Until Further Notice

Whew - what a busy time of year! And to think just after Christmas, we begin working on other things including Easter (Community Egg Hunt, Sunrise Service - read: major outreach). In other words, things won't slow down. It's chaos during the storm; however, experience shows us the hard work pays off. People create relationships, come to Christ, and join in our mission for reaching our community.

All that, to say this: From my perspective, it's been a great year on the blogosphere. I've learned tons from fellow bloggers, been encouraged and corrected, and even had a chance to write a bit. But the time has come for a little rest - at least from the blog.

I don't anticipate posting until 2009. This will give me a chance at completing some reading that so desperately needs to be done. I trust As The Crow Flies will return probably not bigger but hopefully better.

I want to thank those of you who stop by from time to time. Your comments (on the blog and in person) have been priceless. Please consider visiting in January. I'm always available for suggestions or corrections.

I want to wish each of you a very MERRY CHRISTMAS. Yes, you can say that here! If you're traveling, be safe. Pray for those people experiencing stressful family times. And most importantly, remember why we celebrate!

Blessings until next year.

Friday Fodder - God's Interaction

In the near future, I hope to post (a series) on God's interaction within the world. While having lunch with a good friend yesterday, the conversation evolved to the discussion of how involved is God in our lives. Specifically, the question was raised about the third person of the Trinity. I'll give you a taste here.

1) How involved is the Holy Spirit in the life of a believer? In other words, does the Spirit allow a believer to make a certain choice, knowing the choice is not the most beneficial for the (wo)man? Would the Spirit prevent man's choice in any way (read determinism)?

2) Does God determine everything? What does God's sovereignty entail? Is God a Gator fan or a Sooner fan? :)

3) It seems to me that Satan can use certain individuals (often times they are unaware). Might God (or the Holy Spirit) be involved with unbelievers and they be unaware as well? In other words, I realize God reaches out to man for salvation, but might He be involved in other matters prior to salvation?

Thoughts?

Holiday Cookies

One of my favorite cookies this time of year is gingerbread. There's nothing better than a glass of milk with a gingerbread cookie just out of the oven. To borrow a phrase from the old Lay's commercials, "You can't just eat one." In fact, I've indulged too many times in the sweet cookies and see the lasting results.

According to The Amazing Book of Useless Information, "The world's largest gingerbread man was baked on February 21, 2006 in Rochester, Minnesota, and weighed 466 pounds, 6 ounces."

On second thought, maybe I could eat just one. Any holiday desserts that you sense an over indulgence?

White Washed Tombs

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful, but inside they are full of the bones of the dead and of all kinds of filth. So you also on the outside look righteous to others, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. (Mt 23:27-28 NRSV)

This passage has always been interesting to me. It's part of the 7 woes Jesus describes to the "religious" of the day. I've acted as a Pharisee myself from time to time. Odds are, my local church contains people with Pharisaical attitudes. Yours? The same.

Ed Stetzer has a great interview here with Kary Oberbrunner in regards to Christianity and Culture. It's worth checking out. Let me know what you think.

What's the role of the Church within culture?

A Picture of the Church

I have a confession to make. The secularization of the holidays makes me a bit of a Scrooge. I'm convinced that the reason we hear "The Little Drummer Boy" closer to July every year is based on $$$. Black Friday is evaluated to determine the national economy level. And the hungry get hungrier and the poor get poorer.

Needless to say, I wasn't all that thrilled when the wife mentioned her plan for an "Open House". We've (her more than I of course) spent the last few weeks decorating, shining and cleaning, and making great food. All this in an attempt to open our house so that church members could see how we live. I joked from time to time about what would be on display. Would those attending be able to open closets, look in the underwear drawer, and does anyone know the real reason for floating candles in a bathroom sink we use?

Sunday evening the big day arrived. The lights were turned on. Everything was polished. The food was just the right temperature. And several people came. I saw women who were gaga (is that a word?) over decorations, men enthralled by the food, and the kids were playing games. Some were dressed fancy. Others not so much. Everyone looked different, talked different, and enjoyed different things. The diversity was obvious. For a little over two hours, everyone seemed to enjoy the festivities and each other. After it was over, I couldn't help but think that this is what the church should look like.

I thanked Shae for a great night and her hospitality. Even though the work was long and tedious, it was well worth it. And finally, I repented for my attitude and saw the blessing of God providing a true picture of the church.

Friday Fodder - Wisdom

That night God appeared to Solomon and said to him, "Ask for whatever you want me to give you."

Solomon answered God, "You have shown great kindness to David my father and have made me king in his place. Now LORD God, let your promise to my father David be confirmed, for you have made me king over a people who are as numerous as the dust of the earth. Give me wisdom and knowledge, that I may lead this people, for who is able to govern this great people of yours?" 2 Ch 1:7-10 (NIV)

Most of us, okay, none of us are a king over a people as numerous as the dust of the earth. But we do have influence over people in our lives. Many of us are parents or grandparents. Some of us employ individuals and influence how they do their jobs. Some of us are blessed in that we're asked our opinions.

Leaders come and go. But the leaders who are remembered most are those who influenced with wisdom. True wisdom comes from God. And when Solomon is told he may ask for anything he wishes, he displays a certain amount of intelligence in that he asks God for righteous wisdom. Most if not all of us know a leader who has attempted to lead (without wisdom) and ultimately failed.

When is the last time you've asked God for wisdom? It's one of the things we've been promised by God. If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. James 1:5 (NIV)

Godly wisdom is something we all need. And it's available if we will simply ask.

Anything to add?

Who's The Fool?

True stories:

On an American Airlines packet of nuts -
INSTRUCTIONS: OPEN PACKET, EAT NUTS.

On a Swanson frozen dinner -
SERVING SUGGESTION: DEFROST.

On a Sears hair dryer -
DO NOT USE WHILE SLEEPING.

Who exactly are the fools here? Is it the consumer? Or is it the companies who pay individuals to write the instructions?

Marvelous Grace

Marvelous grace of our loving Lord, Grace that exceeds our sin and our guilt! Yonder on Calvary's mount out poured Points to the refuge, the mighty cross.

Grace, grace, God's grace, Grace that will pardon and cleanse within,
Grace, grace, God's grace, Grace that is greater than all our sin!

Dark is the stain that we cannot hide - What can avail to wash it away?
Look! there is flowing a crimson tide - Whiter than snow you may be today.

Grace, grace, God's grace, Grace that will pardon and cleanse within,
Grace, grace, God's grace, Grace that is greater than all our sin!

Maybe you know this old hymn as well. One of my small groups is studying Romans. Romans 5:20 reads, "...but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more" (NRSV). The hymn above often times comes to mind when I read the verse.

Grace is a wonderful thing. A simple definition is often "unmerited favor." But if honesty prevails, we often provide ourselves with more grace than the grace we offer others. In other words, "My sins are covered by the blood of Jesus. But that sinner over there - do you know what they've done?" Quickly we become religious Pharisees.

We know Paul writes "grace abounds". But do we really believe it? Do we create an imaginary "boundary" where grace is no longer offered? Thankfully, God never does. Grace abounds. And it's marvelous!

Anything you want to add/subtract/modify?

The Meat of Choice

Thanksgiving brings about choices. Traditionally, a turkey is served with the feast. Even the most powerful leader in the world (the President) selects a turkey for the table at the White House. Talk about being on death row. Anyway, I digress.

I've never been much for turkey. It always seems a bit dry to me. In our family, there is always a ham that is available as well. There's nothing better than a boneless ham cooked slowly in Pepsi. The last few years, we've also enjoyed a fried turkey. It seems to keep it's juices a little more and who doesn't love anything if fried?

What's your meat of choice? If you haven't decided yet, may I suggest something (even though I haven't indulged yet)?

The largest item on any menu in the world is probably the roast camel, sometimes served at Bedouin wedding feasts. The camel is stuffed with a sheep's carcass, which is stuffed with chickens, which are stuffed with fish, which are stuffed with eggs.
- The Amazing Book of Useless Information

1) Is anyone in the West brave enough?
2) Where would I obtain a camel to roast?
3) My family is quite big. But just how many can you serve with this meal?
4) Any idea of who the original chef might be? I haven't seen Emeril Lagasse attempt anything so extravagant.

Anything you want to add? Have a Happy Thankgiving. Enjoy your family and friends. But more importantly, recognize where your blessings come from.

Brother's Keeper

I deeply desire to be the man God wants me to be. From time to time, I hear someone accuse the Church or individuals within the church to be less than genuine. If I had a choice of what my legacy might be, I'd wish for people to say, "He was genuine, sincere, or real."

I pray often for accountability. I truly believe God places within our lives someone to walk with us hand-in-hand. Our spouse can be that person within certain areas in our lives. However, I need a man or men to know me more than just a casual acquantaince. Men understand how other men are "wired". Men can say things that women don't always understand. I'm sure it's the same for our sisters as well. Leonard Sweet mentions this type of friendship as few and far between. In fact, many times these relationships can be counted on one hand.

