Is God Concerned about Equality?

Equality is a buzz word in our current day and society.  We seem to be truly concerned about equality (and yes, I say we seem to be concerned with it, as I will explain in a moment).  Recent events like the Supreme Court ruling on homosexual marriage has the word "equality" attached to it.  We hold to things like an equal right to vote, or to an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

That sounds really good.  In fact, I would dare say that if you went and asked your average Christian in the USA if God is for equality, he or she would probably say yes.  And yet, there are a large number of sections of God's Word that truly challenge this notion that everyone should be equal.  (And as a bit of a side note, think about it from this standpoint.  What does it truly mean to have equality?  Does it mean that everyone gets the same?  Does it mean that everyone's voice is heard the same?  Does it mean that everyone gets the same opportunities regardless of education, intelligence, opportunity, and the like?  Challenging questions to consider in this discussion.)

So, is God concerned with equality?  I would venture to say that He is not.  Sure, He created us all to be equally loved and cared for by Him, and He has equally purchased and redeemed us from sin, death, and the devil through His Son Jesus.  But that seems to be about the extent to which God concerns Himself with equality. 

Think about some of the topics that would create a controversy in a congregation.  Women's rights is one that jumps to mind for many.  Some would say that women deserve an equal right to serve as pastors.  Yet, from the pages of Scripture, you have a rather challenging time to hold that argument up.  So, what do those who support such a notion do?  They try to change the context.  "It was a cultural thing," they say.  And yet, the idea that God may not be a great promoter of equality may not seem to cross their minds.

Think about it this way, too.  When the various gifts of the Spirit are given out, does it say that all are given them equally?  No.  Rather, it quite pointedly shows that some get one or two gifts, others get one or two gifts, and that means that there are those who get less, or practically none, of a particular gift.  God is not so much about equality when it comes to spiritual gifts, it seems, or else all could heal equally, speak in languages equally, discern spirits equally, teach equally, and the like.

Tomorrow I plan to post about why I believe God isn't about equality.  But for today, I've given us enough to chew on.

Those Darn Kids

"And calling to Him a child, He put him in the midst of them and said, 'Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.  Whoever humbles himself  like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.'"  Jesus, in Matthew 18:2-4

Walking around my house is a little bit like walking through a minefield.  You never know when my little girl has left some small surprise in the strangest of places, often right in the spot you want to walk.  She may take great joy in pulling all the pegs out of her peg board and jumping on them with her bare feet, but I can tell you that my much older feet don't appreciate such surprises, especially when it's dark in the house.

Yet, one thing I have seen in my little girl is the simple joy that she has when doing things, like playing with her pegs.  She wants to feel and sense the world around her, and therefore, she pulls all the pegs off the board and walks on them.  She jumps up and down on them in joy, laughing the whole time.  And more than once, my wife and I have simply marveled at the joy of life that she shows us time and time again.

As adults, life can easily become dreary.  We get used to demands and pressures, and so we lose the joy of the life that God has given to us.  And then, one of the sad things that can happen is that we start to look at those younger than us, and instead of seeing people "trying on" life to see what works, we see "those darn kids."  We see them getting into trouble, and we wonder what they are thinking.  We see them make a mess, and we focus on the mess rather than on the world of discovery that they are seeing through awe-filled eyes.

But even all of this isn't necessarily the point Jesus made in the story referenced above.  In the day and age and culture of the time of Jesus, children were not "valued" as people value children in our day and age.  A child didn't really "become" anyone of significance until they were grown.  While still children of God's promise, until they reached adulthood, they just simply were not "anybody". 

So when Jesus told His disciples that the one who humbles himself like a child would be greatest in the kingdom of heaven, He was speaking of one who would make himself nothing in the eyes of the world.  He would become like a child, a person with no authority, no social standing, no voice.  In becoming humble in such a way, that person would do what was best for others regardless of how others looked upon him.

Jesus Himself was the one who became like this.  Jesus humbled Himself to be one who had no voice, no authority, no social standing.  He became our sin, all to serve us quietly and humbly.  And for that reason, He is now the greatest in the kingdom of heaven, because of what He has done for us.

So the next time you catch yourself looking at what "those darn kids" are doing, just remember, Jesus came to be like them, so that you could become someone in the kingdom of heaven.  And as you remember that, maybe it's a good idea to go and see if you can become a little more childlike, especially in relating to "those darn kids."

Taking Time To Learn

I remember the situation.  A young man had gone through a number of sessions with me.  He had been so excited as he learned about the Christian faith.  He wanted to be involved in the life of God's people.  Word had gotten around that he wanted to be involved, and the church, always in need of people to fill the different roles, asked him if he would take on one of those roles.  He enthusiastically said yes.  He was elected, installed, and hit the ground with his feet spinning like crazy.

However, that burning fire quickly started to get doused.  It became apparent rather quickly that there were just some situations that he was unprepared for in his role.  On top of that, while he knew a few people, he hadn't been part of the group long enough to work his way into their trust circle.  His enthusiasm began to wan.  He started to complain about the lack of encouragement he was receiving.  He felt overwhelmed.

It finally got to the point that the end of his term came up, and he happily relinquished his role.  He became yet another in the countless throng who were part of God's people, but weren't really interested in the different roles which the organization needs filled.  And that was one of my first lessons in "Taking Time To Learn."

