Broccoli, Celery, Got to Be ...

Y'all know the rest, don't you? Of course you do.

VeggieTales!!!

My children came along at just the right time to catch the peak popularity of Bob the tomato and Larry the cucumber. Up until we gave them away, we owned a dozen VHS tapes and more than a few plush toys. We were among those who went to the movie theatre on opening day to watch the first VeggieTales movie, Jonah. Alas, not many more followed.

VeggieTales was the brainchild of Phil Vischer, born here in Iowa, and was taken to the retail world in 1993. It was a unique creation -- talking vegetables that humorously told Bible stories to the under 10 crowd. Like any good youth-oriented product, it was written at a level that both kids and adults could enjoy -- kids for the sheer entertainment of it all, and adults for the cultural references only an adult would understand. VeggieTales become a Christian cultural phenomenon that would eventually become a mainstream phenom too, culminating with the Jonah movie in 2002.

About that time, VeggieTales became VeggieFails -- from a business perspective, anyway. As outlined in the humorous and captivating Vischer book Me, Myself, and Bob, Vischer's Big Idea Productions company had taken on too much debt and could not continue. The vegetables declared bankruptcy and embarrassment. They survive today as an entity of a huge conglomerate, with only moderate creative input from the original players.

This past week the veggies became stars in their second motion picture -- The Pirates Who Don't Do Anything. The picture will be panned by "critics" as being too nice, or too simple, or too archaic in its animation. Remaining fans of the series will hungrily lap it up as one of the very few movies they can take their small children to and not have to be even slightly concerned about obvious, or even subtle, innuendo. To be sure, the most onerous part of taking your kids to a Veggie Tales film is the previews for the other films you must sit through.

My 12 and 9 year-old kids no longer long for VeggieTales, though it wouldn't surprise me if we see this film sooner or later. I'm pretty sure the novelty of talking vegetables telling Bible stories is beyond its expiration date. Yet nothing has taken its place in the retail world.

As I've written before, creative types at Disney, Pixar and other media giants could make a financial killing if they could simply give Christian parents -- any parents -- and young children what they want: squeaky clean entertainment. No eight year-olds swearing, no bare bottoms, no innuendo sexual humor, no political statements. The task seems so easy, yet ... it must be harder than I think or someone would be doing it.

There has never, ever, ever, ever, ever been a show like VeggieTales. Perhaps there never will be again. So come on down to the local theatre -- its time for VeggieTales.

Lessons from the Lord's Supper -- Part IV

There are a great many lessons that can be drawn from the upper room the night Jesus celebrated the Passover feast with his disciples. Previously, I've mentioned these -- 1) that Jesus was eager to share this night with his friends, and 2) that Jesus continues the transition from the old covenant of Israel to the new covenant of His church.

Here's a third lesson: Jesus wants the cross to be remembered.

This may seem too simple to be of importance. Duh, of course Jesus wants the cross to be remembered. But let's be honest -- much of what happens in a church does not directly point to the cross. This is not a criticism, as much as it is an observation. Take for example:

• The modern day American church places a great and growing emphasis on music in worship. We have praise teams, and bands, and choirs, and instrumental interludes, and "special" music. We have practices, and rehearsals, and discussion about what style of music should be used in worship. At its best, our energy focused on music does remind us of the cross of Christ. But we must fight to keep the focus on Jesus and not on ourselves and our "performance." No church is immune, whether you have a choir of 50 or a single man leading an a capella service.
• No preacher is willing and able to preach the cross every week of the year, and most churchgoers would not be content for it to happen. Instead, we might spend weeks at a time going through the minor prophets, or the topics of marriage, child rearing, spiritual gifting ... all Biblical and helpful topics to be sure. It is entirely possible that a sermon might never mention the cross, or Christ himself. Is that true in your experience?
• Sunday school classes, particularly those for children, really hit the miraculous stories of the Bible hard. Kids learn about David and Goliath, the apple in the garden of Eden, Peter walking on water, and even Balaam and the talking donkey. And yes, our classes may broach the subject of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. But, perhaps not often.

You get the idea. It is easy to attend church for 90 minutes each week and not dwell on the message of the cross. But to the early disciples, Jesus had this request (as recorded by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians): "Take it [the bread]; this is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me. This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes."

Jesus knew there would be distractions, both for the disciples, and for us today. He knew that His followers might need a regular reminder of what happened at Calvary. And so, he uses the simple elements of bread and wine, passed among us, to visually and spiritually take us back to the cross. When there, we recall once again that our sin separated us from God; that Jesus is the unblemished sacrifice that bridges the gap; and that our salvation is found in this act of grace.

The disciples took Jesus direction to heart. Luke writes in Acts 2 that the early church was "devoted" to the breaking of bread. While no specific command is given as to how they demonstrated "devotion," the early church likely shared the Lord's Supper weekly, and perhaps several times each week.

When we gather around the Communion table, we do proclaim the Lord's death. In this act, we retell the gospel story over and over again. Let's never grow tired of such a tradition. Let us not take it for granted, even after a thousand cups of juice have been drunk. The cross is everything to the believer, and the Lord's Supper is surely about the cross.

Lessons from the Lord's Supper -- Part III

The book of Acts says that the early church was "devoted" to the breaking of bread, the remembrance we commonly call "The Lord's Supper." Last time we looked at the what the New Testament writer Mark says, that Jesus was "eager" to celebrate the Passover with his disciples. Jesus is still eager to see His followers surround the table and break bread with each other.

A second observation from the Lord's Supper is this -- Jesus uses Communion to continue the transition from the old covenant to the new.