Recently, I was invited to a small group for men. I went for the first time this morning. Different churches are represented. Diversity is obvious. And the only motivation for those in the group is to help one another grow closer to Christ. It's what I think a picture of the Church looks like. I'm not sure my time with these guys will grow into the relationship Sweet describes. I pray that the group or within the group there's an answer to prayer.

In Genesis 4:9, Cain inquires of God, "Am I my brother's keeper?" Read in context, it seems to me that he is. Cain is. And I am as well.

What do you have to add/subtract in regards to accountability?

Friday Fodder - Service

I'm attempting to get FCC (the church I pastor) to be more outward focused. For the most part, the people here are mission-minded. In the six months I've been at the church, I've attempted to "push" a little harder in this area. In other words, many churches I know are concerned about caring for themselves, rather than caring for those outside the church. They're good at fellowship dinners. Many of them have beautiful buildings. They've got $$$ in the bank for a rainy day. They have four-part harmony while singing the old hymns. And "service" or "worship" is 1-2 hours on Sunday.

I may be accused of over generalizing. But is it really? Haven't most who define themselves as "church" really become a social club?

I live in what used to be considered part of the Bible Belt. In other words, this place was saturated with the Church and ministry was going strong. And just the other day, I hear about a bussinesswoman (raised in this area) who admitted to not understanding the reason for Christmas until she was seventeen. So much for saturation. What if a church would have served her in some way?

(At the time of writing), I've just returned from a meeting with a non-profit ministry in town. The ministry is a parachurch organization with a clothing store, education classes, drug recovery groups, and a furniture store. Their mission is to help people meet Jesus and allow Him to restore their lives. I went there for the purpose of partnering with them to reach our community. Even though we disagree on some minutia, we agree on Christ. The ministry has been in town for about 3 years. And the sad thing: Only 3 (of about 30) churches in town have made an effort to determine what they could do to help.

...But whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
Mark 10:44-45 (NRSV)

Lord, teach us to serve!

The End Of Election

This will be the last of the series on the views of election presented by Chad Owen Brand in Perspectives on Election.

<<<<<< Time for some to celebrate >>>>>>>>>>>

Okay. Welcome back. The last essay in the election series is written by Clark H. Pinnock, Professor Emeritus at McMaster Divinity College in Hamilton, Ontario. Pinnock argues for election being seen as corporate, open, and vocational. According to Dr. Pinnock, "Election is not about the destiny of individual persons for salvation or damnation but about God's calling a people who in the New Testament setting live according to the faithfulness of Jesus Christ and proclaim good news to the world" (279). In other words, election is open to all and missional.

It's interesting that Pinnock would place election in the category of ecclesiology rather than soteriology (Calvin) or Theology Proper (Barth). In other words, he maintains election is inclusive, rather than exclusive, (281). Within the common texts of election, Pinnock interprets them not as individualistic but as speaking of a "class" of people. As an example, Dr. Pinnock points out Exodus 19:5-6. Now therefore, if you (Israelites) obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation... (NRSV) "Israel was not called to an exclusive salvation but to a priestly vocation intended to bring the whole world to God" (Pinnock 287).

When God does call individuals, he does so for service to others. In the Old Testament, God chose/elected Abraham, Moses, Nehemiah, David, and the Prophets for specific tasks within or for the community at large. In the New Testament, Pinnock points out Jesus chose the apostles to carry out God's mission throughout the world (294).

As you might imagine, the views of Dr. Pinnock are quickly dismissed by Ware, Reymond, and Talbott.

Now it's your turn. Any thoughts?

Information You Can Uh....Use?

Congrats goes to Cheryl who used the printing of the Eskimo Bible in a conversation. Here's the next challenge:

Being that it's the Fall season, did you know...

"The number of seeds in a pumpkin can be accurately determined, give or take 10 seeds, by multiplying the number of fruiting sections by 16."
- The Amazing Book of Useless Information

1) Impress the produce manager with your new found knowledge.
2) Consider who has time to check out the validity of this claim.

Have fun!

Friday Fodder- The Problem of Evil

I picked up Evil and the Justice of God last weekend. Honestly, I was looking for N.T. Wright's The Challenge of Jesus. I've looked for a few months now to no avail. The bookstore had only one Wright book. I've learned in times past, when given the chance, don't pass it up. I'm a huge N.T. Wright fan and it seems that many others are as well.

Eventually, I'll post on the book. But here I wanted to introduce those of you who haven't read the work to the particular sections.
1. Evil Is Still A Four-Letter Word
2. What Can God Do About Evil?
3. Evil And The Crucified God
4. Imagine There's No Evil: God's Promise of a World Set Free
5. Deliver Us From Evil: Forgiving Myself, Forgiving Others

It's been my experience that when tragedy strikes, people ask the question of "Why?". Last week, our church experienced a twelve year-old boy from our community and his Father killed in a motorcycle accident. In 2001, thousands of innocent people were killed in a place known now as "Ground Zero". In 2005, Hurricane Katrina struck the gulf coast causing destruction, misplacment of individuals, and even death. I could go on an on. But you get the point.

People realize we live in a world that's not right. Even atheists and agnostics will acknowledge some sense of good and bad. The problem is, even when we acknowlege the turmoil, we don't quite understand it. The questions we all ask are valid. But we become frustrated when the answer is not readily available. Here's your chance to help.

1) What are your thoughts of evil in general?
2) What or Who is the origination of evil and does it make a difference as to who originates it?
3) Any thoughts on evil such as natural disasters (that affect many) compared to evil within the life of an individual? Do people seem to notice one over the other?
4) Anything else you want to share?

Talbott's Election (Continued)

Before we move to universalism, my friend Ted has posted an interesing post on predestination and election. You can find it here. I'm sure he would enjoy some feedback. Now on to Talbott's view of universalism.

First of all, Talbott bases his opinion of universalism largely on Romans 8:38-39. According to Dr. Talbott, Romans 5:12-21 is clear that all mankind will eventually be saved, because of God's mercy and due to mankind being created in God's image. God will annihilate all evil short of those created in His image (248). Talbott is clear that Christ will be victorious. "As some Arminians might contend, he brought to all people something less than full justification and life - an offer of salvation, perhaps, or a possibility of some kind that each individual remains free to reject - then the possibility of an ultimate defeat remains" (ibid). Of course, this view would hold that Paul's thoughts in Romans 5 (especially vv.15-18) would carry the possibility of Adam (or the affects thereof) being victorious as opposed to Christ Jesus.

Talbott goes on to point out 1 Cor 15:20-28. According to Dr. Talbott, when verse 27 states "For he has put everything under his feet...", it implies man's will corresponding with the will of God. Because Christ will eventually be victorious, all of mankind will eventually volunteer their will to God's purposes (252-253).

Arminians believe (although available to all) only some of mankind will accept the love of God and therefore be reconciled to Him. Talbott again maintains the view as defeatist on behalf of a loving God (254). In other words, if God wills all to be saved (1 Tim 2:4) then that is the only thing that will happen.

Finally, Dr. Talbott turns to the question: If salvation is the destiny for all, what causes one to live with any morality? Talbott then turns to Romans 11:22 and argues that salvation is not an issue. In other words, because all mankind will eventually be saved, the passage is about consequences for man's actions. Mankind's decisions lead to a life of turmoil or a life of peace (258). "Our free choices, then, have real consequences in our lives and they determine how we will encounter God's grace in the future; but whichever way we choose, God's perfecting love will meet our true spiritual needs perfectly" (ibid).

In conclusion, Talbott returns to the themes of God's victory in the end through Jesus Christ and the unmatchless love of God. "...neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom 8:39 NIV).

Any thoughts?

FYI

Just a bit of useless information today:

The first Eskimo Bible was printed in Copenhagen in 1744.

This according to The Amazing Book of Useless Information. Try to use this new information in a conversation today. Good luck!

A Story Full of Grace

The year was 1986. I was playing football for THE Lovington (N.M.) High School Wildcats as a Senior. The team was undefeated going into the next playoff game against a noble St. Pius X team from Albuquerque. Because of a higher seed in the playoffs, Lovington had won the right to host the game on a Saturday afternoon. Rabid fans in the stands were painted blue and white (young and old with few exceptions). There's nothing like playoff football in Lovington. Anyone ever heard of Chicago Bear Brian Urlacher? Enough said. Anyway, I digress.

In the third quarter of the game, things were going well for the home team. Lovington found things to be going as planned (28-0). St. Pius had the ball on their own fifteen. Our coach felt it was still too early to substitute for the starters. Although a little "winded", I was still rushing the quarterback (as defensive tackle) play after play.

The quarterback dropped back to pass and was hit by my fellow defensive tackle, causing the quarterback to drop the football. Only grass separated me from the football and 6 points for the Big Blue. This was my chance to be a hero, garnish some All-State votes, be written about in the paper, have Division I schools calling to offer great scholarships, and be carried off the field by other teammates. I exagerate a little. But do you know what goes through the head of a seventeen year-old when things like this happen?

I reached down and gathered the pigskin around the 8 yard line. This would surely put the game away. I could hear the fans yelling for a few seconds before everything went quiet. It seemed like everything began to move in slow motion. I was on my way to stardom! And then...

