved one more than that!

I also mark in my calendar the date of death and then I visit the deceased's family on the anniversary of their loved one's death. I have always gotten looks of incredulity upon arrival because I make the visit unannounced. The individual will always be grieving that day; I have not seen otherwise. A special visit on that day ministers to that person's heart in ways you cannot imagine.

I am never in a hurry during death ministry. For the deceased's family, time is standing still. For just a few moments, the pastor's watch can stop. Stumbling in out of breath, disheveled, clumsy, and altogether "not with it" communicates to the family a grave lack of care and concern. Christ is our Rock, our Refuge and Strength, and for a brief few moments, the family needs their pastor to be the same. However, do not be afraid to cry along with your people. Remember, Jesus wept.

And prayer is of utmost importance. Always pray. Every opportunity God gives, take advantage of it and pray with the family. They will be looking for some modicum of comfort and the wise pastor reassures his church family that there is a balm in Gilead.

I also have key Scripture passages memorized. Not only does it make the funeral service itself easier but it also serves as a timely word of comfort to a grieving family. Psalms 23, 121:1-2, John 11:25-26, and 2 Corinthians 1:3-5 are all appropriate. Through Scripture, God's people hear the audible voice of God speaking joy, comfort, and encouragement to them. Through it they can be reminded that God is familiar with death yet He is the One that by His own power overcame it.

Oftentimes, life's most dreaded nightmares become harsh realities. Death always causes more questions to be raised than answered and we will never have all of the answers. But we do know the One who does.

More on the Sexualization of Our Kids

It is plain to see that the overt sexualization of our culture is having deleterious effects on our children. Clothing and doll manufacturers are psychologically damaging young girls encouraging them to readily identify with immorality, provocateur, and subject matters too mature for them to handle. The British newspaper, the Telegraph, has reported on how these products' marketing manipulates a child's desire to be loved and cared for and teaches them improper ways of dealing with those feelings.

A generation of very young girls is being psychologically damaged by inappropriate "sexy" clothing, toys and images in the media that are corrupting childhood, leading psychologists warn today.

They say marketing takes unfair advantage of children's desire for affection and the need to conform, leading to eating disorders, low self-esteem and depression.

Apart from clothing for five- and six-year-olds, with old-fashioned frilly frocks replaced by mini skirts, plunging necklines and sequined crop tops, the report specifically criticises "Bratz dolls".

These outsell Barbie dolls in Britain by two to one and come dressed in miniskirts, fishnet stockings and feather boas.

The Bratz manufacturers confess that they are aimed at sale toward pre-teen girls. To regular readers of The RP, there are no surprises that Disney has contributed to the problem. The Telegraph continues to report:

Disney's Little Mermaid or Pocahontas "which have more cleavage, fewer clothes and are depicted as sexier than characters of yesteryear" are also picked out.

Where is the church's voice in these matters? It is strange that the same parents who are ready to pounce on pedophiles and hormonal adolescent boys are the same parents sending their girls to school (and church) dressed like trollops, advertising something they are incapable of selling.

The Telegraph also ran a portion of an interview with Dr. Jean Kilbourne, co-author of a forthcoming book, So Sexy, So Soon, that addresses this direct link between cultural sexual imprinting and the rise in under-age sex.

Dr. Kilbourne told The Daily Telegraph: "You see these clothes everywhere, tight T-shirts for little girls saying 'so many boys, so little time', that sort of thing.

"Parents think it is clever but they cease to think that when their child becomes sexually active at 12. There is huge pressure on girls to look sexy and dress provocatively at a younger and younger age and boys are getting graphic sexualized messages. But parents can say 'no' and REFUSE TO BUY THIS STUFF [emphasis mine]."

(HT: Doug Phillips)

Dawkins' Dangerous Idea

Regular readers of The Rambling Prophet will know that I have been sloughing through The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. For some reason Dawkins has chosen God as his sworn enemy and has declared an all-out war on faith; and not just Christianity but faiths of all stripes. Whether you are Buddhist, Hindu, Mormon, Muslim, or you rub sticks together chanting while you sit cross-legged on a rock, you are on Dawkins' radar.