Let's remember, Jesus was Jewish, as were the 12. As they gathered for the Passover, they were following the Law that God gave His people. The Passover represented the sparing of life, the protection of the chosen. Each and every year the story of God's wrath on the Egyptians and God's promise to the Israelites would be retold.

As was common with the Law, the Passover also represented sacrifice. The book of Exodus tells us that the Jews were to paint their doorposts with the blood of a lamb. The celebratory Passover week included the sacrifice of a lamb as a sin offering (Deut 16). Under the old law, sin was abundant. As a result, the need for sacrifices was abundant. God required blood to attain righteousness.

This theological pattern could have continued forever, sin = sacrifice. But God had a plan -- one sacrifice to end all sacrifices. The Apostle Paul makes it clear in 1 Cor 5:7 -- Jesus would become the final Passover lamb.

And thus, when Jesus asks His disciples in the upper room to take the bread and eat it, He tells them that His sacrificed body is represented. As He passes the cup, he says that it is "the new covenant in my blood." Translation -- the old covenant of Law and sacrifice has been fulfilled and replaced with a new covenant of grace, purchased with the blood of a Perfect Lamb.

This new covenant, and all that it entails, would be a point of discussion throughout the first century. Many of Paul's letters to the churches addressed this very topic. Even the disciples who reclined at the Communion table with Christ would disagree about the requirements of discipleship (remember the Jerusalem council on circumcision?)

I think we could say the same today. On one level, most born-again believers know that they are saved by grace alone, and not by the works they do -- that our personal sacrifices have no measure of saving worth compared to the one sacrifice made on the cross. Yet, we are quick to tally the balance of our sins against our works of faith, hoping the numbers are in our favor. And, we struggle to avoid counting the sins of others against them.

Jesus is eager to celebrate His death with us, because His death brings life. He reminds us, through the simple, ancient items of bread and wine, that the old requirements of body and blood are no more. Jesus paid it all; all to Him I owe.

Lessons from the Lord's Supper -- Part II

Part II is really lesson number 1: Jesus is eager to share the supper with his disciples.

Luke writes in Luke 22:15, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer." Why? In this last few hours of time with his disciples, before an evening of intense prayer, ears being cut off, and an arrest, why does he eagerly desire this night? Let's look at two possible motives ...

1. Jesus wants to show his friends what it means to sacrificially serve
In the Apostle John's account of this evening, we see that Jesus gets up from the table, takes off his outer robe, and washes the disciples feet. A dirty job, this footwashing business. A good host would provide water and a basin for his guest to wash their feet. A well-to-do host might volunteer a slave for footwashing duty. But the host getting his hands dirty? And not just any host, but the Savior of the world?

This is a teachable moment. Jesus says, "Do you understand what I have done for you? You call me 'Teacher' and 'Lord,' and rightly so, for that is what I am. Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet. I have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you. I tell you the truth, no servant is greater than his master, nor is a messenger greater than the one who sent him. Now that you know these things, you will be blessed if you do them.

God has a role for the disciples -- they will become the leaders of His church. Serve each other, he says. Get dirty. Remember this, do it, and you will be blessed.

2. Jesus wants to tell His friends of His love and plans for them
John's account of the upper room provides teachings from Jesus that the other accounts do not (John ch 13-16). Jesus was God, but also fully human. He had feelings, you know? These men were his best friends. He spent nearly every morning, noon and night with this band of brothers. And now, he is about to physically abandon them, like the mother bird kicking the babies out of the nest and forcing them to fly away. Jesus loves these men. Jesus wants these men to have long-term confidence despite the upcoming short-term events. Again, God has plans for these men. Here are a few things Jesus wants them to know:

• "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
• "In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. You know the way to the place where I am going."
• "And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever -- the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you."
• "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid."
• "Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing."
• "My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command. I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you. You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit -- fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name."

So, again, here's lesson number 1 from the Lord's Supper: Jesus is eager to share this meal with us, just as he was with the 12. Jesus wants Communion to be a teachable moment -- remember, church, serve one another. Whatever you do for others in my name, you do for me. You are not above your master. And Jesus wants to remind us of how much he loves us. He has plans for us. We were created to return to the Father, through the acceptance of the Son. He wants us to know that He is building our heavenly mansion, that He has sent the Holy Spirit to guide us, and that we are his friends. In him, we have peace. In him, we bear fruit.

The upper room must have been an incredible place to be. It can be the same for us today, as we assemble in our house church living rooms and large church sanctuaries. Jesus is eager to meet us at the table.

The Lord's Supper -- Part I

This coming Sunday I will be sharing some thoughts about the first Lord's Supper, as described in the Bible's New testament books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and 1 Corinthians.

I've been chewing on the topic for the last month. My first thought was this -- what could I possible teach, and learn for myself, that would be new? After all, I've been around this block before. I became a baptized believer in Christ when I was 10 years old -- that's 27 years ago. I've been in church most every week since then -- churches that included the Lord's Supper in each week's worship service. Some quick math allows me to estimate that I've come to the communion table more than 1,300 times to take the bread and the cup. On a number of those occasions (maybe 50) I have had the responsibility to lead the church in a few devotional thoughts. So, this isn't the first time I've meditated on the words of the New testament writers.

Those of us who teach in any capacity probably feel an undue amount of pressure to bring something enlightening to our audience. We imagine standing in front of the class (or in this case, the church) and seeing the cartoonish light bulb rise above the head of each listener, suddenly glowing bright as we pour out our topical wisdom. We wish for our thoughts to alter a life, perhaps change it completely.

I have had to work through these feelings many times as a worship leader -- "What can I do to 'make' God's people worship today?" And, as a teacher, "What can I say to bring new insight?" Such hopes seem particularly difficult on a topic such as the Lord's Supper. I'm not the only one in my church who has "come to the table" a few times. Most of us have.