One thing I often stress to people who are new to the Christian faith or to a particular congregation is to take a period of at least 6 months to get adjusted and acquainted with God's people, with the way that we do things, and to spend that time really connecting with people.  I have seen it happen far too frequently where someone came in, was very enthusiastic, and either didn't know the needs of God's people at that time, or simply were frustrated when others didn't share their same enthusiasm.  The problem is, the congregation is often far to willing to play along with it.  "We need someone, and they were so excited to do it" is often the rallying cry.  So the congregation plays along in the very thing that ends up hurting.

That's why I often encourage people to take the 6 months or more prior to getting involved.  It allows them to connect with God's people.  They start to learn which things are important, and why they are important.  When they indicate a willingness to participate, it allows for some training, when necessary, and also allows them to be included, to learn the purpose behind the various things that they may be involved in, as well as learning the expectations that come along with those.  And in the end, those are always good things to learn.

I realize that there are those who don't agree with such an approach.  But I would dare argue that, for every person whose fire of enthusiasm burned out by waiting, there were many more who benefited even more from learning God's people, what was happening, and how to be part of what was going on, and they became more deeply involved.  They understood what they were getting into.  As Jesus instructs us, they learned to count the cost of what they were becoming part of, and were able to have a clearer picture of what that cost was.  And in the end, it benefited them, the congregation, but most importantly, God's enduring kingdom in great ways.

Does God Want Me To Be Safe?

"In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world."  Jesus

The question of safety is one we all face daily.  You get in your car, and what's one of the first things you (supposedly) do?  Put on your seat belt.  Very likely, your car has been tested repeatedly for safety things like impact.  You probably have air bags to keep you safe in an accident.  And safety takes on even bigger impact in other venues.  You go to the airport and have to empty your pockets and walk through scanners, all in the name of safety.

Now, I don't want to downplay the importance of safety to us as humans.  We want to be safe.  In fact, our safety is one of the needs of life, rather than a want.  It's hard to ever be calm or focused if you don't feel safe.  Think about people you know who live in dangerous situations.  They are very stressed, they may not sleep, and it causes a lot of problems for them.  Safety, to some degree, is a need for our human lives.

God recognizes this, which is why we have Him establishing the governing authorities.  One of their roles is the safety of those over whom they have authority.  That is their God-given responsibility.  And yet, the presence of sin in the world also means that safety in this world is a fleeting thing.  To put it another way, we could have a police officer in every classroom in the U.S., but one sinful person bringing a gun to class puts the people in that classroom into danger.

Does God take our safety seriously?  Yes.  However, is our safety God's ultimate priority in this world?  That's where I would venture to answer, "No".  God's primary purpose for us is to be found in Him, in Jesus, so that we inherit the perfect world in which issues of safety are non-issues.  While God wants us to be safe in this world, He also wants us to know that, even in times when we aren't safe, we are still in the blood-stained hands that purchased us, hands which have prepared an eternal, safe kingdom for us to live in forever.

I think we have a duty to teach this to one another, but especially to our children.  Legislation will not bring about ultimate safety.  Sure, it might eliminate a few threats, but the threat of sin never goes away.  Our ultimate safety lays in the fact that we are in the nail-pierced hands of Jesus, and nothing will ever take us away from those hands. 

A Faith Of Influence

In the years following the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus, the Christian faith began to reveal itself as the full will and design of God.  God had spoken to His people of old through the prophets, and finally had spoken by His own Son.  As God's Spirit began to work through His people, the message of Christ and God's hope began to spread.  It didn't take long to push out from its Jewish roots, reaching even the Gentiles.  By the end of the first century, the Christian faith had penetrated to the ends of Europe, into Africa, and on into the east, as well.

By the time the third century rolled around, Christianity had grown greatly.  It was no longer a faith that resided only in the various Jewish synagogues, but was also believed in the households of rulers, and of many of the common people.  In just a couple of hundred of years, it had gone from a group of 11 men sent by God to encompass a whole continent and more.  It no longer was a subversive faith, but had suddenly become the preferred faith.  No longer on the outskirts, now the Christian faith was at the front and center of the Empire.

How did it get to be that way?  During the first couple of centuries AD, this faith had been ignored, and then, at various times, heavily persecuted.  Several rulers had tried their best to stomp it out.  And yet, despite their best efforts, the Christian faith continued to grow.  How was this?  Well, the easiest answer is to say that it is from God, and no one can ever stop anything that is guided and directed by God.  God has promised that His Word will indeed go out, and it will return bearing fruit.

But God's Word also works, not through ruling or dictating, but through influence.  God's Word doesn't attempt to force people to adhere to its guidelines and rules and instructions.  It seeks to change the heart and the soul of those who read it.  God's Spirit works, not to force the believer to simply change the way (s)he lives, but to influence the heart and soul and mind of the believer.

God's Spirit and God's Word work to influence us.  It works to show us the folly and foolishness of trying to do things our way, according to our design and plan.  It shows us how God's design and will works, and what it looks like.  It works to show us the price that God was willing to pay to restore us to Him.  It works to show us Jesus, and to prove God's love in sending a Savior.  It works to change our heart, which then leads to the change in how we live and act.  It doesn't work to change only how we live and act.