His book serves as a piece of atheistic evangelism, encouraging atheists and all would-be atheists to come out of the closet and be unashamed of their true colors. Dawkins' problem however is that he is a great scientist; but a poor philosopher. This is proven true in a recent refutation of the book by Alvin Plantinga, brilliant philosopher from the University of Notre Dame. Dr. Plantinga does an amazing job of showing how Professor Dawkins misses the real points of his own arguments.

Dr. Dawkins' primary problem, his delusion if you will, is his a priori commitment to naturalism. As Dr. Plantinga observes:

The real problem here, obviously, is Dawkins' naturalism, his belief that there is no such person as God or anyone like God. That is because naturalism implies that evolution is unguided. So a broader conclusion is that one can't rationally accept both naturalism and evolution; naturalism, therefore, is in conflict with a premier doctrine of contemporary science. People like Dawkins hold that there is a conflict between science and religion because they think there is a conflict between evolution and theism; the truth of the matter, however, is that the conflict is between science and naturalism, not between science and belief in God.

Often throughout the course of the book, Dr. Dawkins resorts to ridicule and vitriol without seriously addressing some of the major claims of Christianity (even though he asserts his primary beef is not with the Christian God). This is the sign of a poor argument, that one cannot seriously rebut, only mock and ridicule. At times I have found his smart-aleck, "I'm brilliant and I know it" tone quite annoying. As Dr. Plantinga concludes:

The God Delusion is full of bluster and bombast, but it really doesn't give even the slightest reason for thinking belief in God mistaken, let alone a "delusion."

The naturalism that Dawkins embraces, furthermore, in addition to its intrinsic unloveliness and its dispiriting conclusions about human beings and their place in the universe, is in deep self-referential trouble. There is no reason to believe it; and there is excellent reason to reject it.

Perhaps this is why Dr. Dawkins can claim only one convert to his religion. On page 117, his apparent affection for Douglas Adams, deceased author, is admirable and he refers to him as "possibly his only convert." Prayerfully, it will be his last.

Church Discipline in Jamestown

My family and I, along with our homeschool group, spent this past Friday in Jamestown, VA, the first permanent American colony, settled in 1607. Our tour guides were outstanding though I did feel the Powahatan Indian culture was treated a bit too stereotypical, but it was an elementary school-age tour. Going aboard the replica of the Susan Constant was a highlight of the trip and it was very difficult to see how 71 men and boys made it across the Atlantic without going insane.

In the Jamestown village was one interesting feature, at least to me, and that was the meeting house. Church services were required every day of the early settlers' lives. They were to attend twice a day every day and three times on Sunday. If you were to miss a church service, you lost your food ration for the day. If you were to miss a second service, you lost your food ration plus you were whipped with a cat of nine tails. Miss a third service and you were executed.

One in the tour group asked the burning question, "Was anyone executed for not going to church?" The guide answered that historical records did not show that anyone was. Such punishments, or at least the threatening of them, were not uncommon for that era's churches, but it raised a question in my mind. Has the pendulum swung in the opposite direction? The moral laxity and unregenerancy of the church of this era calls for a reclamation of a robust understanding of church discipline, a teaching practically abandoned by most modern, and especially Baptist, churches. Perhaps we should not return to execution or scourging, or even threatening it, but at least practice what the Scripture says about church discipline.

When Philosophy and Science Collide

Not to long ago, I was in a discussion with Streak about the nature of science and its interconnectivity with philosophy, particularly that of origins. It is possible to teach science in a controlled environment and for philosophies about the origin of life to never come up. However, it is unlikely that the subject will never come up and when a student's philosophy collides with his or her view on science, what should happen? Either one should be intellectually honest and confess that one believes in a young earth, holds to creation, etc. or one could simply hide that fact from one's professors and mentors.