And so, the first small lesson I've been reminded of in preparing for this teaching is that it's not up to me to reinvent the scriptures or change a life. Rather, it's God's job. The Bible is, after all, God's Word. It's not mine, it doesn't belong to me. What's more, I can't crawl into a person's heart or mind and undertake a massive construction project. But God can, through the work of the Holy Spirit.

Those of us who teach or lead are the messengers, not the message. We try to share words of wisdom, but we didn't create wisdom. We pray for changed lives, but we aren't responsible for the changing. To assume anything more would be presumptuous, even arrogant.

So, as I approach a teaching that has been delivered by men more learned than I for nearly 2,000 years, my hope is that God simply opens MY eyes to something new, and renews MY appreciation for what happened at the cross. I'll try to leave the rest to God.

God, in His Own Words

The book of Job, chapter 38

Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:

"Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.

"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone -- while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?

"Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb, when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness, when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place, when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt'?

"Have you ever given orders to the morning, or shown the dawn its place, that it might take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it?

"Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep? Have the gates of death been shown to you? Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death ? Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth? Tell me, if you know all this.

"What is the way to the abode of light? And where does darkness reside? Can you take them to their places? Do you know the paths to their dwellings? Surely you know, for you were already born! You have lived so many years!

"Have you entered the storehouses of the snow or seen the storehouses of the hail, which I reserve for times of trouble, for days of war and battle? What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed, or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth? Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain, and a path for the thunderstorm, to water a land where no man lives, a desert with no one in it, to satisfy a desolate wasteland and make it sprout with grass?

"Does the rain have a father? Who fathers the drops of dew? From whose womb comes the ice? Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens when the waters become hard as stone, when the surface of the deep is frozen? Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons or lead out the Bear with its cubs? Do you know the laws of the heavens? Can you set up God's dominion over the earth?

"Can you raise your voice to the clouds and cover yourself with a flood of water? Do you send the lightning bolts on their way? Do they report to you, 'Here we are'? Who endowed the heart with wisdom or gave understanding to the mind ? Who has the wisdom to count the clouds? Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens when the dust becomes hard and the clods of earth stick together?

Oh God, You are my God,
And I will ever praise You.
Oh God, You are my God,
And I will ever praise You.
I will seek you in the morning,
And I will learn to walk in Your ways,
And step by step You'll lead me,
And I will follow You all of my days.
-- Rich Mullins

The Dead Tree

When we moved into our Marion home 18 months ago, I noted that the two trees in our front yard didn't look very healthy. Both were ash trees about 30 years-old. What should have been good shade trees were now nearly bare branches. Last spring I had hoped to see a change, but sadly, the trees' leaves came and went quickly. Last week, I paid a man $325 to come remove the trees from our front yard. Now, we have no shade.

I've been thinking about those trees and about what happened to them. Trees that grew from little seedlings to 30 feet, only to become sick and die. Trees that were grown to serve a purpose (provide shade to a yard), but became useless after a time.

Is there a spiritual metaphor here? Yep.

Jesus talked about trees often -- the gospel writers all record tree stories. One of these examples is in Luke 13.

Then [Jesus] told this parable: "A man had a fig tree, planted in his vineyard, and he went to look for fruit on it, but did not find any. So he said to the man who took care of the vineyard, 'For three years now I've been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and haven't found any. Cut it down! Why should it use up
the soil?' "'Sir,' the man replied, 'leave it alone for one more year, and I'll dig around it and fertilize it. If it bears fruit next year, fine! If not, then cut it down.'"

What was the lesson of Jesus' story? Perhaps the tree represents the religious leaders of his day; men who were planted and mature but were bearing no fruit. These men are of no use to Jesus, and so He commands that they be "cut down," presumably so that another tree could be planted in the same soil and bear more fruit.

That's exactly why I cut my own trees down -- they were no longer producing fruit (in my case shade), and now I will plant another tree in the same soil that has the potential to provide more shade.

In a spiritual sense, do we know any unfruitful trees -- religious people who are taking up space in a church, but are not being very fruitful? Are you and I like that?

Its easy to become complacent, to put our faith on autopilot and just keep doing the same thing week after week, year after year. Our fruit yield diminishes -- maybe dries up completely -- but we don't notice because it happened so gradually.

The Apostle Paul says in Acts 20,

"I consider my life worth nothing to me, if only I may finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me -- the task of testifying to the gospel of God's grace."

This is just one of several times that Paul equates our Christian life to a race. Paul recognized the value of running until the race was completed -- being fruitful until the day of his death. We would do well to follow Paul's example and emulate his attitiude that our life means nothing unless we are fruitful to the end.

Serving the Church

I was going to write about Don Imus today, but he's such an easy target to pick on that I changed my mind.

I thought instead I would let my friends out there know that our church officially asked me yesterday to serve it as a deacon. After our morning worship time, one woman greeted me by saying, "I don't know if that's a promotion ... congratulations." I told her it was probably a demotion! All joking aside, I appreciate the recognition and responsibilities that may follow.

From a Biblical point of view, deacons are simply men (and women) that are recognized by the church "pastors" and elders" (two terms for the same thing) as being men of character that serve other members of the church. Examples of who and what deacons are can be found in Acts ch. 6 and 1 Timothy 3.

Practically speaking, deacons essentially work alongside the elders to accomplish the ministries and works of service the church is committed to. In a church of any size, the number of men recognized as elders is probaby insufficient to lead every work of the church. And so, deacons come alongside to support, and in some cases represent, the elders.

I do not "aspire" to serve a church as a deacon. Rather, it is my desire to simply serve however I am able, however I am gifted, and continue to grow in my spiritual maturity. Certainly, wearing the title of deacon may present some circumstances and challenges that are new. But by in large, I anticipate just doing more of the same -- serving Christ with my church family.

