My wife and I love the Pirates of the Caribbean movies and we were watched the third in the trilogy just the other night. At the end of the movie there is a fight scene between the pirates and the soldiers of the British Army, and anyone watching the movie is hoping that the pirates will be victorious. Then I thought, why? Especially as Christians. Aren’t the pirates actually the bad guys? They are the ones out stealing, looting, pillaging and living a very sinful life.
I realize that they main character in the British Army is evil and a few of his henchmen that he has surrounded himself with are evil as well, but overall the soldiers are just following orders that this deceitful general has given them. Not to mention that getting rid of pirates is not necessarily a bad thing, as they were breaking just about every law they could. Their credo was, “take what you can and give nothing back.” The lifestyle they even portrayed in the movie was that of vivaciousness. They had no moral scruples (it was all insinuated in this movie and not shown), drank continually, and fought for no apparent reasons many times, yet everyone who watches hopes that Captain Jack Sparrow will be the victor in the end. Why? Because he was helping some other law breaking pirates, or trying to find the treasure they stole to begin with. What if we lived like that today? In many ways we are.
How does this compare to Philippians 4:8, “Finally brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable—if there is any moral excellence and if there is any praise—dwell on these things.”
It has been hard for me to reconcile what appears to be a very safe movie in comparison to many others, but at the same time it promotes a lifestyle that is far from what Paul is talking about in Philippians. How can we dwell on anything within the Pirates of the Caribbean movies that is truly lovely, as the “good” guys are actually the criminals?
On the other hand, what an ingenious way to undermine our Christian values and make unacceptable life-styles seen as normal and permissible in our society! As I reflected on the moral principles within the movie, I realized they are pretty much the exact opposite of what I teach. So, how can I tell anyone to see the movie? Wouldn’t that be giving my approval for the values shown within it?
I am wondering how many movies we would actually go see if we based what we viewed on the morals that are being promoted as virtuous and acceptable through the eyes of Christ and His commands in the Bible. For that matter, how many television shows would we have to stop watching? Have our minds really become like that of Christ?
I pray O’ Lord that You continually change me and let me be a Philippians 4:8 man, that I would only think on what You value as right and true, that my mind would be transformed into the mind of Christ.
Romans 12:1-2, “1Therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, I urge you to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God; this is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God.”
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Friday, December 28, 2007
How Deep is Your Foundation?
Whether you know it or not the Christian faith is under attack in America, and in particular at the collegiate level. Their arguments are the same as always, but with different flavors and twists. These new arguments seem to be making an impact on the generation now in college.
One reason is because as a church we have failed to develop our young adult’s foundation in the faith (1 Peter 3:15). We have failed at teaching them the very basic truths of Scripture, and how to know that their faith is not based on just blind faith, but on evidence (Heb. 11:1). Actually, many adults do not have the tools to defend their faith or answer questions brought up by someone who gives them a decent rationale or argument against Christianity.
What would you say to someone who says that the Koran repeatedly calls itself the perfect word of God and the creator of the universe, so Christianity is just the same as the Islam in its’ claims. Meaning that both make absolute claims and claim absolute truth, but both cannot be right, which leads us to believe that both are most likely wrong on some of their points? Christianity must be misleading then in its claims.
How would you answer?
The Koran claims that Jesus was just a prophet and not divine (Koran 5:71-75; 19:30-38). Points like these are brought up in a popular book by Sam Harris called, Letter to a Christian Nation. This is only one of the many accusations he makes against the Christian faith.
Sam asks, “Why don’t you lose any sleep over whether to convert to Islam? Can you prove that Allah is not the one, true God?” (6).
I will answer these questions and many more that Sam Harris brings against the Christian faith that believers in today’s world should be able to handle if we are to witness to this generation. This is one way we become all things to all people, in that we understand where they are at and are able to answer their objections regarding Christianity (1 Cor. 9:22).
If you can articulate some answers to the questions posed above then please do so, as we can all learn together.
One reason is because as a church we have failed to develop our young adult’s foundation in the faith (1 Peter 3:15). We have failed at teaching them the very basic truths of Scripture, and how to know that their faith is not based on just blind faith, but on evidence (Heb. 11:1). Actually, many adults do not have the tools to defend their faith or answer questions brought up by someone who gives them a decent rationale or argument against Christianity.
What would you say to someone who says that the Koran repeatedly calls itself the perfect word of God and the creator of the universe, so Christianity is just the same as the Islam in its’ claims. Meaning that both make absolute claims and claim absolute truth, but both cannot be right, which leads us to believe that both are most likely wrong on some of their points? Christianity must be misleading then in its claims.
How would you answer?
The Koran claims that Jesus was just a prophet and not divine (Koran 5:71-75; 19:30-38). Points like these are brought up in a popular book by Sam Harris called, Letter to a Christian Nation. This is only one of the many accusations he makes against the Christian faith.
Sam asks, “Why don’t you lose any sleep over whether to convert to Islam? Can you prove that Allah is not the one, true God?” (6).
I will answer these questions and many more that Sam Harris brings against the Christian faith that believers in today’s world should be able to handle if we are to witness to this generation. This is one way we become all things to all people, in that we understand where they are at and are able to answer their objections regarding Christianity (1 Cor. 9:22).
If you can articulate some answers to the questions posed above then please do so, as we can all learn together.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Aleris Group Started
Some have asked me to have the blog sent to them each time it is posted. In order to accomplish this, I have started a group. If you wish to have this blog sent to you each time then you can join the group and it will be sent to you each time I post to this blog.
This group is not for sending out emails to everyone and just for receiving my blog posts. If you wish to make a comment about the blog then do so on my blog and not a response on the group itself.
You will see the box to the right of this post where you can join the blog, or tell others where to join to receive an email regarding this blog. I have also made a box below for this post.
This group is not for sending out emails to everyone and just for receiving my blog posts. If you wish to make a comment about the blog then do so on my blog and not a response on the group itself.
You will see the box to the right of this post where you can join the blog, or tell others where to join to receive an email regarding this blog. I have also made a box below for this post.
 |
Aleris Blog |
Visit this group |
Monday, December 24, 2007
Teaching or Indocrinating?
I am starting to think that Pink Floyd may have been prophets without anyone knowing it. In their song “The Wall,” one of their stanzas says, “Hey teachers, leave those children alone.”
Unfortunately that statement is becoming true today, as teachers need to leave our children alone in some areas. Instead of teaching they are indoctrinating our children to believe what they feel is right instead of presenting the evidence. Instead of actually teaching today a lot of teachers are just using the classroom as a platform to spout their opinions on many topics that at times do not have anything to do with their subject. This is not secluded to the college classroom, but is happening in our public school system.
