Thank You for Your Prayers, but You Can Keep Your Prayer Requests

Any long-time church attender in our nation, who has been part of a Sunday School class (or small group, or life group, or home group, or fellowship group, etc.) has likely, at one point, experienced "prayer request time." Now, I know I'm treading on thin ice here. If not read fully, some will say that I'm bashing prayer request time. I am not. I am, however, bashing gossip time disguised as prayer request time.

I touched on this recently in an interview with Janice Backer of Missions Mosaic magazine that focused on some prodigal issues within our family. Some of what is referenced below was covered in the article (link at bottom.)

Regarding Prayer

As our family was working through the shock and pain of revealed sin in our child's life, we found ourselves shaken deeply. Questions regarding personal and parental failures developed. Prayers and deep times with the Lord regarding continued service in the church and continued service in ministry as a pastor were common.

Someone asked if it felt like we had a child die. While I understand the question, and perhaps some similar emotions arose, to equate what we were experiencing with that of parents who had buried their progeny would be insensitive at best. My parents had a baby boy (my brother Michael) who died. My grandparents had a daughter who died at a young age. Many in our church family have suffered the grief of funeral planning for their children, so no, our grief was not the same.

Nevertheless, it was definitely grief we were experiencing.

For the most part our church family responded to our struggles as God's children should. My wife and I experienced the love and comfort from those who were hurting with us. The empathy and sympathy from those who had experienced similar stories was as a healing salve to a wound. Our child was never ostracized from the church. Our child was continually accepted (though the sin was not) and loved as part of the church family. Concerning our child's personal salvation, what seemed certain years ago now leaves us not we are now not certain, but the church never equivocated on the gospel nor on the call to love.

Nevertheless, some did believe it their calling to confront. They did so in love, at least the ones I am aware of. Yet, what is often meant in love may not be received as such. Since most of our confrontations are not loving, it is very difficult to actually do this biblically and in some cases, the "righteous love" that was intended was not perceived. I'm not blaming here, just point out the fact that any confrontation in Christian love, best be prayed about prior with heavy emphasis on "Christian love." That being said, Christian love may feel harsh to the confronted. In fact, it almost always does. Christian love is focused on redemption and righteousness. When those two elements are not present, it's not Christian love. 

The Prayer Requests

Well intentioned Christians can fall quickly into a mode of gossip under the banner of "prayer requests." This did happen in some cases. This was not helpful. In fact, it was wrong and remains wrong. 

32904795925_0048cbdc29_c
Photo by Listshack on Visualhunt / CC BY

I want to roll my eyes when the serial prayer requester starts talking about some unnamed neighbor's cousin's brother-in-law's circumstance in need of prayer...five states away. I wonder "Is this really a prayer request, or someone's need to be sure they have something on the list?" 

The Unspoken Prayer Request

The unspoken prayer request is good, but can be overused as well. Almost every group has the person who wants to express aloud...every meeting...that he has an unspoken. I often wondered as a kid "Wonder what that is? I bet it's really bad!" and sometimes it is. I am all for the wisdom of offering these types of requests and seeking intercession from the community of faith. Sometimes, the issue is just too embarrassing or not yet something for public discourse. Sometimes, unfortunately, it is an unspoken request because the person needing prayer just does not trust the others in the class to truly pray without spreading gossip.

The Un-prayed List

I often wonder how many in the group that gathers actually prays over the requests shared. I'm not seeking to throw anyone under the bus, but I've been guilty of being in a group, hearing requests and then just praying the "Lord, answer all these needs" prayer. Sometimes, I let someone else pray and I just agree by closing my eyes. I'm convicted of this.

At some point, the name on the list, if you do the list, needs to be covered. Find ways to ensure that these needs that have been deemed authentic are actually prayed for by believers. It could be by assigning a portion of the group to pray silently for a just a few requests, or even one. I don't have that answer, but I know that a name on a list with a generic "bless everyone" is not what is needed.

Prayer Availeth Much (James 5:16)

In our circumstance, we continually seek prayers from our church family...in all seasons. I know that many have been and continue to pray.

Thank you!!!!

We have found healing and strength beyond measure through God during these storms of life. The journey is long. One person's (or family member's) sin is no greater than another. Sin is never excused, but it can be forgiven. We are continually reminded that love and affirmation are not synonyms and this has been bedrock for us. 

We have been affirmed that our resting in Christ provides what we need when worry and stress seem overwhelming. (Sometimes, we need reminding about every 30 minutes.) 

Keep reading the Word. Keep trusting in God. Keep resting in Christ. Keep holding true to the Truth, without compromise. 

Keep praying...but consider your prayer requests, keep them holy.

__________

Story referred to from from the December, 2017, issue of Missions Mosaic. Used by permission. To receive this issue or to read more articles about how to exhibit grace in difficult life situations go tohttps://www.wmustore.com/missions-mosaic.


You Are Called to Pastor - Do You Really Need Seminary?

I have served in pastoral ministry for almost thirty years. When I surrendered to God's calling as a pastor, I began counting down the months until graduation at the university I was attending. I knew, immediately, that seminary was my next step. This is likely due to the fact I lived in Fort Worth, Texas which was home, at the time, of the largest evangelical seminary in the world (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.) My pastor was a student at SWBTS, as were the numerous student pastors who served part-time at the small church where I was a member. In fact, it never occurred to me that seminary was not an option. 

I am currently back at seminary, working toward a Doctor of Educational Ministry at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.

So, I would understand if in your reading of this article, you deem me to be biased. I am. I believe seminary education is good and valuable for the one called to pastoral ministry. 

I also understand that it is not a biblical requirement of the office.

Nevertheless, as I have had opportunity to serve in the local church and see young people surrender their lives to what we term "full-time Christian service" there is a trend I have noticed of minimizing the need for theological education. This is not true for all, but there are those who just want to hurry up and get on the field and forego the study.

Do You Have To Go To Seminary to Pastor?

Well, no. You won't find a verse that commands the called out ones to enroll in an accredited school for the purpose of earning a degree. Yet, we must not dismiss this as a viable option for pastors, or in some cases a recommended one.

Dr. Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary states it this way:

Seminaries, when they are faithful as servants of the church and accountable to the church, training ministers without apology for the churches, and doing so effectively, can offer a pastor the most comprehensive background for ministry that can be put into about a three year period. Now, as I say, I hope every pastor would have at least that much, because I think to really be a skilled preacher of God’s word and a pastor, to continue to grow, most pastors will go beyond that and if not in formal study, at least that better be the investment in how they study on their own.

Yet, we have all heard from those in the local churches who have decried the seminary education for fear that all that training messes with good preachers and makes them ineffective. Well, if you haven't heard that type of talk, you haven't been around many of our smaller congregations who struggle with the sending off for educational purposes.

Southern-Seminary
The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary - Louisville, KY

In some cases, these complaints are valid. In fact, in Baptist life just a few decades ago, the great fear was becoming a reality. Biblically-based, theologically conservative institutions were not just leaning, but running quickly to the left and disavowing the veracity of Scripture as inerrant. While many Baptist colleges and universities were lost to the cultural shift, the six Southern Baptist seminaries were reclaimed through what has become known as the conservative resurgence.

Therefore, over the past few decades, much like many years ago, the ministerial training offered at our seminaries has proved to be quality, biblically-sound, and effective. Of course, there will always be small exceptions, but by and large, this is the what God has provided, all to his glory, in our schools.