Zach Johnson and the Masters

Its a stereotypical assumption that men across America sit around on Thanksgiving Day watching football after a big meal. The scene was similar yesterday -- men (and women) enjoying America's most endearing event in golf, the Masters, on Easter Sunday. For Cedar Rapidians, yesterday was especially captivating, as homeboy hero Zach Johnson held off the world's best to win his first major.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about how we live vicariously through the accomplishments of others, and even take some sense of pride in their success. Surely everyone in this Iowa community of 125,000, even those of us who have never met Mr. Johnson, was bursting at the seams.

Johnson is the first Iowan to win the Masters, and the second Iowan to ever win one of golf's most prestigious tourneys. Most of the nation's elite linksters hail from southern states where the courses are open year-round. Iowa is good for just six months of golf -- mid-April through mid-October. Even then, you might get snowed on, or lose your ball in a pile of fallen maple leaves. Serious golfers don't come from our neck of the woods very often. If so, they have left Iowa years ago.

Johnson's story is a good one -- a relative unknown who wasn't good enough to earn a scholarship at his college of choice (the University of Iowa), who played in anonymity for several years trying to earn his way onto the PGA tour, who has just a single tour win to his credit. In interviews after the last putt he described himself as "just your average guy from Iowa." A local sports reporter added, "He's the kind of guy Iowan's would want to have representing them."

All this is great stuff. But what most resonated with me was Johnson's recognition that golf was the second most important event of the day. The first was the Easter celebration of Jesus the Messiah rising from a tomb in Jerusalem about 1,982 years ago. Johnson went the extra distance in the spiritual department on this Sunday. Not only did he mention that "Someone was watching over me," as so many people do in vague reference to God, " but Johnson added that his faith was in Jesus. In this "Christian nation," God is often called out. Jesus, however, is not.

Some might say that Zach Johnson is "this" or "that" when it comes to his faith. I don't know him personally, so I can't say anothing about that. But I do know that his testimony was a good one on Easter Sunday -- the underdog Iowan who proclaims Jesus as his Lord, conquers Augusta National.

Ice and Snow

To my friends the Millers down in Texas -- you left just in time.

Eastern Iowa was hard to find on the national weather map Saturday -- there was too much weather on top of it. The state was a radar blob of white and pink (white for snow and pink for ice) for about 36 hours. Depending on where you live, the mix was more snow than ice, or more ice than snow. Here in Cedar Rapids, it was ice. About an inch of ice fell on power lines and trees, snapping both. Early Sunday morning an estimated 200,000 utility customers in Eastern Iowa (that's probably about 1/6 of all homes) were without power.

That included the Hagerman house. Our power went out just is dinner was coming out of the oven Saturday night, about 6 p.m. We ate a romantic candlelight dinner (well, it was candlelight anyway) and played a game of Sorry! at the table. Then, off to bed early. We hit the sack about 9 p.m. with little else to do. Sunday morning brought more of the same -- no juice. But also, no snow. The predicted 8-12 inches of white stuff that was supposed to follow the ice never came. Instead, warm rain was falling, melting away what little snow was on the ground, and some of the ice, too. The cold temps and snow went north. Our power was restored around noon on Sunday. By then we were thankful that we were not pioneers on the plains in 1840.

I feel bad for those still without power, an estimated 20,000 in Cedar Rapids and many thousands more in rural Iowa. But I don't mind the storm itself. In a powerful way, its a reminder that we simply trust God to provide in all circumstances -- ice and all. As we worshipped on Sunday morning with the 50 that were able to make the drive to the church building, I relished being able to sing words like "It is well with my soul" and "Great is Thy faithfulness." Come hell or high water (or high ice), God is in control, and I belong to Him.

Squeezing the Turnip

I confess I don't really have any idea what that phrase means. I've never eaten a turnip, and not sure I've even seen one. I assume that turnips are dry roots, and that "squeezing the turnip" means trying to get something (in this case, liquid) out of an item that has nothing left to give.

I use this phrase to describe the result of my months-long study of the issue of election/predestination/reformed theology. My intellect is the turnip, and there is nothing else to squeeze out at the moment.

I began with the premise that we (humans) are created with the ability to choose that Jesus Christ become our Savior, or reject this offer and suffer the consequences. Heading down one path, or the other path, is simply a matter of our own will and desire. God blesses us with intellect, and with that that intellect, we make decisions about Him.

I no longer am able to embrace that theology. Passages from the books of Ephesians, Romans, 1 Corinthians, and John (among others) describe man as dead and incapable of turning to God. Furthermore, that we have no ability to make morally positive decisions, because our spiritual nature is completely void of good. What's more, I question the very definition of grace, if ultimately our salvation is dependent on our own decisions and actions (commonly defined in the Bible as "works").

On the other hand, I am not yet ready to wholeheartedly embrace what is commonly called "Reformed Theology." In essence, that before God even created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1), he already knew me and decided my eternal fate (and that of all the other billions of people born past, present and future). And, that my fate is accomplished wholly by God -- my salvation is accomplished by Him lock, stock, and barrel. I am incapable of saying "no" to God, because He will overwhelm me with His Spirit so that I can do nothing outside of saying "yes."

My problem here is two-fold. First, both the Old and New Testaments are filled with real examples of people choosing to follow God and not choosing. Most of Paul's NT letters to various churches describe in great detail how to "work out your salvation," "run the good race," "live in the Spirit," etc. The book of Acts is a litany of people being persuaded to choose Christ. We are warned repeatedly that succombing to evil and failing to turn away from sin is cause for eternal destruction. Reformists say that we choose only because God first chose us, and that the exhortations of Paul are not to those who are unsaved, but to those who are already (and eternally) saved. That all of those warnings are serious and true -- but that our ultimate, eternal fate has already been decided. I can see this in certain Scripture -- but can not yet reason it against other Scripture.