I was having a conversation with a couple of high school girls this past week and they were telling what they were going to do when they graduated school, which led to discussion on some of the topics they are taking in school right now. One started talking about how they had to debate the war, but they could not find anyone to be on the side of supporting what we are doing in Iraq. According to this young lady, the teacher had to assign people. I found this a little unusual, and probed as to why this was. I asked them to tell me why the war is bad and they had only epithets that come from the liberal media.
All their reasoning’s came from either the media of the teacher, as they also told me the opinion, not facts, as to what the teacher was saying. I asked them if they would want to help people who were being killed just for being different, or for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I asked if raping people was okay, or if torture should be allowed? They answered as most conscientious people would. They did not believe in killing, rape or torture, to which I responded that neither does the United States and they were good reasons to remove Saddam Hussein.
We talked back and forth about some of the issues why we went into Iraq, and not just because of oil. They had never heard it presented this way because all they are told is one side by the media and then by their teacher who should be teaching in an unbiased fashion in this type of format. If they want to give their opinion after presenting both sides fairly then fine, but they should not just ignore one side because they “believe” it is wrong.
This is not a singular incident. I have heard many students; middle school, high school and college tell me that their teachers are just teaching one side. Science teachers talking about politics, English teachers talking about church functions, and History teachers talking about philosophical matters, which are all important topics, but they are not part of their class curriculum and they only talk about their belief or only present theirs in the positive light. Unfortunately, the majority of the opinions are false, miss-presented, and/or heavily liberal in their bent. The students just suck in what they are saying as truth, because they are teachers and they would not say anything that was not true. Right?
Why aren’t we teaching our children critical thinking and to seek truth? Why do we continue to allow teachers to push their political, ethical, and spiritual morals down our children’s throats and just allow it? One reason I believe this happens is because most people do not know how to debate what is said and do not know how to critically think themselves. Unless one seeks truth then when false doctrine seeps in you will not know it.
John 8:31-32, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 17:17-18, “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth. As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also may be sanctified by the truth.”
Unfortunately that statement is becoming true today, as teachers need to leave our children alone in some areas. Instead of teaching they are indoctrinating our children to believe what they feel is right instead of presenting the evidence. Instead of actually teaching today a lot of teachers are just using the classroom as a platform to spout their opinions on many topics that at times do not have anything to do with their subject. This is not secluded to the college classroom, but is happening in our public school system.
I was having a conversation with a couple of high school girls this past week and they were telling what they were going to do when they graduated school, which led to discussion on some of the topics they are taking in school right now. One started talking about how they had to debate the war, but they could not find anyone to be on the side of supporting what we are doing in Iraq. According to this young lady, the teacher had to assign people. I found this a little unusual, and probed as to why this was. I asked them to tell me why the war is bad and they had only epithets that come from the liberal media.
All their reasoning’s came from either the media of the teacher, as they also told me the opinion, not facts, as to what the teacher was saying. I asked them if they would want to help people who were being killed just for being different, or for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I asked if raping people was okay, or if torture should be allowed? They answered as most conscientious people would. They did not believe in killing, rape or torture, to which I responded that neither does the United States and they were good reasons to remove Saddam Hussein.
We talked back and forth about some of the issues why we went into Iraq, and not just because of oil. They had never heard it presented this way because all they are told is one side by the media and then by their teacher who should be teaching in an unbiased fashion in this type of format. If they want to give their opinion after presenting both sides fairly then fine, but they should not just ignore one side because they “believe” it is wrong.
This is not a singular incident. I have heard many students; middle school, high school and college tell me that their teachers are just teaching one side. Science teachers talking about politics, English teachers talking about church functions, and History teachers talking about philosophical matters, which are all important topics, but they are not part of their class curriculum and they only talk about their belief or only present theirs in the positive light. Unfortunately, the majority of the opinions are false, miss-presented, and/or heavily liberal in their bent. The students just suck in what they are saying as truth, because they are teachers and they would not say anything that was not true. Right?
Why aren’t we teaching our children critical thinking and to seek truth? Why do we continue to allow teachers to push their political, ethical, and spiritual morals down our children’s throats and just allow it? One reason I believe this happens is because most people do not know how to debate what is said and do not know how to critically think themselves. Unless one seeks truth then when false doctrine seeps in you will not know it.
John 8:31-32, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
John 17:17-18, “Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth. As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they also may be sanctified by the truth.”
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Golden Compass -- Another Opinion
The Pelvic Atheism of Philip Pullman
Posted Dec 17th 2007 8:14AM by Dinesh D'SouzaFiled under: Pop Culture, Christianity, Controversy, Atheism
Just in time for Christmas, Hollywood has released The Golden Compass, a film based on the first book of a trilogy of children's novels written by atheist Philip Pullman. Pullman is not a fan of his fellow childrens' writers J.R.R. Tolkien or C.S. Lewis. He denounced the Lord of the Rings trilogy as "infantile" and absolutely hated the Chronicles of Narnia, calling it "morally loathsome" and "one of the most ugly and poisonous things I've ever read."
This is downright weird.
One may find the Narnia stories simplistic or windy or whatever but it takes a particularly demented mind to see them as loathsome and ugly and poisonous. Tolkien's work is pure genius and the film adaptations of Lord of the Rings have been widely acclaimed. So what is Pullman's problem? Basically his objection comes down to the fact that Tolkien and Lewis were Christians and their work embodies powerful Christian allegories of good and evil, sin and redemption.
Some critics have objected to the overdrawn contrast between the forces of light and the forces of darkness in Christian fiction, but Pullman's trilogy is no less Manichean. The only difference is that in Pullman's world the evil regime is run by God Himself. Pullman pictures a kind of Calvinist moral structure, run by a kind of Catholic network called the Magisterium, and behind the whole oppressive system is a tyrannical God. As Pullman envisions it, the church kidnaps and tortures children and subjects them to hideous experiments in which their bodies are separated fro their souls and the children are turned into zombies who are then left to die. Pullman's trilogy finally ends with God being killed, the collapse of the Calvinist moral rules, and the emergence of sexual freedom.
Profoundly stupid stuff. I was not surprised to discover that Pullman is a big fan of atheist Richard Dawkins. Pullman speaks of religion in terms that could be lifted directly from The God Delusion. Pullman has been quoted saying it is not even possible for God to exist. "Every single religion," he says, "that has a monotheistic God ends up by persecuting other people and killing them because they don't accept him." Actually this is flatly untrue of Judaism and Hindusim and only in a very qualified sense true of Islam and Christianity. It would be more accurate to say that every atheist regime, from Communism to the Nazi regime in Germany, has systematically persecuted and killed its opponents for practicing traditional religion and for not accepting their secular race and class-based ideologies.