It must have been a blade of grass around the 5. Who was supposed to mow anyway? Shouldn't this grass have been mowed recently? After all, this is a playoff game. Maybe it should have been mowed this morning. No! There's no maybe to it. This grass should have been mowed. And it wasn't! The grass caused me to stumble toward the goal line and eventually land on the football at the 2. Slowly, sound came back to my ears. I opened my eyes to notice I was short of a touchdown and being a hero. The offense would have to come in and complete what we started.

I laid on the field longer than usual. I was hurt. It wasn't my arms or legs. I hadn't had the wind knocked out of me. I had been brought back to reality. I would eventually have to go back to the sidelines and be harassed for "tripping over my own feet" and not being able to score. Needless to say, I was not looking forward to the experience.

A few teammates picked me up and congratulated me on the "Great play!". But they were encouraging me to get off of the field. Eventually the game would have to resume. Upon reaching the sidelines, there were a few jibs. But there were more chest bumps, congrats, and pats on the back than I'd expected. In fact, no one on the sideline had expected me to score. After all, I was a defensive tackle. I'd received grace. My actions on the play have also been described as "graceful."

Any stories you want to share?

Talbott's Election (Continued)

I'd planned to post regarding Dr. Thomas Talbott's view of Romans 9-11 and his idea of Paul's theology today. Unfortunately, it's taken me more time to get my head around what Talbott is saying. I apologize for the delay. Hopefully, next week...

I really want to understand, prior to posting. Although I know that's not fully possible with some things (one's view of election might be a good example), I don't believe I can honestly do Dr. Talbott justice here. In other words, what good would a shallow post on election do if the "meaty" parts of Dr. Talbott's theology were left out?

We've all wanted to sit with some intellectual at some point and "pick their brain." I'd love to do that with all of these guys regarding election. But I'm not as familiar as I should be about Universal Election (Talbott's view). For that reason, I've chosen to err on the side of safety. I'll do my best next week.

For those of you sitting on pins and needles about the post :), I appreciate your understanding. And if anyone can fill me in on what they know about Universal Election, I would be grateful.

A New President

The "call" was made just after eleven Eastern time. Finally, after the longest Presidential campaign in the history of our country comes to an end, we have a President Elect. The campaign has inundated our lives for the last five hundred days.

Senator Barack Obama (D-Il.) will be sworn in as the forty-fourth President of the United States in January 2009. He made his victory speech just after midnight (Eastern) on November fifth. President Elect Obama gained more of the popular vote than any Democratic candidate since Lyndon Baines Johnson.

Many people will be estatic about promised change. Others will be disappointed for days, weeks, and even months. Both feelings are nothing new. They're collectively felt, at least every four years.

When the emotions wane and life begins to happen again, it's important to take hold of what we believe. Even though the future is unclear, we serve the One who is firmly in control!

"Lord, you have been our dwelling place throughout all generations.
Before the foundations were born or you brought forth the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God."
Psalm 90:1-3 (NIV)

Of this we can be sure!

Today's The Big Day!

Be responsible. Pray. Vote. Pray again!

"Trust in the LORD with all your heart
and lean not on your own understanding;
in all your ways acknowledge him,
and he will make your paths straight."
Prov. 3:5-6

Friday Fodder

The gospel we preach shapes the kind of churches we create.
The kind of church we have shapes the gospel we preach.

Scot McKnight - A Community Called Atonement


Any thoughts?

Universal Election?

Dr. Thomas Talbott now joins our discussion on election. If the discussion was a puddle, Talbott would be accused of jumping in with both feet.

"Christian universalists insist that election is neither limited in scope nor conditional in nature; election is, after all, an expression of God's love for the world, the whole world, and God's love is neither limited in scope nor conditional in nature" (Talbott, 207).

Dr. Talbott is quick to point out that universalists would not agree with limited atonement, while at the same time, refusing the idea of conditional election that an Arminian might believe. Talbott argues from the following premises:
1) God is love (1 John 4:8, 16)
2) God is merciful to all (Rom. 11:32)
3) Understanding Romans 9 is based on how one understands Romans 11
4) Paul teaches not for limited atonement but for unconditional election and irresistable grace.

Due to space here, we'll deal with numbers one and two. Next week, we'll discuss premises three and four respectively and the responses.

As for God is love, Talbott points out that John Calvin didn't have much to say about the Johannine statements (1 Jn 4:8, 16). In fact, only in his commentary of 1 John does Calvin mention the verses in passing (nothing in Institutes). Recently, Reformed theologian J.I. Packer has discussed the verses in Knowing God. However, Talbott maintains Packer speaks of God being love not to unbelievers, but to Christians only (211). "Packer has stumbled over a text that he finds difficult to incorporate into his overall theological perspective" (ibid.).

In regards to premise number two, Dr. Talbott maintains Augustine was the first to make a distinction between God's justice and God's mercy. According to Augustine, because all mankind are descendants of Adam, all deserve everlasting punishment. God is a righteous judge but is also a loving Father. Mankind's rebellion seemed to put God in a predicament. He must judge, while loving at the same time. However, Augustine maintains, God selects some to receive mercy, while leaving the others to receive the justice they deserve (222).

Augustine's understanding of limited atonement is hard to understand based on Romans 11:32. For God has imprisoned all in disobedience so that he may be merciful to all. (NRSV) According to Talbott, Augustine was notorious for trying to argue that all didn't necessarily mean all in this passage or in 1 Timothy 2:4. Augustine held the view that all meant some of all people groups and nations but not the entirety of mankind. This argument doesn't seem to hold weight in Romans 5. Talbott maintains Paul meant the entirety of mankind when he mentioned all (231 ff).

Next week, we turn to premises three and four and hear responses from Bruce Ware, Jack Cottrell, Robert Reymond, and Clark Pinnock.

Any thoughts here?

So Long My Gas Station Attendant

Just a few decades ago, I remember places that simply sold gasoline. They had a few snack items inside, but for the most part, they were established to sell petrol, and provide service for the machines we drive (wash the windows, provide oil changes, tire repair, etc.). When a vehicle was driven over the rubber chord, a bell rang, signifying someone needed the gas station attendant to "fill 'er up."

Sometime during my teenage years, the "filling stations" changed somewhat. There were islands closest to the store that were full-service. Customers could expect the same service as always. There were also outside islands marked as "self-service". Those choosing to "fill 'er up" themselves, could save a few pennies. The incentive for the customer was obvious, eventually leading to less employees for the business and the elimination of the full-service islands.

We've since moved to automated machines at the pump and the elimination of filling stations for the most part. Businesses have diversified offering staple items inside, while also offering self-service for gasoline. Many people pull to the pump, process a credit/debit card, fill their tank, and are on their way (all without fear of the interaction with other people). It's much like a NASCAR pitstop. If someone were hired by the store now to provide service to the customer (other than running a cash register) people would surely be skeptical of the motivation of that person or the business.

Society has now moved to self-service in general. "No one can put gas in my vehicle like I can. No one washes my car like I do. I can do this project , without any help, thank you very much!" This kind of "progress" is much to our society's detriment. Many find it difficult to accept anything from anyone else without strings attached.

The proverbial pendulum has definitely swung from one side (living within community) to the other side (the idea of self-sufficiency). We attempt to teach personal responsibility, while also teaching teamwork and counting on our neighbors. It's no wonder that those we lead are confused.

Anything to add/subtract? BTW, post #100 is now in the "books". Thanks to those of you who read and respond, despite the author!

A Healthy Addiction?

This week at our small group, we began discussing the "passages of thirst." John 6:35 reads, "Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty." This is one of the many verses we chewed on.

The group is growing closer each time we meet. We've had several conversations where opportunity abounds for differences of opinion - all done in love. This time, it was about addiction. Although there are bad addictions (these come to mind quickly), are there any addictions that might be considered good?

Here's my thought: When Jesus speaks of hunger and thirst, He's obviously speaking of those things that sustain and lead to real life. If one is so passionate about living real life, can we say that person has an addiction (this time, healthy) to something God ordained as good?

We sang a song called Breathe, during our corporate worship. The chorus includes phrases like "I'm desperate for you", "This (desire for God) is my daily bread", and "I'm lost without you." These phrases sound somewhat similar to the "hunger and thirst" verses in the New Testament.

The discussion among the group brought up some good questions. 1) Is there anything remote to a healthy addiction?; 2) How does one become so passionate about God and continue to live with their feet "on the ground"?; 3) Is it possible to share that love, passion, or addiction, with those around or do we leave the change up to God/Holy Spirit? ; and 4)If there is something of a healthy addiction for Christ, how does one get his/her fix?

I'm now off to do a word study. Thoughts?

Friday Fodder

I read church growth articles in several publications - even publications that are entirely devoted to church growth. There are many things that come across my desk claiming to be the "next best thing" to win people to Christ - oh, if I just had 40 days! Church growth companies call from time to time and offer something that will benefit my local church. (These groups are 500-1000 miles away. How do they know what the people need here?) "Everything is included for the low price of $999.99. It's guarunteed to have people beating the doors down to get into your place of worship."

Need a quick fix? Check out Church Marketing Sucks!