Pastoring Without Seminary

Yet, there are many godly men serving in pastoral ministry who do not have seminary degrees. These are not unlearned men. They are wise and biblically sound. 

Matt Chandler, Pastor at The Village Church, is one such man and has addressed this clearly. He states:

I have been asked recently about what my thoughts are concerning seminary and why I never finished. I have found this to be a very polarizing subject where people put me in the camp of those who think that seminary is unnecessary or put me into the other camp that thinks scholarship isn't important for the pastorate. The truth is I think most men need to go to seminary and scholarship is extremely important. 

There is a recent trend of really sharp, entrepreneurial, driven men skipping seminary all together and planting churches. I don't have a problem with this at all if those men have picked up the tools they need in other places and are continuing to grow theologically and philosophically. If a guy can handle the Greek and Hebrew, knows at least at the cursory level Christian history and can wrestle through and find answers for deep, difficult theological questions then he might not need a degree from a seminary. These men are usually driven, avid studiers and readers by nature. If they could, they would spend their whole day with the scriptures as well as with men like Calvin, Luther and Spurgeon. I said might because seminary then becomes an obedience issue between him and the Lord and may still be a very good idea.

On the other hand, if you don't have the tools, have a tendency to be lazy in study, can't handle the languages, know nothing of how to find answers to deep, difficult theological questions except to quote John Piper and know nothing of our rich history then you need to go get some tools. If you are lazy in study and continue to get in front of people and teach, you have much more courage than I do. I would strongly recommend seminary for its accountability and plan to educate you in doctrine, language and history.

Speed Doesn't Justify Poor Theology

Dr. M. David Sills has written an incredible book titled Reaching and Teaching: A Call to Great Commission Obedience. As a former field missionary overseas and now as a seminary professor, he brings great insight into the flawed model of ministry that offers little discipleship training and provides empty titles for those determined to be leaders.

With a desire to reach the unreached, we have unfortunately turned previously reached groups into unreached groups while ultimately seeking to speed the return of Christ (as if we actually can manipulate God to adjust a time he already has set.) Yes, reaching the unreached is a mandate. It is biblical. It is right. Nevertheless, as Dr. Sills states, "The great missiological error of our day is the mistaken notion that the Great Commission equals reaching the unreached."

Reaching and discipling are not synonyms. (TWEET THIS)

The great tragedy of the world is not that it is unreached; it is that it is undiscipled. Jesus commanded us to make disciples, not just to get decisions.

Sills continues in a recent article posted on the International Mission Board site...

Theological preparation is necessary to plant the pure seed of the gospel in the soil of the target culture rather than simply bringing a potted plant that is indigenous to the missionary’s home culture.

Yet, a degree from a theological seminary may not be necessary, and in fact, some seminaries might do more harm than good. But every missionary must have a masters degree from the School of Christ, no matter how or where he gets it.

Missionaries would be wise to go to the best seminary they can find, one that teaches sound theology and biblical missiology, and get all the education they can in preparation before deploying to the nations.

If God opens the door before they actually graduate, then by all means they should follow his guidance and go. The Lord knows what each missionary needs to do all he has planned for him or her to do, and he also knows what the world needs.

Make sure you hear the still, small voice that says, “This is the way, walk in it,” and then obey that call as if souls depended on it. You shouldn’t run before you’re ready any more than you should delay once you are. God’s timing is not ours. If he hasn’t yet said, “Go now!” then get all the education you can get while you’re home.

Planters, Pastors, and Missionaries in Hurry Up Mode

As we have mentored and coached young ministers and pastors over the years, a few challenges have arisen. In some cases, a person surrenders later in life (when it comes to schooling, this may mean over age 30) and while working a full-time job and seeking to raise a family, deem theological education as not being an option. While some, as in Chandler's case, may rightly continue serving without any training, others drastically need coaching.

When there is an urgency to hurry up and get to work in the ministry, things often do not go well. Don't get me wrong, God remains sovereign and can work through anyone willing to serve. I'm not negating his power or call. Yet, I have seen unteachable people rush to service only to do more harm than good for the kingdom.

Sills states "If God opens the door before they actually graduate, then by all means they should follow his guidance and go." I agree, but I also have seen some vibrant newly surrendered ministers and missionaries who actually forced the door open. In these cases, undone work remains undone. 

In these cases, it's really not about seminary or continued education. It is about having a teachable and learnable spirit. 

If he hasn’t yet said, “Go now!” then get all the education you can get while you’re home.

Patience is a pain, but it's a virtue too, right? In the waiting, God prepares and provides. Seminary and theological training are not tools to cool one's passion for the gospel. It is a gift of God. We should remember that and take it to heart.

And, just as a building with the name church on it does not make it a viable option for education and worship, neither does an institution with a name college, university, or seminary mean it's a good option. That being said, I'm glad to say that as a Southern Baptist pastor, I can wholeheartedly recommend our seminaries for those called into ministry, for the furtherance of their training. I can, and do. We live in an era where quality theological training does not mean uprooting one's family and moving across the country (though it could.) Distance learning is provided by all our schools, and depending on the region one lives, most likely an off-campus site is available in a short driving distance. If not, then by all means move. As God calls, he provides.

Our SBC seminaries:

 


Why We Need the Nashville Statement & Why I Signed It

There's really nothing new in the Nashville Statement, but there is need for it.

On Tuesday morning, August 29, the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW) released a statement, signed initially by over 150 evangelical Christian leaders. Once the statement went public, it was expectedly met with both praise for its clarity and denouncements for ... well, it's clarity.

Nashville statement

I received a text last night from my friend Christopher Yuan who served as part of the team of leaders who put the statement together. Others such as Albert Mohler, John Piper, Russell Moore, Denny Burk, James Merritt, J.D. Greear, Mac Brunson, Jackie Hill Perry, H.B. Charles, Jr., Ligon Duncan, R.C. Sproul, Sam Allberry, Rosaria Butterfield, Robert Gagnon, and many others also served on the team. For many, these names may not be familiar, but for Christian leaders and pastors, most names listed here and on the website's "Signers" page, are known as men and women who risk much for the sake the Gospel, especially when confronted with changing cultural norms. 

Christopher asked if I had seen the statement and if I would sign it. I responded that I read it soon after release and while I was attempting to sign it, the website was having issues at the time. Fortunately, I was able to complete the signature last night as many others have. I'm sure the site will be updated with more names as the days go by. It seems the servers may have been a bit bogged down with the heavy viewership and attempted registrations.

The Need for Clarity

Why is there a need for this statement? Is there anything in the articles that differs from historical, biblical Christianity? The simple answer is NO, there's nothing new in the statement regarding biblical truth. Yet, as the Preamble to the statement makes clear...

Evangelical Christians at the dawn of the twenty-first century find themselves living in a period of historic transition. As Western culture has become increasingly post-Christian, it has embarked upon a massive revision of what it means to be a human being.

Cultural shifts in what is good, bad, fair, unfair, right, and wrong have led to a need for clarity among Christian leaders. This is not new for Christ's church. In all cultural settings throughout history, the church has been mandated by God to declare His truth clearly, concisely, lovingly, graciously, and without apology.