Certainly Pullman knows that there is nothing oppressive or murderous in today's Anglicanism. He is free in his native London to believe or not to believe. What is it then about religion that he's so strongly opposed to? For Pullman, as for many atheists, the problem with Christianity seems mostly to focus on sexual freedom. Reviewing Pullman's work in The Atlantic Monthly, Hanna Rosin writes, "The most curious aspect of Pullman's theology is the primacy he places on teen sexuality...the whole series builds up to a celebration of losing your virginity." So here is Pullman's case against religion. Basically, religion is what asks you to pull your pants up. This may be termed Pelvic Atheism.
True to form, Hollywood has stripped Pullman's movie of its overt anti-religiosity. The evil guys in the Hollywood version are not God's minions but a kind of amorphous Nazi-type dictatorship. Pullman can take solace, however, in the fact that the movie will probably lead a lot of people to read his books. Aren't we fortunate to have an atheist children's novelist whose main objective seems to be to corrupt the minds and morals of the young?
Posted Dec 17th 2007 8:14AM by Dinesh D'SouzaFiled under: Pop Culture, Christianity, Controversy, Atheism
Just in time for Christmas, Hollywood has released The Golden Compass, a film based on the first book of a trilogy of children's novels written by atheist Philip Pullman. Pullman is not a fan of his fellow childrens' writers J.R.R. Tolkien or C.S. Lewis. He denounced the Lord of the Rings trilogy as "infantile" and absolutely hated the Chronicles of Narnia, calling it "morally loathsome" and "one of the most ugly and poisonous things I've ever read."
This is downright weird.
One may find the Narnia stories simplistic or windy or whatever but it takes a particularly demented mind to see them as loathsome and ugly and poisonous. Tolkien's work is pure genius and the film adaptations of Lord of the Rings have been widely acclaimed. So what is Pullman's problem? Basically his objection comes down to the fact that Tolkien and Lewis were Christians and their work embodies powerful Christian allegories of good and evil, sin and redemption.
Some critics have objected to the overdrawn contrast between the forces of light and the forces of darkness in Christian fiction, but Pullman's trilogy is no less Manichean. The only difference is that in Pullman's world the evil regime is run by God Himself. Pullman pictures a kind of Calvinist moral structure, run by a kind of Catholic network called the Magisterium, and behind the whole oppressive system is a tyrannical God. As Pullman envisions it, the church kidnaps and tortures children and subjects them to hideous experiments in which their bodies are separated fro their souls and the children are turned into zombies who are then left to die. Pullman's trilogy finally ends with God being killed, the collapse of the Calvinist moral rules, and the emergence of sexual freedom.
Profoundly stupid stuff. I was not surprised to discover that Pullman is a big fan of atheist Richard Dawkins. Pullman speaks of religion in terms that could be lifted directly from The God Delusion. Pullman has been quoted saying it is not even possible for God to exist. "Every single religion," he says, "that has a monotheistic God ends up by persecuting other people and killing them because they don't accept him." Actually this is flatly untrue of Judaism and Hindusim and only in a very qualified sense true of Islam and Christianity. It would be more accurate to say that every atheist regime, from Communism to the Nazi regime in Germany, has systematically persecuted and killed its opponents for practicing traditional religion and for not accepting their secular race and class-based ideologies.
Certainly Pullman knows that there is nothing oppressive or murderous in today's Anglicanism. He is free in his native London to believe or not to believe. What is it then about religion that he's so strongly opposed to? For Pullman, as for many atheists, the problem with Christianity seems mostly to focus on sexual freedom. Reviewing Pullman's work in The Atlantic Monthly, Hanna Rosin writes, "The most curious aspect of Pullman's theology is the primacy he places on teen sexuality...the whole series builds up to a celebration of losing your virginity." So here is Pullman's case against religion. Basically, religion is what asks you to pull your pants up. This may be termed Pelvic Atheism.
True to form, Hollywood has stripped Pullman's movie of its overt anti-religiosity. The evil guys in the Hollywood version are not God's minions but a kind of amorphous Nazi-type dictatorship. Pullman can take solace, however, in the fact that the movie will probably lead a lot of people to read his books. Aren't we fortunate to have an atheist children's novelist whose main objective seems to be to corrupt the minds and morals of the young?
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Emergent Dillusion
If someone where to tell you that Nazi ideology should not all be done away with because it has some good aspects like teaching a solid education to youth and a commitment to a strong national defense, what would you say? I am hoping you would not say this is a good reason for keeping it as an ideology. First, the ideology brought horrible results upon the Jewish nation (killing millions), and second, we do not need Nazi thought to justify of a solid education for children or a strong national defense for our citizens.
The same can be said for the Emergent Church movement and it’s post-modernity. The Emergent conversation will bring destructive results to the Christian faith. I must admit I have said there were some good things about the Emergent church in the beginning, but in reality I was wrong.
Those good things were always there and do not need a movement that is harmful to Christ for us to know them. J.P. Moreland says in Kingdom Triangle, “Its harm to the cause of Christ and human flourishing far outweigh any advantages that may accrue to it, and whatever those advantages are, they do not require postmodernism for their justification.”
As with post-modernism the same can be said of the Emergent Church. This is not a case of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater,” but throwing out a movement that is dangerous to those that come in contact with it. If the baby is the Emergent Truth and the water is post-modernism then in reality we should throw “throw the baby out with the bathwater.”
All the truth that is within the Emergent movement was already there within the current church. What is not within the current movement in many ways is trying to incorporate relative truth and utilizing pagan rituals to worship our Lord, as the Emergent Church does.
If we use the saying that there is some good within the Emergent movement then we would have to say the same of Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons and any other religion that claim to be Christian in its beliefs. They both teach morals that could be seen as “good,” but in the end their practices are not of God.
How does Satan best destroy the church from within? By wrapping apparent good with destructive lies, as relative truth and questioning all truth doctrines of Scripture (hell & salvation), and even questioning the truth of Scripture itself with what are some good things, as helping the poor and remembering the those who are different from ourselves.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15 says, “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.”
The Emergent Church is one baby that needs thrown out with its bathwater.
The same can be said for the Emergent Church movement and it’s post-modernity. The Emergent conversation will bring destructive results to the Christian faith. I must admit I have said there were some good things about the Emergent church in the beginning, but in reality I was wrong.