Christianity is a faith of influence.  That makes it a very challenging faith and, at the same time, a faith of deep conviction.  When your heart is changed, it simply cannot help but impact the rest of your life.  A mere change of behavior rarely will change the heart, but a change of heart cannot help but impact the rest of life.  And that's how the Christian faith also works.  It doesn't seek to bend people to God's will, but seeks to influence them by God's Word, through God's Spirit, so that they see what God has done for them.

Christianity: A Religion of Influence, Not Authority

"Jesus called them to Him and said, 'You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and that their great ones exercise authority over them.  It shall not be so among you.  But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many."  Matthew 20:25-28

To some degree, we humans strive to have power and authority over others.  It's inherent in each of us.  We want others to do things the way we think or believe that they should be done.  The simplest way to get others to do this is to simply make them do it.  For a parent, it's much easier to tell your child, "Do it because I told you so" than to try to explain why you want them to do something.  And sure, in the short term, the "Do it because I told you" might work.  But after a while, we tend to rebel against those who "force" us to do things.

For many years, the authority of the leaders of the United States have sought to draw their authority based upon what God says.  Maybe it's because a significant portion of the people who settled this country came here to be able to freely express their faith.  Maybe it's because they saw the benefit to aligning society along the lines of God's will and desire and design.  I doubt we could ever find one single reason why they chose to go the route they did, but regardless, they seem to have drawn heavily from God's Word in creating the laws of our land.

In recent years, however, our nation has seen great change.  There are now many in our borders who do not align themselves with the Christian faith.  It's significant that they don't share the same set of core beliefs that shape how we live as people.  And so, when we, as Christians, attempt to "force" our beliefs on them through legislation of the laws of the land, should we be surprised, then, when they rebel against them?  Or, should we be surprised when those whose background is not formed by the word of God begin to pass legislation that differs greatly from what we believe to be God's design and desire?

For a while, it seems as though many Christians thought that they could simply pass more laws that followed God's will and design.  Doing that, they must have reasoned, would lead to change in the hearts and lives of the people of the nation.  And yet, it seems as though the opposite has happened.  Rather than being drawn to God, they have rebelled against the laws that Christians have sought to pass.  They may call it "freedom," but really, what they are striving to get away from is Christians holding authority over their lives and what they can and cannot do.

I believe that there is a reason that Jesus said that His followers are not to "lord" it over others, or even one another.  Jesus recognized that we are all tainted with the stain of original sin.  None of us likes having someone else tell us what to do or not do.  And so, Jesus then suggests another way for His followers.  He calls it serving others.  As we continue these posts, I'm going to expand upon that thought of serving one another, and my goal is to demonstrate that the most powerful way for Christians to seek for others to follow the design and will of God is through influence, not power or authority.  As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.

Power, Laws, or Influence?

Matthew 20:25-28: "Jesus called them to Him and said, 'You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and that their great ones exercise authority over them.  It shall not be so among you.  But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many."

 When the governing authorities are in disagreement with our beliefs as Christians, how do we work to bring about change?  Well, the popular approach that Christians seem to have followed (at least to my eye) is to try to get more laws passed by our national authorities.  In a way, we want to curb what others do by passing laws.  If I wanted to be a bit more harsh-sounding, I could say that we try to enforce what we believe on others who may not necessarily agree with our beliefs.

But is that the right approach to take?  This really isn't an easy question to answer.  Sure, there is a great deal of benefit to passing laws that echo God's design and desire for life.  In some respects, it's far easier to live in such a society.  It's familiar to us.  Having a society set up in such a way also tends to mean that most of us are thinking the same way.  It's a lot easier to convince someone of the right thing to do if they are already thinking along similar lines as us.

However, when you read the verses above, that almost seems to go against the way that Jesus emphasizes to His followers.  Forcing others to live according to the design that we see is from God is merely that; forcing them.  And not very many of us respond well when we are forced to do something.  We tend to rebel against it.  If we enforce the kind of life that our beliefs call for onto others, we can expect to meet some resistance, especially if they don't think the same way we do, or believe the same things we do. 

Passing more laws to emphasize the Christian way of life will likely not have the outcome that we might desire.  Sure, there are always those who are happy to follow the rules, but there are also many who don't want to follow the rules.  And passing laws, or creating rules, is not the same as creating faith in God's design and desire for life.  (I think this is a very important and very understated point.).  The goal of Christians is not to create a society that lives in accordance with God's laws, but to share the message of God's hope for sinful humanity.

To that end, I suggest a far different approach than working to merely pass laws or force others to live according to our beliefs.  Those still may have some value, and we shouldn't necessarily just give up our efforts to influence the laws of the land.  But I suggest that the Christian faith fits far better when it isn't in "control", but is under the radar, so to speak.  When it's a movement, and not connected to politics.  When it looks more to persuade rather than to rule or govern.  In other words, it seems like Christians would be much better served to work by influence rather than by force or the power of laws.  More on that in future posts.

God and Country in Disharmony

Yesterday I shared a few thoughts about how things would be in a perfect world, especially with an eye toward God and those who rule/govern.  I even delved into the idea that there are some things that are from God which rulers/governors actually endorse in their rule, such things as not murdering and not stealing from others.  These worldly leaders recognize that there is a benefit to society overall if everyone holds firm to these "ideals".