My second problem is this -- understanding the nature of God. If God is indeed glorified by both choosing people for salvation and choosing people for condemnation, and works everything out so that His plan for each soul is executed without flaw, then how does that glorify God? I'm not saying it doesn't, but that I don't know why. My human reasoning tells me that God would be more glorified if souls turned to Him out of freedom of will, rather than planned compulsion. But even as Paul says in Romans, who am I, the clay, to question God, the Potter?

So, there you have it. I could go on, and on and on ... but it would be like squeezing the turnip. I've studied this theology with more diligence than anything else in quite some time. God has moved me from one side of the pendalum, to the other side, and now I'm resting in the middle. It's not a comfortable place to be -- there is no truth in the middle -- but it's where I am nonetheless. In time, aided by prayer, study, and the Spirit, I expect that God will reveal more of Himself to me and clarify my understanding. Until then, the turnip is going to rest awhile.

Oh, two more things .... First, this is a pretty significant doctrine that earnest, Godly people disagree about. There is a trememdous demonstration of Christian unity when people from both sides of this doctrine can agree to disagree and still maintain love for God and each other. So, to my brothers out there on both sides ... I appreciate your patience, prayers, and commitment to Christ, however it is you came to know Him and understand His promise of salvation to those who genuinely believe.

Secondly, if you have never before (or even recently) considered the nature of God's grace, man's sinful nature, and salvation -- consider it. There is value in the struggle, and blessings in the Word. My dry turnip does not mean that my study has been unprofitable -- quite the opposite is true. Being a disciple means wrestling with truth from time to time, and growing from the battle. I know I have been sharpened -- you will be too.

Is Your Church a Cult?

I have been reading a blog recently where individuals are recounting their church experience and how they feel the church resembles a cult. Well, not resembles, but in fact, IS a cult.

In order to make a comparison, it's helpful to have a working definition of what a cult is. Wikipedia defines a cult as "a cohesive group of people (of varying size) devoted to beliefs or practices that the surrounding culture or society considers to be far outside the mainstream. The literal and traditional meanings of the word cult is derived from the Latin cultus, meaning 'care' or 'adoration,' as 'a system of religious belief or ritual; or: the body of adherents to same.'"

Let's break it down .... Is a church a cohesive group of people? I hope so. Jesus and the Apostles had a lot to say about love and unity among his people. I think most churches would like to be cohesive.

Is the church committed to a set of beliefs and practices? Again, I hope so. Chief among those beliefs is that God is the creator of all, that Jesus is His Son, that the Bible is God's Word recorded for our reading and interpretation, and that salvation is found only through the grace of God made available by faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus. The Christian practices of worship, prayer, baptism, fellowship, evangelism, financial giving, etc. generally demonstrate our belief and love for God.

Does the surrounding culture or society consider the church to be far outside the mainstream? That's a good question. Certainly Jesus recognized that His followers were going to be far outside the mainstream in some ways. Jesus taught that many souls would cry out to Him on judgement day, but only a very few would He acknowledge as belonging to Him. The Apostle Paul says that Christ-followers are not citizens of this earth, but, that we are aliens. The New Testament repeatedly warns Christians not to get too comfy on earth, nor to judge success using the same methods as the world judges.

We Christians walk a fine line of trying to be "normal" as the world defines it, but "aliens" as we are described by Christ. Church leaders walk a fine line of encouraging their congregations to demonstrate love to Christ through good works, while not trying to by too "pushy" and ask more than the human mind says is "reasonable."

So, is your church a cult? Frankly, it better be. I know, I know ... the "C" word has taken on a negative connotation in the last 30 years. We invision death by KoolAid, fiery compounds in Waco, flowers being handed out at the airport, bloody animal sacrifices.

But Christians ARE called to be unique and different. If churches are made up of devoted Christians, it would stand to reason that the church body should also be unique and different from society.

Just look at the church in Acts chapters 2-5. The Christians were meeting every day (not just once on Sunday). They were selling their posessions and giving to those who had need. Many who had come to Jerusalem from far away likely stayed much longer than planned. Acts 2:42 says that these Christians were dedicated to learning about Jesus through the Apostles teaching, to prayer, to fellowship, and to the breaking of bread (commonly, the Lord's Supper). What a bunch of wackos.

So, if your church leaders encourage you to attend a few church events each week, have Christian friends in your home for fellowship, give just 10 percent of your wealth to God (as opposed to all of it), pray regularly, read your Bible, seek Godly counsel about important decisions, and tell others about Jesus, are they cult leaders? Are you a brainwashed, manipulated, deceived individual?

Some would certainly have you think so. What do you think?

The Spiritual and Sinful Natures

Due, in part, to my recent study in Romans and my recent reading of the Ted Dekker book Three, I find myself thinking about the nature of man. Specifically, the dichotomy between man's spiritual nature and man's sinful nature.

I define man's spiritual nature as the part of man that seeks to imitate the holiness of God. I (think) I believe that all men are born with a spiritual nature. At some point in time that nature is given a rebirth, as God and man become joined through Christ in salvation.

The human nature is certainly something we're born with. It is that part of us that acts out of selfishness and pride. It seeks to put us at the center of all that happens around us. It allows us to rationalize our actions and push God to the backburner.

The spiritual nature and the sinful nature are always at war. Each wants to be fed. Each needs to be fed in order to grow and dominate the other. Why are the so-called spiritual disciplines and spiritual activity so important -- prayer, fasting, worship. meditation, fellowship with believers, the Lord's Supper, baptism, reading of scripture, etc.? Because it is food for our spiritual nature. Think of each as a power pill -- a dose of God that refreshes the spiritual nature.