Those good things were always there and do not need a movement that is harmful to Christ for us to know them. J.P. Moreland says in Kingdom Triangle, “Its harm to the cause of Christ and human flourishing far outweigh any advantages that may accrue to it, and whatever those advantages are, they do not require postmodernism for their justification.”
As with post-modernism the same can be said of the Emergent Church. This is not a case of “throwing the baby out with the bathwater,” but throwing out a movement that is dangerous to those that come in contact with it. If the baby is the Emergent Truth and the water is post-modernism then in reality we should throw “throw the baby out with the bathwater.”
All the truth that is within the Emergent movement was already there within the current church. What is not within the current movement in many ways is trying to incorporate relative truth and utilizing pagan rituals to worship our Lord, as the Emergent Church does.
If we use the saying that there is some good within the Emergent movement then we would have to say the same of Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons and any other religion that claim to be Christian in its beliefs. They both teach morals that could be seen as “good,” but in the end their practices are not of God.
How does Satan best destroy the church from within? By wrapping apparent good with destructive lies, as relative truth and questioning all truth doctrines of Scripture (hell & salvation), and even questioning the truth of Scripture itself with what are some good things, as helping the poor and remembering the those who are different from ourselves.
2 Corinthians 11:13-15 says, “For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.”
The Emergent Church is one baby that needs thrown out with its bathwater.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
My Man Dr. John MacArthur
MacArthur: The Emergent Church is a Form of Paganism
Paul Edwards
Paul Edwards, host of “The Paul Edwards Program” on WLQV in Detroit, interviewed pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church John MacArthur about the emerging church movement in America. Paul begins the interview by asking Pastor John to respond to a radio interview with prominent emerging church leader Doug Pagitt. In the clip from October 22, 2007, Pagitt denied that there is a place of eternal conscious torment for persons who die apart from faith in Jesus Christ.
Paul Edwards: Help me with this—the emerging church prides itself on conversation, having a conversation, so let’s have a conversation. How can you have a conversation with someone, when you’re not even speaking the same language?
John MacArthur: Let me just cut to the chase on this one: [Doug] Pagitt is a Universalist. What he was saying is real simple. He was saying when you die your spirit goes to God and judgment means that whatever was not right about you, whatever was bad about you, whatever was substantially lacking about you, gets all resolved. It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Buddhist, a Hindu or a Muslim—doesn’t matter whether you’re a Christian really; we’re all going to end up in this wonderful, warm and fuzzy relationship with God. That’s just classic universalism.
I think you know it’s most helpful, Paul, to go back and kind of recast how we view these people. He’s not a pastor; he’s not a Christian; that’s not a church. When you call yourself a Christian and you call yourself a pastor and you say you have a church, all of that has to be—to be legitimate—defined biblically. And if it’s not, that’s not a church and you’re not a pastor and you’re not even a Christian.
What you have here is a form of false religion … A form of paganism that basically wants to be thought of as Christian because it gains a certain ground. But the underlying bottom line of this whole emerging movement is they don’t believe in any doctrine, they don’t believe in any theology. They don’t want to be forced to interpret anything in scripture a certain way and the out is, “Well the Bible isn’t clear anyway.” In other words, we don’t know what it means; we can’t know what it means.
Brian McLaren says nobody has ever gotten it right—we haven’t got it right now—so let’s not make an issue out of anything. Let’s just be open to everything. Let’s not take a position on theology, or for that matter, on morality or behavior because, hey, there’s no judgment anyway so we’re all going to end up in God in some ethereal, eternal relationship. And that’s just non-Christian. It is blatantly, flagrantly non-Christian. It’s as non-Christian as any false religion.
Edwards: [When “Emergents” and many seeker-sensitive church advocates say “We do church a certain way,”] it seems to me that they do it by totally ignoring the book of Acts and the Epistles.
MacArthur: I’m going to seem anachronistic if not an outright dinosaur at this point. I believe the church has one function, and that is to guard the truth, to proclaim the truth and to live the truth. So you take the Word of God, you teach it, you proclaim it, you protect it, you defend it, and you live it, and that’s a church. The Word of God rightly divided, rightly understood.
That’s not the idea in a seeker church; that’s not the idea certainly in an emerging church. Everything becomes style and contextualization and everything is built around the manipulation of people’s hot buttons as if we were selling a product like any other product in our culture. This fails to understand that the only real power in the spiritual realm is Divine and that God works His power through His truth, and that’s all that matters.
I think the illusion of success is created by crowds. You’ve probably heard recently that Bill Hybels, who is the guru of the seeker movement, has openly confessed that they did a big survey and found they’ve been doing it wrong.
Edwards: “We made a mistake,” he said.
MacArthur: Yes, we made a mistake. And so, the solution is—one of the lines in the statement was—we gotta get a blank piece of paper and start all over again. That’s exactly the problem. Why do you want a blank piece of paper when you have all kinds of paper full with the Word of God?
Edwards: Right.
MacArthur: If you want a biblical mandate and you want to do ministry biblically, you teach and preach the Word. I don’t think it matters whether you have smoke and mirrors. I don’t think it matters whether you wear a tie, or don’t wear a tie, whether you wear a black T-shirt and holes in your knees or a blue suit. (I think there are reasons to go with the suit rather the grunge approach—of dignity, respect, sober mindedness, seriousness, loftiness, etc, etc.)
At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that we proclaim the Word of God. Look, I’ve been doing this for so long, and I haven’t changed anything. Contexts come, contexts go; fads come, fads go; styles come, styles go. I just keep doing the same thing. We show up on Sunday morning, we sing a little bit, we pray, we open the Word of God and explain His meaning to the people. The people just keep coming and coming and what I say goes around the world, on radio, and then it gets transferred into 50 languages and books and commentaries because [the Word] knows no boundaries. It knows no cultural restraint, because the Word of God is transcendent.
Edwards: One of the things I get most frustrated about is whenever people like you who are standing for truth point out the error both in the emergent church and in the seeker movement people will immediately run to 1 Corinthians 9 and begin screaming, “You know Paul said, ‘I became all things to all men,’ which means to the grunge I become as grunge, to the Universalist I become as a Universalist.” But in 1 Corinthians 9 Paul isn’t saying that we compromise the message and we become whatever the audience needs us to be in order to make the gospel palatable.
MacArthur: Well, of course not. All he is saying is there’s a foundation in the proclamation of the gospel with the Jew and there’s a different starting point with the Gentile. If I’m going to evangelize a Jew, I’m going to start with the Old Testament because that’s the substantial basis. So every time the Apostle Paul preached to the Jews he started with the Scripture—the Old Testament Scripture. Every time he evangelized Gentiles he started with creation. For example, in Acts 14 and Acts 17 he talks about the unknown God. Who is the unknown God? He’s the God who made everything—that was the foundation.