However, some of the things that God lists out as part of His design and desire aren't always seen as necessary by the worldly leaders.  Take, for example, the command of God not to commit adultery.  From a spiritual standpoint, we see that there are reasons for this command from God.  But in some sense, from a strictly worldly standpoint, stepping over this line may not seem to be something worth "enforcing".  A national ruler may look at those whom he rules and see the overall benefit of them not killing each other randomly, or the benefit if they don't steal each other's stuff.  But he may also see that people can have sex outside of God's bounds of marriage, but it doesn't detract greatly from his nation.  In fact, he may even see that, if he grants freedom in an area like this, people are more likely to listen to him and think that he's a good ruler.

The thing is, we've seen that this is true, to an extent, in our world.  Someone may have multiple sex partners, but still be a "good" citizen.  They pay their taxes.  They keep the laws.  They don't disrupt society.  (Yes, there are some downsides to this, which will be pointed out in future posts.)  But overall, rulers may look at them and see that they are overall pretty good citizens.  So they don't place the same amount of importance on that particular command of God as they do, say, on what God says about murder or theft.

Permissiveness on the part of those who rule doesn't necessarily mean that we to go as far as our government permits.  We are free to travel from state to state here, but you don't have to do that.  We may be free to be promiscuous in our nation, but you don't have to be.  But even as we recognize that, it doesn't mean we stand idly by and allow our leaders and rulers to be as permissive as they want.  What I will argue in future posts is that working to pass more laws is largely going to be met not only with resistance, but can actually serve to detract from the hope that Jesus gives.  I'm going to suggest that we, as Christians, adopt a different approach than merely trying to ensure that the laws of the land align with God's desire and design.  So keep tuned in!

In a perfect world....

I cannot think of a single person that I know who would ever come remotely close to claiming that we live in a perfect world.  We don't even really need to look at the world around us to see this.  We have more than enough evidence in our families and our own lives.  Turning on the TV, the radio, or connection to the internet simply confirms what life shows us.  We do not live in a perfect world.

However, if we did live in a perfect world, we would notice a lot of differences.  One of the differences would be in how those who govern us, or rule over us, go about their business.  If the world were perfect, they would do exactly as God says and wills and desires.  There would be no difference between what the rulers of the world wanted and what God wanted.  They would find themselves in perfect agreement, and would be working to the same ends.

But we don't live in a perfect world.  We live in a very flawed world (the Bible would use the word sinful there, which is far more appropriate, but that's another topic for another day).  And one of the ways we see that flawedness (sinfulness) is in those who govern or rule.  The morning or evening news goes to great lengths to document how flawed some governments in the world are.  Every day lately, we seem to be hearing more and more news about places like North Korea.  And while we can look at places such as that to see the flawed governments, we also need to remember that we don't even have to look at places other than our own nation.

Because we live in a flawed, sinful world, the rulers of the nations do NOT necessarily seek to govern as God would, or according to His will and design.  Sure, there are some things that God says that make sense to all rulers.  It's hard to govern well when you allow rampant murder, or when theft is encouraged.  But the reality is that, beyond a few general ways, those who govern find their source of right and wrong from places other than what God has to say.

I don't think any of us would ever go so far as to say that those who govern are perfect, no matter what their faith may be.  But it is necessary to begin our look at how we, as Christians, view those who govern, and how what they say impacts our lives, before we engage in some of the more challenging decisions that our rulers have to make. 

Of God And Country

"Jesus called [his disciples] to him and said, 'You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them.  It shall not be so among you.  But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for man.'"  Matthew 20:25-28

In recent weeks, there was a much anticipated buildup to a ruling that would be handed down by the Supreme Court of our land.  It involved whether or not to recognize same sex partnerships as the legal equivalent of opposite sex partnerships.  For many, this issue was trumpeted as an opportunity to display equality, and for others, it was trumpeted as an opportunity to stand up for what marriage was created to be.

As I weigh in with a few words on this issue, I should be right up front about this.  I don't follow things like this with a great deal of interest.  When it comes to the laws of our land, in many respects, I am woefully ignorant, and choose to be that way.  In the next few posts, I hope that my reason for this starts to become somewhat apparent.

It seemed that this particular issue was seen as an either/or issue.  Either you supported homosexual marriage, or you supported the Christian view of marriage.  And in a sense, it truly is an either/or issue.  If you believe that the Bible speaks about God's desires for how things should operate in this world, you have a hard time reconciling with those who believe otherwise.  If you believe that equality is of the utmost importance in society, you'll have a hard time reconciling what the Bible says about marriage.

This issue is definitely one that is much like walking through a minefield.  It doesn't help that both sides tend to be very emotional about the issue, which often clouds any effort at hearing what the "other side" thinks or says.  And yet, I believe that there is a great opportunity in this discussion to present the message of God, His desire and design for life, and the Good News of Jesus that we celebrated over this past weekend with His death and resurrection.  So read on in the coming days, and let's see how this journey goes.