The sinful nature hardly needs any direct "help" from us -- it is fed at will by the world. The more wordly our environment, the more we eat. Sometimes, simply being in the presence of "sinful nature food" is enough to get us eating, whether we know it or not. A few examples .... Ever been to a party and eaten three dozen shrimp tails, when six would do? I have. Somewhere between six and 36 we cross the line to gluttony. At the same party, a person may be handed a beer or glass of wine. Seven later, the line from sobriety to drunkenness has been crossed. The sinful nature has been fed. Or how about last year's raise? What kind of food was purchased with the extra money -- spiritual food or sinful food? If I made an extra five grand, would I give a substantial amount away, or would I instead by a few more toys that I have been "sacrificing" until I could "afford" them?

The hard part about the spiritual and sinful natures is this -- seems we have to be pretty intentional about feeding the spiritual nature, while the sinful nature can saddle up to the buffet all day long. I suppose that's one reason why Jesus said that the ultimate highway of the spiritual nature (salvation) is just a two-laner, while the road to destruction is paved a mile wide.

What will you and I choose today for food? May our eating be profitable.

Bogged Down in Romans -- Part II

Thank you for the private feedback I received from several readers following my "Part I" post.

• One responder suggested that there is a third position on election -- universalism. It is the concept that because God loves us so much, He will not punish anyone to eternal damnation. Hell is figurative, not literal. I don't want to muddy the water with this theory, except to be reminded that Jesus warns that "not everyone will enter the kingdom of heaven."
• Another responder questioned the role of faith, particularly the faith displayed in the "Hebrews Hall of Fame" (ch. 11). Didn't these men choose their path of following God, rather than being elected to do so?
• Also, is the application of the Jacob/Esau story really implying anything more than God had a plan for the Jews?

I left off around Romans 9:18. In Romans 9:19, Paul again acknowledges that his audience may question his line of teaching -- "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" In other words, how can we be held accountable for our actions, if God has already determined our course in life? That's the same question I would have asked (and ask now). Paul's response -- "But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'" Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?" Hmmm .... So, God makes each of us for different purposes, Paul says. But "ignoble use" doesn't have any relevence to salvation, does it?

Let's understand the progression up until this point. Paul is presenting to the Romans a gospel message throughout Romans. He is encouraging both Jews and Gentiles to understand that the wages of sin is death (Romans 3:23). He say that, at just the right time, Jesus died for the ungodly (Romans 5:6), and that this death was enough to bring justification to all people (Romans 5:18). He makes a case that this gift is for all races, not just the Jews (Romans 4:16). Paul paints a beautiful picture of how we pass from death to life (Romans 6:3-7) as we are baptized into Christ. After discussing the relationship between sin and grace, and then what it means to become a new creation in Christ, Paul comes to chapter nine. He begins, as we saw last time, by lamenting that his Jewish race will not all come to salvation, even though they had all the opportunities to follow God. Then Paul beings to explain why this can be -- how a nation so thoroughly bedazzled by God can not connect with Him. Paul concludes that it is because it was not God's intention that all should come to Him, but only some. And those that do? It's because He created some for the purpose of salvation, and others for "ignoble use."

Now, the crux of election theology.

Romans 9:22-24 -- "What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath -- prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

Paul seems to say that there are two kinds of people. One is those who he prepared for destruction. The other is those who are the objects of His mercy. God uses the destruction of one to demonstrate His love for the other. And then, just so we don't think that this is applicable to Jews only, Paul tacks on, "not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles."

So, if that's it, what is the role of faith?

Paul discusses faith throughout Romans, and also in his other NT writings. Paul indicates many times that we are saved through faith, we walk in faith, our faith is of greater value then gold, etc. He essentially says time and time again that we are saved by faith in Jesus. If that's the case, where does faith come from? And how does the role of faith jive with this Romans 9 discussion? Next time ...

Comments???

Bogged Down in Romans -- Part I

My posts have been slowed because I'm bogged down in Romans, considering what the Apostle Paul has to say about the relationship between man choosing God and God choosing man, as it relates to salvation.

Romans seems to be the key text for those who view salvation as a result of God's election. Consider the following from chapter 9:

• Paul begins the chapter discussing the plight of his own race, the Jews. He reminds readers that it is the Jews who received every advantage from God -- adoption as sons, the law and covenants, the temple worship, the patriarchs, and the lineage of Christ. But, (vs. 6) "Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel." What has Paul said? That not all of Israel is saved, but just some? What is the basis for this?
• Paul goes on to say that it is the portion of Israel that are descendents of Isaac only that are "children of the promise." (vs 7-8) So that, it is "not the natural children who are God's," but only children of the promise are God's children.
• Then Paul discusses Isaac's children, Jacob and Esau, and the continuance of the promise. Paul points out that (vs. 11) "Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad -- in order that God's purpose in election might stand, not by works but by him who calls -- she was told, "The older will serve the younger. Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated." What does Paul say here? Well, that God had a plan -- that before the children of Isaac wore born (before they had demonstrated even one nation of holiness or sin), God would fulfill his promise of salvation to the line of Jacob (the youngest) and not of Esau (the oldest). Paul then reminds us that God loved Jacob but hated Esau (vs. 13). That doesn't seem fair of God, that he would love one and hate the other, just because He wishes to, does it?
• Paul anticipates that his readers (and us today) would question God's fairness, because he then writes (vs. 14) "What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
• For those who preach election, that is where the argument really starts to gel. Note what has happened here. Paul has said that not all of Israel will be saved, but only some. The predictor of those who would be saved is not human behavior, but God's plan of salvation -- even to the extent that a line of Israel was chosen through Jacob before Jacob was even born. Furthermore, Paul knows that his audience will cry foul and say that God's behavior doesn't seem fair. Paul answers this by simply quoting God's own words to Moses -- "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." Then Paul summarizes this by saying (vs. 16) "It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy." "It" is salvation.
• Then Paul uses one more example, that of Pharoah (the Egyptian ruler that experienced God's plagues before the Jews left Egypt). Paul says, essentially, that Pharoah was born for a single purpose (vs. 17) -- "that I (God) might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." Paul then summarizes this verse by saying "God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden."