All he is saying in 1 Corinthians 9 is you must understand the starting point of your audience and here’s the point: ideologically. In other words, how do they think ideologically, philosophically, religiously? What are the ideas, the theories, the viewpoints that they hold? It’s not about identifying with their lifestyle; it’s not about being able to converse about every episode of South Park, every R-rated movie and every Rap song—that’s not it at all.
How do people think religiously, how do they perceive truth?—those are the starting points that Paul was establishing. That’s a far cry from saying that to reach this generation we must do their music, we must dress the way they dress, we must live the way they live, we must be familiar with the baser components of their culture. That’s a million miles from what the Apostle Paul had in mind. He was talking about those things that controlled their thought process and their worldview.
Paul Edwards is the host of The Paul Edwards Program, a columnist and pastor. His program is heard daily on WLQV in Detroit and on godandculture.com. Contact him at paul@godandculture.com.
Find this article at: http://www.crosswalk.comhttp://www.crosswalk.com/pastors/11560481/
Paul Edwards
Paul Edwards, host of “The Paul Edwards Program” on WLQV in Detroit, interviewed pastor-teacher of Grace Community Church John MacArthur about the emerging church movement in America. Paul begins the interview by asking Pastor John to respond to a radio interview with prominent emerging church leader Doug Pagitt. In the clip from October 22, 2007, Pagitt denied that there is a place of eternal conscious torment for persons who die apart from faith in Jesus Christ.
Paul Edwards: Help me with this—the emerging church prides itself on conversation, having a conversation, so let’s have a conversation. How can you have a conversation with someone, when you’re not even speaking the same language?
John MacArthur: Let me just cut to the chase on this one: [Doug] Pagitt is a Universalist. What he was saying is real simple. He was saying when you die your spirit goes to God and judgment means that whatever was not right about you, whatever was bad about you, whatever was substantially lacking about you, gets all resolved. It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Buddhist, a Hindu or a Muslim—doesn’t matter whether you’re a Christian really; we’re all going to end up in this wonderful, warm and fuzzy relationship with God. That’s just classic universalism.
I think you know it’s most helpful, Paul, to go back and kind of recast how we view these people. He’s not a pastor; he’s not a Christian; that’s not a church. When you call yourself a Christian and you call yourself a pastor and you say you have a church, all of that has to be—to be legitimate—defined biblically. And if it’s not, that’s not a church and you’re not a pastor and you’re not even a Christian.
What you have here is a form of false religion … A form of paganism that basically wants to be thought of as Christian because it gains a certain ground. But the underlying bottom line of this whole emerging movement is they don’t believe in any doctrine, they don’t believe in any theology. They don’t want to be forced to interpret anything in scripture a certain way and the out is, “Well the Bible isn’t clear anyway.” In other words, we don’t know what it means; we can’t know what it means.
Brian McLaren says nobody has ever gotten it right—we haven’t got it right now—so let’s not make an issue out of anything. Let’s just be open to everything. Let’s not take a position on theology, or for that matter, on morality or behavior because, hey, there’s no judgment anyway so we’re all going to end up in God in some ethereal, eternal relationship. And that’s just non-Christian. It is blatantly, flagrantly non-Christian. It’s as non-Christian as any false religion.
Edwards: [When “Emergents” and many seeker-sensitive church advocates say “We do church a certain way,”] it seems to me that they do it by totally ignoring the book of Acts and the Epistles.
MacArthur: I’m going to seem anachronistic if not an outright dinosaur at this point. I believe the church has one function, and that is to guard the truth, to proclaim the truth and to live the truth. So you take the Word of God, you teach it, you proclaim it, you protect it, you defend it, and you live it, and that’s a church. The Word of God rightly divided, rightly understood.
That’s not the idea in a seeker church; that’s not the idea certainly in an emerging church. Everything becomes style and contextualization and everything is built around the manipulation of people’s hot buttons as if we were selling a product like any other product in our culture. This fails to understand that the only real power in the spiritual realm is Divine and that God works His power through His truth, and that’s all that matters.
I think the illusion of success is created by crowds. You’ve probably heard recently that Bill Hybels, who is the guru of the seeker movement, has openly confessed that they did a big survey and found they’ve been doing it wrong.
Edwards: “We made a mistake,” he said.
MacArthur: Yes, we made a mistake. And so, the solution is—one of the lines in the statement was—we gotta get a blank piece of paper and start all over again. That’s exactly the problem. Why do you want a blank piece of paper when you have all kinds of paper full with the Word of God?
Edwards: Right.
MacArthur: If you want a biblical mandate and you want to do ministry biblically, you teach and preach the Word. I don’t think it matters whether you have smoke and mirrors. I don’t think it matters whether you wear a tie, or don’t wear a tie, whether you wear a black T-shirt and holes in your knees or a blue suit. (I think there are reasons to go with the suit rather the grunge approach—of dignity, respect, sober mindedness, seriousness, loftiness, etc, etc.)
At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that we proclaim the Word of God. Look, I’ve been doing this for so long, and I haven’t changed anything. Contexts come, contexts go; fads come, fads go; styles come, styles go. I just keep doing the same thing. We show up on Sunday morning, we sing a little bit, we pray, we open the Word of God and explain His meaning to the people. The people just keep coming and coming and what I say goes around the world, on radio, and then it gets transferred into 50 languages and books and commentaries because [the Word] knows no boundaries. It knows no cultural restraint, because the Word of God is transcendent.
Edwards: One of the things I get most frustrated about is whenever people like you who are standing for truth point out the error both in the emergent church and in the seeker movement people will immediately run to 1 Corinthians 9 and begin screaming, “You know Paul said, ‘I became all things to all men,’ which means to the grunge I become as grunge, to the Universalist I become as a Universalist.” But in 1 Corinthians 9 Paul isn’t saying that we compromise the message and we become whatever the audience needs us to be in order to make the gospel palatable.
MacArthur: Well, of course not. All he is saying is there’s a foundation in the proclamation of the gospel with the Jew and there’s a different starting point with the Gentile. If I’m going to evangelize a Jew, I’m going to start with the Old Testament because that’s the substantial basis. So every time the Apostle Paul preached to the Jews he started with the Scripture—the Old Testament Scripture. Every time he evangelized Gentiles he started with creation. For example, in Acts 14 and Acts 17 he talks about the unknown God. Who is the unknown God? He’s the God who made everything—that was the foundation.