The CBMW was founded three decades ago and rightly affirmed the biblical narrative that God created man and woman in His image. The CBMW stated clearly that God designed men and women, as image-bearers of himself, to equal in personhood and human dignity, yet different from and complementary to one another. Christian husbands, as delineated in Scripture, are called to lead their homes through self-denial and sacrificial love. In addition to the home, within the church, men are called by God to be pastors in leading the church. In 1987, the CBMW released the Danvers Statement declaring belief in complementarianism.

As Ligon Duncan put so clearly...

The Nashville Statement is a complement to Danvers, but it speaks into issues of human sexuality. Danvers addresses the respective roles of men and women in the home and church. Nashville articulates the Bible’s teaching on important and disputed aspects of human sexuality. 

Clarity from the church is needed now more than ever. There are many voices in our culture (even within the church) speaking contrary "truths" or "truthisms." In such a world (as has always been the case) the church must speak Truth in love, as God's Word declares.

Albert Mohler states...

In a time of confusion, one of the greatest gifts that can be given to and by Christ’s church is clarity, and clarity requires at times that matters of truth, matters of truth in particular times of trial, should to be put into words in order to bear the testimony of that clarity. 

The Nashville Statement includes fourteen statements of belief, or articles. As with other manifesto statements such as this, there are delineated affirmations and denials. 

The statements declare God's order of creation, his intention, his unmistakable design, and order as he desires. Affirmations and denials are based on Scriptural foundations, albeit from the perspective of inerrantists (of which I am included.)

As churches seek to show the love of God clearly in grace and love to others, the clear statements of who we are in Christ and the foundational truths of Scripture provide guidelines and guardrails as others seek to bend truth or change it completely to fit better in a culture opposed to Christ.

The Push Back

Those opposed to the Nashville Statement are not declaring lack of clarity on the part of the writers. In fact, they're decrying the clarity expressed. The push back was expected. Social media, as if often the case nowadays, has become the venue for statements of disgust, disagreement, and in some cases, attacks and hateful and grotesque speech focused upon signers and the CBMW. In some cases, the comments end up devolving into statements about politics, politicians, and pastors. That's a conversation for another day, as the Nashville Statement actually does not steer into that realm.

Yet, there are esteemed individuals in our nation and in churches who are opposed to the statement. Many op-eds are appearing across news feeds this week revealing this. 

The mayor of Nashville, Megan Barry is opposed to the statement and takes umbrage at the document and the use of the name of her city. She tweeted that the Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee had created a Nashville Unites resolution in response (and opposition) to the Nashville Statement.

Denny Burk, President of the CBMW was asked why Nashville was in the name. His response here...

There is a long Christian tradition of naming doctrinal statements after the places where they were drawn up: The Nicene Creed (325), the Constantinopolitan Creed (381), the Chalcedonian Creed (451), etc. Even more recently, there was the Barmen Declaration (1934), The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978), The Danvers Statement (1987), and the Manhattan Declaration (2009). There are countless other examples. In each case, the name simply indicates where the statements were drawn up. Whether The Nashville Statement will prove to be as enduring as those others remains to be seen. But that is the reason for the name. We were simply following a precedent set by many before us.

Reverend James Martin, SJ, has written a perspective piece in The Washington Post in opposition to the Nashville Statement

Stories on Fox News, CNN, The Huffington Post, NBC News, and other news agencies have revealed opposition to the Nashville Statement and even declared "Woe to you" to the signers.

Mark Silk, writing for Religion News Service, disagrees with the Statements biblical assertions and declares...

But as a devotee of the Free Exercise Clause I say: Go for it, guys. If that old-time heteronormativity is the hill you want evangelical Christianity to die on, be my guest.

Clearly the culture and the church-at-large is divided on the issue of human sexuality - more now than ever. I share these statements as a point of clarity. While I disagree with those who disagree with the statement, it behooves us to at least read their reasoning. My convictions and affirmation of the Nashville Statement remains.

Why I Signed

I signed the Nashville Statement for the same reasons others have. I do believe the church has the responsibility of clarity regarding biblical teaching in all areas and that includes human identity and gender/sexuality issues. 

Of all the articles, it is number 10 that seems to be getting the most opposition through social media postings.

Article 10

WE AFFIRM that it is sinful to approve of homosexual immorality or transgenderism and that such approval constitutes an essential departure from Christian faithfulness and witness.

WE DENY that the approval of homosexual immorality or transgenderism is a matter of moral indifference about which otherwise faithful Christians should agree to disagree.

At first, the statements seem as reactionary to the shifts in cultural and legal acceptance of same-sex marriage. As days go by and the continued shifts in the moral revolution are revealed, it becomes clear (again that clarity) that same-sex marriage is not the ultimate issue. There's a deeper discussion regarding identity at stake. 

As a Christian, pastor, husband, and father, the reality of all that led to the declarations of the Nashville Statement is more than just some story about people "out there." This is about family. This is about the church family. This is about our community. This is ultimately about the Gospel.

Some who agree with the verbiage of the statement may actually not sign, believing that as Christians they should not take a stand on these issues. I fear the reality that many grew up with in our culture that allowed personal conviction to remain hidden will soon be stripped away. No pastor, no Christian leader, in fact, no Christian will be able to stay silent (one way or the other) regarding personal stance on the issues of marriage, sexuality, gender identity, and humanity as image-bearers. 

These questions are present within each church's congregation. If your church has any number of people (I'd say over five) in the congregation, you have someone either related, friends with, co-worker of, or in the sanctuary struggling with these issues. The church cannot be silent.

Culture may declare that "Love is love" but biblically, we must remember that God is love and that has never changed. He defines and reveals the agape love that redeems through Christ. 


Holy Hand Grenades and the Unfortunate Result of Empty Christian Debates

I addressed this reality a bit during last Sunday's sermon. We all know people who just love to debate.  If you're a Christian who attends church regularly and are part of a small group or Sunday school class, you probably have someone in mind right now. Just about every group has "that guy." You know, it is the one who responds to every statement with a confused look and a question, perhaps complete with a raised eyebrow. It starts with "Really?!? Is that right?" (You may be picturing Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson right now with his eyebrow up, staring you down.)

Questions are not to be feared and rightly dividing the Word of God is needed. Christians should be able to as questions honestly. They should also dig deeply into God's Word in prayer for biblically sound answers. This fact is not to be debated.

Outside the evangelical sub-culture that many western Christians now live, there are vast debates being raged. The battle of world views is in full swing. Just turn on television and spend about five minutes on one of the cable news channels, or better yet, give ESPN a look. Entertainment disguised as reporting often ends with a group of frenemies yelling (or at least speaking loudly) at each other attempting to sway opinions. Then, the show ends, the masquerade ceases, and the hosts go get dinner together.

At least that's how I imagine it happens.

In the Christian sub-culture, debates rage as well. My comments from Sunday...

When world views collide, debate often occurs. This may be in the Sunday school class, at the dinner table, on Facebook, through text message, or in varied other ways. There are good and valuable debates and discussions that we as Christians must be prepared to enter into. These cannot be ignored. To do so is to sin in our calling as light and salt.

Yet, there are debates as well that exist solely to fill time, celebrate pontification, and ignore issues that truly matter.