So here's the fodder? Lately, many churches have been accused of "selling out" all in the name of reaching people for Christ. In other words, church leaderships have bought into the secular idea of having the newest, freshest, or shiniest whatever. And when the church has the newest, freshest, or shiniest, it just makes sense to tell everyone about it. Paul said, "I have become all things to all people." But did he really mean selling out on the Gospel?

Isn't the Good News still good news? Doesn't the power of the Holy Spirit still work today? And if this is true (I believe that it is!), surely marketing the vision of a local church should still be acceptable. The question is how so?

What's a healthy balance between trusting the power of the Gospel and marketing? Any thoughts?

One Reformationist View of Election

Today, we return to Dr. Robert Reymond's view of election. If you haven't noticed, I was corrected (and rightly so) by Frank. Dr. Reymond has a P.H.D. from Bob Jones but is not on the faculty. Again, thanks for the correction Frank.

The last post on election had more to do with the Westminster Confession of Faith than I had anticipated. Although Dr. Reymond quoted much from the WCOF, it's now a good time to hear his own commentary.

Dr. Reymond argues from the Reformationist view of Calvinism. He uses the Pauline texts of Ephesians 1, Ephesians 3 (especially verse 11), and Romans 9 to articulate his point of God's election of certain individuals. The doctor attempts to convince the reader of a "logical" order of God's elements of salvation. Reymond also has much to say about the word "foreknew" (proegno) in Romans 8:29, going as far as defining the word as "set his (God's) heart upon" (160).

Dr. Reymond has very little to say regarding the Arminian view of election. The phrase "the Biblically informed Christian" will come to XYZ conclusion (Surprise! It always seems to be his conclusion.) is written time and time again. The essay is written to defend supralapsarian over infralapsarianism within Calvinism.

Dr. Cottrell is the first to address his concerns with Reymond. According to Reymond, every decree is made to serve the eternal purpose of God's salvation of mankind. For Cottrell, this idea sends up a red flag. "This means that God has decreed the fall of Adam and the ensuing sinfulness of the entire human race so that there would be sinners to redeem" (202). Others (the non-elect) are "passed over" or simply not chosen by God. These things happen by God's decrees having an ultimate purpose of God's glorification. Cottrell maintains, "To some Calvinists such a view of God and his decrees may sound like pious and glorious mysteries; but to most non-Calvinists it is the height of irrationality and moral contradiction and approaches blasphemy" (ibid).

Dr. Clark Pinnock offers his opinion as follows: "It would seem that the most important issue here (Reymond's view of God's determinism) is not the doctrine of election as such but the character of God" (203). He goes on to say, "Reymond and I both admire the awesome power of God...It is not the kind of power, spoken of in deterministic theologies, namely, raw power, the power to make everything else surrender...Surely the glory of God consists not in God's all-controlling power but in God's self-sacrificing love" (203-204).

Thoughts? Remember when responding that others will (sometimes passionately) disagree. Please respect those who agree or disagree.

Have You Heard? Do You Care?

I rolled out of a warm bed around 7:15 this morning. My feet landed on new carpet in our home. I made my way to the shower and received warm water to bathe. "Man it's good to have what I have!" I brushed my teeth and eventually made my way to a job where I lead a local church in reaching our community for Christ. Our church meets weekly for corporate worship. The hours are published and easy to see for everyone interested. We gather and serve our community at least monthly. We do these things without fear of persecution.

It's true that some may sneer or think how gullible we are for believing in One we can't see. But physical persecution is something we needn't fear. That's not true for many brothers and sisters throughout the world. Susan Wunderink posted yesterday at Christianity Today regarding the death of a sister. Gayle Williams was killed for serving those around her. It seems she wasn't evangelizing - technically. But the Taliban thought her to be a threat and disposed of her.

The tragedy that I think of includes Gayle. But also tragic is those of us who return to our safe places of ministry, employment, and even recreation, without knowing or caring about a faithful sister who was murdered for serving those different than she. I'm reminded of how much I take for granted, how blessed I am, and how those who God has placed in harm's way need our prayers for God's safekeeping. So tell me. Have you heard? Do you care?

A Great Word for Scrabble

I've never been much of a Scrabble fan. But I do understand the concept. Of course, the more letters one uses to form words, the more points are rewarded. I have a suggestion for those of you who play...SUPRALAPSARIAN. Sure you would have to have some luck. But you never know. This could be a winner. Of course, before using this word, you might obtain a good theological dictionary. As thorough as Noah Webster was, his editors didn't include this word in the edition I have. For those of you intent on using the word in a conversation, supralapsarian is defined as "the view that God, contemplating man as yet unfallen, chose some to recieve eternal life and rejected all others." This according to Theopedia.

Continuing our study through election in Perspectives on Election, we now turn to an essay by Dr. Robert Reymond, Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at Bob Jones University.

Dr. Jones begins by sharing from the Westminster Confession of Faith. "...for the manifestation his own glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlatsting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death" (III/iii) (153). He continues to quote from the WCOF (1646) time and time again. Because of space, you can find the document here.

The WCOF states that Adam was placed in the Garden and had the ability to obey God or rebel and sin. However, because of mankind's (Adam's) choice to rebel against God in the Garden, the offspring of Adam (all mankind except Jesus) no longer has the same ability. Man is dead in sin (Rom 3:23, 5:12). The WCOF then makes mention of an "effectual call" (Chapter X), stating that only those God has elected (prior to creation) will be saved. The rest of mankind is doomed to damnation (Chapter XXXIII).

This post is not intended to be a treatise on the Westminster Confession of Faith. However, Dr. Reymond continues to move point by point through the document, while staking his claim. I intend to hear more from Dr. Reymond next time, rather than hearing again from the WCOF.

By the way, when making his arguments, Dr. Reymond continues to preface his statements with the phrase "the bibically informed Christian will conclude..." Does this bother anyone except me?

What are your thoughts?

My Problem With Mission Statements

Yesterday, a good friend and I had the opportunity to drive to Albuquerque and hear Brian Jones, pastor of Christ Church of the Valley in Philly. Brian had many good things to say. Perhaps I'll blog about a few in the coming weeks. If you ever get a chance to hear him, don't hesitate. Sadly, he's called it quits on the blog (although he was encouraged to begin again yesterday :).

One of the things I was struck with yesterday was how important we make mission statements in the local church. It seems the church always has to have the latest and "greatest" mission statment. The leadership provides some catchy saying in an attempt to get others to understand what the church is all about. What hit me yesterday is: Why do we (as the Church) use such things to market who we are? If we're being the church, hasn't our mission statement already been established?

Don't get me wrong. I've bought into the necessity of mission statement before. In the churches I've pastored, we've used A Real Church In a Real World serving a Real God, Reaching Up Reaching Out Reaching In, and now At the Heart of the Community with the Community at Heart.

Here's the problem: If we're trying to be the church and not allow the corporate world to inundate what we're doing, why do we need to establish a catchy saying so that it will sound cool and look good with our logo? Why not return to what we're supposed to be about? Why not have a mission simple enough so that everyone remembers and understands, while at the same time, it's not something we've created? Wasn't it Jesus who established His mission statement (and ours) as Love God and Love Others?

Sounds like a pretty good mission statement to me. What are your thoughts?

Blue Parakeet (Part 4)

McKnight moves from writing about discernment (Section 3) to giving an example - in this case, women in ministry. Again, the reader is encouraged to visit the question Do I read the Bible through tradition or with tradition? The answer will surely lead to certain outcomes.

In this case, McKnight makes the argument that the Church has read through tradition. In other words, God's principles were established and were never intended to change from the original (even within a culture or a time period). For that reason, McKnight maintains women in the church have never had a "fair shot" when it came to pastoring or teaching (especially holding authority over men). McKnight is quick to point out that instead of reading through tradition, one should read through Story (refer to Section 1). According to McKnight, reading through Story leads one to restoration/redemption/the way things were intended. He refers the reader back to the Garden when man and woman had a mutual relationship with God (cf Galatians 3:28).

When one asks the question "What did women do?" in the New Testament, he is obligated to study the influence of women such as Deborah, Esther, Mary, Junia, Priscilla, and Phoebe. According to McKnight, reading about these women in the Church (through tradition in lieu of with tradition) has been minimal and created a "Blue Parakeet".

McKnight then takes his readers (and a group of students) through a case study on 1 Timothy 2:8-15. His point is clear: We choose to adhere to some of Paul's commands and not others. Dr. McKnight then summarizes his thoughts reminding readers of Gen. 3:16 "... he (man) will rule over you", 2 Cor. 5:17 "... a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!", and arguing for the mutuality of relationship. Again, it seems imperative to read the Bible as Story.

As a good professor/writer does, Dr. McKnight then summarizes each section of the book and how they interact with one another. "Reading the Bible as Story teaches us to go back to that story so we know how to go forward in our world ... The story of the Bible is not only the story of our past, it is the story of our future." (212).

A Few Things:
I really enjoyed this read. McKnight is easy to read. His points are coherent and clear. He writes in a way that challenges the reader to think, while at the same time, writing in such a way that the reader is prevented from perceiving any arrogance on the part of the author. I would recommend the Blue Parakeet to any serious Bible student. The book is released November 1.