All he is saying in 1 Corinthians 9 is you must understand the starting point of your audience and here’s the point: ideologically. In other words, how do they think ideologically, philosophically, religiously? What are the ideas, the theories, the viewpoints that they hold? It’s not about identifying with their lifestyle; it’s not about being able to converse about every episode of South Park, every R-rated movie and every Rap song—that’s not it at all.
How do people think religiously, how do they perceive truth?—those are the starting points that Paul was establishing. That’s a far cry from saying that to reach this generation we must do their music, we must dress the way they dress, we must live the way they live, we must be familiar with the baser components of their culture. That’s a million miles from what the Apostle Paul had in mind. He was talking about those things that controlled their thought process and their worldview.
Paul Edwards is the host of The Paul Edwards Program, a columnist and pastor. His program is heard daily on WLQV in Detroit and on godandculture.com. Contact him at paul@godandculture.com.
Find this article at: http://www.crosswalk.comhttp://www.crosswalk.com/pastors/11560481/
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
From the Mouths of Babes!
If you have 7 minutes then sit back and listen to this young lady preach it!
Monday, December 10, 2007
Ignorance is Bliss!
I was at an function that my daughter attends regularly and I brought a book with me because I knew that otherwise I would be rather board. I was sitting there reading my book when a woman that was standing beside me asked if I was in school.
I found this question weird for several reasons. The first being that I do not look like a college aged student, though I guess we all go to school at different stages in our lives. I was not holding a textbook, but a paperback book. I think it was because of the book title, which was ‘Illiberal Education’ by Dinesh D’Souza. Maybe the title or just the name having education in it, but I am not sure it was visible.
I believe that I was asked that question because I was reading a book that was not a current movie (i.e. Harry Potter or Bridge of Teribithia), or was a self-help book (i.e. You Best Life Now or Purpose Driven Life). This truly demonstrates to me an example of our American culture. In order to read a deep book that causes you to think, you must be in college and not just a thinking person who is looking to engage his mind or looking at challenging issues.
This is a sad comment on our culture. If someone is reading a semi-intellectual book, you have to be in school or doing some sort of academic work. As I looked around to see what others were doing, it became apparent that her observation was not off base. One person was reading a super-market check out magazine, another was texting on their phone, and yet another playing a video game. I was the only one reading a book that would require some thought to comprehend what was written, and I do not consider myself that much of an intellectual.
It is not a surprise when everyone believes what is being said within the media and what the liberal agenda pumps out in the press. It is no wonder why Christians have a hard time defending or understanding the deeper truths of Scripture. When we do not feed our brains they will start to atrophy. It is a muscle that needs to be used.
Some of the brilliant minds today will tell you to read an easy book of interest, and also read a book that you have to go slow through and think about as you read it. Read something challenging that challenges your thinking and strengthens your brain function. One great book that will challenge you over and over again is the Bible, as it will always make you think, reflect and challenge the way you see the world today.
The next time you are somewhere look around and see what people are reading, and my bet you will see books that you find on the best sellers list at any bookstore. Try reading Summa of the Summa, The Kingdom Triangle, Socrates, Pensee, Philosophy of Religion by Norman Geisler. Read some authors like Peter Kreeft, N.T. Wright, Dinesh D’Souza, J.P. Moreland, William Lane Craig, and Norman Geisler. These books and authors are not typically seen on popular lists, because they make people think too much. Train your brain, challenge your thinking and search for truth. You will not do any of it in the plethora of non-thinking jargon that is found on popular shelves at most bookstores.
I found this question weird for several reasons. The first being that I do not look like a college aged student, though I guess we all go to school at different stages in our lives. I was not holding a textbook, but a paperback book. I think it was because of the book title, which was ‘Illiberal Education’ by Dinesh D’Souza. Maybe the title or just the name having education in it, but I am not sure it was visible.
I believe that I was asked that question because I was reading a book that was not a current movie (i.e. Harry Potter or Bridge of Teribithia), or was a self-help book (i.e. You Best Life Now or Purpose Driven Life). This truly demonstrates to me an example of our American culture. In order to read a deep book that causes you to think, you must be in college and not just a thinking person who is looking to engage his mind or looking at challenging issues.
This is a sad comment on our culture. If someone is reading a semi-intellectual book, you have to be in school or doing some sort of academic work. As I looked around to see what others were doing, it became apparent that her observation was not off base. One person was reading a super-market check out magazine, another was texting on their phone, and yet another playing a video game. I was the only one reading a book that would require some thought to comprehend what was written, and I do not consider myself that much of an intellectual.
It is not a surprise when everyone believes what is being said within the media and what the liberal agenda pumps out in the press. It is no wonder why Christians have a hard time defending or understanding the deeper truths of Scripture. When we do not feed our brains they will start to atrophy. It is a muscle that needs to be used.
Some of the brilliant minds today will tell you to read an easy book of interest, and also read a book that you have to go slow through and think about as you read it. Read something challenging that challenges your thinking and strengthens your brain function. One great book that will challenge you over and over again is the Bible, as it will always make you think, reflect and challenge the way you see the world today.
The next time you are somewhere look around and see what people are reading, and my bet you will see books that you find on the best sellers list at any bookstore. Try reading Summa of the Summa, The Kingdom Triangle, Socrates, Pensee, Philosophy of Religion by Norman Geisler. Read some authors like Peter Kreeft, N.T. Wright, Dinesh D’Souza, J.P. Moreland, William Lane Craig, and Norman Geisler. These books and authors are not typically seen on popular lists, because they make people think too much. Train your brain, challenge your thinking and search for truth. You will not do any of it in the plethora of non-thinking jargon that is found on popular shelves at most bookstores.
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Where are the Fathers?
While I was at the apologetics conference a few weeks ago Josh McDowell spoke, and his talk was very impacting to those listening. It confirmed for me some things that I have been thinking about and debating in my head for some time. The gist of what Josh McDowell was getting at was that without love mixed with apologetics there is trouble. Without the love of Christ, apologetics just becomes another arsenal in your debating closet.
But he made another statement within the context of this speech and he mentioned the lack of involvement in fathers today, and how they are contributing to the areas that people struggle with in our society. Think about it. Who does not want to hear that their father is proud of them and loves them no matter what they do? Who does not want their father’s attention and their unconditional love? Today in a lot of family lives this is just not the case. Fathers are not there with their children and are not giving their families the time that they need. There is a whole missing in the family structure.
Today fathers make all kinds of excuses for not spending time with their children. I am too busy working. We just do not have the same interests. Many fathers are just plain not around, or do not want to be involved. Of course there are the alcoholic, drug addict, and the abusive fathers, but in a lot of ways there is not much difference from the father who does not give the proper time to their children.
