grab a yoke

Here is the situation.

First, if you follow the teachings of Muhammad, the Buddha, I Ching, The Book of Mormon, Depak Chopra, you name it, if it is based on teachings similar to Jesus’, then your life may improve for a while. But, there is also a key difference. Jesus will not work against himself. There is much in the sources I named that is contrary to the message of Jesus as recorded in the Bible. Jesus may use other religions and philosophies to open your eyes to his Lordship, but he will not work with you if you deny him.

Second, if Jesus is really the resurrected Lord of all, then his promise to yoke with you will only happen if you are following his lead. Jesus is not going to work with you to do that which is contrary to him. There is a huge difference in serving humankind under human power compared to under Jesus power. The reason why most of us don’t experience this is we don’t realize the power is there or Jesus won’t trust us with his power because we still think we are in the driver’s seat. Jesus is perfectly capable of saying,

“You want to drive? Fine. Thy will be done.”

I think it was John Maxwell who said,

“When you pray, don’t always ask Jesus to bless what you are doing. Ask him to guide you to do what he is already blessing.”

Grab a yoke and hang on.

the yoke of Jesus

Matthew 11:29-30 (NLT)
Take my yoke upon you. Let me teach you, because I am humble and gentle, and you will find rest for your souls. [30] For my yoke fits perfectly, and the burden I give you is light."

Matthew 28:20 (NLT)
Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

The resurrection of Jesus changes everything. I can learn from him and accomplish what he wants done. But the way he works means I can’t apply his teachings to my agenda. I am no longer in the drivers’ seat.

Jesus says, “Take my yoke…” The yoke is a tool that is used to increase the effectiveness of the work of two animals. Take an ox. An experienced ox is yoked to an inexperienced one and they work together. In time, the rookie learns to work in cooperation with the master. The experienced ox sets the pace and gives direction. Good plowing occurs when the two animals work as one.

This is what Jesus means (I think) when he says, “Take my yoke..”

“Join me in my work and you will find rest for your soul.”

Why?

“Because you will be doing exactly what I created you to do all along.”

What does this have to with the resurrection? Because he is alive, he can yoke with me. When he says, “I am with you always,” it’s not primarily saying, “I will protect you.” We so often think of security and safety. O, we are completely safe and secure with Jesus, in the long run, don’t get me wrong.

But it is more than this. It is Jesus saying, “Join me in my Kingdom work and I will remain yoked to you.” This means so much more.

More tomorrow.

Jesus Houdini?

The Easter story details sometimes go by unnoticed. The linen wrappings that covered the body of Jesus are a good example. According to the burial custom of the day, 100 pounds of linen cloth with burial spices mixed in to the wrapping, would have covered the body of Jesus. The cloth is wound tightly around the limbs and then the body itself, with a separate wrapping for the head. All of this results in an airtight seal.

Luke 24:12 (NLT)
However, Peter ran to the tomb to look. Stooping, he peered in and saw the empty linen wrappings; then he went home again, wondering what had happened.

I would wonder what had happened, too! How did Jesus get out of the wrapping when he came back to life again? It doesn’t say "a pile of ripped up linen" ala’ the Hulk. There was no one there to unwrap him. Mel Gibson’s, The Passion of the Christ, reenacts it with Jesus eerily flowing out of the cloths. This might be closer to the actual scene. Jesus, who has command of all dimensions through his glorified body (walking through walls [John 20:19]), can certainly escape his grave cloths and the tomb (Sorry, Mel, but the stone had been rolled aside after Jesus left, so people could look inside, not so Jesus could get out [Matthew 28:2]).

Amazing. And, and now I have a question. Why do we call it the “Empty Tomb?” There were linen wrappings still there. Probably because, “The Empty Tomb, Except for the 100 Pounds of Burial Linens,” is just too much of a mouthful.

where do you find life?

The words of the angel on Easter morning are to the point.

Luke 24:5b (NLT)
"Why are you looking in a tomb for someone who is alive?

To look for life you seek someone who is alive. This day after Easter the message of life is clear. If you wish to really live, then look for the one who is alive, Jesus.

If Jesus is the creator of all there is (Colossians 1), than he designed the best way to live life. Meaning and purpose become central. Yet, we can “look for the living among the dead” in the many things we focus on that aren’t healthy for us. Things that are even called an “escape” from life.