Just because a person studies theories that differ from a creationist standpoint does not make that student an automatic proponent of it. A creationist professor can teach theories that differ from his own perspective and vice versa. That is simply scientific faithfulness. However, what if one's beliefs collide with what a scientific institution purports and a student receives a degree that blatantly contradicts deeply held philosophical beliefs? From BP:

Typically, a scientist must follow the guidelines of secular science if he wants to earn an advanced degree in the field from a reputable university. So when Marcus Ross wrote a dissertation to finish a Ph.D. in geosciences from the University of Rhode Island, he had to work within a conventional scientific framework.

Even though he wrote that the earth is more than 65 million years old, he doesn’t really believe it. Ross is a young earth creationist who believes in the Genesis account of creation and is certain the earth is no more than 10,000 years old [emphasis mine].

The New York Times article, Believing Scripture but Playing by Science’s Rules, 12 February 2007, justifies Dr. Ross' actions by "separating paradigms" and that Ross' dates are "entirely appropriate."

“For him, Dr. Ross said, the methods and theories of paleontology are one ‘paradigm’ for studying the past, and Scripture is another,” The Times reported. “In the paleontological paradigm, he said, the dates in his dissertation are entirely appropriate. The fact that as a young earth creationist he has a different view just means, he said, ‘that I am separating the different paradigms.’”

The aforementioned quotation illustrates the tension. Can (or should) the paradigms be separated? Should one publish a work that contradicts his deeply held religious beliefs and then use those same credentials to gain employment? Dr. Ross teaches earth sciences from a creationist perspective at Liberty University.

IT'S A BOY!!!!!

Mere words cannot express the joy and excitement in my heart. As most of my blog friends and regular readers know, I am the proud daddy of four little girls, ages nine, six, four, and two. My wife is expecting our fifth child and we were pleased to discover today, my wife being nineteen weeks and five days, that we are expecting our first BOY! Notice in the picture to the left that he is waving to us and might be giving us the thumbs up; "Every thing's OK in here. How are you all out there?" Notice the little guy looks just like me, doesn't he? Wait...everybody in the blogosphere thinks I look like a car...

Imagine that, I am going to have a son! We have to go buy all new clothes, not to mention that I need to buy fishing poles (a priority), baseball gloves, balls, and bats, and I need to put a .22 rifle away. Or maybe a 20 gauge. And a chocolate lab. Matchbox cars. I need Matchbox cars! And Tonka trucks...a football, and there is this great trebuchet in the Vision Forum catalog I can now get with adequate justification..."Honey, our son needs that trebuchet!!!"

I enjoy playing baby dolls, having tea parties ["I am Mrs. Nesbitt! Tell me I look good in the hat!" (Blog satisfaction to who can name that movie quote!)], and Little People. Now it will be cowboys, army men, tanks, and mud. It's a boy! And in the picture below, you have a shot of the proof, that infamous turtle every daddy looks and hopes for in the ultrasound room! Its been "Big Macs" the last four times, but there you have it!

Miracle Baby Amillia Sonja Taylor

Amillia Sonja Taylor was born at one day under twenty-two weeks, the shortest known gestation period for a live human birth. Born at less than ten ounces and roughly the length of a ball point pen, she was born by C-section. Given little chance to live, Amillia amazed doctors when mom and dad, Eddie and Sonja Taylor took her home Thursday, February 22.

She was delivered early due to complications her mother was experiencing and MSNBC reports that:

...if doctors had known Amillia’s real gestational age, they might not have intervened. He said he thought she was at least 23 weeks, and doctors were shocked when the Taylor's fertility specialist pinpointed the exact date of fertilization.

Her gestational period was first pinpointed at twenty-three weeks, but after specialists examined her they more accurately judged her gestation at twenty-one weeks and six days. The typical legal limit for an abortion is twenty-four weeks and this has put abortion in the spotlight. Thanks to advancements in medical care and neonatology, Amillia is the youngest baby to survive such an early delivery.

This has prompted a debate among medical doctors on the viability of a baby at twenty-two weeks. Normal deliveries take place between 37-40 weeks. Amillia went home healthy at 4 1/2 pounds and 15 1/2 inches spending four months, nearly the remainder of her gestation, in the neonatal intensive care unit.