Just by logging into my computer at work this morning, I see it happening. Social media blows up with another shared story questioning how certain churches can justify doing certain things. The questions are not even wrong, but the format or venue for the questions lead to some unforeseen damage. Questions about the holiness of "so-called Christians" end up in comment sections. Holy hand grenades have the pins pulled and then are launched over the berm into the flatlands of social media. BOOM, the show is on. And the world pulls up a chair just to watch. Truth is declared, but slides into the background as the self-appointed "Debate Team" begins to emphasize items that do more to push people away from Christ than declare his glory. Reminds me of Sunday's message focus on the Pharisees who were so caught up in the washing of hands that they totally missed the cleansing of heart that is needed by all. (Sermon Audio and Notes Here.)

33871757814_a3d302ea54_b
Photo credit: Diari La Veu - http://diarilaveu.com via VisualHunt / CC BY-NC-SA

But, at least you win the debate, right?

Christians must always be prepared to contend for the faith with boldness.

Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. Jude 3 (ESV)

To be clear, I am not shying away from declaring biblical truth in all venues, physical and virtual, and at all times, whether in person or on social media, but sometimes, I fear, we (well-meaning Christians) begin throwing these grenades in order to position ourselves to declare our own versions of righteousness. When self-righteousness and "holier than thou attitudes" are all that's left when the fog settles, the Gospel is not only ignored, but no where to be found. We, as Christians, must push against the idolatry of self that leads to an "appearance of godliness" but avoiding the glory of God and his power.

Truth spoken (or posted) in love for God and His image-bearers is not akin to truth spoken in arrogance.  (TWEET THIS)

And, if you're bold in your faith at the keyboard, you'd best be bold in person as well. Yet again, boldness is not a synonym for arrogance and self-righteousness. Be careful. I have to continually remind myself of this.

Speak the truth in love. 

Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and held together by every joint with which it is equipped, when each part is working properly, makes the body grow so that it builds itself up in love. Ephesians 4:15-16 (ESV)

Don't get caught in the trap of majoring on the minors and falsely believe you are victorious just because you "win" a debate on matters that do not have eternal focus. Don't celebrate yelling in the synagogue and miss your opportunity to engage on Mars Hill.

 


"I Take That Back" - Eugene Peterson's Retraction

Once again social media reacts (maybe with some responses) regarding statements made by a Christian leader. Yesterday, the buzz centered on Eugene Peterson's interview with Jonathan Merritt of Religion News Services and his stated affirmation regarding same-sex marriage.

Today, Peterson retracts his statements (Full article here.) He stated:

Peterson

Recently a reporter asked me whether my personal opinions about homosexuality and same-sex marriage have changed over the years. I presume I was asked this question because of my former career as a pastor in the Presbyterian Church (USA), which recently affirmed homosexuality and began allowing its clergy to perform same-sex weddings. Having retired from the pastorate more than 25 years ago, I acknowledged to the reporter that I “haven’t had a lot of experience with it.”

To clarify, I affirm a biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman. I affirm a biblical view of everything.

It is difficult to retract statements made on controversial subjects, but we have all said things that after further thought were regretted and retracted. 

I am glad Peterson has made this statement. These are good words, yet notably there remain some questions. 

Many shared discouragement, yet continued love, of Peterson based on his statements yesterday. Today, many of those who were saddened find some solace (though still questions) regarding his retraction. 

Of course, this means that those who celebrated his pro-same-sex marriage statements yesterday have now jumped over to lambasting him for his seeming flip-flop on the issue.

Some have questioned whether LifeWay's threat to remove his printed materials from their bookstores impacted this retraction. While it could be true, I stand by my statement in yesterday's posting that I doubted that would impact him personally regarding his stance.

Retractions are interesting, especially those like Peterson's. They seem like the corrections offered in newspapers found hidden on page 12 that reference the previous day's front page headline.

Cynicism is not a spiritual gift, though I often display it. In this case, I seek not to be the cynic and will take Peterson at his quoted word.

To clarify, I affirm a biblical view of marriage: one man to one woman. I affirm a biblical view of everything.

If nothing else, these stories have reminded us of the continued challenges in our culture as worldviews collide.


Eugene Peterson's Disappointing Message of Affirmation

In the Christian corner of the Twitterverse and blogosphere, there's a bit of a disruption today. Author and pastor Eugene Peterson, in an interview with Jonathan Merritt for Religion News Service shared his current views affirming homosexuality and same-sex marriage in particular. Here's his answer when asked by Merritt on his position:

I wouldn’t have said this 20 years ago, but now I know a lot of people who are gay and lesbian and they seem to have as good a spiritual life as I do. I think that kind of debate about lesbians and gays might be over. People who disapprove of it, they’ll probably just go to another church. So we’re in a transition and I think it’s a transition for the best, for the good. I don’t think it’s something that you can parade, but it’s not a right or wrong thing as far as I’m concerned.

Peterson, most widely known for his paraphrase of the Bible titled The Message, as well as numerous other books such as A Long Obedience in the Same Direction and As Kingfishers Catch Fire has publicly made known his views on perhaps the most divisive and controversial of topics in America and especially the church today.

TheMessage

This should not be totally shocking for those who have read or follow Peterson. He served as pastor in the Presbyterian Church (USA) in the past, most notably Christ Our King Presbyterian in Bel Air, MD which, like others in the PCUSA have affirmed homosexuality and same-sex marriage. The PCUSA endorsed same-sex marriage in 2015. Not all pastors and members of PCUSA churches agree with the endorsement. Many have since left the denomination and I know of one pastor in our region who was forced to leave for not affirming homosexuality. Nevertheless, based on Peterson's statement, it appears he is lining up with the denomination's leaders and others who have stepped away from a biblical worldview on manhood, womanhood, and sexuality.

Peterson drew concern from many who have enjoyed his writings (and to be clear, he is an incredibly gifted writer) when he endorsed Rob Bell's controversial book Love Wins in 2011. Bell's revelations in his book moved him from orthodox Christianity when he disavowed the centrality of the Gospel and Christ as the only way to salvation, not to mention the existence of hell. Peterson stated at the time that while he didn't agree with Bell, he endorsed his work because he valued the conversation. While I agree that conversing about differing beliefs is valid and should occur, to endorse a book that, in my opinion, is heretical was too far. When Peterson was asked "Do evangelicals need to reexamine our doctrines of hell and damnation?" He replied:

Yes, I guess I do think they ought to reexamine.  They ought to be a good bit more biblical, not taking things out of context. But the people who are against Rob Bell are not going to reexamine anything.  They have a litmus test for who is a Christian and who is not.  But that’s not what it means to live in community.

The answer he gave then (2011) was broad and sought to be non-offensive. I agree that our answers ought to be a good bit more biblical and correct in context. Yet the eyebrows were raised and today, once more, a shift from biblical truth has been revealed.

It's easy for Christians to just "throw under the bus" those with whom we disagree. There are way too many blogs out there focused on dividing the church and built on sensational negativism. My desire is not to fan the flames of divisiveness, but to reveal once more how the cultural revolution and anti-biblical worldviews subtly, at times, seep into the church and Christianity.

You will find articles, tweets, and postings from conservative evangelicals over the years affirming some of Peterson's writings. As stated before, he truly has a gift of creativity through writing. It was today when many of these same individuals stated their disappointment in Peterson's newly revealed stance.

Peterson had stated he was stepping away from the public eye and would no longer be authoring books. Then, in the second portion of Merritt's interview, he reveals his stance on human sexuality.

Will this affect his book sales? Yes, likely. However, I don't think he really cares. His publisher may, but he likely does not. That's not a shot - just an opinion. I do think some at NavPress may be working on damage control, but it likely won't help.

