Even in His Death...

...he still polarizes. Dr. Jerry Falwell is one of the most polarizing firgures to have ever called himself an evangelical.In reading many blogs about Dr. Falwell as a man, a visionary, a leader, a pastor, and a preacher of the Gospel, the opinions have ranged from "glad he is dead" to "bold man of God."

I have had a decided opinion of Dr. Falwell, and as a conservative living in Virginia, one cannot listen to Virginia Baptist news without the names Dr. Falwell, Liberty University, or Thomas Road Baptist Church eventually coming up. As a preacher of the Gospel, few could rival Dr. Falwell for his bold proclamation, his tender invitation, his compassionate identification even with the poorest of sinners. As a pastor, the Thomas Road Baptist Church family loved him; he was willing to get his hands dirty with ministry, reaching out to the lowliest of drug addicts and alcoholics, condemning abortion yet doing all in his evangelical sway to open another shelter for unwed mothers.

One thing I can say about Dr. Falwell, as some have already noted on their blogs, Dr. Falwell made some onerous statements. I will not rehearse those. Regardless of the sharpness of his tongue, no one would have ever caught Dr. Falwell in an adult book store. His integrity in witness and committment to his family, immediate, church, and to the larger Body of Christ, rose above every other character flaw he may have had, and if anything, I respect his boldness and courage. Greatness as a man of God is not precluded by any personal bias one may have for any man, whether conservative or moderate in their theology.

I disagreed with Dr. Falwell on politics. He was too close to too many politicians, nor were his political affiliations consistent, and his galvanization of a "values voters" block was too single-issue and too polarized for my tastes. His legalistic and fundamentalist bents made political favor part of a personal relationship with Christ and with that I take issue. Christ is part of no political party. But all that is personal bias.

Dr. Falwell was radical. He was extreme. He made people mad. However, having met Dr. Falwell, shook his hand, attended services at Thomas Road, heard him preach in person and on radio, he was a sweet man. But when he became political, he morphed into something entirely different. Here is where I diverge with the man, for better or worse.

I appreciate, admire, and respect the contributions of Dr. Jerry Falwell to evangelical Christianity, culture at large, and even to us as Baptists. May God bless his family, watch over them during this time of crisis, and may a man of God be raised to fill his enormous shoes.

Dan Edelen's Comments on Falwell

Dan Edelen, well-respected God-blogger, had this to say about the sorrowful passing of Dr. Jerry Falwell. A great quote, I will let it stand on its own merit.

No matter what any Christian thinks of Jerry Falwell, he decisively answered a most important question that all Christians must consider: Does a sacred/secular divide exist?

For most of Christian history, the answer has been yes. Jerry Falwell said no. And I believe he was right.

We can’t underestimate the profundity of pulling down the curtain between the sacred and the secular. Many of us today fail to realize how much we’ve gained by understanding that all of life is sacred, and it loses none of its sacredness when it intersects with everyday living. Eliminating that divide better frames the Kingdom of God in its proper context. The Kingdom penetrates everything it touches when Christians advance.

Jerry Falwell believed that Christians should not be ashamed to enter secular realms with the Gospel. Before he came on the scene, too many of us lived a double life. He didn’t found the idea, but he made it popular for Christians to go into the highways and byways of the world confident in Christ.

We forget what it was like before Falwell, don’t we?

Sadly, while the idea reflects God’s heart, the execution of that mandate doomed itself by going too far. Instead of letting the light of Christ speak, we decided to make something happen. Like Moses striking the rock, we overstepped our bounds and made a laughingstock of Evangelicalism. We equated expanding the Kingdom into secular realms with attempting to rule it with a not-so-subtle iron fist. In effect, the mishandling of the elimination of the sacred/secular divide led to power grabs from overly smug Evangelicals, rather than a humble glowing of light from within the traditionally dark areas of life long ago abandoned by believers.

Dr. Falwell Dead

From CNN:

The Rev. Jerry Falwell, the television minister whose 1979 founding of the
Moral Majority galvanized American religious conservatives into a political
force, died Tuesday at age 73. Falwell was found unconscious and without a pulse in his office at Liberty University, the college he founded in Lynchburg, Virginia, said Ron Godwin, the school's executive vice president.