The laws will not change without a lengthy debate, but the evidence is irrefutable; a baby at less than the legal limit for an abortion is thriving now, healthy, and at home. Should therefore, the laws be changed in light of this miracle baby? Follow the MSNBC link to see pictures of Amillia at birth and on the day she went home.

(HT: Doug Phillips)

Evangelism in a Static Community

Modern notions of evangelism do not endear themselves to rural church ministry. I had considered titling this post "Door-to-Door Don't Work" but decided against it. Not only is it grammatically incorrect but I thought it would send the wrong idea. Metropolitan churches tend to use door-to-door methods and they work admirably. However, in the sticks where people do not live in subdivisions enabling you to reach out your kitchen window to your neighbor's to borrow a cup of sugar, evangelism is a lot more relational.

Emphatically though, door-to-door does work in certain contexts. It has worked to a certain degree here even though the community is essentially static. I can count on one hand how many families have moved into this community in the last five years. The prospect list therefore is not very long and so evangelism is not very proactive.

Evangelism in a rural community takes place a lot less dramatically than on the front door step having just shared a full-bore Gospel presentation. Of all the folks I have led to Christ in this ministry, none of them were folks I didn't already know to some extent. They made a commitment to Christ while sitting on the tailgate of a pickup, leaning on a post-hole digger, across the dinner table, or at the front of the sanctuary.

Evangelism to rural folks is borne of relationship. Intentional evangelism has its place and I use that method when appropriate. The cultivation of relationships is key, having spent long hours in people's homes, at the country store, and even lending a hand chopping wood. These attain an audience more easily than just the entitlement of knocking on a door.

Most of the folks in the community I serve have lived here all their lives. Transfer growth is therefore virtually non-existent. Moreover, most rural churches are territorial. Once, I proposed at a fellowship meal to some key people that I wanted to start doing more intentional evangelism and that I would like to see our church reach all the folks within a five to seven mile radius of the steeple.

"We can't do that," was the immediate reply. It was not because they were afraid to tell other folks about the love of Christ but because if we followed through with a five to seven plan we would encroach upon another church's "territory." Territorialism is indicative of the mutual concern and care that rural folks tend to have over one another, often absent in metropolitan areas.

The fear of anything that might threaten that community is a hurdle to evangelism and a wise minister will not attempt to overcome that community but rather work with it. Community is what the church is to foster; why not use the existing structure and build upon it?

Farmers help other farmers at harvest; people give generously when others are going through a crisis; businesses are supported faithfully because they are local, not because they have competitive prices. Anything that builds community is welcomed and that which threatens it is fiercely opposed. So to be effective in outreach, being a part of the community is an absolute essential.

Glen Daman in his useful book, Shepherding the Small Church, quotes Steve Bierly:

The small church has a bad reputation for being "against growth" because it balks at plans coming out of the church growth movement. But smaller congregations have been unfairly labeled. It's not that they are against growth; its that they are against changing characteristics that make them unique. Small congregations aren't opposed to bringing men and women to Christ, but they are opposed to becoming mega-churches. They don't want to be asked to become something they are not.

Evangelism in a small community is difficult and often bears little fruit. Focusing only upon results fosters discouragement and amotivation. But one must focus not on temporal fruit, but rather the fruit that remains. And that makes laboring in this vineyard worth it.

Pastor Steals WHOLE Church

(Post updated.)

I have heard of stealing sheep, but the whole church? This is ridiculous.

For nearly a decade, members of Ripon's [CA] First Congregational Church bared their souls to Pastor Randall Radic. But clearly it didn't work both ways. There were certain things he wasn't telling them.

That became obvious a year ago, when Radic pleaded guilty to betraying his flock and secretly selling the church and its rectory out from under them. He used the money to buy himself a brand-new black BMW and a laptop...

[...]

"This is a town with a lot of faith," said Navid Fardanesh, president of the Ripon Chamber of Commerce. "People had a lot of trust in him, and unfortunately he took advantage of the situation."

First, Radic faked documents giving him possession of the parsonage, and used the property to take out about $200,000 in personal loans, prosecutors said. Then he forged papers saying he had the power to sell the church, and sold it to a couple for $525,000.