Obvious things like drinking or drug use to get us in another place than our real lives. Not so obvious things like excessive TV watching or excessive game playing. Even less obvious escapes like being dominated by our studies (for you students out there) or our work (for you employee’s). Isn’t it rather ironic that something we call “making a living,” can become that which draws us away from true life?

I keep going back to the words of Jesus from Matthew 6. Here they are “old school” King James Version.

Matthew 6:33 (KJV)
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Live for Jesus, through Jesus, with Jesus and join him in the greatest cause of life, bringing his Kingdom life into your everyday life. Living out his Kingdom in your “kingdom,” where your “kingdom” begins to look like his.

The message of Easter is about new life. Keep seeking Jesus and you keep getting life from him.

why crucifixion?

Today is Good Friday, in many ways the most somber day of the year. I was looking through various images of the crucifixion this morning, and I thought, once again, of the meaning of the actual event. Why did Jesus die in this way?

Here are some alternatives.

Death of the baby Jesus- Herod tired to have Jesus killed before he could do any harm (Matthew 2:16). Kill the baby Jesus and you never discover who God really is. End of story.

Death by stoning- The Jewish authorities attempted to have Jesus stoned to death on several occasions (John 8:59; 10:31, e.g.), but were never successful. Death due to a religious dispute is quite common and it remains “in-house.” Not much of an impact outside of the local Jewish scene.

Death in the Garden- Dallas Willard introduced me to the ancient church’s teaching of the devil trying to kill Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. The anguish he is going through is not some attempt to get out of the crucifixion (a careful reading of the Gospels shows a Jesus almost sprinting to that cross, not wimping out), but rather the “opportune time” (Luke 4:13) Satan has been waiting for. But Jesus will have none of it. Dallas puts it this way, “Try to preach a Savior who dies of a heart attack.” No witnesses other than his own three disciples. No Roman or Jewish authorities involved.

So, a very public crucifixion during Passover in Jerusalem with thousands and thousands of potential witnesses of various cultures (see John 19:19-20) is an awful, but effective, setting for the truth of Jesus really dying.

For all people.
For me.
For you.

did Newsweek get a "Jesus" article right??

They did it again and this time--- trumpets are blowing now--- Da, da, da, da, da da--- they actually used mainstream scholars and made normal, orthodox claims based on evidence and logic. I am talking about the latest “before Easter” Newsweek Jesus cover story.

I posted before Christmas (December 17) how it always seems like Time and Newsweek have out of the mainstream extreme scholars giving reports about the questionability of the Christian faith in articles before Christmas or Easter. Well, I have to give credit where it is due. The most recent Newsweek story wasn’t bad. Not bad at all.

The fact that they use highly respected normal biblical scholars like N.T. Wright is compelling for their fairness. Then I am struck by sentences by the author of the article, himself, Jon Meachem. Like this.

“The uniqueness- one could say oddity, or implausibility- of the story of Jesus’ resurrection argues that the tradition is more likely historical than theological.”

Indeed! So, many opportunities for contemporary opponents of the Christians to refute the evidence of the empty tomb and the resurrection appearances of Jesus to eyewitnesses, and instead they are silent. You couldn’t have made up a more bizarre story unless of course it is true.

Congratulations, Newsweek. I have to give you credit. Now, please don’t disappoint me next Christmas. You are on a roll.

Terri Schiavo pt. 3

I remember working in a Veteran’s “Mental Hospital” back in the 70’s as part of my training in psychology. The mental capacity of some of the patient’s was severely challenged. Some scenes seem to have come straight out of “One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest.” Schizophrenia, catatonic states, you name it; there were the elderly from wars of the past, and the young more recently from Vietnam. There was no way you could ever hope to communicate with some of these folks, and yet to even think of purposely killing them would never register.

If there is no brain function and someone is on total artificial life support than there are arguments to be made from all sides. But when we are simply using terms like “quality of life” and such for those who are living in a challenging situation like Terri’s, let alone with opportunities for improvement that haven’t been explored, than I would argue there is no question as to the rightness of letting her live.

The efforts of those who would starve her seem diabolical, not judicious. When I hear she can swallow on her own and is being denied water, even ice chips, I must admit I am haunted by the whole scene.

Matthew 10:42 (NLT)
“And if you give even a cup of cold water to one of the least of my followers, you will surely be rewarded."

Well, Jesus, what happens if you don’t?