I disagreed with Dr. Falwell on many things, primarrily his political method. However, I also held many things in common with him, mainly a great love for the Lord Jesus Christ. Our prayers are with the Falwell family during this difficult time.

Is Church Good for Kids?

That is the conclusion of a recent study by a team of sociologists at Mississippi State University. The study claims that it is "quite clear" that religious attendance has various positive effects on children and that children who attend church of some description fare better emotionally, behaviorally, and cognitively. The study also found a direct correlation between positive childhood development and regular attendance as opposed to sporadic attendance.

The study's definition of religion is one significant drawback in that they only examined generalized data; denomination or affiliation was not included in the study parameters. Therefore, it cannot be concluded (from this study) if attendance at a Baptist church would have a significant difference over attendance at a church of another denominational stripe or even religious affiliation.

A significant finding from this study is that parental disagreement about faith does impact a child's development and his views on faith later in life.

But Bartkowski's study did determine that while church attendance is good for children, parental debate over religion is not. In fact, the study found that when parents argue about religion, it can "significantly undermine" a young child's development. However, when they are in agreement, it can be very beneficial. The study also said parent-child discussions about religion "often yield positive affects on child development."

Regularity in attendance can make a difference, too.

"In many of the developmental domains featured here, the children who are doing the best are in households where both parents attend worship services frequently," the authors wrote.

Though regular church attendance does indeed have a positive impact on children, a more significant conclusion of this study, one overlooked or drawn unwittingly, is that how faith is modeled at home has a much more significant impact on the child's development as well as how he views faith later in life. Parents who are unequally yoked serves, as Scripture testifies, to confuse childhood faith development.

In such home settings, any work done in church to disciple children is typically undone at home or is not being reinforced and does indeed confuse the child. The study does draw this point, that church should reinforce what is taught at home and not vice versa. This draws the more general point that faith is best taught at home and the church setting serves to best act as a conduit for working faith out, being edified and encouraged, and enjoying fellowship with other believers.

What is more significant is whether or not the child knows Jesus Christ and is being led to love Him, serve Him, and follow Him. So while church attendance is indeed good, parental discipleship is still best.

Dr. Frank Page: A Strong Voice of Reason in the Education Debate

Dr. Page has sought to clarify his stance on the proposed education resolution authored by Voddie Baucham and Bruce Shortt. Dr. Page's name is mentioned six times in the resolution and today he issued a statement clarifying his position on schooling issues.

"I am pastor of a church that has strong support for home schoolers and their families," Page said. "Many in my church go to Christian schools. Two of my three daughters graduated from Christian schools. However, I also support those who feel led to continue their children in public school education. I strongly support those Christian men and women who teach in our public schools and our young people who are seriously considering the teaching profession as a possible calling of God. Basically, I support a parent's right to decide where their children should be educated. There are many crucial issues involved. Parents must be very careful about where they place their children. They must carefully seek the leadership of the Lord in this important matter. I am also deeply concerned about those in our society who cannot afford to either home school (because of work schedules) or place their children in Christian education because of the costs. This is a serious issue to me.

Amen.

Education Resolution Redux

My post on the education resolution to be brought to the SBC in San Antonio this June stimulated a great response and my friend Les and I discussed the "do-ability" of this resolution. I suspect I came off as a dreamer, anticipating that churches could work together, pool resources, and make such a proposal work over the course of several, even many years. Les took the opposite tact and remains a bit skeptical. He said in the comment thread, "Unfortunately, it would take some very unselfish churches to accomplish it. It grieves my heart to say this but I don't see that many unselfish SBC churches around."

After mulling it over for a day, Les is probably right. There are not very many unselfish churches around; a sad indictment but one that is nonetheless true. After a thread's worth of discussion, I also became doubtful and I tend to be fairly optimistic. However, E. Ray Moore, outspoken proponent of pulling out of public schools, also dreams of a day when such a proposal may work. He is quoted in a recent World Net Daily article,

Moore told WND that for the most part, there would be nothing simpler than Christians creating a parallel school system.

"The resources are there," he said. "Church buildings lie fallow five days a week, so the buildings are there. The people are there. The children are there. Budgets are in place in churches. In many cases there are Christian public school teachers who could come over. Everything is there, in place, available, right now as I speak."