I do not know what to find most extraordinary...this pastor's bravado; the naivety of the couple who bought the property; or the fact that the new pastor lives in a motor home. You can read the whole AP report here.

(HT: Ken Fields)

How do Rural Church Folks Spell Love?

T-I-M-E.

A new blog friend and frequent commenter, Heather, posed a question in the comment thread in my last post. I think it deserves attention. She simply asked, I'd enjoy hearing hear about how you lead your people to be a loving church (or how the Lord is guiding you in that direction)!

One simple caveat: the things I do, I do not not prescribe as normative for every ministry. The things that I do, though very simple, are what work in the context of ministry in which I serve.

Once while preaching on parenting I talked about spending time with my children. I made the point that my children really do not care what I do with them, just as long as I spend a long time doing it. Once is never enough with them, and to quote my father-in-law, if once is good, fifty times has to be better.

I discovered that principle in ministry to rural church folks as well. While studying in seminary, the pastoral ministry professor taught a lot of simple principles. These were inculcated and erroneously filed away as normative. Don't sit on the bed when making hospital visits; visit, and give the impression that you will stay a while, but only stay a few minutes; follow-up once on sick and surgery patients; never give a gift to a church member.

Many of these principles were taught in the interest of good time management. However, life moves a lot slower in the hay fields of Virginia. I discovered that visitation is important. Granted, it gets tiresome and there is only so much visiting I can do before I tire of it and I am ready to do more proactive ministry.

Yet, when handled appropriately, visitation can be proactive. Most folks, especially the aged, enjoy a visit from their pastor. When I go, I plan on staying at least an hour; I stay longer yet I visit less. Relationships are not built in a few moments but over time. How do you get to know somebody you do not talk to? So, to leave after only a few minutes is seen as an insult; the visit is interpreted as condescending patronization.

Therefore, I try to take advantage of the time. A good pastor friend calls these kinds of visits "tea and crumpet" visits; but I see the inherent value in them. I turn the visit to spiritual discussions. I ask simple, probing questions, such as, "What has God been teaching you lately? Has any passage of Scripture stuck in your mind recently? How can I pray for you and your family?" These questions always lead to sharing about family struggles and perfect opportunities for discipleship. It leads the discussion to biblical solutions for problems, examples to uphold and prescribe, and sometimes, revealing of sin.

These days time is a precious commodity. In these days when communications are instantaneous, drive-thru windows are the norm, what's new is hot, and the old is not quite so good anymore, there remains a place for visitation. Relationships have eternal consequences and most of the time, the fruits of those visits are not seen. Time and time again, I have proven Jim Elliff's words true. In the article I referenced last post, The Rural Church Dilemma, he says of the lack of "visibility" in rural church ministry:

Remember that you are entirely unaware of the impact of your ministry. For instance, you may teach older adults without much visible impact. But one of them, perhaps a grandparent of an unconverted child, may receive stimulus from your ministry that makes her a true witness to her grandchild. Her witness, prompted by your stimulus and instruction, may be the very thing God uses to bring that child to Him. She may not even be aware of her impact. In fact, it may not come to bear until after she has passed on. The grandchild, in time, may one day marry a believer and raise up children who also become believers in another part of America. Do you really know what that will mean in terms of eternity? Do you know what it means in terms of generations of believers? What if, three generations down the line, one of the Christians in this line is instrumental in the evangelization of an unreached tribal group? Did you see that when you taught that grandparent on a sleepy Sunday morning? Likely not. Don't forget that Jesus said, "I will build my church." The time you taught that grandparent might be far more instrumental in the building of the universal church than ten years of ministry in some large city church with all its innovations and activities. You cannot know how God will work for sure, yet you can be confident that it would be a total surprise to you how significant your labors are. Therefore, "sow in hope."

This is what I do; I "sow in hope." Serving a church with a regular attendance of about 85, I thankfully know a little bit about every person in our church. Mega-church pastors, even mid-sized church pastors, cannot say that.

More posts on this topic forthcoming...