General Call (vocatio externa) or...?

What a wild week. Thanks for your patience. The Fodder typically posted on Fridays will be replaced with the last of the McKnight Blue Parakeet reviews. Now, on to election.

Last week, we observed Dr. Ware's thoughts of election specifically through Ephesians 1. Today, we move on to what Ware (and others) term "effectual call." In other words, Ware is quick to mention a general call (vocatio externa) from God "extended to all people everywhere, that whoever hears the gospel is invited to come to Christ and be saved" (15). He even goes to the trouble of footnoting passages such as Isaiah 45:22, 55:1; Matthew 11:28, 22:2-14; John 7:37; and Revelation 22:17.

Ware then mentions a "special" (his term) call "... because 1) it is a call to salvation directed only to some people, not all, and 2) it is a call that always succeeds in bringing people to saving faith in Christ" (16). This special call would be synonymous with an effectual call (vocatio interna).

In an attempt to make his point of the effectual call, Dr. Ware then returns to Romans 8:28-30. According to Ware's interpretation of this passage, the calling of God to be saved here is extended only to some and not to all - those he predestined. Thus, this call is not extended to all people everywhere but only to a certain subset of the whole of humanity, viz., only to the predestined" (ibid). Ware goes on to maintain, "If God unconditionally elected just certain specific persons to be saved, and if this election is grounded only in the good pleasure and will of God and does not consider the characters, actions, or choices of these individuals, and if this election of God is certain so that those individuals cannot fail to be saved, then it follows that God must so work in them particularly such that they, but not others, are surely and certainly saved" (17-18).

Suffice it to say that we'll return to the conversation of effectual call in later posts. As for now, any thoughts on what Ware has to say or on the Romans 8 passage?

Friday Fodder

As you know, today our House of Representatives will debate (and possibly vote) for the second time, regarding a "buyout" costing $700,000,000,000. The first fell short by 13 votes on Monday causing a dip on Wall Street. On Wednesday, the Senate passed a plan including the previous amount + $120,000,000 of tax breaks etc.

Although I'm interested in politics, As The Crow is not the time and place. Just a couple of things today:

1. Pundits have said the legislation passing or failing to pass is a "life or death situation" for our economy. In other words, passing this law will save us or failing to act will cause the economy to go into a tailspin and lead us into similar situations as the Great Depression. Someone needs to cue the Chicken Little music here. The sky is falling! The sky is falling! If one listens to our leaders, it seems that success or failure is based on what we do or don't do. Do you ever get the sense that God is just shaking his head? Isn't it time that we place our faith in God rather than man?

2. Our society has become a place where victims are rampant. In other words, there is no personal responsibility for anything that goes south in my life. "It's the way I was raised, my co-workers, or just bad luck that has caused all of my problems." In the case above, we blame the creditors, the "players" on Wall Street, or the government. When does it become my responsibility to refuse a credit card, a mortgage I can't afford, etc.

Just a few things to chew on. I'll be glad to hear what you have to say.

Election in Ephesians 1

Our survey of Perspectives on Election continues by turning to Ephesians 1. This particular chapter has been part of the heated debate regarding election for some time.

Dr. Ware focuses most of his attention on verses 4, 5, and 11. He is quick to state, "Paul brings to his mind and lips specific reasons for why God should by blessed, the first and second items he recalls and celebrates are our election in Christ (1:4) and our predestination to be adopted children through Christ (1:5)... the primary purpose for including this detail, it seems, establishes the fact that election of those whom God will save is God's choice pure and simple, a choice with which we had nothing to do and could have had nothing to do" (italics mine 13). I would be remiss if I didn't list a summary from Dr. Ware. "God works everything according to His will, but notice that nothing is said here (1:3-14) about God working things out according to our wills! In other words, all that God chooses is unconditional, including his predestination and election of us" (14).

Dr. Cottrell accuses Ware of using the "usual Calvinist spin" (61). Of course, Cottrell offers another interpretation of election - namely that Paul is speaking of a predestination of Jews and Gentiles. "I base this case on two facts: 1) the sudden shift from first person plural to second person plural in 1:13; and 2) the underlying theme of the letter in 2:11-3:21 i.e., God's eternal purpose of uniting Jews and Gentiles together through Jesus Christ in to a single body, the Church" (ibid).

Personal Observation

Dr. Ware maintains his argument of unconditional election based on verses 6, 12, and 14. However, he overlooks verse 13, despite 1:3-14 being one complete sentence. According to the NRSV, verse 13 reads, "In him you also, when you had heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and had believed in him, were marked with the seal of the promised Holy Spirit;" (emphasis mine). Now is not the time and place to debate the participle use of "believed". However, it seems the seal of the Holy Spirit is based upon one acting on their knowledge - something Dr. Ware conveniently overlooks.

Any thoughts or disagreements?

Blue Parakeet (Parts 2 and 3)

Part 2 Listening

After discussing reading the Bible as Story, McKnight then encourages his readers to hear God within the Story. In other words, reading the black or red words on the white page is not enough. The things read should be meditated on and the questions "So what?" or "What does God want me to do?" should be asked. Only when one considers what is heard can they love God, through listening and ultimately acting on what they've heard.

McKnight chooses to describe the listening one does to God's Word as "missional listening". The purpose of listening to Story is not just for information. The information must lead one through a process of spiritual growth and following the model of Jesus Christ (serving God and serving others). This is only accomplished through and with the Holy Spirit.

Part 3 Discerning

Following the teachings of Jesus within the context of Scripture is where things get a little muddled. In other words, does one follow every commandment in Scripture or pick and choose what to follow? According to McKnight, the Church has picked and chosen what to follow (and what not to follow) from its inception. He encourages his readers to own up to picking and choosing what commandments they adhere to for their own benefit.

The section includes examples of controversial subjects such as divorce, what role women play in the church, speaking in tongues, etc. According to McKnight, "All genuine biblical faith takes the gospel message and 'incarnates' it in a context...We can be firmer: it is unlikely, since it is clear that each of these persons adapted the Plot and Story for their day, that their message or manner of life will be precisely the same as our message and our manner of life" (143).

Next week: The Role of Women in Today's Church (Part 4 0f Blue Parakeet)

Any thoughts regarding parts 2 and 3?

More Weekend Fodder

Two weeks in a row - say it aint so! Two Saturdays in a row with something to say (other than Boomer Sooner). I'll use this post as some sort of confession, if you don't mind.

I learn best in dialogue - conversation with those around a table (literal or proverbial), some who may agree and those who may not. I've always been intrigued by attempting to understand what people believe and why. For example, almost a year ago, God allowed me to meet a man who was a pastor of a church just a few miles from the congregation I pastored. The pastor and I began having lunch and praying for one another. From time to time, we'd discuss theology. We agreed on much. We disagreed on a few things. The friendship during the previous year has blessed me in many ways.

One of the disagreements the pastor and I had was one of election - specifically how Scripture defines the Elect. Although I was sure of what I believed, our discussions led me to begin a deeper study on the subject. Reading some of his recent posts, I know we continue to disagree; however, we're still friends.

All that, to say this. There are blogs I've run across where the purpose seems to be arguing for one view over the other - even to the detriment of relationships. That was never the case with As The Crow Flies and will never be this blogs intent. Again, everyone should be allowed at the "table" to discuss the issues as they see them. Each one should bring coffee, beer, or whatever drink of choice, pull up a chair at the table, and share their opinion. The older I get, the more I realize I need to learn.

Recently, the Thursday posts have concerned election while reviewing Perspectives on Election. I've attempted to present two sides (Calvinism and Arminian). As I recently mentioned, there will be times that I also have a comment about the articles written. The debate between Calvinism and Arminians, the question of who and who is not elect, and how those elect are determined, is often somewhat heated. For that reason, some believe these are discussions that might be avoided. In other words, "There has always been disagreement and there will always be, why throw fuel to the fire?" My respectful response is: If we don't study (even the hard things in Scripture) then we've relegated our responsibility as believers to something that it should't be.

My attempt is not to convince anyone of my opinion. I'd really like to hear the opposing view. Again, that's the way I learn and that's how my faith is strengthened. I'll attempt to complete the study, without making it too tedious.

Thanks for hearing my "confession" and for listening. And if the study is something you're even remotely interested in, please join the discussion on Thursdays. If not, the table is open Tuesday-Friday as well.

Blessings!
Mike

Friday Fodder

One of the things I really appreciate about our corporate worship time is the time we speak about prayer concerns. If facilitated well, those sharing won't preach or see this opportunity as a time for "open mic". However, we've had our challenges.

For those of you who are unaware, we take 5-10 minutes during worship to mention any new requests and then pray about those things. Prayer is not just talked about. We actually do it. I've had those visiting tell me that was something that really "stood out" for them.

After facilitating the time for several weeks, I was convicted stronger and stronger each day about the time becoming a laundry list of wants, needs, and desires. I've attempted to refocus our attention on how blessed we are. I begin with the question, "How has God blessed you this morning? This week?"