Add to that the availability of Internet, satellite and other course options, and there you have a school, he said.

"But they do not have a biblical theology and the will to do it," he said.

Well, there you have it.

As far as declaring that the current problem is a theological one, he may be hermeneutically off-base. He quotes Proverbs 22:6, "Train up a child in the way he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it." He then claims that many Christians are disobedient to Scripture because this command includes education. He goes on to say,

"This should be part of their witness, along with Bible study, faithful attendance, and tithing [Oh my!]," Moore said. "That's what we're teaching. That's sort of made us a little different. We're teaching this as part of biblical obedience."

That "Oh my!" was from me. I won't argue that he is probably right about churches possessing the wherewithal to accomplish such a monumental task, but here is where I would like to open this up for discussion. Where do you see flaws in Moore's reasonings, if any?

Children are Bad for the Planet

I normally criticize the right on this blog, but this comes from the decidedly left and all I can say is, no.

No.

No.

No.

Having large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.

The paper by the Optimum Population Trust will say that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family's carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

John Guillebaud, co-chairman of OPT and emeritus professor of family planning at University College London, said: "The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights.

"The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child."

In his latest comments, the academic says that when couples are planning a family they should be encouraged to think about the environmental consequences.

"The decision to have children should be seen as a very big one and one that should take the environment into account," he added.

Professor Guillebaud says that, as a general guideline, couples should produce no more than two offspring.

Thank you professor for that keen insight. Let me offer my commentary:

"Bwahhhhaahhhaaahhhahhhhhhaaaa!!!!" And just in time for Mother's Day.

(H/T: Vision Forum Blog)

Finally-An Education Resolution that Makes Sense

From Christian Newswire:

As the controversy over public schooling among Southern Baptists and other Christians continues to gather force, for the first time a president of the Southern Baptist Convention has publicly called upon churches to start more Christian schools and to make sure that provision is made for the children of families that would not otherwise be able to afford to attend.

Anyone that reads this blog knows that I am an avid homeschooler. However, I could not get behind the 2004 SBC education resolution. I am not certain it represented a large block of the SBC's membership's feelings on schooling issues, being utopian, unrealistic and radically extreme. You can read the entire text of the failed resolution here, but I excerpt it to show how radical it was.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the 2004 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention encourages all officers and members of the Southern Baptist Convention and the churches associated with it to remove their children from the government schools and see to it that they receive a thoroughly Christian education, for the glory of God, the good of Christ's church, and the strength of their own commitment to Jesus, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2004 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention encourages all churches associated with the Southern Baptist Convention to work energetically to counsel parents regarding their obligation to provide their children with a Christian education, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2004 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention encourages all churches associated with the Southern Baptist Convention to provide all of their children with Christian alternatives to government school education, either through home schooling or thoroughly Christian private schools. [All emphases are mine.]

The resolution failed to take into account the number of families simply unable to afford Christian education, which was one of my primary concerns when the resolution was first made public, the gravity of urging all parents in every SBC church to just "remove" their children from the school system, the fundamentalist bent driving the resolution, as well as the number of members of SBC churches employed by school systems. Moreover, it just sets a goal that cannot and will not be reached.

Granted, all radical movements are driven by some extreme personalities. However, the 2007 resolution to be brought to San Antonio is one that I can fully support and makes a lot more sense than the 2004 resolution. You can read the entire (proposed) resolution here, but I excerpt a portion that outshines the first resolution.

Whereas, event and personality driven methods of evangelism are ineffective, unscriptural, and fail to overcome our failure to disciple our children;

Whereas, Christian educational alternatives to government schools are an effective means for evangelistic outreach and discipling, and, as Dr. Page recognizes, such alternatives are desperately needed immediately by orphans, children of single parents, and the disadvantaged;

[...]

Whereas, churches can collaborate in providing alternatives to the government school system; and

[...]

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention urges that the agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention to heed Dr. Page’s call to expand Christian education by assisting churches in the development of Christian schools and help coordinate efforts, including partnerships with churches in low income areas, to provide a Christian educational alternative to orphans, single parents, and the disadvantaged;

[...]