Love and the Rural Church

I am pastor of a mid-sized rural church. We are literally about six miles from a gallon of milk and often the ministry can be pretty lonely. I found this article, The Rural Church Dilemma, by teacher and writer Jim Elliff to be especially encouraging. This is a helpful quote about how rural churches can be very loving churches.

Be energized by the concept that your church could become the most loving church in the world. I find this compelling. There will be many things your church may not be. It may not be the most educated church or the most innovative church, or the most evangelistic church, etc., but it can be the most loving church. There is nothing to stop that from happening except your lack of determination and/or the will of the people. Love, after all, is the sign of maturity as a church. Now, if you are seeing this, you will find ways to encourage love. This will mean that you will work out ways for people to be in your home, and in the home of the other church members. You will think of ways to get people to really know the insides of each other. Sheep need help to overcome their reserved nature. They will need to be commended for acts of love, just as Paul often did. You will need to set the pace and demonstrate a passionate love for the people. Dream about this. And, my experience is (and the Bible's teaching is) that this is a powerful way to witness. The love of the people of God for each other is, as Francis Schaeffer said, "the final apologetic."

Commitment: Part of the Problem?

To commit to something means to devote oneself or pledge oneself to the doing of a certain thing. When that term is used it often expresses a desire on the part of the one making the commitment to stand firm for that commitment.

How often Christians use that term to express their relationship to God; "I am a committed Christian." However, in our culture of laxity and drive-thru lifestyles, commitments are often too easily abandoned. If something that is more attractive presents itself, we readily turn our backs on that prior commitment and then commit ourselves to the doing of that other thing.

Commitments are typically made with a few caveats. I commit as long as it does not interfere with soccer practice on Tuesday evenings; I commit as long as it does not cause me to do serious introspection; I commit as long as I can be arbiter of how long the commitment lasts; I commit as long as situations and circumstances do not change; I commit as long as this thing to which I commit brings accolades and lauds of praise; I commit insofar as it does not put me out; I commit as long as it is convenient.

I am persuaded that the Bible really does not teach commitment, at least not our American idealistic understanding of it. Consider:

Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let Him deny Himself, take up His cross, and follow Me." Matthew 16:24

Christ was not calling for commitments. He was calling for absolute surrender. Surrender is purely antithetical in our rugged individualistic lifestyles, our DIY mentalities; yet surrender is exactly what Christ calls for. A commitment presupposes that you can question the thing to which you have made the commitment. Christ demands unflinching obedience.

When Christ said to His disciples that they must take up their crosses, they were not woefully ignorant of what He was asking of them. They had witnessed too many crucifixions for that. They understood that He was calling them to a life of unwavering obedience and absolute surrender to His will for their lives. If He called them to die, then so be it. And they were to find joy in it.

How easily we check out when the going gets tough. We commit to give God our all but when something less than appealing jumps in the way, we head for the hills, checking out on that commitment. Church not going the way you like it, the way you think it ought to? There is another one down the street. That relationship struggling? Go elsewhere. Mentoring that baby Christian not as easy as you thought? The fledgling ministry floundering? Obedience to those commands just too tough? Pastor, do you have your resume in your inside coat pocket?

Perhaps part of the problem is commitment and perhaps it is derived from the fact that commitments are not typically kept. Perhaps it is that one commitment leads to another commitment which leads to over-commitment and then the weary, overzealous Christian flames out underneath the burden of keeping all these commitments. These things are not a sign that one's life is surrendered to the lordship and authority of Christ.

Here is an idea: tell them "no" and then see what happens.

Christ did not commit Himself to the cross. He was surrendered to it. His Father's will is what held sway over Him; not some mealy-mouthed commitment. That is why He prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane, "Lord, not My will, but Your will be done." As long as Christians remain committed and not surrendered, their lives will bear little or no spiritual fruit. Surrender is what produces the fruit that remains.

Commitments do not carry you through the tough times. Commitments weigh you down even further, like a millstone around the neck. But to be surrendered to the Lordship of Christ even the difficult times bring joy because you then completely understand that this thing (you fill in the blank) can be worked out for your good. Surrender also gives you the faith to stand firm even if that thing does not work out for your good.