LifeWay has announced that once he affirms the statements given in the interview, they will be removing his resources from their stores. This is exactly what they did with Jen Hatmaker's resources for the very same reason. The consistency is laudable and I agree with the decision.

In the interview, Merritt speaks of a day when Peterson will no longer exist. I think a poor choice of words was utilized by Merritt. This has been addressed by others, most notably Denny Burk here.

I am disappointed in Peterson's assertion regarding homosexuality and same-sex marriage.

Does this mean I won't be buying any Peterson books?

Well, yes, but I wasn't really buying his books anyway.

Does this mean I will not use The Message in my study or preaching?

I will not. However, I never did. The Message is not a translation. It's a paraphrase and while some of the modern-day wording is interesting and offers an unique spin on the inerrant, it is not a translation and should not be used as such. Just as The Living Bible should not be, in my opinion, the Bible for study or preaching.

Why blog about this?

I have sought to be cordial and not mean-spirited in this posting. I hope I have accomplished that. Nevertheless, some will categorize me a "hater" once again. Peterson is a pastor. He is speaking on a deeply important theological, and cultural issue. To be clear, all cultural issues are theological.

The sinfulness of humanity is common to all. The arguments regarding the affirmation of homosexuality as a lifestyle are getting louder. Some in the church are abandoning biblical truth for cultural acceptance and the current state of "fairness." Nevertheless, the truth remains. God has not changed regarding the sinful nature of humanity and the need for redemption. That's the radical message of the Gospel. 

Some Christians seek to avoid this issue, mostly because friends and family members identify as LGBT. Yet, that is a weak excuse. I speak as one with a dear family member who identifies as such. To ignore the issue is to silently affirm the sin.

Denny Burk said it so well in his response today:

To say that Peterson's justification for same-sex relationships is really thin would be an understatement. His is not an argument based on Scripture. Rather, it's an argument based on sentiment. He says that he's known some nice gay people, therefore he now discards the moral consensus of the entire 2,000-year history of the Christian church. This is not pastoral wisdom. It's folly of the first order.

I agree with Burk. Pastoral responsibility leads me to clearly state that Peterson's affirmation of homosexuality and same-sex marriage (just as with Hatmaker's and others who have made such statements) is wrong, unbiblical, and sinful. Words matter and Peterson is a wonderful wordsmith. I just wish his words weren't so very damaging.


Superheroes on Mars Hill - Engaging the Comic-Con Culture With the Gospel

So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription: ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you." Acts 17:22-23 (ESV)

The story of Paul's engagement at the Areopagus, or Mars Hill, reminds us that the message of the Gospel is not just to be held privately, but strategically taken to those in need of redemption through Jesus Christ.

While there have been many advancements regarding technology and industry in the centuries since Paul spoke to these ancient people near Athens, not much has truly changed. Humanity remains depraved and in need of rescue and redemption. The Gospel remains true. God's church continues to move forward under the mandate of the Great Commission as we go through life to engage others with the message of truth.

Comic Books and Superheroes

When I was a boy, I loved reading and collecting comic books. When I had saved up enough change (from that quarter a week allowance) I would ask my parents to stop by the 7-Eleven on the way home from church in Montgomery, Alabama so I could peruse the comic book stand for the latest issues featuring my favorite heroes. This was no comic book shop. There were no plastic bags with acid-free boards for storing the magazines. The rack was metal, spun, and sat near the door.  Most of the comic books were bent as children like me would bend them down to see which issues were hidden behind. I remember when they were 25 cents, then 30 cents and 35 cents and then "Still Only 35 cents." I normally would go home with two or three issues. These would be read numerous times and added to the stack I was accumulating.

Of course, like most people my age, I would get the first issues of new comics hoping that one day they would be worth thousands of dollars like the first "Action Comics" and "Batman" issues of old. Nevertheless, most of the magazines my generation bought were stored safely and because our parents didn't throw them out like those from previous generations, we now have a plethora of books that are "Fabulous First Issues" which aren't worth much because supply (in those plastic sleeves in cardboard boxes) is so high.

8015843393_6701ed8039_b
Photo credit: Sam Howzit via VisualHunt.com / CC BY

Resurgence of Superheroes in Comic Books

In case you haven't noticed, after a time when comic book sales tanked and superhero films and television shows seemed to be fading, a renewal of interest in these heroes with powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal man has occurred. 

The Golden Age (1936 - early 1950s)

Since the Golden Age of comics (1936 - early 1950s,) heroes with brightly-colored spandex have attracted the interest of children and teenagers. During the 1940s, superhero comic interest waned. Magazine publishers began to produce books with different themes such as westerns, romance, science fiction, crime, and horror. In fact, many superhero titles were cancelled at this time. Of the dozens produced in the early 1940s, the only ones featuring superheroes to continue production by DC (the industry leader at the time) through the decade were Action Comics, Adventure Comics, Detective Comics, Batman, Superboy, Superman, Wonder Woman, and World's Finest Comics.

5690970467_349b246448_z
Photo credit: Terry McCombs via VisualHunt.com / CC BY-NC

The Silver Age (1956 - 1970)

Many changes took place in the world of comic books following the Golden Age. Controversy developed over the alleged connection between comic book themes and juvenile delinquency. In 1954, the comic publishers implemented a self-regulated Comics Code Authority and a shift from crime and horror themes led to a reintroduction of superheroes. The introduction of a new Flash from DC Comics launched this era and soon upstart Marvel Comics launched the Fantastic Four and a new wave of fans was born.

7887317012_0bd2a7bb8b
Photo credit: Michael Vance1 via Visual Hunt / CC BY-NC-SA

The Bronze Age (1970 - 1985)

This next age of comic book production moved Marvel Comics to the forefront. It was during this time I was collecting those books sold at the 7-Eleven. While many of the mainstay heroes remained, newer ones were introduced and a return to darker plot lines emerged (e.g. racism, alcoholism, drug abuse, urban poverty, pollution, etc.). Many of the heroes introduced in this era became the models for newer television shows like "The Incredible Hulk," "Wonder Woman," and "Spider-Man" and movies like the Christopher Reeve helmed "Superman: The Movie" and Michael Keaton's "Batman."

6954733666_f1a3c17ceb_z
Photo credit: Brian Wilkins via Visualhunt.com / CC BY-NC

The Modern Age (1985 - present)

As generations shift, so too do the heroes they admire. While comic sales dropped, new business models were implemented. Character licensing was sold and plans for new films have been made. It is during this era when many comic book characters were redesigned, creators gained ownership of characters through independent comics, and publishing houses became more commercialized.

Some call this the Dark Age of Comics due to the influence of writers and artists like Frank Miller and Alan Moore. Anti-heroes (like Deadpool, the Punisher, and even Batman) became more popular.

3944029615_5430dd451f_z
Photo credit: Asbestos Bill via Visualhunt / CC BY

The Cinematic Universes

When Christopher Reeve first put on the blue tights and red "S" a new era of marketing comic book heroes developed. The "Superman" movie from the late 1970s stated that fans "would believe a man could fly" and based on ticket sales, they did. When Tim Burton introduced a darker "Batman" to the big screen in the 1980s, many fans thought it would fail, primarily because Michael Keaton was cast as Bruce Wayne/Batman and the campiness of Adam West's Caped Crusader was the prominent screen image known. When Burton's film became a hit, it seemed like superhero movies would soon take over the multiplex. Nevertheless, sequels didn't fare as well and other films like Dolph Lundgren's "The Punisher" and David Hasselhoff's "Nick Fury: Agent of S.H.I.E.L.D." proved that Hollywood hadn't quite figured out how to move the comic heroes en masse to the big screen.