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the 2007 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention applauds the many adult members of our congregations who teach in government schools, and this resolution should be construed to encourage adult believers who are truly called to labor as missionaries to unbelieving colleagues and students to continue their missionary work in the dark and decaying government school system. [All emphases are mine.]

This is an education resolution that makes sense--and seems doable. Plus, churches working together to accomplish a perceived end is much more plausible than just "pull out," workable over the course of several years. I know many parents who want a Christian education for their children, but because of aforementioned reasons, cannot provide that for their kids. I have always been an advocate of our churches helping those who cannot provide for themselves and this is a step in the right direction, not just chastising the single mother who works two jobs whose ex-husband doesn't pay child support, that she is failing in adequately having her children educated.

Too often our churches exact a standard on those who cannot reach it and then respond with fury when they do not reach it. (I think that might be called legalism.) Yet this resolution actually offers a plausible standard and then offers ways and means to assist parents in reaching it. This seems to be a bit more in accords with New Testament Christianity. Now, if our churches will just hear and respond.

Pulpit Plagiarism: Still a Problem

I know a handful of preachers read this blog and I came across this article from the Christian Century which troubles me. I spend a great deal of time preparing messages and Bible studies. I set aside several hours of study time to ensure that the congregation I serve is fed the Word of God, as limited as I am.

It continues to surprise me that preachers are not above plagiarism and that a preacher would be guilty of such, but I guess I am a bit idyllic. I see no harm in reading other preachers' sermons, finding illustrations (as long as they are not shared as original), or to hone theology. However, preaching an entire sermon, or even parts, is still "homiletical petty larceny."

Pulpit plagiarism may not be new, but there is plenty of evidence that the practice is spreading and that the kerosene on the fire is the Internet. Not only are thousands of sermons available for the snatching on church Web pages, but scores of commercial sites hawk complete sermons, illustrations, outlines, images and PowerPoint accompaniments for a fee.

I know that there are seasons when time is scarce and valuable study time is at a minimum. It is easy to log on, easier to find a sermon posted, and woefully simple then to pass it off as your own. Many sermon websites are now carrying ridiculous disclaimers to soothe the conscience.

"We know you may be worried about plagiarism," they essentially warble, "but the authors of these sermons want you to use them. And besides, these sermons are designed to stimulate your imagination as you create your own sermons. You'll still be doing the work."

Rick Warren added his invaluable two cents worth: "If it fits in your gun, shoot it." His website states, "When I was planting Saddleback Church, other pastors’ sermons fed my soul – and eased my preparation!" So if Rick Warren offers you full access to his sermons, what is the harm in using them?

Plenty. Our folks come to church looking for a fresh word from God, not warmed-over table scraps. Moreover, how does this nourish the preacher's soul? I find my study time fresh engagements with God, opportunities not just to prepare to feed the congregation God has given me to serve, but soul nourishment of my own. Who do you think the congregation would rather hear, a pastor who spent eight to ten hours of study time alone with God or Rick Warren? What is the point of preaching if the preacher does not prepare to deliver God's message? It will be as Randy Cohen, publisher of The Ethicist, writes,

"Perhaps sermon writing should not be a job requirement." Being a pastor, Cohen said, requires many different gifts, and no one can possess them all in abundance. "If an otherwise excellent pastor is clumsy with his pen," he mused, "his parish would be better served by hearing him deliver the profound and stirring words of a more talented author."

I just recently began preaching without the aid of notes. Not only is this liberating and allows much more freedom for the Spirit to work, it also guards against passing another's material off as one's own. The primary issue is, I believe, one of truthfulness. It isn't about giving credit where credit is due, keeping one's ethical nose clean, or even about making best use of one's time. It is about honoring God in all that you do, giving Him the glory, and allowing Him to work through His inspired Word to do His business.

(H/T: Michael Duduit)

Delta Farce

Has anyone seen the trailer for this new movie, Delta Farce? I saw it last night channel surfing and I found it quite troubling. I'm not comfortable with Larry the Cable Guy in a military uniform, not that I have regard for him anyway, but it seems Hollywood can sink their talons into any story or topic now, no matter how poorly they treat it. This smacks of poor taste and even poorer judgment, just like two other movies I refuse to see, Flight 93 and World Trade Center.

