Where we are

This week we will meet from 3-5. We'll start at Romans 14:1. I look forward to seeing you all.

Certainties

Yesterday seemed like a good day to be thinking about taxes. The old saying that “the only certainties are death and taxes,” came to my mind. I think there are another two certainties.

The first thing true of every person, is that we are built with an inescapable need to be in reciprocal and perfect love.

The second is that we are completely incapable of establishing or maintaining reciprocal and perfect love.

What Shall I Do Next?

Last Sunday we discussed the long section in Romans where Paul addresses only the Jews in Rome, and then the short section where Paul talks to the Gentiles about the Jews and how the gentiles should view and treat the Jews.

Several mentioned that they would really like to ask some questions of a practicing Jew. Modern Judaism seems to contradict the Judaism in Biblical times.

I said that I had done that with a Jewish friend several years ago, and maybe I could find another Jewish friend who would be willing to answer questions from the group.

I asked a medical student if she would sit down with us and answer our questions. Explained some of the questions I expected we would ask and assured her that we would be kind, respectful, and that she would leave thinking it was a very pleasant time.

She responded that while she is “a religious person” she feels unqualified to answer our questions. She gave me the name and contact info for the rabbi at a local conservative temple, and for the rabbi at a local “reform” temple.

So, send your vote by taking the poll on this page.

Leadership 3

Another key point is most of the modern books on Christian leadership is “assemble the right team.” One of these well-known books, by a well-known author suggests that potential team members should have “character, competency, and chemistry.”


The thought is that the person should know Christ and walk in honesty and integrity (character), a track record of accomplishment (competency), and “fit in” with the rest of the team (chemistry). While it’s obvious that it would be foolish to do ministry with someone who doesn’t know Christ, is dishonest, is unable to accomplish a task, and annoys everyone else, I wonder how God’s selection method fits these criteria.


Moses was a murderer that succeeded in the great career move of losing his place in a palace to live in a tent and chase sheep around in a desert. I don’t recall Jesus giving the 12 any special screening. He took a pretty variable lot that included some pretty undesirable qualities. And all of them ran away and hid when things got really tough. “Not many wise” of this world are chosen. (I Cor. 1:26)


Why is it dangerous to find someone with character, competency, and chemistry? Because character is impossible to accurately read (man looks at the outward appearance but looks on the heart. I Sam. 17:7). Competency leads to pride (God has chosen the base and despised people so that He would get the glory rather than the person. I Cor. 1:26-29) Chemistry leads to comfort and complacency or a clique that the church people cannot penetrate. (When they were well fed and comfortable, they forgot God. Hos. 13:6)


What do I propose instead? I propose that the church should not seek leaders. A focus on “assembling the right team” is a focus on the wrong thing. The “right team” can accomplish great things, but it cannot, ever, under any circumstances accomplish the right things.


We don’t need to identify great candidates. We need to be broken and lost fellow-laborers with other broken and the lost people until they become fellow-laborers indeed. This is not just a cliché. This is not an excuse to never have paid staff. (although I think most churches rely too heavily on paid staff) This is a fundamental shift in values and focus. It does not matter if our team fits any criteria on any list, has had success in any way, or enjoy the same things in each other’s company. What matters is that we and they be humble in admitting that we are struggling sinners that cannot live for God the way we wish, but despite that, we focus our energies on pleasing Him and serving others in His name, despite our ineptitude which ensures we will routinely fail.


An old song by a very creative Christian artist (Steve Taylor) was called “Jesus is for losers.” (I edited out a few verses here for space)


If I was driven
Driven ahead by some noble ideal
Who took the wheel?


If I was given
Given a glimpse of some glorious road
When was it sold?


So caught up in the chase
I keep forgetting my place


Just as I am
I am stiff-necked and proud
Jesus is for losers
Why do I still play to the crowd?