This past Friday my wife talked about homosexuality and the issues that surround this issue. Even here we can see the impact of fathers. It has been proven that a lack of fatherly time with their children can lead them to this life style if they are not confirmed in their manhood or womanhood. Many in the gay community who have come out have said that their fathers never gave them the time they needed for many different reasons. Again, you can be a wealthy, non-drinking, non-smoking, non-abusive father and if you do not give them YOU then there will be problems. There will be a hole that will need to be filled.
Fathers, if you do not give them time and love then they will seek it from wherever they can. If they struggle with attraction to same sex then there. If they have an attraction to drugs then there or maybe they will become promiscuous because they cannot trust anyone. Fathers you help a boy become a man and demonstrate how they should act in society, and if you are not there who will fill that role? Fathers, you are the picture of who your daughter should marry when she grows up. How do you rate?
Stop making excuses, and make the change and commitment to your family. Be the prince for your daughter and the man your son needs to see. Be Christ to them.
For those fathers that have been there and have been this for their children. Thank you!!! Today you are almost a rarity.
Our children need you. We are losing them and Dads need to step up and be Dads!!
But he made another statement within the context of this speech and he mentioned the lack of involvement in fathers today, and how they are contributing to the areas that people struggle with in our society. Think about it. Who does not want to hear that their father is proud of them and loves them no matter what they do? Who does not want their father’s attention and their unconditional love? Today in a lot of family lives this is just not the case. Fathers are not there with their children and are not giving their families the time that they need. There is a whole missing in the family structure.
Today fathers make all kinds of excuses for not spending time with their children. I am too busy working. We just do not have the same interests. Many fathers are just plain not around, or do not want to be involved. Of course there are the alcoholic, drug addict, and the abusive fathers, but in a lot of ways there is not much difference from the father who does not give the proper time to their children.
This past Friday my wife talked about homosexuality and the issues that surround this issue. Even here we can see the impact of fathers. It has been proven that a lack of fatherly time with their children can lead them to this life style if they are not confirmed in their manhood or womanhood. Many in the gay community who have come out have said that their fathers never gave them the time they needed for many different reasons. Again, you can be a wealthy, non-drinking, non-smoking, non-abusive father and if you do not give them YOU then there will be problems. There will be a hole that will need to be filled.
Fathers, if you do not give them time and love then they will seek it from wherever they can. If they struggle with attraction to same sex then there. If they have an attraction to drugs then there or maybe they will become promiscuous because they cannot trust anyone. Fathers you help a boy become a man and demonstrate how they should act in society, and if you are not there who will fill that role? Fathers, you are the picture of who your daughter should marry when she grows up. How do you rate?
Stop making excuses, and make the change and commitment to your family. Be the prince for your daughter and the man your son needs to see. Be Christ to them.
For those fathers that have been there and have been this for their children. Thank you!!! Today you are almost a rarity.
Our children need you. We are losing them and Dads need to step up and be Dads!!
Thursday, December 06, 2007
An Untimely Death
How sad but true this is:
My parents told me about Mr. Common Sense early in my life and told me Iwould do well to call on him when making decisions. It seems he wasalways around in my early years but less and less as time passed by. Today I read his obituary. Please join me in a moment of silence inremembrance, for Common Sense had served us all so well for so manygenerations.
Obituary
Common Sense
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, whohas been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he wassince his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. Hewill be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as knowingwhen to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm, lifeisn't always fair, and maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend morethan you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not childrenare in charge).
His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned butoverbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boycharged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspendedfrom school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired forreprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.
Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing thejob they themselves failed to do in disciplining their unruly children.It declined even further when schools were required to get parentalconsent to administer Aspirin, sun lotion or a Band-Aid to a student,but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant andwanted to have an abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live when religions became businesses andcriminals received better treatment than their victims.
Common Sensetook a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in yourown home and the burglar can sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed torealize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little inher lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; hiswife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. Heis survived by three stepbrothers; I Know my Rights, Someone Else is toBlame, and I'm a Victim.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
Author unknown
My parents told me about Mr. Common Sense early in my life and told me Iwould do well to call on him when making decisions. It seems he wasalways around in my early years but less and less as time passed by. Today I read his obituary. Please join me in a moment of silence inremembrance, for Common Sense had served us all so well for so manygenerations.
Obituary
Common Sense
Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, whohas been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he wassince his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. Hewill be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as knowingwhen to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the worm, lifeisn't always fair, and maybe it was my fault.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend morethan you earn) and reliable parenting strategies (adults, not childrenare in charge).
His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well intentioned butoverbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a six-year-old boycharged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspendedfrom school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired forreprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.
Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing thejob they themselves failed to do in disciplining their unruly children.It declined even further when schools were required to get parentalconsent to administer Aspirin, sun lotion or a Band-Aid to a student,but could not inform the parents when a student became pregnant andwanted to have an abortion.
Common Sense lost the will to live when religions became businesses andcriminals received better treatment than their victims.
Common Sensetook a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in yourown home and the burglar can sue you for assault.
Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed torealize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little inher lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; hiswife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. Heis survived by three stepbrothers; I Know my Rights, Someone Else is toBlame, and I'm a Victim.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
Author unknown
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Ezekiel's Disciplined Faith
I was reading Ezekiel 24 today for my devotions, and I came across a verse that just stopped me in my tracks for a moment. It is one of those verses that you sometimes have to do a double take on, because you think what you read cannot be possible. But it was, and I now have read it many times from talking to people about it and from continually thinking upon, which is why I had to write this blog.
Ezekiel 24:15-17 says, “Also the word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Son of man, behold, I take away from you the desire of your eyes with one stroke; yet you shall neither mourn nor weep, nor shall your tears run down. Sigh in silence, make no mourning for the dead; bind your turban on your head, and put your sandals on your feet; do not cover your lips, and do not eat man’s bread of sorrow.”
Read it again and look it up in your Bibles and read the rest of the context. It is a tough section and demonstrates a great man of faith and very disciplined. What would be your first response if God told you He was going to take your wife and you could not show any sorrow, except a quiet whimper? Not only that you could not perform your Jewish traditional rituals. I thought about this. Just to think about my wife dying now causes me to choke up a little, but to have God tell me that she is going to die and I cannot mourn. Man. . . . That is almost an insane thought, but obviously it is not, as God did it.