It appears there are many who are going find out the answer to that question.

Terri Schiavo pt. 2

There have been comments made by supporters of Michael Schiavo’s efforts to end his wife’s life that are a bit disingenuous, I would argue. It goes something like this. If you are a Christian you should support Michael’s husbandly authority in the marriage to make the decision. I have no idea where that is coming from. I suppose it is a misguided effort to connect these submission texts to the situation.

Ephes. 5:21-22 (NLT)
And further, you will submit to one another out of reverence for Christ. [22] You wives will submit to your husbands as you do to the Lord.

First, notice the Bible is calling for a mutual submission for all Christians. Listening deeply and responding carefully in placing the needs of others ahead of your own, when appropriate. This is a far cry from, “I am the husband, and so I can order for you to be starved to death.”

Second, it’s not as if Terri has a choice of “submission” in all of this in the first place. She cannot communicate clearly, remember? And while we are on this subject, if husband’s have marital authority than where are these same people when we pass laws that say abortion can be carried out without the husband’s consent? Where is the outcry?

So what is a husband’s duty to his wife? In many Christian marriage services these words provide a haunting backdrop to this case.

“…to have and to hold from this day forward, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until death do us part.”

Michael Schiavo is engaged to another woman and has two children with her. Why didn’t he divorce Terri in the first place? I am not saying I agree with him doing that, but in his circumstance if he was going to marry again why not do it in an honorable fashion? The whole “husbandly” argument as it relates to Terri kind of breaks down here, don’t you think?

Terri Schiavo

Terri Schiavo. I have some questions about this situation.

Is a human being less of a human being when the brain becomes damaged? Conversely, are you more human, the more your brain capacity? If this is the case than those who suffer from Alzheimer’s disease and other brain disorders are less human. Any of us who slowly lose our memory are becoming less human as we age. Am I “Dana” now, but become less “Dana” as my brain function declines in some ways, as I get older? Do you constitute my being by my memories? Can you decide to starve me to death because I am losing my humanity? At what point do you decide?

Terri Schiavo is not about a DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order. Taking extraordinary measures to keep a heart pumping. This is about starving her to death because she cannot eat on her own. But, I spent a good part of my early days not being able to feed myself. At least my mom and dad would tell you that. When I was an infant, did that fact make be less human? When we assist people who are paralyzed to eat, are they less human, as well?

Taken to the extreme, where does IQ and ability to “increase” brain capacity fit in to all of this? Am I more superior than someone else because I have better use of my faculties? Should there be an IQ test requirement before I am allowed to vote?

I think the answer to all these questions is you are a human being or you are not. The questions become more difficult when we consider that our mind is more than our brain. The research of patients who are “brain dead,” not registering any brain activity, reviving and then clearly speaking of the things that were happening around them clouds the picture even more. And everybody keeps using the phrase “vegetative” state, and such, and I don’t know how you really can accurately make that statement.

If you can’t communicate clearly with a human does that make them no longer human? Then does that make me more human if I can communicate “better” than you? Is someone who “communicates” for a living, like an effective preacher, a higher order human than someone who does not?

More questions tomorrow.

follow the evidence

If you are going to trust that Jesus rose from the dead almost 2000 years ago and lives today, this doesn’t take a lot of faith. A careful and honest examination of all the evidence makes it a very reasonable proposition.

Of course, just like in the sciences, we are not talking about “proving” anything. Jesus knows the human condition better than anyone. It’s not about proof, it’s about following the evidence. In the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we see that if Jesus were visibly standing before you today saying, “Follow me,” you may decline. In the story, the rich man, suffering in hell, asks Abraham, who is in heaven, to send someone to warn his brothers still living on earth to turn from their sin.

Luke 16:30-31 (NLT)
"The rich man replied, 'No, Father Abraham! But if someone is sent to them from the dead, then they will turn from their sins.'
[31] "But Abraham said, 'If they won't listen to Moses and the prophets (examine the evidence of the scriptures), they won't listen even if someone rises from the dead.' "

There will always be reasons why you might choose not to trust in Jesus. But, when you follow the evidence, you will find it takes a lot more faith to not believe in him than to believe in him.

getting personal

Ultimately, trust that Jesus did rise from the dead has to do with personal experience. Here are the various possibilities.