Then Tobey Maguire became Spider-Man and soon thereafter Christian Bale moved under the cowl of the Dark Knight and, as they say...the rest is history.

Marvel and DC have created effective (at least financially) cinematic universes that have proven to connect with audiences.

33628362851_d96e8de340_z
Photo credit: junaidrao via VisualHunt.com / CC BY-NC-ND
33313992044_49c1ae32bc_b
Photo credit: junaidrao via Visual Hunt / CC BY-NC-ND

More Than a Weak Sermon Series Theme

Apparently there are many fans of superheroes in our communities. These run the gamut from stereotypical fanboy or fangirl who knows intricate details of multiverses to the casual fan who just saw Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and watches Sheldon and Leonard on "The Big Bang Theory."

In recent years, with attempts to capitalize on pop culture with catchy themes, some have preached sermons or themed kids events at churches with pseudo-superhero concepts. I'm guilty of having done this in the past, but the truth is as Dr. Timothy Paul Jones stated in a blog post from earlier this year:

For many Christians, the temptation seems to be to engage in what I would identify as a “thin reading” of these cultural artifacts (comic books and superhero films,) hunting for surface-level connections between the Bible and our favorite superhero tales. Pastors who become caught up in such thin readings may construct entire sermon series out of the latest films or feel compelled to drop references to movies into their messages—all to achieve a perceived sense of relevance by linking Scripture to culture. This is not authentic cultural engagement, however. In most instances, it’s closer to uncritical cultural appropriation. Full-fledged Christian engagement with the culture digs deeper than surface-level links and wrestles with the conflicting worldviews that undergird these artistic artifacts.

Jones' article goes deeper and is well worth your read. Read it here.

Engaging on Mars Hill

What is it about these heroes that not only connects generations and draws fans, but gathers groups together at Comic-Con and movie premieres? The religious undertones are not always subtle and the fact that most early superheroes such as Superman were rooted in Judaism (ever wondered why his name is Kal-El?) reveals many Old Testament themes woven into the histories, especially from the Golden Age. 

Yet, even anti-religious sentiment and humanistic worldviews aside, there is a sense, for the most part of good, evil, truth, justice, and other such things that at the core are religious concepts.

Many of the fictional heroes and heroines either find their root in Greek and Roman mythology or at a minimum are influenced by some of these types of stories. It is my contention that the culturally popular fictional heroes are not much different than the false gods and goddesses worshipped and adored by the ancient people of Paul's day.

Paul engaged those who were far from God strategically. He went to Mars Hill for this purpose. He did not remain silent, but talked intelligently and not condescendingly to those in the crowd. 

What If?

After reading numerous articles and studying God's Word on living sent as his church to a lost and dying world, I thought of Dr. Jones' postings about worldviews as revealed in comic books and the cinematic universes of Marvel and DC.

What if the church engaged this affinity group through story-telling in ways that centers on the Scripture and the Gospel? What if rather than just continuing to add programs and events to reach the already reached, we went to this "Mars Hill" in our culture today? I have talked to a few teenagers specifically about this. Some attend church, but always seem to be on the fringes. Others have no place for church in their lives and basically have denied or ignored the message of the Gospel. I asked if they would consider joining me for a study called "The Meta-narrative of the Gospel as Revealed in the Marvel and DC Cinematic Universes?" Yeah - that's what I named it, based on Dr. Jones' articles. However, I may shorten it to "Superhero Sunday Nights."

Their interest was piqued.

I asked, "Do you have any friends who may be interested in something like this?" 

The answer was yes and they began to rattle off names of students I do not know. Most have no connection with a church and no relationship (or desire for a relationship) with Christ.

I am not sure what this will even look like - The Big Bang Theory meets the Bible? I hope more than that. It's just that we (the church) have done much over the decades to connect with students through affinities like athletics, drama and theater, dance, and music, but I have yet to hear of an intentionally evangelistic effort (more than a gimmick event) that seeks to connect with those whom many categorize as nerds and geeks, but most likely think deeply and love and understand the intricacies of story. Ultimately, the Story is what they need.

Some will mock. Some will ignore. Yet, I believe some will be drawn by God to Himself. It's been done before.

Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, “We will hear you again about this.” So Paul went out from their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them. Acts 17:32-34 (ESV)

 


Steve Gaines to Nominate J.D. Greear for SBC President in 2018 - That's How I Heard It

The Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting concluded yesterday with quite a bit of public media attention and continued talk of what is next in the SBC.

Steve Gaines, Pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church in Cordova, Tennessee was reelected for a one-year term as President. He has done a fine job in leading our denomination this past year, and especially through a challenging annual meeting.

I am thankful for his leadership and service to our convention, not just this year but in years prior. I will continue praying for him as he remains on the national stage, not only as pastor of a significant church in our denomination, but as our President this next year.

Last Year's SBC Election

If  you remember the SBC Annual Meeting in 20116 that took place in St. Louis, there was quite a bit more drama regarding the presidential election of the denomination. Of those nominated, a virtual tie resulted between Pastor Gaines and Pastor J.D. Greear of Summit Church in North Carolina. Messengers were scrambling to get back into the meeting room for ensuing votes and rather than a sense of unity among messengers, a growing sense of division was developing.

I was unable to attend that meeting in St. Louis, but was watching online via livestream. Based on tweets from friends and messengers and conversations with those in the convention center, the feelings of disunity were growing.

The Meeting Between Gaines and Greear

It has been shared numerous times, and once more this year at a Baptist 21 Luncheon on Monday. At seemingly the exact same time, in two different locations as these men prayed alone and with family, they each decided to recuse themselves from the election - allowing the other to win the nomination. 

Dr. Danny Akin, President of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary shares that he was in the room when the men met together. Dr. Gaines shared he would be stepping away from the nomination and allow Dr. Greear to be nominated. Greear responded with appreciation and the instruction that Gaines could not do that because he had come to the same conclusion and would recuse himself.

This moment that would not have happened in our denomination about three decades ago between nominees was vital, inspiring, and needed.

J.D. Greear stepped out of the race and Steve Gaines won the presidency of the SBC in an amazing moment of unity before our messengers, our churches, and the watching world.

God's timing is always perfect and this has proved to be true once more.

Unity Is a Continual Challenge

To be unified is challenging. It takes strength and focus to remain together for the sake of a cause. In this case, the cause is the most vital in the world - the Gospel. We just experienced an attempt from our enemy to divide our churches at this year's SBC meeting. (Read about that here and here.) 

The Baptist 21 Meeting This Year

In the Baptist 21 meeting on Monday much was discussed about the current status of the SBC. This meeting took place a day prior to the resolution issues regarding the Alt-Right and racism, so that discussion was not center stage, yet. Nevertheless a candid discussion on numerous issues where culture and faith intersect occurred. The discussions featuring a panel discussion with Steve Gaines, Albert Mohler, Danny  Akin, Russell Moore, J.D. Greear, Matt Chandler, Kevin Smith, and Jedidiah Coppenger. At one point the moderator, Coppenger, asked about unity and last year's SBC presidential situation.