It seems when we focus our attention on how God has blessed, the needs, wants, and desires are not as numerous. God has blessed us in so many ways! So what about it? Are you more concerned with your wants, needs, and desires? Or do you recognize God's gracious hand upon your life?

The Purpose of Election?

Today, we continue our study through Perspectives on Election. We've reached the point where we need to discuss texts from the Pauline corpus.

Again, we'll begin with Dr. Ware. "One of the clearest and strongest assertions of the unconditional nature of God's election is given by Paul in Romans 9:10-16" (Ware 9). Maintaining that some scholars believe that this particular passage is in regards to calling for service rather than salvation, Ware points to the beginning of the chapter and then 10:1-4 to make a stand for Paul speaking of salvation. He makes mention of God's concern for Israel's salvation (ibid). However, Ware then somehow moves to an individualistic idea of salvation (for those loved enough to be chosen). "As Paul explains, before the two had been born, and before either had done anything good or bad, God chose Jacob over his older brother Esau" (Ware 10).

Ware then moves to Romans 11:5-7. Interestingly enough, Dr. Ware returns now to a nationalistic view of salvation (the nation of Israel). Based on this passage, Ware argues the Apostle is referring to a gift of election and not salvation (12, emphasis mine). In other words, although the nation of Israel was chosen by God, only a select "remnant" from the nation was elected. Again, Dr. Ware states, "Here God's grace is not only grace (unmerited favor) that saves but grace (unmerited favor) that elects. Those who otherwise would be hardened in their rebellion are instead saved, and this has happened only because God's grace has elected them to be saved. Election then is unconditional" (12-13).

Cottrell begins his statements in regards to Romans 9:10-16. "As I argue in my own essay in this book, the point is unconditional election to service, not to salvation" (Cottrell 60, emphasis his). According to Cottrell, where Dr. Ware errs is using the beginning of Chapter 9 and 10:1-4 to make his argument in regards to the type of election. "This argument [election to salvation] is fallacious, however, because the issue is not whether the passage is about salvation but whether the election to which the passage refers is about salvation..."(ibid., emphasis his).

As to Romans 11:5-7, Cottrell distinguishes the "election" in this passage from that in Chapter 9 - this being for the purpose of salvation and the previous for service. Cottrell makes the point "The error here is to equate unconditional and undeserved" (60-61).

Personal Thoughts

1. I recognize some see this study as somewhat tedious. More about that in another post.
2. I've attempted to and will continue to provide "both sides" of the issue as described in Perspectives on Election. From time to time, I will point out what I perceive to be strengths or weaknesses with both sides.
3. I've pointed out above that I think it strange for Dr. Ware to choose his text, make the argument (in this case seeing the salvation of Israel as a nation) and then changing the argument (to a more individual salvation), before returning again to his previous thought of Israel. If Paul is writing with any coherence, wouldn't it make sense for him to continue the previous thought (God's relationship with Israel as a nation)? For those interested, the pizza man has a good post here in regards to Romans 9.
4. Next week: Election in Ephesians 1

Review of McKnight's Blue Parakeet #1

Recently, I was blessed to be able to receive an Advance Reader Copy of Scot Mcknight's the Blue Parakeet. The book hits the shelves in November. Based upon his blog and other books, I was looking forward to receiving this book to review.

McKnight begins by asking how one determines how to read Scripture. He then introduces us to a concept known as a "blue parakeet" - ways in which we read the Bible and attempt to "tame" those various passages. McKnight argues it shouldn't be attempted and can't be done. His foundation for his work is completed in the introduction (Chapters 1 and 2).

Section 1 (Chapters 3-5) then takes the reader into how McKnight teaches the Bible should be read, specifically, as Story. According to McKnight, too many go to the Bible and read snipets of a story, believing them to stand alone. For example, many choose to focus on God's promises or God's blessings, as they read. However, when one reads the Bible in it's entireity, one sees God's Story in 66 books.

I appreciated McKnight's example of wikipedia. After pointing out that wikipedia is a site of ongoing definitions, McKnight perceives the compiling of Scripture in that way. In other words, several authors describing one Story with their individual story. In the Story, McKnight points out 1) Oneness (the way God created); 2) Otherness (the result of the Fall and mankind's pride); and 3) Oneness (restoration of relationships including God, man, self, and others).

A review of sections 2 and 3 will follow next week.

What's With the #s?

Advertising and marketing firms have always used numbers for the purpose of "knowing their target audience". For example, when one goes to the supermarket and makes a purchase, the bar codes on the items are recorded. Although there are various reasons, some include 1) minimizing the work at the time of inventory; and 2) determining who is purchasing what items for the purpose of marketing those items in creative/better ways.

I worked in radio for sometime. Part of the job included calling people at random and determining what radio station they listened to, at what times of the day, for what reason, etc. The radio stations would then compare their findings with that of a national survey company and then provide the #s to those in sells positions. After all, those buying advertising could then determine where, when, and how often to advertise.

One might think the church is immune to some of the #s. However, they would be wrong. Consider the work of George Barna, Christian researcher. Every few months, Barna provides those in ministry with #s, in an attempt to better equip them for their ministries. Ed Stetzer, church growth "guru", also has something to say about Christian research. Although the post is lengthy, you might benefit from reading what Stetzer has to say about Christian research. The link is here.

I've always been a bit skeptical about the validity of #s. In other words, who's doing the survey, what's their motive, and who are they talking to? For example, I could do a survey on the importance of dairy in one's life and use the Dairy Farmers of America to provide my data. Chances are, the farmers would assure me they have "happy cows" and dairy is a necessity in one's diet. Those reading the compiled #s might not question the farmer's integrity or honesty, but would do well to learn why I chose to survey 1000 farmers in Wisconsin.

So what are your thoughts? Should we rely on #s? After all, it's an election year. And I've been told, "The numbers don't lie." Should we do away with surveys altogether? Anyone else a bit skeptical?

Weekend Fodder

Typically, I attempt to provide some chewing material on Fridays. However, I ran across the phrase below on a blog and wanted to get your thoughts. The context is in regards to Christianity and healthcare; more specifically, "How would God want us to deal with healthcare?". The post was written by Neale Donald Walsch. You can find it here.

Now here's the quote. The question is asked (bold type) and then Walsch's response.

What does God will in this question?
God's Will is our will. God wills for us what we will for ourselves. God is not some being separate from us, "willing" something that He cannot make us do, but wishes that He could. God is the Life that is flowing through us. We are God, physicalized. We are the physical manifestation of the Divine. And because we are Divine, we can create life any way that we want it on this earth. We have the collective power to do so. We can solve any problem that we face -- including the problem of health care. It is simply a matter of Will.

Any objections to what Walsch says? Any applause? Other thoughts?

Friday Fodder

Yaaaaaaaaaahooooooooooooooooooo!

Mcknight's The Blue Parakeet came in the mail yesterday. I look forward to reading the book and reviewing it here. Because of the responsibility I feel towards Scot and Zondervan, other books have been pushed aside for a short time. You'll note what I've read this year. I continue to reread A Community Called Atonement and N.T. Wright's Surprised By Hope among others.

On deck, I plan to read Frank Viola's Reimagining Church and Eugene Peterson's Eat This Book. Although I'm unaware of any patterns, you can see what I read and attempt to take in. Any suggestions?

"Election" in Acts

Today, we continue our study through the perspectives on election.

When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and praised the word of the Lord; and as many as had been destined for eternal life became believers. (NRSV)

Bruce Ware turns to his second text in Acts 13:48. Concerning the emphasized phrase above, Ware uses the Holman Christian Standard Bible and maintains, "One indisputable aspect of Luke's statement, 'All who had been appointed to eternal life believed,' is that God's appointment of those who would receive eternal life preceded the belief of these very people" (8). He goes on to say if those believed simply based upon their decision and no act of God, then why would Luke make so big of a point (ibid)? Ware maintains Luke is pointing out God's choosing. In other words, when the Gospel is presented to the Gentiles, according to Ware, it's because the Jews (as a whole) rejected the Gospel, whereas the Gentiles (as a whole) accepted the Good News. "In short, these Gentiles believed the Gospel, while Jews rejected the same saving message because God had chosen these very Gentiles to believe" (9).

The response to Ware is taken up by Jack Cottrell. As to this particular verse, Cottrell maintains the verb form of tetagmenoi "should be taken as middle voice, not passive" (60). In other words, Cottrell translates the verse, "As many as arranged themselves unto eternal life believed" or "As many as turned themselves toward eternal life believed" (ibid). How one translates the tense of the verb from the original language seems to make a difference.

Next week, we turn to the writings of Paul. Any thoughts in regards to the verse in Acts?

Holiness, Righteousness, Faithfulness

Deuteronomy 28 is what most would call "black and white". In other words, there are consequences for obeying God's Law and consequences for disobeying the same Law. Obedience leads to blessings. Disobedience results in curses and destruction.

The original readers were reminded of God's grace and mercy. Years prior, they were led from slavery in Egypt - a horrific way of life - to freedom and on their way to the land God had promised. Things would work out well if they valued their freedom and chose to honor the One who provides that same freedom. Again, it appears their future would be a result based on their decisions.