Changing Culture and Society, Post 7

Working with young people has been one of the biggest joys of my life.  I have had the privilege and opportunity to be a part of many special moments in the lives of quite a few young people over the years, and many of those will be some of my best memories as I grow older.

One of the challenges of working with young people is how rapidly their thoughts and moods change.  One moment you might have a happy, energetic youth, and then you suddenly have a moody, sullen young person who makes you want to pull your hair out.  There has been more than one moment where I've looked at the young person that I have been interacting with thinking, "Who exactly are you at this particular moment?"

But one of the great joys of working with young people is seeing them grow, becoming more mature, and taking more ownership of their lives.  And that's where I want to go with today's post.  Just like change does not often happen easily or quickly, working to enact change by raising up young people in the way that they should go is also going to be a longer process than what we might wish or hope for.  And yet, in the end, it's very likely that we will find very few other pursuits in life more rewarding.

Perhaps the best starting point is with those who have the God-given joy, privilege, and responsibility to bear the title "Parent."  I know dealing with your kids is a challenge.  In my life, I'm just entering into that challenge with my 9 month old.  Many of you have much more experience and history than I do.  And yet, there is a reason that God created the man and woman to come together in the union of marriage, and from that foundation to create the foundation of society, that of the family.

As parents, you have the greatest impact on any change that you may want to see in culture and society.  If you don't like the fairly rampant promiscuity that you see, you can work to change things by interacting with your children.  How you approach the topics and changes that you would like to see is also important, but perhaps the most important thing is simply to be there with your children, and to keep the lines of communication open with them.  Also, don't let them be the ones to initiate the conversations, either.  There are some things that they will be more comfortable bringing to you, and others that they will want to avoid as much as possible.  Even if the conversation is awkward, it's better to have an awkward conversation than to let them learn about certain things from their friends, or TV, or the internet.

Change always begins in the home.  A Christian man of about 500 years ago realized this, and developed an instrument to assist parents in teaching their children about the Christian faith.  His name was Martin Luther, and the instrument he developed is called the Small Catechism.  I honestly believe that many parents could help shape the future culture by reading that small instruction book together, and then talking about the topics that they read.

Young people have their finger on the pulse of the culture.  You can expect clashes as they struggle with the development of their identities and the content of their faith.  But more on that tomorrow!

Changing Culture and Society Post 6

Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old, he will not depart from it.  Proverbs 22:6

You've probably heard the expression, "you can't teach an old dog new tricks."  While I will say that I don't completely agree with such a sentiment, it really does seem much easier to teach and to mold the minds and thought processes of the young.  As we get older, not only have we learned more about how the world really does work, we also become more comfortable.  Learning new things requires effort, and sometimes we have to admit that we simply do not want to put forth that effort.

As we think about bringing change to the culture or society that we find ourselves part of, one question that I believe we should ask is, who are the young people that can be taught according to the pattern that we are looking to create?  It makes sense to think about this approach for a number of reasons.  First, they are less likely to have fully "bought into" the current culture, especially if it's one that is new to them.  They'll be a bit more willing to do things that haven't become "the way we do things around here."  They simply haven't been part of the culture for long enough to learn those things.

A second reason that younger people are good instruments of introducing change is that they will have a longer span of time to bring about and solidify the change.  Let's take a business office that is looking to change their culture.  If you approach the man who has three years until retirement, how likely is it that he will be around to see the results of the change of culture?  Contrast that with the young lady who has only been on the job three years.  While we may live in a day and age where careers and jobs change rapidly, the possibility of her remaining there to see the change through is much more likely.  Not only that, she might be more open to the first point in the paragraph above, willing to try something different or new that the soon to be retired guy just may not want to do.

A third reason to look to the young as instruments of change is that they may also have great ideas.  Sure, some of the ideas may have been brought up before, but they may just have a different approach that could make the idea work, or the time may have arrived where that idea is now viable.  If you stifle their creativeness, it's likely that they will either go somewhere else that will appreciate their creativeness, or they'll think it's just not worth it and won't stick their neck out again, even if it's a good idea whose time has arrived.

I'll continue a bit more on the thought of the influence of the young on change to culture and society tomorrow, from a bit of a different approach. 

Changing Culture and Society, Post 5

I've noticed over the years that we humans have a tendency to think that there are certain changes that we can make which will make things better.  In a somewhat general way, we recognize that changes need to be made.  The problem that I have often seen is that, even though we may recognize that changes need to be made, we hesitate or rebel when it actually comes to us, as individuals, having to change to fit in line with what is needed.

Maybe an example is in order.  I work in a church.  I have yet to come across a church that doesn't want to be reaching out to young families and children.  Everyone seems to recognize that there are a lot of benefits to it.  So we'll create strategies and programs to do that very thing.  Everyone is on board with it.  It sounds great, and surely God will open the doors and the people will come flooding in, right?

But that's when we start to come across the struggle.  Okay, so we want to reach new families, but what if they don't know how to follow an order of worship out of hymnbook?  Are we going to discard the hymnbooks?  Well, we don't like that because we grew up with a hymnbook, and let's face it, hymnbooks are the way that God intended for us to worship.  (I hope you can get a sense of my somewhat sarcastic tone at work in that previous sentence.)  We'd really like for young families to come and worship here, but shouldn't they learn how to use our hymnbook rather than us changing for them?  Oh, and it would be great if the pastor could be really active with the youth.  Only, don't take him away from our Bible study to allow him to interact with the kids.  Maybe he can find time outside of what we expect and want of him.