IMG_2816
L-R: Gaines, Mohler, Akin, Moore, Greear, Chandler, Smith, Coppenger

As the discussion and recounting of the events of last year were covered, Dr. Gaines mentioned that he would be excited to nominate J.D. Greear as President of the SBC in Dallas in 2018. 

I heard him say this and thought "Wow! This is a huge step for our convention."

There is obviously no animosity between Gaines and Greear. For Dr. Gaines to proclaim his desire to nominate Greear next year stated clearly to those in the room and no doubt other Southern Baptists who have grown accustomed to seeing Baptists divided, that we are unified for a larger cause than self.

I look forward to an official announcement to come, likely early next year regarding Greear's nomination. As far as I know, Greear has not stated whether or not he will run again, but I believe he would serve the SBC well.

Our Southern Baptist family is just that - family. Our Heavenly Father has chosen to use us for His glory and we graciously move forward unified in the Gospel. 


Southern Baptist Vote on the Alt-Right & Racism Overwhelmingly Passes - Now What?

The 2017 Southern Baptist Convention Annual Meeting has ended. The second day of our annual gathering traditionally has welcomed less-than large crowds following lunch. In recent years, required business, for the most part, was completed during Tuesday gatherings. Wednesday has been the time for one last opportunity for unfinished business (normally, not newsworthy outside the SBC) and reports from LifeWay Christian Resources and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. Of course, those reports with required time for questions have, at times, elicited some interesting sound bytes.

This year was different.

Following lunch, as I previously posted, our SBC messengers were given the opportunity to vote on a resolution regarding a denunciation of the Alt-Right and white supremacist movements. (CLICK HERE TO READ MY PREVIOUS POST EXPLAINING THIS.)

The New Resolution

The wording of the previously declined resolution was reworked and made more clear. Copies were made available digitally through the SBC Annual Meeting app, and online while printed copies were available at the doors for all messengers. A copy of the document is available here:  Download Resolution 10

The "resolved" sections are stated clearly...

Screenshot 2017-06-14 18.35.13Barrett Duke, Chairman of the Resolutions Committee and Executive Director of the Montana Southern Baptist Convention, spoke to the resolution. His clarity and transparency was welcome. As the entire committee stood with him, an apology was offered for not recognizing the need to allow messengers to vote on the resolution. Reasoning for initial declination was described in my previous post as well. Duke then clearly and loudly proclaimed that everyone on the committee stood firmly against the motives and declarations of the Alt-Right movement, white supremacy, and all forms of racism.

LO-SBC17_060_vp_web
Barrett Duke, chairman of the Southern Baptist Convention Committee on Resolutions, speaks during the SBC annual meeting June 13 at the Phoenix Convention Center. Photo by Van Payne

 

The committee apologized.

That is no small thing.

We have a wonderful denomination. We are family. I have been part of an SBC church since the womb. I love our denomination, and yet, since we're human, we know that we mess up at times. Even seeking to live in Christ, follow the Word and have ears to hear and eyes to see ... we sometimes (more often than we'd like) mess up and sin. 

And like family, when we do, we confess. 

At that confession and repentance, forgiveness is offered. 

This is truly the Gospel at work in the lives of God's people.

What's so challenging is that we are gathering here in Phoenix having a family meeting with the entire world watching via social media, livestream, or news media stories. It's like we're on an episode of Big Brother, but a moral version, with much more at stake.

The Question

Following Barrett's recommendation for the resolution to be passed, the floor was open for questions. There were a few. One focused on amending the proposal by editing just a few words in the "Resolved" section. The wording recommended clarified the enemy's tactics of deceit and the Resolutions Committee took it as a friendly amendment and the floor voted overwhelmingly for the amendment.

Another question sought to amend the resolution by adding to it other aspects of racial division present in the US. This was ruled out of order due to the fact it was actually worded as an additional motion and not an amendment.

Dr. Russell Moore spoke from the floor, not as President of the ERLC, but as a messenger from his home church. His statement was strongly worded and clear. The opening of his statement addressed that the resolution had a number on our list of resolutions of ten. That was a fact and the crowd waited to hear where he was going with this. Then he stated, "The Alt-Right and white supremacist movement has a number, too. It's 666." And at that, the room knew. 

Well said, Dr. Moore!

Finally, one more comment from the floor strongly seeking the committee to reject any other added amendments that would ultimately weaken the wording of the resolution with concern that a weak document would express the opposite message to non-white brothers and sisters about our seriousness regarding racism.

The questioning time ended.

The SBC Votes "YES" on Resolution 10

As SBC President Steve Gaines called for the vote, he asked messengers who wished to affirm the adoption of Resolution 10, he asked for all in favor to raise their ballots. The scene was beautiful as hundreds of green ballots in an overwhelmingly positive vote made clear that despite our family's sordid past, and even our founding as a denomination, regarding race relations, we would stand firmly upon God's Word, declaring His love and ultimately our love, for all peoples regardless of race, skin tone, or cultural background.

LO-SBC17_090_pb_web
Photo by Philip Bethancourt

Was It Too Little, Too Late?

I guess time will tell, for some. Ultimately, it is never too late to do the right thing. Through God's grace and providence he led us to agree with Him in this defining moment. This moment declares that political ideology does not drive our biblical theology.

In this moment, we acknowledge our dependance on God for guidance, for insight, for wisdom, and for life.

This moment reminds us that the sins of our ancestors do not define us. The sins of our churches are forgivable. The sins of just a day prior can be eradicated by the grace and forgiveness of Christ.

Some will say that our mechanism of voting and revisiting the vote means that we truly didn't mean what we ended up saying. That simply isn't true. Our final vote was clear. Our family (SBCers) were united to ensure we ended this issue (of the resolution) well.

Should we have voted on Tuesday? In retrospect - yes. Hindsight is always 20/20. 

Thank God we didn't leave the issue undone. Thank God the initial discussion was on Tuesday so that we could resolve this on Wednesday. Otherwise, it would still be hanging over us as we await next summer's Annual Meeting.

Some have and will say that our vote in the affirmative was prompted by media and social media outrage. 

It would be disingenuous to state that no one in the room heard or read what was being said. God has used numerous things, people, organizations, and circumstances throughout history to get the attention of his children. The Minor Prophets declare many ungodly things, nations, and people used by God for His glory. 

I actually thank God that we were listening.

Yet, rest assured, the SBC did NOT vote in affirmative to decry the motives and beliefs of the Alt-Right and white supremacists solely because Twitter prompted us to do so and because it was the politically correct thing to do.

The ultimate vote was yes because it was and is right. 

Racism is evil. It is demonic. It is divisive. It flies in the face of the Gospel. We believed this before our meeting. We believed it during our meeting. We voted on a resolution we likely never thought we would have to vote on to declare it even more clearly.

There are likely many churches and pastors who will be having to address angry church members who either don't fully understand the depth of the issue, or who could be wrongly racially motivated and in need of forgiveness. Our churches are varied and in diverse locations. No two SBC churches are identical, believe me.

I pray that our churches will be eradicated of racism within the pew and if need be, in the pulpit. My prayer is that the Spirit of God will convict and transform those who have either been excusing this sin or just now realize they are knee-deep within it. Apart from transformation, I pray that biblical churches will do what many have never done and enact biblical discipline upon those who remain unrepentant in this area.