I'll stop here for now. Any feedback on these verses?

Free Will and Choice

Where do the ideas of free will and choice come from? Theologically, is there a reason for us to believe that we are free to be you and me?

It would seem so, at least in some ways.

• It starts back in the garden of Eden. Eve is walking around naked (Adam can't be too far behind) and gets talked into eating a special apple, choosing to ignore God's warning about such eating and instead following the bad advice of the serpant. In the Biblical account of this first temptation and consequent sin, it appears that Eve and her husband could choose to obey God, or not. They chose the latter, with severe consequences (Eve started wearing clothes, among other things).
• In Deuteronomy chapter 30, Moses is giving Israel a final pep talk before they are to occupy the land of Canaan. Some of Moses final words to the people of God are, "This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."
• Moses' protege Joshua encourages more of the same in the 24th chapter of Joshua -- "Now fear the LORD and serve him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your forefathers worshiped beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD. But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."
• Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived, gives this advice to his son -- "Since they [sinners] hated knowledge and did not choose to fear the LORD, since they would not accept my advice and spurned my rebuke, they will eat the fruit of their ways and be filled with the fruit of their schemes. For the waywardness of the simple will kill them, and the complacency of fools will destroy them; but whoever listens to me will live in safety and be at ease, without fear of harm."

Interestingly, each of these examples is from the Old Testament. If you perform a word search for "choose," most of the choosing is done by God, not be man. The phrase "free will," of course, does not appear in the Bible. But from these verses, it would seem that man is sometimes presented with the decision to choose God or not. An affirmative choice leads to life, the alternative to destruction.

These choices above are specific to moral decisions. Obviously, we make many choices everyday that are not specifically a choice for God or against Him. What we wear, what we eat, our route to work, and a hundred other matters of personal taste and expression. Does God care about these things?

In my next post I want to highlight a few of the things we don't seem to be able to choose.

Comments???

Cause and Effect

As I think about this topic of election/free will, I'm also thinking about the other end of the equation -- eternal security. If the discussion over "How does our salvation initiate" represents the beginning of a strand of theology, then the end might be "How does our salvation cease" (if, in fact, it can). Both the answer to the beginning point and the end point say a lot about who God is, who we are, and the relationship between us and Him.

After asking the question, "Why am I here" in the previous post, I've been pondering about what it means to be created in God's image. In Genesis, we read that God did indeed create us in His own image. What does that mean?

Are we created in God's physical image? If that is the case, what aspect of it? Remember, God's image is represented in three parts -- the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Which one doe we physically resemble?

Are we created in God's spiritual image? If so, how does that manifest itself? Is it our soul that represents His image, or something else?

Are we created in God's intellectual image? Is the logic, intellect, and reasoning skills of humans what tie us to the image of God? Is this the primary criteria that most separates man from animals, and hence, why man is the crowning glory of God's creation?

Are we created in God's emotional image? Is our ability to laugh, cry, experience guilt and remorse, a reflection of God Himself? We find in Genesis that God was both "pleased" with His creation, and a few years later, "grieved."

I have long held the opinion that to be "created in God's image" means that we represent the only part of His creation that is drawn back to God. I think of God as having created the whole kit and kaboodle and releasing it into the continuum of time to do its thing. What makes man unique is that after having been created, God maintained a relationship with man. So, in short, man reflects the image of God through this relationship.This is due to man reflecting some aspect of God's divinity (spiritual characteristics) and God's humanity (emotional and intellectual characteristics).

At least, that's my theory. But then Adam and Eve had to crunch into that apple and complicate things with sin. Frankly, I'm not yet sure what sin does to my theory. Still working on that ... Thoughts?

Why am I Here?

That's probably the most fundamental question a person could ask, isn't it? Indeed, why am I here? A few years ago, Rick Warren sold a boatload of books to Christians and non-Christian alike by trying to answer a closely related question, "What is my purpose?"

If you do not believe in a creator, the answer to "Why am I here?" can be nothing more than, "I don't know, it was really an accident. Some cosmic thing just happened a billion-trillion years ago, and over all of history, matter has been evolving into what it is today. I just happen to be the accidental product of science and time."

But if you believe in the Creator, the One who claims in Genesis chapter 1 to have made it all, then the question becomes more complex. Why did God create anything at all, let alone mankind?

I ask the question in light of the Arminian/Reformed theology struggle.

One thing we do know from Genesis 1:31, is that what God did create, He approved of.

"God saw all that he had made, and it was very good."

The phrase "very good" comes from the Hebrew "me'od towb." "Me'od" is a superlative word that could be translated as "exceedingly," or “especially." "Towb" is translated as "pleasant," "pleasurable," "precious," among other words.

So God created everything, last of which was mankind, and said that it was "exceedingly pleasant," or something to that effect. That doesn't answer the question of, "Why am I here?", but it does summarize what God thought of what he created.

I'm not sure the Bible comes right out and tells us why we're here -- God doesn't seem to plainly say, "I made you because ..." So, I admit my answer may just be speculation, but here it is: do we exist simply to please God? If He describes His creation as "pleasurable," it would be an explanation for why He created.