Consider that Sunday School favorite, the story of Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. They refused to bow down to an image of gold. They answered and said to King Nebuchadnezzar,

"We have no need to answer you in this matter. If that is the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us form the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up." Daniel 3:17-18

Commitment just says "but." Surrender says "but if not."

Snake Handlin' Done Right

What do you do with a sixteen foot anaconda? You kill it!

At least that is what sixty-six year old Joaquim Pereira of Brazil did when he found the snake wrapped around his eight year old grandson, Mateus. Mateus was playing with friends near a creek on his grandfather's ranch in Cosmorana. Joaquim bludgeoned the constrictor for half an hour until he released his hold on the boy, finally killing the monster snake. Normally very afraid of humans because they kill the large creatures on sight, they will attack the unwary. Follow the link to see pictures.

Wow. And I was aggravated the other night because I had to put out a mouse trap.

(HT: Doug Phillips, via CNN World)

Cinderella: Greeting Card Trollop

Do you pay particular attention to items that are for sale that are targeted toward children?

Today, my family and I were in WalMart (I know, I know). We were searching for the latest flimsy cardboard cutouts that they might give them to their friends next Wednesday in the name of Valentine cheer. As I perused the seasonal aisle of Valentine's flotsam, I began to notice a trend among several of the boxed sets of cards.

The boys' cards were what you would expect; Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Superman, Spiderman, and Pirates of the Carribean, your standard testosterone inducing fare. However, many of the girls' cards were along the same level. They were hormone inducing, but not for the same reasons as the boys' cards.

The girls' selections were comprised of notably, Disney Princesses, such as Cinderella, Ariel (The Little Mermaid), and Belle (Beauty and the Beast). Tinkerbell of Peter Pan had her own box and then there were the Bratz; radical, pre-adolescent change agents.

The Disney characters were noticeably different from what I remember from my childhood and adolescent years as well as recent family viewing. Cinderella was not what these cards portrayed her to be. In the film, she was innocent, virtuous, chaste; an unspoiled maiden, the envy of her wicked stepsisters. Cinderella was not the trollop brazenly and voluptuously brandished across those children's boxed sets of Valentine's Day cards.

Without being overly descriptive, Cinderella was posing in such a way to betray her "best" features; a hand provocatively slung back on her hip; slyly leaning forward in a much bustier dress than she wore in the classic movie; all accompanied by a mischievous "come hither" look. The Tinkerbell cards were much worse, some of her poses offering a soft porn flavor.

The departure from the childlike innocence of the original movies to parallel the erotic love often associated with Valentine's Day is especially troublesome, particularly on a child's set of cards to be handed out to other children. This is not the same Cinderella that scolded Bruno the dog for dreaming that he was chasing Lucifer the cat; "That's bad!" Cinderella insisted.

Cinderella would also say "that's bad" to how a slick greeting card company turned her sweet, chaste demeanor into provocateur rather than further dignifying her as the patient lady in waiting that she most assuredly was; not to mention the simple fact that the cards are aimed at sale to children.

The message that this sends to young girls is obvious; chastity, propriety, and modesty are no longer virtues. It may not be implicit on the face of each and every little card, but the seeds of impropriety and immodesty are being sown and they cannot be denied nor overlooked.

Cinderella is the wrong character to impose this kind of licentiousness upon. Tinkerbell might have been crafty, sneaky and even downright mean; but Cinderella? The Bratz seem to have been created for the express purpose of instilling sexuality and a mall mentality in the minds of young girls before the age of nine, but Cinderella? The extrapolation is sickening.

Why contort Cinderella? Why defame her good nature, undermine her humility and ridicule her femme sole? She could easily be the poster-girl for chastity and purity. I know the answers to my questions. If it can be instilled in the minds of girls at a young age that sexy, provocative dress, sly backward glances, and flirtatious body language "works" and gets them what they want, then why not start early? Its what boys look for and what they expect, isn't it? Cinderella was communicating the way girls ought to look and act, and chaste is not it.