Some of our pastors may feel they're standing alone when they meet with their membership on Sunday. Remember, pastor ... you are not alone. Ever. 

Now What?

A resolution was passed. This is good.

Racism remains in our world. This is a reality and still very bad.

The mission remains. Nothing has changed for the church but the conversation. And this is a big change. This generation of pastors and church members is being led into a dialogue that has been ignored by too many for too long. Older members of our churches, both black and white, have memories of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. Churches in the South were segregated, just like everything else. For many of our older brothers and sisters, these are memories. 

For the younger generations (50 and younger) these are history stories. 

Maybe we fooled ourselves into thinking that since we have come so far regarding race relations in our nation that we had completed the task? Rest assured, based on what we have seen in our nation over the past few years, no one could rightly say we have arrived.

There is much work to do.

Racial reconciliation remains on the table and will for years, likely. The church, and in our case, the SBC churches, acknowledge the stains in our history, but must resolve (no pun intended) to not be defined by them.

The work to be done by the church to bring healing will not be done through political movements. That which must happen to unify Christians will not occur simply through a resolution. Presuming to understand fully the plight of another race is insulting and impossible. In other words, as a white man for me to tell my black brother "Oh I understand what you go through" is demeaning and wrong. Yet, there is hope.

Not Too Late Because There Is Hope

Through Christ forgiveness occurs.

Through Christ healing happens.

Through Christ, the church prevails.

We had just better remain humbly focused on Christ.

God led us this week in Phoenix. He brought our denomination to the river (in a desert no less) and directed us to trust Him as we stepped in. 

We stepped in and with him we will remain secure as we walk together through the waters ahead.


No, Senator Sanders - You Do Not Understand

While most of America was watching, or at least aware, of the Senate hearing last week featuring former FBI Director James Comey, there was another hearing taking place in Washington DC that flew under the radar for the most part. This other hearing potentially may impact more Americans long-term than anything coming from the Comey hearings.

The event was a confirmation hearing for an executive level position in the Office of Management and Budget. That alone is why this hearing did not garner news media attention. It was a simple hearing that in most years would not be newsworthy, but basically a formality. Yet, that is far from the case this time.

Russell Vought had been nominated by President Trump to serve in this position. Of those on the Senate panel interviewing Mr. Vought were Senator Bernie Sanders, I-Vt, who last year ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic Party nomination for President, and Senator Van Hollen Jr., D-Md. 

Bernie Sanders burst onto the national scene last year, after decades of public service, as an alternative to Hillary Clinton. His brash, pro-socialist agenda resonated with many, especially young adults. College and university campuses welcomed Senator Sanders and young men and women who were looking forward to participating in their first presidential election "felt the Bern" and lined up behind him and his message. Nevertheless, Mrs. Clinton bested Sanders in the race and many young Democrats have since expressed their frustration that Sanders did not win. Thus is American politics.

5748719435_22206095ca_z
Photo credit: Randy Bayne via VisualHunt.com / CC BY-NC-ND

Sanders has been described as a Jewish agnostic based on his heritage and self-proclaimed status as "not particularly religious." Hollen's political stances have consistently fallen on the far left of the American political spectrum. He has often made public statements condemning anti-Semitism and has gone on record with statements affirming the religious freedom of people around the world. On September 15, 2011, he declared this on record:

Around the world, millions of people suffer persecution merely because they practice a different religion than other people around them. No one should be made to feel that the practice of their religion is a crime or a source of shame. Such persecution violates their inalienable human right to practice the religion of their own choosing and promotes political instability.

Despite the well stated affirmation for religious freedom, Senator Hollen along with Senator Sanders, have now gone on record to declare Christianity a religion to be condemned, freedom be damned.

What Happened?

Russell Vought, the nominee of the President, is an evangelical Christian who graduated from Wheaton College. Wheaton is a solid, evangelical college with a clear statement of faith and biblical worldview. Last year, the college came under scrutiny when they parted ways with a professor who made spurious claims that Muslims and Christians are both people of the book and then quoted Pope Francis by affirming that "we worship the same God.” These statements stand in contradiction to biblical truth and the statement of faith held by evangelical Christians and Wheaton College. 

Mr. Vought, as an alum of Wheaton, defended his alma mater's statement of faith and wrote an article for the conservative website The Resurgent regarding this.

Vought clearly declares the authority of Scripture and salvation through Christ alone. This quote from Vought's article was the element brought to the table by Senator Sanders:

Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned.

It is doubtful that Senator Sanders regularly reads The Resurgent, but props to his staff who, in the current world of political divide, found this nugget to offer their boss. 

Standing Condemned

Senator Sanders landed on this statement of condemnation and made claims that should cause every American, not just religious Americans, to take note:

"In my view, the statement made by Mr. Vought is indefensible, it is hateful, it is Islamophobic, and it is an insult to over a billion Muslims throughout the world. This country, since its inception, has struggled, sometimes with great pain, to overcome discrimination of all forms ... we must not go backwards."

It is true that as a nation, we have struggled to overcome discrimination. Yet, in the following comments, if you can peer between the political buzzwords and Twitter-worthy statements, you will discover a revealed discrimination that is growing.

Sanders asked Vought if he considered his statement about Jesus to be "Islamophobic." Vought began to respond with "I am a Christian..." but before he could go any further, he was interrupted by Sanders who asked if Jews were also condemned because they reject Jesus. 

When Vought began to answer Senator Sanders, he said "I am a Christian..." but was once again interrupted by the Senator.

I understand you’re a Christian. But this country is made of people, not just… I understand Christianity is a majority religion, but the people of other religions in this country and around the world believe in their judgement that people convicted of non-Christians?”

Senator Hollen quoted from Vought's article, saying:

"I think it is irrefutable that these kinds of comments suggest to a whole lot of Americans that, number one ... you are condemning people of all faiths. I'm a Christian, but part of being a Christian in my view is recognizing that there are lots of ways that people can pursue their God ... It's your comments that suggest a violation of the public trust in what will be a very important position."

Ultimately, these push backs may be as much against the President who nominated Mr. Vought as to Mr. Vought himself. Nevertheless, the positioning is clear. Biblical Christianity is condemned by the culture while seeking to claim that Christianity is condemning others.

 

No, You Don't Understand

When Senator Sanders says "I understand you're a Christian..." it is clear that he does not really understand. When Senator Hollen states "I'm a Christian, but..." it is clear he does not affirm biblical Christianity.

This is a battle of world views and it is nothing new. What is new, or seemingly new, is that most Americans have never truly acknowledged the deep divide between absolute truth as expressed in God's Word and the "truthiness" of the world.

At a minimum, the senators' comments, stances, and ultimately recommendations for non-approval of Vought have positioned them, by their own words, as creating a religious litmus test for those serving in public office. As Dr. Russell Moore of the ERLC made clear,

"While no one expects Senator Sanders to be a theologian, we should expect far more from an elected official who has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution."

Of greater note for evangelical Christians is the fact that regardless who is in the Oval Office, who represents us in DC or local political offices, the world view divide will ultimately require a statement of belief.

Do You Understand?

Christian - do you understand what it means to be a follower of Christ? He is the ONLY way! He is the ONLY truth. Through Christ ALONE, may we have life eternal. It may sound intolerant to those who do not understand. For those who do understand, it sounds like grace.

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. - John 3:18 (ESV)