1. He didn’t rise from the dead and he doesn’t make a difference in your life or the world around you.

2. He didn’t rise from the dead, but you believe he did, and all the transformation for the good accomplished in his name by you is really by chance. In other words, “All you have to do is believe.”

3. He did rise from the dead, but you aren’t becoming the kind of person (read, “dead-to-yourself humility”) he can trust with his power, yet.

4. He did rise from the dead and you are his apprentice who is learning from him in every way, immersed in the life of his Kingdom now. He is transforming you to live your life as he would live it if he were you in any given situation.

Do you want to know another reason why I have confidence that Jesus did rise from the dead and he is who he says he is? I look at the lives of those who authentically live on the path of discipleship. Who live # 4. Their lives are qualitatively different.

Yes, I know Jesus has risen from the dead because I know his transforming power in my own life. I have seen his power at work through me and around me, and have experienced his presence. If you have another way of living that will bring about what I have experienced, by all means, go ahead. I just can’t imagine any other way that works like living in his Kingdom now. Good luck.

why would anyone doubt the resurrection of Jesus?

With the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus so compelling, why would anyone doubt it? Here are some reasons:

1. They have never honestly examined the evidence.
   
   
2. People don’t use the same criteria for studying the resurrection as they do for all other ancient history. As a result, no matter how much evidence there is, they will set the standard for authenticity so high they don’t have to acknowledge it.
   
   
3. They come to the resurrection with a prior belief that there is no such thing as the supernatural.
   
   
4. They have preconceived notions about the bad things done in the name of Jesus and are already set not to believe.
   
   
5. They want to appear politically correct and want to say all religions are on the path to the truth and so are uncomfortable with the exclusive claims of Jesus that it is only through him that one has access to God. If he didn’t rise from the dead, then you don’t have to take his claims seriously.
   
   
6. They do think it happened but they have a fear of following Jesus and so continue to delude themselves into thinking the resurrection didn’t happen.
   
   

So, what can be done to change all of this?

• If you don’t trust in Jesus, examine all the evidence and realize he will give you the power to believe through his Spirit, if you allow him in. But he will not force himself on you.
  
  
• If you do trust in Jesus, become more familiar with the evidence and quit relying on simple slogans like, “The Bible says it and so I believe it.” Your friends may need a little more than that.
  
  
  
  
  
  

the rapid spread of Christianity

The Christian faith spread rapidly from the Holy Land outward. There is evidence of Christian influence from Great Britain to India, sweeping through North Africa and the Middle East, all within 100 years of the resurrection of Jesus.

Now what is so remarkable about this spread of the preaching of the good news is that this is also a time of persecution and hardship for those who preached Jesus. Eventually there would be no property ownership rights, lack of right to employment, imprisonment, and during some periods, execution for Christians. This all took place during the absolute rule and authority of the Roman dictatorship.

The Christians faced tremendous obstacles. So, we see how compelling the message of the eyewitnesses and their students must have been. Teaching a holy man who was crucified was no big deal. This had happened frequently. Preaching the Son of God who died and rose from the dead, now that was a big deal! What is more compelling evidence than the actual response of the earliest Church that Jesus is indeed risen Lord?

But what about Islam? It spread rapidly through the Middle East and North Africa within 100 years of the time of Mohammed. Why doesn’t this make the spread of Islam unique? The spread of Islam, like Alexander the Great’s conquest and the Roman Empire before, and Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan after, was by the sword. Islam spread through military force. Sweeping through countries with the message, “Surrender or die,” is a little different than the Christian message, “Surrender to Jesus and die to yourself for the sake of others and you will live.”

disciples are willing to die for the truth

The constant reporting of suicidal murder by militant Islamists makes this seem like an everyday part of our world now.

How many people were killed this time?
How did the Lakers do last night?

Purposely trying to kill innocent people for your religious cause is astoundingly arrogant and narcissistic. “Unless you think exactly as I do I will try to kill you.” Why do these bombers do it?

First of all, when you mix a cult of death and hate it is a deadly combination. There is an obsession with death that is hard to comprehend. The bombers die willingly because they believe they will go directly to Paradise. Most of the bombers are young men and for many of them their imam’s (religious teachers) are telling them they will receive 72 virgins to have sex with in Paradise as a reward for blowing up babies on purpose at restaurants, or children on school buses, and so forth.