Just as I am
Pass the compass, please
Jesus is for losers
I'm off about a hundred degrees


If I was groping
Groping around for some ladder to fame
I am ashamed


If I was hoping
Hoping respect would make a sturdy footstool
I am a fool


Bone-weary every climb
Blindsided every time


Just as I am
I am needy and dry
Jesus is for losers
The self-made need not apply


Just as I am
In a desert crawl
Lord, I'm so thirsty
Take me to the waterfall


Just as you are
Just a wretch like me
Jesus is for losers
Grace from the blood of a tree


Just as we are
At a total loss
Jesus is for losers
Broken at the foot of the cross

Love that is hotter than Hell

I like to say that I love people. I just read a passage that made me realize that I really don’t. If Paul were not inspired of the Holy Spirit and if the Scriptures were not the word of God almighty, I would be convinced that Paul was self-deceived.

Under what circumstances would you willingly accept Hell? Eternal damnation and eternal isolation are partial and incomplete descriptions of the horrors it holds. When I contemplate hell I am motivated to an evangelistic zeal for grief over the idea that anyone will face that permanent tragedy.

Paul says he would willingly accept Hell for himself, if it would mean that his Jewish brethren would be spared. (Romans 9:1-3) I am out of words.

Leadership 2

There is a second point, consistently made in the current books on leadership geared toward Christian leaders. It can be worded in several ways, but essentially it is this. “Be single-minded in the sense of that you do not allow anyone to distract or divert attention into any direction other than the vision you have.”

Last night I was reviewing one of those books (a best seller). In it, the respected Christian leader told every member of his staff “If you cannot work your ministry with the same vision the church has adopted, you need to find a new job.” What was the vision that some staff members were not following? It was an emphasis on moving people into small groups for discipleship. Every ministry, from the meals for the homeless program to the nursery, had to organize itself around a process that promoted small groups.

My chief objection to this single minded focus is that it makes the “vision” a greater priority than the people. The point is often made that the word “church” does not mean a building, or a worship experience. We need to remember that it’s not a vision statement, either. The people that are the core of what “church” means are vastly more important than the building, the style of worship, or the vision statement.

I wouldn’t be making this point if the vision statement were an undeniable Biblical truth…. “Proclaim Christ!” (for example). The vision of promoting small groups is (in my opinion) a good one. But the vision is NOT more important than the people it is supposed to serve.

I’m afraid that I want to take my disagreement farther. To me, it seems arrogant to assume that the vision I believe is from God is more certain, more fixed, and more reliable than the people He brings to the church. I do not believe that the pastor and the elders have a more reliable access to God’s direction than others involved in the ministry. I believe God can and will speak to me and to the elders THROUGH the voices of the people in our ministry. The lady who brews coffee for the men’s breakfast may the one member of the body who has an important key insight to refine the vision. To believe anything less denies what Paul teaches about the body and its many members.

It’s a terrible misunderstanding of “church” if we have a greater steadfast commitment to the vision statement than to the people. The scriptures place a much greater emphasis on loving the people in the church than an unwavering commitment to the style of worship or an emphasis on seekers as opposed to an emphasis on discipleship, or nearly anything placed in many vision statements.

It may be helpful to call this error “the tyranny of the vision” just to contrast it with the opposite error, “the tyranny of individualism” (anarchy). It is foolish to fantasize that a leader can let every person have their own vision, agenda, and ideals. A team must always work in harmony or it will splinter into factions and become completely dysfunctional. In my leadership, I avoided the danger of “the tyranny of the vision,” but fell into the “opposite” error. Predictably, our group splintered into factions and fell apart. But this danger does not justify reducing the people to a level lower than the vision.

It’s much easier to commit one error or the other than to find the balance between them. I cannot claim to have walked the balanced line often, but I think I can describe something close to the right path.

Every person, regardless of the role they play in the body, must always have the freedom to dream and to express their dream as a possible refining of the vision we are pursuing. When there are contradictory visions at play the answer is not to “throw out the [immoral or disagreeing] brother.” The answer is to leave your [sacrifice or vision statement] at the altar and go immediately to your brother and reconcile. Talk, discuss, quarrel, and humbly esteem the brother until the contradiction is resolved. Do not make any dramatic changes in the practices of the church until the contradictory visions are reconciled or all parties agree to pursue one approach together.

Neither the tyranny of the vision nor the tyranny of individualism, are acceptable. The only way the middle ground can be found and walked is when the unity of the Spirit is valued and pursued, as an inviolate portion of the vision for the church.