Nevertheless, my girls did not notice Frankenrella. Thankfully, they were more interested in the barnyard animal, Care Bears, and bug-eyed house pet cards.

Just How Biblical is the Sinner's Prayer?

This post is essentially thinking out loud about something I have been pondering for a while. I thought by posting this I could get some feedback and evaluate my thoughts. Someone may have already addressed this adequately. I hope I am not splitting hairs too finely, but here goes...

When I came to Christ as a teenager, I prayed a prayer similar to what you find in most Gospel tracts:

"Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am sinful and I need your forgiveness. I believe that You died to pay the penalty for my sin. I want to turn from my sin nature and follow You instead. I invite You to come into my life. In Jesus' name. Amen." Steps to Peace with God, Billy Graham

I know that countless others have prayed this prayer to initiate their life with Christ. On the surface, the prayer seems theological enough--there is acknowledgment of need, confession of sin, the substitutionary nature of Christ's death, and repentance, all biblically necessary for receiving salvation.

However, is there anywhere in the Bible that someone prays for their initial salvation? I don't think so. I do not want to say that if an apparently Scriptural practice, if it is not chapter and verse, that it is immediately unbiblical. There are a lot of modern constructs used in Christian life and practice that though they do not have a biblical precedent it does not make the usage of them sinful. Nevertheless, there is no notion of a sinner's prayer in the Scriptures.

God has outlined the plan of salvation clearly in the Scriptures. And from that plan, there is no mention of prayer being a prerequisite. The plan goes like this:

1. Hear the Gospel message (John 5:24, Acts 15:7, Romans 10:14).
2. Believe in Jesus as the resurrected Son of God (John 3:16-18, 11:25-26, Romans 10:9).
3. Repent of sin (Matthew 3:2, Luke 13:3, Acts 17:30).
4. Confess Christ before others (Mark 8:38, Romans 10:9).
5. Be baptized as an outward testimony and as an act of obedience (Matthew 3:13-15, Acts 9:18, 16:33).
6. Live faithfully and steadfast as a Christian (Matthew 10:22, Hebrews 3:6, 14).
   

Of all the conversions recorded in the New Testament, there is no witness to any kind of prayer to receive salvation. There are nine conversions in the book of Acts alone and all follow this plan.

1. 3,000 on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41)
2. Simon and the Samaritans (Acts 8:9-12)
3. The Ethiopian Eunuch (Acts 8:26-39)
4. Saul/Paul (Acts 9:1-19 & Acts 22:3-16)
5. Cornelius’ Household (Acts 10:44-48)
6. Lydia (Acts 16:11-15)
7. The Philippian Jailer (Acts 16:16-34)
8. The Corinthians (Acts 18:1-8)
9. The Ephesians (Acts 19:1-7)

There are also the conversions recorded in the Gospels (for example, Nicodemus, the woman at the well, the Gadarene demoniac, Zaccheus) where similar patterns are evident, though they do not follow the pattern from the book of Acts.

What I am not trying to do is impose a rigid rule upon the salvation experience, for each person's experience coming to Christ is different. However, it seems that a pattern can be discerned from Scripture that is noticeably devoid of prayer of any kind. I do not think prayer as a matter of course cannot be part of the initial saving process. The concern raised in my mind is what the usage of the sinner's prayer has done to discipleship. Has the church overemphasized the usage of the prayer to the effect that it has the opposite effect on maturity?

The prayer seems to truncate the primary Christian discipline of discipleship as well as the most noticeable indicator of salvation; that one continues in the faith. I have served in church long enough to garner enough empirical evidence to see that those who have prayed the sinner's prayer, if it is not solidified with discipleship, the prayer then becomes an end unto itself. The sinner has then staked his eternal soul not on the merit of Christ, but a tenuous prayer.

The sinner's prayer, often used as a substitute for the dirty work of discipleship, can even be prayed again if one does not "feel" saved, purely contrary to the Scriptural teaching on salvation.

So, just how biblical is the sinner's prayer?

Quote of the Day

"Christianity is neither creed nor ceremonial, but a life vitally connected to a loving Christ."

- Josiah Strong, 19th century preacher