One of the bits they showed in the trailer was a sergeant badgering the soldiers about taking them to paradise. When they arrive in Iraq, he equivocates and says "Oh, I meant Fallujah."

I shudder to think how this film will portray the Iraqis if they do at all, but I am tired of everything being for sale, even the war in Iraq. Maybe I am a bit more sensitive since my brother is in the army. However, I cannot see turning Iraq into a B-grade parody positive.

I'm Not Making This Up

My family and I were going to Bedford today for a little fun when we passed by this church sign. I want to provide a caption, or an explanation, but I just cannot. I guess, at least they are honest.

Giuliani-A Candidate with No Hope...but Falwell

Rudy Giuliani has officially sold himself out to the religious right. Having changed his stance on same sex unions, Jerry Falwell is now calling the shots. As his National Liberty Journal records, "Giuliani is the candidate we wish we could love." Falwell uses a mass email list and the most recent one said,

“Mayor Giuliani believes marriage is between one man and one woman,” the Giuliani campaign said, responding to a New York Sun query. “Domestic partnerships are the appropriate way to ensure that people are treated fairly. In this specific case the law states same sex civil unions are the equivalent of marriage and recognizes same sex unions from outside states. This goes too far and Mayor Giuliani does not support it.”

Never mind that the resurrected mayor has vacillated on this point too many times to count, but the rhetoric of Falwell is not surprising either.

But as America has come to a social and political crossroads in terms of the same-sex marriage debate, I am more concerned than ever that our leaders understand that traditional marriage is a foundational component of civilization, not an issue in which we can bounce around new ideas and pounce on the ones that are the most politically expedient.

[...]

So while Mr. Giuliani’s abrupt rebuke of the New Hampshire Senate’s bill is welcomed, we are still hopeful for more encouraging evidence of his commitment to social conservatism.

Here is how I see it: Rudy can no longer appeal to the left of center republicans because of his vacillation on certain issues and has nowhere else to turn except the far right. However, Dr. Falwell has ratcheted up the pressure and has essentially upped the ante on Rudy; my question is, will he deliver?

Giuliani is now beholden to Falwell and his cronies and it would behoove him to toe the party line--or else he will deny himself any opportunity in 2008.

Milestones and Maturity

Having four kids and expecting a fifth, I am pretty familiar with milestones. Milestones are those understood markers that as a child grows, she ought to reach that particular milestone at an approximate age.

For instance, a child develops language patterns early. My oldest daughter said her first word by the time she was nine months and was speaking in complete sentences by a year. My other children followed that pattern, but not as closely.

Typically a child will vocalize beyond crying at about six months. They will make noises often just to hear themselves, preparing their little voices for the formation of sounds. Between nine months and a year, they should be babbling; ma ma ma, da da da, and so on.

At about a year to fourteen months a child should be saying simple one syllable words and by eighteen months to two years they should be saying two syllable words as well as making two to three word sentences. Beyond two years old, her vocabulary should be increasing exponentially and she should be making conversation.

Some friends have a child who had not reached any milestones beyond vocalizing by the time their son was eighteen months. He was combative, frequently upset, and out of sorts most of the time. The fact that he had not reached any milestones was of grave concern to them and so they made an appointment to see a doctor. Something was abnormal and it was of utmost necessity to have him looked at by a physician.

They discovered that their son had hearing troubles as well as a mild case of autism, easily treatable through therapy. In cases of unreached physical milestones, drastic steps are often taken to ensure those milestones are reached or at least to diagnose the problem. When it is discovered that something is wrong, the source of the problem is then treated.

What happens however, when it is discovered that spiritual milestones have not been reached? What happens if a member of the body of Christ has not reached those milestones?

Typically, nothing.

More thoughts later.

You're Rich and Didn't Even Know It...

...compared to everyone else in the world, that is. It is our tendency in American culture to place a heavy emphasis on wealth and our rabid consumerism fosters a desire for more, no matter the cost. Even the lowest rung on the ladder in America is wealthier than third world countries.

H/T to Henry Cate for pointing us to this site that helps to put things in perspective. I have always said that I am rich, I just don't have a lot of money. Maybe I need to stop using that trite statement because according to this rich list, I am in the top 3.81%.

Go see for yourself, and stop griping.

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.