Bible Posts

The Myth of More

24 Jun , 2010 2 Comments

We often think, “the more I have the better off I’ll be.  The more I have the happier I’ll be.”  Someone said, “I know money can’t buy happiness but I would sure love to figure that out through my own personal experience.”  Well, you don’t need to.  In fact, the entire book of Ecclesiastes is a primer on wisdom learned from mistakes made by a man who had it all.  Solomon wrote the book (and God put it in the Bible) so that we could all learn from his experience.  He was the wealthiest man in the world.  In Ecclesiastes 5:10-17 he reveals the myth of having more. In his little book, The Treasure Principle, Randy Alcorn breaks it down like this:

The more you have…

The more you want (vs. 10), the less you’re satisfied (vs. 10), the more people will come after it (vs. 11), the more you realize it does you no good (vs. 11), the more you have to worry about (vs. 12), the more you can hurt yourself by holding on to it (vs. 13), the more you have to lose (vs. 14), and the more you leave behind (vs. 15).

J. D. Rockefeller was, at one time the wealthiest man on earth.  When he died a reporter asked the executor of the Rockefeller’s estate, “How much did he leave behind?”  The executor answered, “All of it.”

Giving is the only antidote to materialism.

When you embrace the fact that God owns all that you have, then you’re free to give out of adoration and celebration- not out of obligation or calculation.  People who’ve been set free from their stuff give joyfully- it’s the hilarious giver that Paul talks about. Instead, people have all kinds of strange ideas about giving, about giving 10%, about the offering…

God prospers me, not to raise my standard of living but my standard of giving.

The truth is, most of us are working- not to fund our needs but to fund a lifestyle that we’ve chosen lifestyle.  At the core of the missional life is one who is a GIVER- and YES, it starts with our money because money is number one deterrent to living a life of generosity.

Five Things You Can Do With Your Money (the world’s way):

1. Spend it  2. Repay debt  3. Pay taxes  4. Save it  5. Give it

The Financial Flip-flop (God’s way):

1. Give it  2. Save it  3. Pay taxes  4. Repay debt  5. Spend it

Here’s what I’ve learned: Underneath this entire conversation about holding loosely to your stuff is this: a proper understanding of GRACE.  If you have come to realize that you are a sinner saved by grace then you will practice radical generosity- not just in certain areas of your life, but in every aspect of your life.   When you realize the cost of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross and how He has bought you to be His own- how He has given His life for you to set you free from sin, guilt, and hell- then you begin to live in that freedom.  You’re not bound to the things of this world.  Then, and only then, will you lighten up.

Christ Transforming Culture

16 Apr , 2010 No Comments

Call me crazy but I am certain that when Christ was dying on the cross He was not thinking, “Now my followers will be able to go to church on Sundays until I return.”  I believe His vision was one of a people radically transformed by His love and, in response to His love, loving others in the same way He did.  I say this because this is exactly what He taught.

The Church Jesus envisioned was one transforming every aspect of culture, one person at a time.  By “the Church” I mean His people (not a building or even a gathering) but His followers scattered across every aspect of culture.  Christ alone will transform our culture and He will do it through His followers.  How does this happen?

When we speak of culture we are talking about multiple domains among a people.  In America it might be shown like this graphic on the left (there are clearly other ways to break down the different domains but these are the main divisions).  Often we think that the Church (or even our faith) is one domain among many and if we could just get people IN church we will impact our culture for Christ.  Increasingly, however, people are not going to church and therefore many conclude that our impact in culture is waning.  However, when we explore the early Church we see that “success” was never measured by how many were “coming to church”.  Their measure of “success” was simply dying to self, living for Jesus, and loving Him so passionately others were blessed.  I believe that God is bringing about an awakening among His people and I see a reformation of global proportions taking place.  This reformation is not about something “new” but about something very old.  It is a rediscovery of the Church, not simply gathered, but scattered.  Gathering is critical to the life and health of Christ’s followers but it is the church scattered that transforms a culture.

A better depiction of the Church is one scattered across the many domains of culture.  As Christ’s followers recognize themselves as a sent people, sharing His love with others (by serving and sharing the Gospel), we will see the culture revolutionized by His love.  When a culture is transformed it means that people across every domain are encountering Christ and His bigger Story.  His bigger Story (the Gospel) is bringing restoration and redemption to all people and to every aspect of culture.  Business people realize that they are being called into God’s bigger and better Story- blessing others through ethical business, providing income for families to have what they need, and offering necessary goods and services.  They’re actually partnering with God and His greater kingdom agenda in Christ.  Parents realize that their role is to raise children to love God so passionately that others are blessed.  Politicians and government workers rise up to serve their God-given role to protect, bring justice, and bless the people by serving them.  Educators join the great calling to teach and train up children as global citizens and servants of God.  Those in media and entertainment seek to recapture the arts to the glory of God, expressing truth and beauty in all that they do. This is the church scattered.  And like all previous reformations this one will come from the bottom up as God’s people decide to trust Him enough to live out the words of Jesus:

“Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave- just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many.” Matthew 20:26-28

“Good” Friday

02 Apr , 2010 1 Comment

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” Matthew 27:46

While on the cross Jesus cried out in anguish, perhaps the most perplexing words He ever offered. In an attempt to understand more fully what Jesus meant we must go back to the Garden of Gethsemane on Thursday night and hear Him crying out to God in Ch. 26:39- “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken away from me.  Yet not as I will but as you will.”  What was this “cup”?  What was Jesus hoping to avoid?  It’s not merely death, it’s not even the physical pain on the cross.  It’s not the scourging or humiliation, not the torture of nails being driven through His body, not the horrible thirst, or the disgrace of being spat on, stripped or beaten.  It was not even ALL those things combined.  I say this because those were all the things Jesus said NOT to fear.  In Luke 12:4, He said, “And I say to you my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more they can do.”  “But,” He went on to add, “I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after he has killed, has power to cast you into hell; yes, I say to you, fear him!” (vs. 5)  Clearly, what Christ dreaded most about the cross- the cup from which He asked to be delivered if possible- was not physical death.  It was the outpouring of the wrath He would endure from His Holy Father.  The key here is a clear understanding of “the “cup”- It was a well-known Old Testament symbol of the divine wrath against sin.

Look at this and you’ll see what I mean:

“Awake, awake! Stand up, O Jerusalem, You have drunk at the hand of the Lord the cup of His fury; you have drunk the dregs of the cup of trembling, and drained it out.” Isaiah 51: 17

“Take this cup of fury from my hand, and cause all the nations, to whom I send you, to drink it.  When they drink it, they will stagger and go mad because of the sword I will send among them.” Jeremiah 25:15-16

“Drink, be drunk, and vomit!  Fall down and rise no more, because of the sword which I will send among you.” Jeremiah 25:27

What Jesus was experiencing on the cross was nothing less than the cup of the terrible wrath of God!  The Father’s holy reaction to sin unleashed on the Son.  The “cup” that Jesus was to drink was the vile, repulsive cup of sin bringing upon Him the full fury of the wrath of God.  THIS is where the story of Jesus intersects YOUR story, MY story.

“He Himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by His wounds you have been healed.” 1 Peter 2:24

In the garden we find the only place where Jesus addressed God as “My Father” (Matt. 26:39,42).  In fact, Mark records He prayed “Abba, Father”.  “Abba” is the Aramaic equivalent of “Daddy” or “Dada”.  I believe that Jesus was experiencing a kind of “holy separation anxiety”.  What parent has not seen the terror in the eyes of a child while being left behind- as if their eyes and their cry is saying “I can’t believe that you are leaving me!” as if to say, “Why have you abandoned me?!”  I believe that is precisely what Jesus went through on the cross, and the garden was a prelude to the pain He knew was coming.  With this cry, He yelled, “My GOD…” not “My Father” (the only place He does this).  Did the Father really abandon the Son?  Was there really violence done to the Trinity while Jesus was on the cross!?  I can’t explain it theologically nor understand it rationally, but how else can you justify this cry of Jesus?

Here’s what happened on the cross: At this cry of anguish, God’s inflexible holiness and boundless love collided, and redemption was made possible.

For you to be fully forgiven, Jesus HAD to be fully abandoned.  The “man” Jesus is not in charge, the Father is in charge.  And this is where HIS story and YOUR story collide.  Praise God for “Good” Friday. Good for us, not for Him.  What a wonderful Savior!

Core vs. Non-core (Part 3)

29 Mar , 2010 2 Comments

In Parts 1 and 2 we noted that a church focused on the Gospel will be a place of grace.  Grace will lead to inclusion, which will lead to diversity, and diversity to varied opinions regarding preferences and ultimately, conflict.  Critical to the leadership of any great church is a radical commitment to the core- the Gospel.  As the Gospel is defined, examined, scrutinized, lived out, and shared, the Church finds herself on mission with Jesus.  By definition then, the non-core is exposed as such because it is not at the core of the Church’s message and activity.

The challenge comes when there are differences of opinion regarding what’s really core.  How do you determine what is core?  It’s actually much easier than most Christians realize.  There was a little-known reformer (born in 1854), Rupertus (Peter) Meldenius who is famous for one quote (that has been wrongly attributed to others like Martin Luther):

“In Essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity.”