What impresses me is that Ezekiel does exactly what God said. He does not mourn. He does what God tells Him. This is one disciplined man. He knows His God and trusts in Him, even though God took His most valued desire. He trusts God and His decisions no matter what it looks like from his immortal finite mind. To be this disciplined is just amazing, and I pray that I could be as faithful and disciplined to whatever called me to do as well. But, I must be honest that it would be very tough if He said He was going to take my wife or one of my girls. I can only hope that He would give me the power through the Holy Spirit to make it through.
Do you have this kind of faith and discipline? Are you ready to truly give up everything for your Savior? If we worship anything above God then it is an idol, and our spouses can fall into that category. Is your spouse your idol? You have to walk in a deep relationship with God to be as disciplined and faithful as Ezekiel. How is your walk? I know I am truly looking at mine after reading this passage.
Ezekiel 24:15-17 says, “Also the word of the LORD came to me, saying, “Son of man, behold, I take away from you the desire of your eyes with one stroke; yet you shall neither mourn nor weep, nor shall your tears run down. Sigh in silence, make no mourning for the dead; bind your turban on your head, and put your sandals on your feet; do not cover your lips, and do not eat man’s bread of sorrow.”
Read it again and look it up in your Bibles and read the rest of the context. It is a tough section and demonstrates a great man of faith and very disciplined. What would be your first response if God told you He was going to take your wife and you could not show any sorrow, except a quiet whimper? Not only that you could not perform your Jewish traditional rituals. I thought about this. Just to think about my wife dying now causes me to choke up a little, but to have God tell me that she is going to die and I cannot mourn. Man. . . . That is almost an insane thought, but obviously it is not, as God did it.
What impresses me is that Ezekiel does exactly what God said. He does not mourn. He does what God tells Him. This is one disciplined man. He knows His God and trusts in Him, even though God took His most valued desire. He trusts God and His decisions no matter what it looks like from his immortal finite mind. To be this disciplined is just amazing, and I pray that I could be as faithful and disciplined to whatever called me to do as well. But, I must be honest that it would be very tough if He said He was going to take my wife or one of my girls. I can only hope that He would give me the power through the Holy Spirit to make it through.
Do you have this kind of faith and discipline? Are you ready to truly give up everything for your Savior? If we worship anything above God then it is an idol, and our spouses can fall into that category. Is your spouse your idol? You have to walk in a deep relationship with God to be as disciplined and faithful as Ezekiel. How is your walk? I know I am truly looking at mine after reading this passage.
Monday, December 03, 2007
You have to Pray just to make it today!
“I am so busy now that if I did not spend two or three hours each day in prayer, I would not get through the day.” – Martin Luther
One of my favorite philosophers once said, “You have to pray just to make it today.” M.C. Hammer wrote these lyrics for his song, “Pray.” There is much truth in this little statement.
I took some Ransomed college students on a prayer retreat this weekend, and it was great. It was incredible to see students come just knowing all they were going to do is pray and talk about building a better prayer life. There were no games, no special events, no planned “fun” time, just being with God and communicating with Him in a deeper fashion.
As I was reflecting one night after we had stopped for the night, I started to think about Jesus and being one of His disciples. He had so many different personalities in His group, yet they were able to pray and eat together because of their faith that Christ was the Messiah. How else could a tax collector, a zealot and some local fishermen remotely get along for any period of time? Only because of Christ could this ever happen. While He was there they listened and learned under His tutelage, and after the resurrection they were bonded by their faith in Him as Savior and Lord.
We had the same differences at this prayer retreat. There were many different personalities here as well, but they all had one thing in common, that they wanted to deepen their prayer life, which would ultimately deepen their relationship with Christ. It was interesting to observe and just proved to me the power of Christ. When we put Christ first, all else seems to go to the side. Maybe we should be more worried today about bringing people to Christ and helping them grow in Him? I bet half the other issues would go away if we started to do this just as Christ did in His day. He tends to make a great example to follow.
As you focus on Christ the answers to a lot of the other questions will answer themselves, whether it is morals or personality conflicts. If you are with brothers or sisters in Christ and there seems to be some personality differences then try praying together. I watched these college students put a lot of their differences aside, as they all had one thing in common and that was the inerrant authority of the Bible to direct their prayer and their Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. What else in life truly matters?
It was truly a blessing to be part of this prayer retreat and to see these young adults come together in the name of Christ. I will end my thoughts about the retreat with the same great philosopher I started with, “Thank you Lord for blessing me.” It was truly a blessing to be part of and something we all could learn from in our lives. If you want to know Christ then you have to pray, as there is no other way (I believe spending time in the Word is a form of prayer as it is hearing from God).
Col. 4:2: “Continue earnestly in prayer being vigilant in it with thanksgiving...”
One of my favorite philosophers once said, “You have to pray just to make it today.” M.C. Hammer wrote these lyrics for his song, “Pray.” There is much truth in this little statement.
I took some Ransomed college students on a prayer retreat this weekend, and it was great. It was incredible to see students come just knowing all they were going to do is pray and talk about building a better prayer life. There were no games, no special events, no planned “fun” time, just being with God and communicating with Him in a deeper fashion.
As I was reflecting one night after we had stopped for the night, I started to think about Jesus and being one of His disciples. He had so many different personalities in His group, yet they were able to pray and eat together because of their faith that Christ was the Messiah. How else could a tax collector, a zealot and some local fishermen remotely get along for any period of time? Only because of Christ could this ever happen. While He was there they listened and learned under His tutelage, and after the resurrection they were bonded by their faith in Him as Savior and Lord.
We had the same differences at this prayer retreat. There were many different personalities here as well, but they all had one thing in common, that they wanted to deepen their prayer life, which would ultimately deepen their relationship with Christ. It was interesting to observe and just proved to me the power of Christ. When we put Christ first, all else seems to go to the side. Maybe we should be more worried today about bringing people to Christ and helping them grow in Him? I bet half the other issues would go away if we started to do this just as Christ did in His day. He tends to make a great example to follow.
As you focus on Christ the answers to a lot of the other questions will answer themselves, whether it is morals or personality conflicts. If you are with brothers or sisters in Christ and there seems to be some personality differences then try praying together. I watched these college students put a lot of their differences aside, as they all had one thing in common and that was the inerrant authority of the Bible to direct their prayer and their Savior and Lord, Jesus Christ. What else in life truly matters?
It was truly a blessing to be part of this prayer retreat and to see these young adults come together in the name of Christ. I will end my thoughts about the retreat with the same great philosopher I started with, “Thank you Lord for blessing me.” It was truly a blessing to be part of and something we all could learn from in our lives. If you want to know Christ then you have to pray, as there is no other way (I believe spending time in the Word is a form of prayer as it is hearing from God).
Col. 4:2: “Continue earnestly in prayer being vigilant in it with thanksgiving...”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)