I say most of that previous paragraph somewhat tongue in cheek.  I recognize that there are those who will read that paragraph and will not like what I am intimating there.  The point I want to make, however, is that we may all agree on what needs to be changed, but when it comes to the point of impacting what we like or expect, we often become the very ones who resist the change, and who therefore get in the way of the change actually happening.

Changing culture and society means that we not only identify the things that need to be changed, but that we also take a good look at ourselves and the role we play in maintaining the status quo.  Sometimes we may discover that we are actually the ones getting in the way of the change that we really want to see happen.  We may not like the impact that it has on us, and end up getting in our own way.

So what does this mean for us?  It means that we need to take a good look at ourselves to see if we are willing to sacrifice something that may be desirable for ourselves for the good of the greater culture.  In a congregational sense, maybe we sacrifice having the pastor lead the Bible study so that the families and kids know that they are valued by us and by God.  Maybe we sacrifice the familiar feel of the hymnbook in our hands because we want to make it easier for those who are unfamiliar with our order of worship to follow along.

As we think about that, isn't that something along the lines of Jesus telling us that we should count the cost that we might incur before we jump on board with something?  I believe that this is one thing that we often don't do, and then are surprised by it when the change we are working toward begins to affect us.  If we were to sit down and think about the repercussions that will probably affect us, we can either be more ready for them, or discover if we think they are worth what we are trying to achieve.  And then, if we decide that it is worth the price, we take up the sacrifice gladly out of love for our neighbor.

Tuesday Reflections on 9/11

It all seemed unreal when it happened 11 years ago.  I remember a student stopping by my office to tell me that a plane had crashed into one of the Trade Towers.  I decided to go home and learn a little more, and then watched on TV as that impactful morning unfolded.  Still today, I remember many of the details that kept being shown on the news that day.

It's now been 11 years.  The mastermind behind the attacks is no longer living in this world, though terror still finds itself attempting to influence politics around the world.  And in the aftermath of that momentous day, many Christians still cling to the hope they have through Jesus and the cross, that this life is not the only one that we will live, and in that new life, nothing like that will ever happen.

It still saddens me that we humans tend to resort to extreme measures to get our way.  And no, Christians are not immune to this, either.  Anyone who has withheld offerings or left a church because they didn't agree with the pastor or the direction of the church has basically resorted to extreme measures to display their disagreement.  And sadly, in many churches, there are those who will give in to such measures and allow these Christian "terrorists" to win.

That's the trouble with the fact that every single one of us is conceived and born sinful.  We simply cannot help ourselves.  It comes so naturally, and we don't want to think that we are sinning when we resort to such tactics.  And yet, God's Word is very clear.  Anything that isn't proceeding from faith is sin.  Anything not done out of love for neighbor is sin.

9/11 now gives us a day to remember the tragedy, as well as a chance for us to think that we would never resort to doing such things.  However, it pales in comparison to Good Friday, where Jesus endured the greatest act of terrorism of all time, as the weight of the sin of the entire world was pinned on Him unjustly and cruelly.  And yet, out of that action, came the greatest gift that the world could ever hope for; forgiveness and new life through faith in Jesus.

As I think about 9/11 today, more than anything, I am thankful for one who saves me and so many that I love from a life that will always be defined by terror and sin.  I look forward to the new, eternal, perfect life in which such things will never occur.

Are you born morally/ethically neutral?

Yesterday I presented a few challenges to the prevailing thought that people are good by nature.  Today, I change slightly and take a look at the idea that we are born neutral, that we enter this world without either positive or negative influences prior to our birth and growth in this world.  As you can imagine, some of the challenges are still the same, though there are a few other thoughts that can be added.

Once again, the primary question becomes, where do the bad things in life come from?  If we are born morally or ethically neutral, that would mean that we have to learn "bad" from others.  But that's where it breaks down.  If we need those influences to "become" bad, then where did those people who are bad get their influence?  Eventually, we're left at a loss.  Somewhere bad had to enter the world, but we're at a loss to explain where it came from and why it started to have an effect on us.

There are some things that we can work with in this scenario, however.  Typically, someone who thinks that people are born morally neutral don't have the issues of dealing with "bad" or evil, either from others or from themselves.  After all, the possibility that we can become bad exists.  True, that leaning all depends on the influences we have in our lives, but, unlike the thought that we are born good, the possibility of bad exists.

And yet, there is a different problem that this scenario also presents.  Where did we learn "good" in this scenario?  If we have good influences in our lives that shape who we are, where did they come from?  After all, if we're neutral by birth, that means we don't take any shape until we encounter something either bad or good.  It's the other side of the coin from bad.  Where did the initial good influences come from that determine our goodness?

As a Christian, I can find myself understanding those who want to believe this particular tenet.  I think most of us are realistic enough to realize that the "born good" idea just doesn't carry a lot of weight.  It leaves no room for the suffering and pain that we see so much of in this world.  This idea of neutrality at least leaves the possibility of good and bad on the table.  It means that the possibility of either exists, and that gives an opening for conversations that we, as Christians, can work with as a starting place.