A not-so-well-known pastor would say it like this: “In core issues, unity; non-core, freedom.  In all things, grace.”  These words have, for a long time, formed somewhat of an Evangelical credo.  Evangelicals (like Baptists) have traditionally believed that there are certain doctrines that form the core of the Christian faith.  They are called “cardinal (essential, core) doctrines.”  They are what we might call the sine quo non- the “without which, not”-of the Christian faith.  In other words there are certain doctrines that when denied, by definition, give evidence that a person does not have the basic core beliefs that must be present in the truly regenerate person.  Included in this credo is the belief that there are certain doctrines that are “non-essential” or “non-cardinal”.  What I’ve always called, “non-core”.

3 tests that reformers, evangelicals, and Baptists have used through the ages:

1. Historicity: Does the doctrine have universal historical representation?

2. Clarity (Perspicuity): Is the doctrine represented clearly in Scripture?  One of the principles that the reformers sought to communicate is what they called “perspicuity”- the (clarity) of Scripture.

3. Explicity: Does the passage of Scripture explicitly teach that a certain doctrine is essential?  The Scriptures speak about a great many things but the Bible is often explicit with regards to that which is of essential importance.  For example, Paul says to the Corinthians, “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures” (1 Cor. 15:3-4; emphasis mine).  The “of first importance” tells us that Christ’s death and resurrection “for our sins,” from Paul’s perspective, is an essential component of Christianity.  Without such, according to Paul, there is no Christianity (1 Cor. 15:12ff).  The Gospel of John also speaks about the importance of faith. “Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son” (John 3:18).

All three of these three criteria must be present.  If one or more is lacking concerning a particular doctrine, it is not possible for us to legitimately argue for its core essentiality.  As well, all three feed off each other and are somewhat self-regulating.  In other words, if someone doubts whether something is clear in Scripture, all he or she has to do is look to history.  If something is not clear in the Scripture, it will not find that it passes the test of history.  This is why it is of vital importance that Christians not only be good exegetes, but also good historians.

Christians have always argued over what’s core and what’s not.  In fact, it has been the ruin of many great Christian movements.  There will always be those who want to bring focus, energy, and time to non-core preferences, forms, and issues- believing them to be something worth such time and effort.  It is critical for any church, ministry, or denomination to stay focused on the Great Truth of the Gospel, the Great Commandment, and the Great Commission.  In the end, the center of all focus, attention, and energy is brought to the Great Person of the Gospel, Christ Jesus our Lord.  As we bring our full devotion to Him the Core becomes very narrow and self-evident.  Let us unite around Him (Matthew 6:33) and all else will follow.

Core vs. Non-core (Part 2)

26 Mar , 2010 No Comments

In Part 1 I noted that a church devoted to the Gospel as the core message and proclamation will be a church in which grace is central in all things.  We noted a progression that takes place in churches devoted to the Gospel:

Grace -> Inclusion -> Diversity -> Differences/preferences -> Conflict

The more grace is offered the more diversity a church will experience and logically, the more conflict will follow.  Now, I use the word conflict, not as a negative one, but as a positive (or at least necessary) outcome and means toward even more grace.  Think about it: the greater the diversity, the more grace is necessary.  So it becomes grace upon grace.  Grace abounds in a church like this.

So, pastors- and the people of the church- are called to a difficult challenge (that only God can accomplish).  In a diverse congregation the pastor must lead in a way that honors the Lord and brings unity to the Body.  However, too many people (pastors included) believe this means that we simply maintain status quo.  Certainly this is the easiest way, but it is not God’s Way.  As a pastor, I know that when God speaks to me regarding my congregation, I must obey- regardless of what I think.

Here’s how I describe the constant role of the senior pastor:

Preserve the core AND (at the same time) stimulate progress and innovation.

I’m indebted to Jim Collins for helping me grasp this coexisting task of great leaders.  First, the role of the pastor is to constantly preserve the core.  By definition, to be core, to be essential means that it is not be open to change- never.  It means it never has been changed and never will be. If it is non-core, however, it must be open to change (or it has, by default, become core).  This is the stuff heresy is made of- either core issues becoming non-core or non-core issues becoming core. This is how the Church has moved forward for 2,000 years: Preserving the core while stimulating progress and innovation.  Any great church will be devoted to the core (and be united around the core) and we will not allow non-core issues to divide.  This is a Spirit-led strategy of leadership for a pastor and the leaders of any great church.

Of course the challenge comes when we start talking about what is core and what is not core.  How do you define what it is core?  And we all respond in unison: “The Bible is our authority!”  How do you know (biblically) what is core and what is not core?  Let’s look at that in Part 3.