Since God sent His Son to die for the sins of the world (2 Cor 5:21, 1 Jn 2:2), we have lived under grace rather than Law (cf. Paul's admonitions to the Galatians among other texts). Although I want to make decisions that result in the blessings mentioned in Deut. 28, my flesh continues to drag me "south". And the Bible makes it clear this is going to be an issue until Christ returns and restores all things.

About this time, Romans 7 might have come to mind. There's a great post from a friend here. Kinney Mabry has a good post on the Law here.

Although we no longer live under the Law, the New Testament is clear New Testament Christians continue to have responsibilities. Consider Jesus declaring, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill" (Matt. 5:17 NRSV) or Peter reminding readers "For it is written, 'You shall be holy, for I am holy" (1 Pet. 1:16 NRSV).

My decision today is to live for Christ. I know based on previous experience, I'm going to sin. I'm going to be selfish. I'm going to "miss the mark". But I'm not going to rationalize those things. I refuse to push them aside and just claim "That's just the way I am." I'll call them what they are - SIN. Then I'll go to Christ and repent, knowing "...he who is faithful and just will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (1 Jn 1:9).

Anything you want to say?

Things Learned On The Road

The family and I had the chance to return to the Austin area last weekend. The primary reason for going back was performing a wedding; however, the visits we had with those people we love was unbeatable. Here are a few things learned or confirmed from the recent trip.

1. Somehow, the stress of a wedding (rehearsal, planning, order of service, weather, etc.) is always worth it.
2. Traffic in central Texas is definitely getting worse. With a few rare exceptions, people are in a hurry and their errand is more important than anyone else's errand.
3. The people who had become our family at a recent ministry (and allowed us to become a part of theirs) still love us. Sharing memories was priceless.
4. We stayed at friends house who also hosted evacuees from Ike. During the stressful time of watching the news coverage, I was reminded of how much I take for granted. It could all be gone tomorrow and insurance doesn't bring it all back.
5. There are 433 miles, 15 towns or cities, and 1,573,829,001 bugs between here and there. BTW, we hit all but 4 of the bugs.

It's good to be home!

Friday Fodder

Anyone at the church I pastor will tell you I'm BIG about discipleship. One of the things I've been convinced of the last few years is the church dumbing down the message we have for the world. In other words, why do people who claim to be a follower of Christ look the same as they did as before? Why is there no change? How important is discipleship? What's the difference between discipleship and someone going over the edge into legalsim? Should these things even be a part of conversation? Check out this video and then let me know what you think.

September 11 7#

Today marks the 7th anniversary that our country was so violently attacked. There will be several memorials throughout the day. Many people will have things to say and they will say them much better than I ever could.

For that reason, I would encourage you to check out their thoughts. Our study on election will resume next week.

God Bless America and America Bless God!

I've Been Tagged!

Okay. My friend Ted was kind enough to tag me. It seems, these are the rules:

1. Write about 5 specific ways blogging has affected you, either positively or negatively.
2. link back to the person who tagged you
3. link back to this parent post (L.L. Barkat is not so much interested in generating links, but rather in tracking the meme so she can perhaps do a summary post later on that looks at patterns and interesting discoveries.)
4. tag a few friends or five, or none at all
5. post these rules— or just have fun breaking them

So here goes:
1. Blogging for me has been fun. Although I've been tempted to quit from time to time, I'm always encouraged by friends in the blogosphere to keep writing. I look back in the archives from time to time and review what I was reading/studying months ago. Blogging takes time and effort. I'm still attempting to get on a "set schedule" - whatever that means in ministry. The negatives are miniscule with blogging. The positives are priceless.
2. Blogs I enjoy reading include Jesus Community, The Jesus Creed, Ben Witherington, She who reads, may write, and Preacherman.
3. Here's L.L's blog. Her thoughts are always worth the time.
4. I'm tagging a friend at Political Hope.
5. See above. Good reading!

The North American Church

From time to time, I check out church research "guru" Ed Stetzer's blog. You can find it here. The most recent trend Stetzer points to is evangelical churches in North America forgetting their mission of sharing the Gospel message and replacing it with a "twelve step program for inner peace." The results have been a lack of importance for evangelism in the North American church.

Stetzer's biggest concern is Christians have lost confidence in the Gospel. In other words, we've moved past the good news of Christ providing restoration, hope, and love to a dying cosmos. We've begun to see salvation more as a individual blessing and for that reason, the challenges in people's lives and meeting those challenges (recovery groups, benevolence ministries, etc.) have taken the lead over the power of the cross. For that reason, the church in North America in is decline. Those "outside our walls" become complacent, apathetic, or skeptical about what goes on inside the church - that is, until a practical problem arises in their lives. The North American church has become a therapy center rather than a place to understand the Gospel.

What are your thoughts?

Friday Fodder

"The only people who can hurt you deeply are the ones you allow to get deep inside your soul." - Erwin McManus

Transparency in relationships is something we all struggle with (some, of course, more than others). Many of us carry scars from previous relationships. The scars run deep and sometimes last for years. Because of the past hurts, many choose to be intentional about keeping others at arms length. They miss the love they so desperately need.

Without the possibility of love, there would be no scars. Without love, we could never experience God's greatest attribute. We would never be able to know one another intimately. Isn't the danger of scars worth the love we experience?

What are your thoughts?

Unconditional Election in John 17

Bruce Ware, Senior Associate Dean at the School of Theology of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville is the first essayist regarding the doctrine of election. The response for this particular passage is provided by Jack Cottrell, Professor at Cinncinati Bible Seminary.

Ware writes from the Calvinist perspective and argues firstly for unconditional election.

"Unconditional election refers to the claim that God's selection of those whom he would save was not based upon (or, not 'conditioned' on) some fact or feature of those individuals' lives, in particular...not conditioned on something they would do, some choice they would make, how good or bad they might be, or anything else specifically true about them in contrast to others also enslaved to sin and deserving God's just condemnation." (3)

Dean Ware begins to make his case with the prayer of Jesus in John 17, using specifically verses 2, 6, 9, and 24. The phrase Ware points to over and over again is "to all whom you have given him (Jesus)." The phrase occurs in similar ways in the verses Ware mentions above. Anticipating an argument from classical Arminians, Ware states, "Belief is necessary, to be sure. But those who believe are those given to Christ by the Father" (7).

Professor Cottrell responds to the idea, by maintaining "...that Jesus' references to 'those whom the Father has given him' apply to the twelve apostles, not to the totality of saved individuals" (59). Cottrell's argument is based upon verse 20, which reads, "I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word" (NRSV). Cottrell moves on to argue the election in John 17 is for apostolic service rather than for salvation (59). His belief is the call to apostolic service is also true of John 15:16. The Arminian professor then maintains "their (the apostle's) salvation is not assured simply because they have been 'given' to Jesus by the Father" (60).

It's obvious that the two interpretations of the prayer of Jesus in John 17 (at least with election) are polar opposites. One of these distinguished individuals might be wrong (causing the other to be in error), both may be wrong, but it seems both cannot be correct. Which begs the question: Is the exegesis provided good exegesis? Do either or both of these individuals go to this passage with "an end" in mind? If so, isn't that dangerous?

What are your thoughts about this particular passage and how it fits into election?

Election starts Thursday!

I've looked forward to receiving a particular book in the mail for the last few weeks. Finally, the book arrived. The work is edited by Chad Owen Brand and is entitled Perspectives On Election. Five theologians write essays describing their view on the doctrine of election and then a response is given.

The Apostle Paul writes to the Ephesians "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world...this is the pledge of our inheritance toward redemption as God's own people, to the praise of his glory" (Eph. 1:3-14).

For centuries, this text has been paramount among those who debate what election means through the New Testament. Of course there are others. But the Ephesian text seems to cause people on both sides to stake their claim to the truth. From the time Luther and Erasmus disagreed about the term and its meaning in the 5th century until the modern era, good people have disagreed.

Our task on Thursdays for the next several weeks is to look at the different perspectives and attempt to determine Paul's meaning of the term. I'll attempt to summarize the essays and the responses. I look forward to hearing your thoughts as well.

Better Late Than Never...I guess!

Last week, I'd planned to post on William Young's The Shack near the end of the week. You've figured out by now, that didn't happen. I should have warned you. I have a very analytical mind. Sometimes that's beneficial. Other times, not so much. This time, it's taken me a few extra hours to get through this particular book.

To be honest, I really didn't want to read Young's work. My reading list is always full and this book wasn't on it. And then friends and family read the book inquiring of what I thought. I still wasn't interested. I heard someone else say, "This book will change your life." I'd heard that before. But the way it was said had me thinking, "What's the big deal?" I was then shown the cover and noticed Eugene Peterson's quote. "This book has the potential to do for our generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for his. It's that good!" I knew I had no choice but to read it and weigh in with my humble opinion. So here goes:

Mackenzie Phillips takes his children on a camping trip. His young girl is abducted and murdered. For good reason, Phillips grieves and experiences A Great Sadness. He steps over the line when he accuses God of being responsible for the tragedy.