A Challenge: Are You Morally Good by Nature?

There seems to be a popular conception out there that humans are morally good.  Yes, I know, I wrote about this about a week ago or so, but since I failed to pick up the ball afterward and continue the thought, I want to revisit it for a few moments.

Let's start off by thinking about what may seem to be good about thinking of ourselves as good by nature.  That means that we can start off feeling good about ourselves, right?  After all, if we're all good by nature, then everything is good in our world.  We're going to do the right thing, treat each other nice, and everyone will simply get along.  After all, we're all good by nature, right?

What happens, then, when this isn't want happens?  As we go through life, we tend to experience the reality that people are not always good or nice.  People can be downright mean sometimes.  Who hasn't been the teenager that got mocked because you were different than your friends?  Who hasn't had something of value taken from you, and the other person didn't give it back?  Why did our parents have to teach us that it's not good to talk to strangers, since they might not be trustworthy people?  And in the back of our minds, we should have been shouting, "BUT WE'RE GOOD BY NATURE, RIGHT?"

That's the problem with this thought.  What happens to it when we see people that aren't good?  What happens to us when we do something that isn't good, such as when we spread that message that hurts our friend, or when we are tempted to do something that ends up bringing hurt?  The refrain "But we're good by nature" seems to be more of a cruel taunt than a reality.

That's when we start to suffer from the common malady of "low self esteem."  We're good by nature, but something isn't right, and I don't feel good about it.  The other thing this starts up within us is the desire to find out what is causing us to feel bad.  But here's the rub.  It can't be us.  We're good by nature, after all.  It simply cannot be our fault.  So we have to find fault in others who we profess to also be good by nature.  The only thing is, they're now the ones with the problem, not me.

There's another deadly side to this.  If we're good by nature, but we start doing things that aren't good, the other thing we can do is give up our hope.  We can't reconcile that we are good by nature and yet, we find it so easy to do bad things.  We start to internalize the problem.  We start to see ourselves as the problem, and this creates a huge dilemma within us.  If we're good, but we do bad things, then we feel so bad that we may even think about ending this existence.  The root of suicidal thoughts cannot be far behind if we find ourselves faced by this reality.  Either suicide, or we seek to find our escape through addictive, harmful ways.

If you can't tell by now, I don't hold to this belief.  It leaves way too many problems for what the real human situation is.  However, I see that this belief continues to be held by so many in our world.  In coming posts, I hope to present a better, more realistic approach.  Oh, and please don't be surprised to find that this approach is one that comes from what God says in the Bible.

Commitment

Commitment is a big word these days.  Mostly, it seems to be from the fact that so many people seem to be without commitment.  We see it in many different ways.  A couple doesn't want to be committed to one another, so they call their life together a time to "try things out".  People don't choose to be part of various activities, such as ministries, because they don't want to be committed to something out of fear that they won't be able to get out, or will be made to feel extremely guilty if they do try to get out.  And these are just a few examples.

I've been thinking that this is very interesting.  Could it be that, in our day and age, there are few things that people really want to be committed to simply because they don't see how their involvement makes a big difference?  About 50 years ago, thousands of people committed themselves to various marches to secure freedom and equal rights for people of differing skin colors.  During that same time, many people committed themselves to fighting against participation in a war that they didn't support.

Think about recent events in the life of our country.  What has been there for us to really commit ourselves to?  Sure, quite a few people "committed" themselves to occupy Wall Street or other streets throughout the US, but were many of those committed, or were they just looking for a reason to not go to work or school?  How many people seem to be truly committed to political people? 

Could it be that the lack of commitment comes because these things just don't seem to make a difference anymore?  In some backward-seeming way, could it be that we as a people don't commit simply because we don't see the hope that is offered in the various ventures in which we could be committed?

Sadly, this is greatly present in the Christian Church and its various ministries and auxiliaries, as well.  Could it be that the Christian message has become more about engaging in politics or telling people what is right and wrong rather than painting a picture of hope for this world and beyond?  It seems that people are more likely to become committed to something that offers hope for the future, hope for change, hope that things will be better.

The fundamental message of the Christian faith is that God is indeed working to bring about hope and a better future.  It's not something that will be realized in this world, but does give us a picture of a perfect life beyond this world, one which is open to all who put their faith in Christ Jesus.  In an age of hopelessness and lack of  commitment, maybe the thing that is needed is to paint the picture that things will not always be as they are now.  There is hope for the future, and the people of this world can be part of that hope.  Maybe that hope in the One who was lifted up to draw all people to Himself can once again draw people to Christ and give a great sense of hope to many who are floundering in their hope and their commitment.

Alcohol, conferences, and their connection

During my time in Russia, we held a five day conference in Siberia.  This conference was for church workers and their wives.  The first day of the conference, as we all gathered together, the President of the district laid out a few ground rules for our time together.  One of the more interesting ones was that no alcohol was to be consumed for the duration of the conference.

In light of the problem of alcoholism in Russia, this rule made perfect sense.  Since the problem of alcoholism is so prevalent in Russia (I would argue that it is here in America too, though we just don't want to admit it), I fully supported this rule.  When men and women in Christ come together, while there are occasions where a friendly drink or two may be appropriate, holding a conference in which the problems of hangovers, or even people who have one or two and then let their loose tongues wag is not something that is going to happen, was something I was looking forward to.