“I, therefore, the prisoner for the Lord, urge you to live worthily of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.”
Eph. 4:1-3

Being a Leader

In our beginning, we fell apart. I read every leadership book I could find. I applied all the principles to the best of my ability, and I think that’s what went wrong.

The problem with leadership books is that they are written by people that have seen great results from their leadership efforts. All these authors are clearly excited about the vision that has and continues to motivate them. Their enthusiasm for the vision seeps from every word they write. They feel driven to bring about the vision they cast. Somehow the arrogance of that position never quite seemed to be the point I understood.

Christian leadership books often point to the story of Moses resisting God’s call to make the accurate point that a leader needs to be humble. Somehow in the text, however, the humility they propose is drowned out by the passionate, invariable, dedicated pursuit of the success evident in bringing about the vision.

But Moses was not merely humble; he was completely averse to taking a leadership position. He refused to obey God unless Aaron would take the role of official spokesperson. Jeremiah refused to lead. Jonah refused to lead. Gideon refused to lead. Barak refused to lead. Jesus refused to allow the crowd to coronate Him. None of the twelve asked to given the title of “apostle.” When they did seek a position of honor, Jesus rebuked them.

Allow me to go so far as to say that any person that seeks a leadership position will not be a good leader. A person that seeks a leadership position is invariably pursuing an agenda. When I started this church, I did so reluctantly. I stated plainly that I did not believe I had the right skill set to be a pastor. But when 40 or more people immediately followed me, it went to my head. I drew the false conclusion that using the skills I had, and learning from other leaders, I could be a leader in a great work. That became my goal. That’s when it all blew up. It blew up because so many strong personalities followed my lead and set up their own agenda.

In fact, every faction in our little group was led by one strong leader whose agenda was essentially the same as mine. “This church will be a place where I can prove my competence and value.” A painful implosion by conflict was the inevitable outcome. As we rebuild this church, my reluctance to lead needs to stay further entrenched. I am convinced that I do not have the skills necessary to build a church, with God’s help, I’ll never believe otherwise.

Follow up on previous entry

An interesting observation from our discussion in Church Sunday evening. (We discussed the previous entry in the blog – in the context of Romans 1 – 4.) We were intrigued with the hypothetical situation of the letter from the court. The consensus was that we would respond with questions, objections and challenges if we had no idea that we had broken any law. We would respond with gratitude and celebration if we knew we were accused of something serious.

How true that is in Paul’s letter, too. The law was given at least in part, to remove any doubt that nobody can live to the standards of God’s perfect holiness (Romans 3:19,20). The clear evidence is that the Jews, as a whole, didn’t get that message. They were trying their best to keep the standards of the Law and feeling spiritually successful, superior and righteous because of it.

It seems that as a race, we are each skillfully adept at failing to notice that “I am a sinner.” And we reject the mercy of God because of it.

Paul's Doctrine (Part 4)

Imagine that a letter arrives. It claims to be an official letter from a legal representative of the court. It says…

“I would prefer to tell you this personally, but have not been able to do so. Acting in my role as a legal representative of the court, I have very good news for you. You will not be required to serve any prison time, or pay any penalty. In addition, you will be given everything you need to live comfortably and confidently. The only requirement is that you maintain a residence within the jurisdiction of this court.

How would you respond?

• Would you compose a reply that challenges the court decision by asking “What do you mean I don’t have to serve prison time? What have I done to deserve any prison time? Why am I being given the award? Why do I have to keep a residence in this jurisdiction?
• Would you start packing to move to another jurisdiction?
• Would you jump for joy, and begin celebrating?

Most of us think we would do the third, but in reality, we do the first AND the second.

Paul wrote, in so many words… “I am speaking as an official representative of the all powerful deity. I have good news for you. God will use His power to rescue you from penalty and give you the ability to live in comfort and confidence. The only thing you need to do is have faith in Him.” (Romans 1:16, 17)

Rather than rejoice, people in Paul’s time and ours start asking questions and challenging the offer.

• Why do I deserve a penalty?
• Why should I get a penalty, when others are worse than me?
• What other options do I have to get out of this penalty I may deserve?