Not a very attractive worldview. And a lie. Unfortunately, dying for a false cause is not uncommon. The suicidal murderers don’t realize you don’t get to “party with the babes” when you hate and destroy. Not only is that sick (sexist, as well, by the way), but I don’t think that’s exactly what God has in mind for these young men.

Now, contrast this to the first disciples of Jesus. They followed the cause of life and love. Because they knew Jesus personally, and knew he had died (they had seen it happen) and had raised from the dead (they had spent time with him after), they were embolden by the Holy Spirit to spread his message of hope and new life throughout the world. Tradition tells us they got pretty far. From Great Britain to India.

If you didn’t think like the disciples and trust in Jesus as your Savior, they didn’t blow you up, they just moved on to the next town to see if there was a more receptive audience for their message, following the example of Jesus (Mark 6:1-6). And they prayed for you to change your mind.

The disciples didn’t kill for their cause. They died for it. Tradition tells us every disciple but John was killed for their faith. But unlike suicide murderers, the disciples died for the truth. You see every disciple except John was killed because they would not recant (go back) on witnessing to the living Jesus. If he hadn’t risen from the dead, there was no reason to die for something you knew for a fact wasn’t true. They had seen Jesus alive.

This is powerful evidence for the truth of the resurrection. People will die for what they think is true. In the disciples case, a truth they were eyewinesses to. No one gives their life for a lie knowing it is a lie.

women as the first eyewitnesses

In my post for yesterday, we saw how we have discovered manuscript evidence so close to the actual events, that there were eyewitnesses alive as the message is being passed along. Unlike other ancient writings and the sacred writings of other religions, the New Testament doesn’t give much time to develop legendary material. Another compelling piece of evidence is the simple fact of the first recorded witnesses of the empty tomb and first sighting of the resurrected Jesus.

By women! (Matthew 28:1-10)

Women were not allowed to testify in court at this time. They were not considered reliable witnesses. It makes absolutely no sense to attribute the first witnesses of the resurrected Jesus to women. Why would the authors of the gospels mention the women at all?

a. To make their case stronger?

No, it weakens their position to use less “trusted” witnesses.

b. Because this is what actually happened?

Ah, that’s more like it. The Bible records women as the first witnesses because---they were.

eyewtinesses accounts

The Bible records eyewitness accounts to the death of Jesus and the post-resurrection appearances of Jesus. Of course the actual physical resurrection occurrence was not witnessed at the very moment as Jesus was in a tomb when it happened. The standard procedure of following the evidence would suffice it to say it happened if the appearances are legitimate.

1 Corinthians 15:3-7 is the earliest account of the resurrection appearances. There are eyewitnesses alive at the time who can deny Paul’s reporting of the event. They do not. There are Jewish writers at the time who can refute the eyewitnesses during their lifetime. They do not. There is no denial. But, how accurate is the Bible?

Compare the New Testament to other ancient writings. In the Bible days there were, of course, no printing presses. Books were passed down orally from one generation to the next. If something were extremely important, it would painstakingly be written down on stone, animal hide, or papyrus. Obviously the earlier it was copied, the more accurate it would be. So how does the Bible compare to other ancient writings?

We all have heard of the writings of Aristotle and his teacher, Plato. Chances are somewhere in high school or college you were introduced to these philosophers. Much of modern thought can be traced partially to these two men’s teaching.

Well let’s compare how many ancient pieces of manuscript we have today that are from Plato or Aristotle, and how many manuscript pieces are there from the New Testament. Then let’s compare how close the age of the manuscript piece is to the actual time of the person. These are two tests that archeologists use to measure the authenticity of texts.

Source Copies Time from actual event Plato 7 excerpts 1200 years after
Aristotle 49 excerpts 1400 years after
New Testament 24,633 excerpts 25 years after first excerpt

Also, within 350 years after the whole New Testament is available!

Now, philosophers don’t seem to question the accuracy of Plato or Aristotle, but the same people may question the accuracy of scripture. There is no ancient document that even comes close to the historical accuracy of the Bible! The evidence compelling.

the foundation of the Christian faith

The physical resurrection of Jesus is the foundation of the Christian faith. Everything else rises or falls on this historical event. Trusting that Jesus did rise from the dead and is ruling now is what identifies us as Christians. Not trusting in this, or considering it a figment of the early church’s imagination makes you a non-Christian. To say “Jesus is a wonderful role model and had some noble teachings” is not an option for a Christian. The miracle of the resurrection is the ultimate evidence that Jesus is God.