I found it very nice and refreshing to have conversations with people who were sober minded (I have taken part in past conferences or meetings where one or two people may have had a few drinks, and then proceeded to share their thoughts on everything under the sun).  I also was struck by the thought: what would happen if a similar rule was put in place when pastors in my particular church body came together to meet.

This is where I think our American sense of individualism would really be highlighted.  If such a rule were put in place, I have no doubt that there would be many who would simply reply, "You can't tell me what to do" or some variation of this.  And yet, I think that having sober-minded conversations with my brothers in Christ could serve to give us clear heads to pray together, worship together, and actually talk about things together without the negative effects of alcohol interfering.

Don't get me wrong.  I am not at all opposed to sharing a beer or two (or, even better, a really nice glass of wine!).  I do think that there are occasions where that is appropriate, and others where it isn't.  When we gather to make decisions that concern the state of a particular church body, or when we are supposed to be having productive talks, I think that alcohol has a greater negative effect than we may realize.

(As I write these things, I also feel compelled to mention that I believe the problem of alcoholism strikes many more pastors than we really may think.  Such a rule would remove that temptation from them, and, as for those who truly do not have this problem, looking upon our brother's need in love really should compel us to avoid something that is a temptation for him out of his benefit, and not do it simply because it's my right.  Again, just my personal thoughts, though I do believe that God mentions doing things such as this quite often in the Bible.)

Culture and Christianity

Many books have been written about the connections and the differences between culture and Christianity.  I'm not trying to re-invent the wheel here, but rather, to share some of the ways that I saw that Christianity has the ability to both shape a culture and to fit into a particular culture, sharing a few observations from my recent time in Russia.  My hope is that, as you read, you start to consider how Christianity impacts the culture in which you live, and how the culture in which you live has impacted the form that Christianity takes.

Today I want to focus solely on one thing, the title which the head of the Lutheran Church of Ingria bears.  Ari Kuggapi oversees the Lutheran Church of Ingria, and he is known by the title Bishop.  Having spent just a mere hour and a half with Bishop Kuggapi, I could see the importance of his faith in his life, the importance of that faith going out and being declared, and his genuine humbleness as he serves his God and Savior.

But I can see where that title, Bishop, would not necessarily work in all places.  In Russia, it is a very appropriate title, as their culture and society is one in which people are used to those who are "in charge" simply giving directions for others to follow through.  Other Christian church bodies use this same title, and it implies a kind of structure of authority, with the bishop being recognized as "overseeing" others.

I honestly cannot see how this same structure or title would work in North America, however.  Here, we have a culture which prizes individuality, and the individual's choice.  Having someone "in authority" over us causes us a lot of problems.  Even in my church body, where we have men who are selected to "oversee" geographical regions, the thought is very present that they carry no authority to tell others what they can or cannot do.  In many ways, these men are supposed to encourage and provide, but really cannot give direction or demonstrate authority over others.

Is one way right and the other wrong?  It would seem that the Russian way sounds strange in American ears.  Having someone who can tell a pastor if he is doing something right or wrong, and that there are consequences if he doesn't change, seems rather dictatorial and open to abuse, and so, Americans who are raised with individuality as a hallmark of their culture would naturally not be in favor of such a system.  However, for the people in Russia, who have a culture of authority and following authority, it fits rather well.

I can imagine that a Russian pastor who worked in America would wonder who really is in charge around here (a question I have frequently asked myself).  Our particular culture and values would seem very strange to him, and he might wonder what the consequences are if someone really does get out of line.  Those who are chosen to be in positions of authority very likely would seem as though they don't really have any authority.  Anyone who tries to tell an individual pastor what he can or cannot do is likely to be told that he has no authority to do so.

There are a number of places in the Bible that speak to each of these scenarios, and our human nature rebels against the things we really don't want to hear.  I truly do believe that, at times, our thoughts and reactions are guided more by the culture that we live in than by what God says in the Bible.  To me, the saddest part is when we choose not to think about it or really even try to do anything about it.

Enforcing Christian Morality

In my continued efforts to bring clarity to my thinking, you will likely see a bit about how my mind works in this post.  I have a hard time when I'm as scattered as my thinking has been on "morality" in general.  Again, most of this scatteredness will probably become evident in the next few posts.

However, on with the topic!  The morality a Christian follows, though imperfectly, is one that is driven by faith and belief in God.  Through His Word, God has set forth what the conduct and thinking of a Christian would ideally be.  While a Christian, changed by the Holy Spirit into belief, takes on this morality, (s)he does so imperfectly (that darn sinful nature thing still works against us, even after we have been claimed by God).

This means that Christians can hold one another to certain types of standards.  Again, we will do this imperfectly because of the continual battle against the devil and our inherited sinfulness.  But, in general, Christians have the obligation to uphold certain standards of morality.

Where this topic gets tricky is when the Christian encounters the person who does not share a Christian faith.  My assertion is that Christians CANNOT enforce Christian morality upon a someone who is not a fellow believer.  Tomorrow's post will dig a little deeper into this topic.

Again, thoughts, comments, questions welcomed.