Many examples in the Bible seem to support the conclusion that pleasing God is certainly part of our DNA. Here are a few:

• In Exodus 33 Moses is asking God for validation and evidence that God is pleased with him. "If you are pleased with me, teach me your ways so I may know you and continue to find favor with you," says Moses. In response, God says to Moses, "I am pleased with you and I know you by name."
• In Deuteronomy 28, Moses is reminding Israel the importance of obeying God's commands. After recalling the punishment God sent to Egypt, Moses says, "Just as it pleased the LORD to make you prosper and increase in number, so it will please him to ruin and destroy you. You will be uprooted from the land you are entering to possess." (The "land" referring to the promised land of Canaan.) This is interesting to me, as it suggests that God could take pleasure in both blessing His people, and destroying His people.
• In 1 Kings 3, God tells Solomon in a dream, "Ask for whatever you want me to give you." The Lord was pleased that Solomon had asked for this. So God said to him, "Since you have asked for this … I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be.”
• In Psalms 40 and 41, David asks that God be pleased with him, and then, “I know that you are pleased with me, for my enemy does not triumph over me.”
• Upon being baptized by John, God declares to Jesus and the witnesses, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
• Later in Matthew’s gospel, God again speaks in the presence of witnesses and says “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!"
• In 1 Corinthians, Paul references Israel’s 40 years of wandering because they disobeyed God’s order to enter Canaan. Paul says, “Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert. Now these things occurred as examples to keep us from setting our hearts on evil things as they did.”
• In Hebrews’ “Bible Hall of Fame,” the writer says “By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death; he could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.”

If my sole purpose for existence is to please God, then the next question to answer might be, “What pleases God?” That’s another topic for another day. But I think as I ponder salvation and the respective roles that God and I play (or don’t play) in that, it’s important to consider that what pleases God is not necessarily what pleases me. In other words, what God defines as pleasing, or fair, or righteous, or holy, may be different from my sense of those things. Let’s discuss …

Reformed Arminianism

I hate it when I get stuck in my thinking and I don't know how to choose the best of solutions. That's how it has been for the past 12 months as I've considered the Christian doctrine of election.

Growing up in the churches of Christ, I was taught that in order for a person to receive salvation, they must strike up a relationship with God. Salvation was summarized in this six step model:

• Hear the Word of God
• Believe in Jesus
• Confess your sins
• Repent (turn away from) your sinful life
• Be Baptized (completely immersed in water) for the forgiveness of sins and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit
• Continue to live for Christ (measured almost exclusively by good works)

Who takes these steps? The sinner, of course. It is up to the sinner to turn to God, to beg for mercy, and to show his sincerity/commitment by being baptized. Then, the sinner turned saint must faithfully continue to hold up his end of the relationship to maintain the promise of salvation.

I didn't know it at the time, but this philosophy of salvation bears the label Arminianism (after the 17th century theologian Jacobus Arminius). Man is sinful because of Adam's bite of the apple, but not so totally separated from God that he can't choose to turn to God (and turn from sin). Are we saved by grace? Yes. But, we can choose to turn down God's gift of grace, and thereby control our eternal destiny.

Because churches of Christ traditionally have separated themselves from the whole of Christian thought, I was never exposed to the other, widely taught possibility concerning salvation -- that God controls the whole process.

This is the concept of election -- that God elected before the beginning of time who would ultimately receive salvation and who would not. When we "come to Christ," it would be more accurately stated that Christ has already come to us, and through the Holy Spirit, both initiated and completed the salvation process. This is necessary, because when Adam sinned, all of mankind became so corrupt that we are completely incapable of choosing God. So, by necessary inference, if we can't choose God, then He must choose us.

Election was widely taught by St. Augustine, and later by John Calvin and others during the Protestant Reformation. Some would say that election is clearly taught by the Apostles John and Paul in their New Testament writings.

There really is no such thing as the title to this blog -- "Reformed Arminianism," but it's what I am right now. A fencesitter. A student. A confused modern-day theologian.

I may post in coming weeks some further thoughts on the issue as I read through a couple of books on the subject. Your thoughts, as always, are welcomed.

Proverbs 11

Proverbs 11:22

Like a gold ring in a pig's snout is a beautiful woman who shows no discretion.

I couldn't let that one slip by.

Three proverbs of common theme appear back-to back-to back in this chapter -- 11:24, 25, and 26: "One man gives freely, yet gains even more; another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty. A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed. People curse the man who hoards grain, but blessing crowns him who is willing to sell."

Said in three different ways -- the man who puts other people's needs above his own will receive even greater blessing than what he is giving up. That's a hard lesson for men in the 21st century of the United States. It has been a hard lesson for me personally.

A couple of other thoughts. While Solomon uses the word "man" here, I doubt this is a proverb intended for men only. On the other hand, I think the theme of these verses is harder for men to adopt than women. Generally speaking, aren't women more generous than men -- with their time, their money, their kind words. It may be an extension of the notion that women seem to be more relational-oriented, while men are task-achievers.

The most inspiring of these proverbs for me is the middle one: "A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed." "Refreshing others" is not about giving away your house, or even a $20 bill. Instead, it denotes something more emotional, more personal. How do we refresh others? With words of encouragement, expressions of gratitude, acknowledgements of effort, and praise. Again, a hard teaching for most of us men to consistently follow. We've got to really go out of our way to do this, because it probably doesn't come naturally.

Not coincidentally, these proverbs fit pretty snugly with what we call the Golden Rule -- treat others as you would like to be treated. How many of us love to receive words of praise and gratitude? Is it possible that the more we hand out these expressions to others (genuinely, of course), the more we receive back?