I have posted several times on the recent announcement by Antony Flew, world’s most prominent atheist that he now believes in God. He doesn’t believe in the particular God of the Bible, but he did say if he was to believe in a specific God, it would be the God of Jesus, Why? He doesn’t believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus, but he thinks it is the most compelling possible miracle.

The evidence for the resurrection is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion. Its outstandingly different in quality and quantity, I think, from the evidence offered for the occurrence of most other supposedly miraculous events.

Flew is close.


So, what is the evidence that Jesus really did rise from the dead? Let’s highlight four areas in the coming days:

1. eyewitness accounts
2. women as witnesses
3. willingness of the apostles to die for this belief
4. rapid and non-violent spread of Christian faith

protest?

A common example of opposition to government is the protest. Protest can be an effective media event. At the same time, it is probably the most common act of civil disobedience if city law is being violated by the event. Protests, many times, become simply ad hominem (name calling rather than stating your case in a principled, reasonable fashion) events. Many protests are rather arbitrary.

Take the most recent anti-war protests concerning Iraq. One of the main issues of protest was no “UN OK” for going into Iraq. Yet, I don’t recall massive demonstrations when we went into Bosnia without UN support.

Should Christians be involved in protest? It depends. Does it support arbitrary thinking? Are we using logical fallacies and spin to lift up our cause? Then we aren’t “loving the Lord with all our mind.”

Are any laws being violated? Then we need to be willing to suffer the consequences. There may be times when a Christian would stand up and be counted at a protest (think recent protests against the Syrian occupation in Lebanon), but it would have to be done in a truthful, respectful, and reasonable fashion. In many cases, there are probably other ways for a Christian to spend their time being an influence that would be more effective.

disobeying government?

When would it be proper to rebel against your own government? Well, according to the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident:
That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness…that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

So, possible rebellion is one of America’s foundational principles. What is less clear is when individuals oppose their government for sake of conscience. Especially in light of biblical passages like Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-17 which speak of obedience to government.

Perhaps the best guideline is we are to follow our government’s rule unless it forces us to disobey God (Acts 5:29). If the choice is disobey God or government, we go with disobeying government, always remembering we must be willing to suffer the consequences. Paul gives an example of what this willingness might look like.

Acts 25:9-11 (NLT)
Then Festus, wanting to please the Jews, asked him, "Are you willing to go to Jerusalem and stand trial before me there?"
[10] But Paul replied, "No! This is the official Roman court, so I ought to be tried right here. You know very well I am not guilty. [11] If I have done something worthy of death, I don't refuse to die. But if I am innocent, neither you nor anyone else has a right to turn me over to these men to kill me. I appeal to Caesar!"

We commonly refer to disobeying government for reasons of conscience, “civil disobedience.” There are many issues at stake.

- What if you are wrong about what you disagree with? What if you don’t have your facts straight?
- Have you exhausted legitimate means to express your opposition?
- Are you harming others in your acts of disobedience as a byproduct of your cause?

An example tomorrow.

being the church

The way a Christian community stays focused on discipleship is primarily the result of the preaching and teaching that takes place. As Dallas Willard says,

“Does the preaching and teaching of the community attract people who are choosing to become disciples or does it attract consumers of religious goods and services?”

Most churches in America would cater to the latter. The most popular mission statement (subconsciously)?

“It’s all about You”

So, where is the next Luther going to come from? A church that caters to consumers or a church that calls people to join Jesus in what he is doing in his Kingdom work now by dying to yourself and becoming the kind of person God can trust with his power?

Just asking…

challenge of church

When Christians gather in communities on a regular basis to worship Jesus, walk with Jesus, work with Jesus, and witness to Jesus, we call this, “church,” or “fellowship.” The biggest challenge of living in a church community has to do with commitment to the mission of Jesus to be disciples and make disciples. Metaphors are helpful in considering what is a healthy church and what is not.

Healthy
A school of life with Jesus the Master Teacher where you learn from Jesus as much as you can how to live life as he would live it if he were you in any given situation.

A training camp where you learn the plays, get strong, work as a team, and scrimmage, all for the sake of getting into the real game of life and thriving.

A hospital where you go to be healed so that you can get out into the community and serve once more.