Phillips receives a letter from God inviting him back to the scene of the crime. He returns to interact with God through something of a time/location warp. Through the three personalities of God and wisdom, Phillips begins to understand God and His love for mankind. He's then given the choice of whether to stay and continue to learn from God or return to his "other life" and continue the healing process with his family. He chooses to return knowing that decision will bring different challenges.

First, the good things:
1. This book really makes the reader think about theological concepts. Every reader that follows the plot will be challenged to think about his/her beliefs. God can use any media (including a fictional book) to call mankind to Himself.
2. I appreciate the way Young describes the interaction between God and the primary character. The outflowing of God (and His love) throughout Mack's time at the shack flowed easily throughout.
3. Young's "setting the scene" in the first few chapters was difficult to traverse. After the plotline begins to share the story, this became much easier. All in all, I found the work to be enjoyable.

Some issues:
1. Although I appreciated Young challenging the common view of God (an old man with a flowing beard), there were times I felt God's humanity was stressed more than God's divinity. I realize Jesus was fully human. But He was also fully God.
2. Young's view of God is about love, acceptance, and forgiveness. However, because of the importance of seeing God's love, justice and man's responsibility takes a back seat to Young's attributes of God.
3. When Mack is allowed to observe his earthly father and attempt to reconcile, it's almost as if Young moves a little bit New Age(y).

Again, I really appreciated the book as a whole. Would I give it as much praise as Peterson? Uh...no. Is it worth the read? I think so. Almost anything that raises questions about God and our relationship with God should be considered. Is there a genre for Young in the future? Let's wait and see his next project.

Friday Fodder

Today, I'd really like to hear your thoughts on knowledge - particularly different types of knowledge. For example:

1. Is there a difference between head knowledge and heart knowledge?

2. Explain what it means to KNOW GOD, rather than KNOWING ABOUT GOD. Chances are, you've heard those cliches as I have and maybe even used them.

3. Can a historian "know" a person through a book or does one have to "do life" with someone else to gain knowledge?

4. What about pictures? Do they reveal who we are? Can I know someone else or myself through a picture?

5. What can I KNOW about someone or myself, by listening to life experiences of others (stories)?

A Letter of Apology

Dear Confused,

You have likely seen my "name changes" over the last few days. As you know, when posting a comment, one is required to have some sort of moniker. "Mike" was fine for me - that is, until I saw how many other Mikes there were. I then changed my name to "The Other Mike." Before I was berated by friends in the blogosphere about how corny the new name was, I changed it to "The Crow."

Yeah! That was it. It was an old nickname. The blog is As The Crow Flies. Everything seemed to fit. And then I remembered a dark film called The Crow from the 90s. I've never seen the movie but the photos allude to a "darkness." Is that really what I want my friends to think when they see The Crow respond to their blog? I think not. I've settled on "crowm". Speak now or forever hold your peace. Do you know of a problem with crowm?

Throughout Scripture, a child's name alluded to her/his destiny. The name "Michael" means "one who is like God." Joshua means "a savior of his people." The followers of Jesus were called "Christians" in Antioch - Christian meaning one who is like Christ.

My wife and I thought for several months about our son's name. We settled on Christian. We want him to know what his name means and how important it was for us to give him that name.

So what's the big deal? Does a name "make" or "break" a person? What's in a name?

Sincerely,
Mike, The Crow, crowm

P.S. I apologize to those of you who have felt like I've had some sort of identity crisis. Hopefully, it's over now.

Is it good to grow?

On 4/18, I posted a question that was asked of me. The question: What's holding you back? My close friend inquired due to being concerned about my spiritual growth. I didn't get much response then (okay, no response), so I thought I would ask again.

What's holding you back? Is it poor choices you make? Is it social injustice? Is it something else? What about future generations? Is there a connection between this discussion and how at times we slow our kids down so that others can catch up?

Have you seen this? This, of course, is physical. How much more important is the question when we consider spirituality? Do I slow down so that others can catch up?

What are your thoughts?

A Hodgepodge of Thoughts

* Alright, this is not the time or place to weigh in on the DNC convention. Although I enjoy watching and studying politics, I'll leave my comments for elsewhere.

** I'm approximately halfway through The Shack. Uhhh, interesting. I'll plan on a review by the end of the week.

*** The Blue Parakeet has yet to arrive. I was really looking forward to the review. I guess I didn't make Zondervan's "cut." It looks like I'll have to splurge in November when the book is released.

**** Part of my study for the Romans class has led me to Roger Olson's Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities. Olson is a Baptist professor at Baylor but a self-proclaimed Arminian. Although I've read it before, it was more of a cursory read. I'd recommend it to anyone interested in the Arminian/Calvinist discussion.

***** Football season is just around the corner. High School and college teams begin playing this week. The professionals start the following week. Fans will have great aspirations for their teams. For many the aspirations will wane by halftime. For others, their hope will last the entire season. It's what hope does to people.

Don't you hate a hodgepodge of whatever?

Friday Fodder

Friendship has always been a prayer for my life. I don't mean acquantainces or relationships we have that never seem to move from the shallow end of the pool into something a lot more dangerous. The relationships I think of include transparency, honesty, accountability, etc. These are people who laugh with you and cry with you. They know much about you and love you anyway. Most people believe those relationships to be few and far between.

I've even been told those relationships should be counted on one hand. They're that special. A few people mention their relationship with their spouse being this way. They're blessed. My wife and I have a great relationship. We share many things. However, I'm thinking of men challenging men to be spiritual leaders. Relationships that entail women challenging other women to provide spiritual nourishment for the home.

If God created us to encourage and challenge one another, shouldn't this deep relationship be a huge part of our lives? Is this something we should pray for?

The Next Challenge

I'm between blogging on books. Hopefully, McKnight's The Blue Parakeet will arrive soon and I can weigh in. For the time being, I've finally (after much prompting) picked up The Shack and will post a few times about the work.

The next challenge is teaching a small group through the book of Romans. I've been told many times, "If you want everyone to know what you believe, teach Romans. There will be no doubt." I've done this a few times and have been encouraged each and every time. My faith has become stronger and I pray others have grown closer to Christ as well.

So what about it? Some of you have actually studied the letter with me. What's your take? For those of you preparing, what's the apprehension? For the teachers/preachers in the blogosphere, what's your advice?

The Paraclete (Relationship #12)

Sweet leaves the best for last. Traveling toward the crucifixion, Jesus promised His followers of a paraclete - a comforter, helper, and guide. Upon receiving Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, we receive the Holy Spirit (cf Acts 2). Wherever we go, whatever we do, God's presence lives within us.

He guides in the sense of letting our conscience know the difference between right and wrong. He brings conviction when and where its needed. Our prayer should be the same as John. "He (Jesus) must increase, but I must decrease" (John 3:30).

The paraclete also is a friend who comes along side us in life. God has said, "I will never leave you nor will I forsake you" (Dt. 31:6,8; Josh. 1:5). Even though the the Peters, Rhodas, Judas', and Jethros of our lives will let us down, the paraclete (God with us) will never be unfaithful.

Finally, the paraclete is our comforter - not in the sense that He's our slave providing a cold drink, a warm blanket, or a pillow for our weary head. The presence of God in our lives comforts us in that He goes before and behind. He protects us and provides providence. As the Apostle Paul said, "If God be for us, who can be against us?" (Rom. 8:31)

Scripture calls Abraham a friend of God (Is. 41:8). The Gospel is exactly that message. Each one of us can be a friend of God. As Sweet says, "The secret of a happy life is friendship with God" (219).

Too many people believe God to be a standoffish, powerful ogre, just waiting for someone to mess up so that He can make the record straight. When we understand this most important relationship with that of the Paraclete/Holy Spirit, it reidentifies our lives in Christ. God is still all-powerful and holy. That's what makes His offer of being His friend (the Gospel message) so amazing.

Friday Fodder

Etymology is the study of words and how they evolve into meanings different than the original. The meaning of words can also remain constant but how we choose to use them in language might change. For example, does the word "commitment" mean something different than it did fifty years ago? 20 years ago? What about the word "loyalty"? Any change in meaning or how we choose to use that word?

Recently, I've thought much about commitment and loyalty. It seems in present day society, we're only commited to what seems to be convenient for us. One might consider the divorce rate and how the number has seen a sharp incline over recent decates.

Loyalty seems to have changed recently as well. While growing up, I was taught to fulfill your obligations, persevere to the end, and support the small business man who is just trying to make a living. Twenty years later, our society has welcomed commercialization. The small business man has closed shop for the mega store(s).

Many times our attitudes have become "I'll be committed as long as its convenient. I'll persevere until it gets to uncomfortable. I'm loyal until someone or something better comes along." What will societies view of commitment and loyalty look like 20years or 50 years from now? In other words, what are our future generations learning from us today?

When I think about the Bride of Christ, sadly I see no difference than the above. The divorce rate among Christians is similar to that of unbelievers. Church hopping seems to be at an all-time high. Too many believers live with an attitude of "que sara sara - what will be will be". We act like we're in first grade by taking our toys and going home, just because things didn't go our way.

So how 'bout it? Am I making too much of this? Or is something we should be concerned about? Thoughts?