Not so healthy
A country club where you go to relax, socialize, connect with your friends, and you are catered to by the staff and leaders of the church.

A museum where you admire worship done “correctly” (meaning what you are used to growing up), admire “real” church music (what you are used to growing up), and where you are looking to connect with experiences you remember when the church was “really” faithful.

A political action group where you decide to let society tell you what cause is important and you work for that cause rather than grow as a disciple and become the kind of person who can make a difference and bring benefit to others in the natural flow of discipleship.

You get the idea about the meaning of church. Now you can see where conflict can arise. Groups of people connected together for different reasons. With healthy churches the agenda is making disciples. With unhealthy churches the agenda is having your needs met. With unhealthy churches the challenge is all of those metaphors can appear important if you want them to be. Good fellowship, upholding our rich heritage, and working for peace and justice, who can argue with these?

dating and marrying a disciple (continued)

I have been posting on taking a stand when family, church, or government might bring pressure on you to not follow Jesus' way. I want to post more on raising children in the faith.

First, we need to get one huge misunderstanding out of the way. If you don’t trust that when you are a disciple you get to join Jesus and live within the work he is doing now and enjoy the eternity you are spending with him, then it might seem “bigoted” to only look to marry a disciple of Jesus. If your worldview is, "everyone can live a healthy and fulfilled life regardless of their faith," and if you believe that "all people will live in heaven forever, or all 'good' people," then why would it matter to you if your children are Christian or not, let alone who they end up marrying? Of course you would have a problem with the idea that your children should have a shared faith with their spouse or prospective spouse.

At the same time, if Jesus is really God and his words from the Bible are true, then you are going to have a different view. Jesus says, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me (John 14:6).” If he means this, then it would certainly be going against God’s desire for you to raise your children in such a way that you didn’t give them the best opportunity to place their trust in him, as well.

Hence, I posted earlier on teaching children to date active Christians only. This is an extremely difficult situation to comprehend, on the surface. To give one example. Christians, of all worldviews, want to make friends with potential Christians, in order to be an influence in the possibility of their coming to faith in Jesus.

But friendship isn’t all that marriage is about. It is about making a lifelong covenant under the Lordship of Jesus Christ and, for most married couples, raising children. If the model of Jesus and his words from the Bible are correct, then to not give your children every opportunity to trust in Jesus is sinful. To not encourage them to be the primary influence (which a parent is) to carry on their faith to the next generations by raising their children as disciples, is sinful, as well. So, the best opportunity for your children to raise growing disciples of their own is if they are joining in this mission with a spouse who is also a disciple.

Now, obviously, Christians marry non-Christians, or come to Christ after they are married, and are able to raise their children in the faith, in part, because their spouse is open to this and encourages this. I commend these non-Christian spouses for seeing the benefit of their children trusting in Jesus. I pray that they will see the benefit of discipleship some day and see the need to seek Jesus for themselves. If Jesus is God and the words of the Bible are accurate, we want our potential Christian spouses to come to faith. Our greatest act of love for them would be to pray for this and be as much of an influence for Jesus as we can.

never say, "never"

(More on standing up for your faith tomorrow. Have to post on recent event.)

First Antony Flew, and now Brian “Head” Welch.

Flew, if you haven’t heard, announced back in December that he believed in God. Not the God of Jesus. Yet. But coming from the world’s most prominent atheist, believing in God is a start. Flew was finally convinced at age 81 that there must be a God because of the evidence of intelligent design, in particular in DNA research.

Brian Welch is a different story. Last Tuesday, it was announced that he is leaving the heavy metal rock band, Korn. This is a very dark, very explicit lyric, very popular group. One of the most popular hard rock bands around. Well, it’s not unusual for band members to leave. So, why is this news being reported all over the world? Why is MTV freaking out?

Here is the announcement from the Korn website.

"Korn has parted ways with guitarist Brian 'Head' Welch, who has chosen Jesus Christ as his savior, and will be dedicating his musical pursuits to that end…"

This is headline news.

“Korn off the kob,” was the headline of the Miami Herald.

Welch came to Christ when he started attending Valley Bible Fellowship in Bakersfield, California. He gave his testimony Sunday to about 10,000 worshipers. It wasn’t intelligent design theory. It was getting off of “meth” that drew Welch to seek the Lord.

"I have a 6-year-old daughter, and I want her to be able to look me in the eye.”

Never say, “Never.”