Does asking those questions sound like having faith in Him? Of course not! That’s how we are really taking the second option (moving to another jurisdiction and invalidating the gift), when we begin on the first option (challenging and questioning the offer). The questioning and challenging IS moving away from a position that acknowledges the jurisdiction and authority of God.

Why do we choose such a bizarre, self-destructive, course of action? The same reason we deserve the penalty to begin with. Questioning and challenging the good news confirms and further entrenches the guilt. We refuse to recognize that God has jurisdiction, and that He desires our best interest. (Romans 1:20)

Paul's Doctrine (Part 3)

Some positions require a nuanced explanation. In a recent Presidential debate, the moderator asked the candidates to raise their hands if they believed that “global climate change is a serious threat and caused by human activity.”

One of the candidates refused. “I’m not doing hand shows today, no hand shows.” The moderator tried to force a yes or no answer to the question but the candidate refused. He made it clear that he would be happy to answer the question if he could take a minute to give a full explanation.

Sometimes a topic is important enough, that a simple answer isn’t accurate enough to be helpful. That’s the kind of topic Paul has tackled here. In that vein, and like the politician, Paul must embark on several clarifying arguments as he explains the gospel.

If we summarize his teaching so far, we could do so as…

1) Being rescued depends on God’s power and generous mercy.

2) No-one deserves His generous mercy because everyone has sinned, and sin is rooted in denying His power and generous mercy.

Paul has taught this gospel before. I think he knows the misunderstandings and accusations people commonly make about it. As the text will later show, one misunderstanding of the gospel Paul taught is a wrong conclusion drawn from the last two points.

“If everyone has rejected God and turned to sin, and no-one deserves to be saved, but God saves people anyway, then it doesn’t really matter how I act, or whether I sin or not. I might as well ‘sin big’ and show God’s grace even more.”

Chapter 2:1-16 is Paul’s answer to this common misunderstanding. He explains that God will judge every person, every action, and every intent.

But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath for yourselves in the day of wrath, when God's righteous judgment is revealed! He will reward each one according to his works (Romans 2:5-6)

It’s worth noting that the mind bent away from God, can take the greatest “good news” imaginable and turn it into license to sin. Paul notes this in verse 4.

You surely don't think much of God's wonderful goodness or of his patience and willingness to put up with you. Don't you know that the reason God is good to you is because he wants you to turn to him? (Contemporary English Version)

But the main point is that Gods generous mercy should not make us forget that sin and righteousness still matter.

Romans 2:1-16 If you judge anyone, you basically condemn yourself by agreeing that judgment should be given and should be based on works. (Which I just pointed out condemns everyone.) In contrast, God’s judgment is based on the attitude and faith of the person, not just the deeds. Don’t think that pointing at others that have done worse things, will get you off. Don’t imagine that God is too merciful to punish anyone, so you can go ahead and sin. Doing that, will just making your judgment worse because He will surely judge. He will judge on the bases of faith, and deeds, not on some arbitrary or inequitable scale. He will punish those whose deeds are selfish and disobedient. He will reward those whose faith and deeds are right. Knowing what’s right or coming from the right background is not important; having the right faith and the right deeds matters. In fact, there are people who have never heard all of God’s truth, but they still have the right attitude and many of the right deeds, they prove that the essential truths are evident in creation. They prove that His truth is evident unless it is deliberately suppressed. They will be judged by the standards of the gospel I am preaching. (God will apply His power and mercy to anyone that has the faith He is looking for.)

Anybody Need a Star?

Have you ever envied the “three wise men” of Christmas tradition? I don’t envy them a long Camel ride, or even having enough gold to spare giving some away. What I really envy is their star. They started on a trip with a clear objective… follow the star.

I wish I had a star to follow. I spend far too much time trying to decide which goal I should be pursuing right now. Nothing wrong with writing, but maybe my time spent writing this would be better spent writing a note to my mother. If I just had a shining miraculous star to show me the path, I could feel confident that I was always doing the right thing, pursuing the right course of action.

But if you read the story carefully, at some point, the star disappeared. What did the wise men do then? If they were like me, they wandered about confused and uncertain. But like I said, they were wise men so, we could be pretty sure they did something different. They thought. They reasonably decided that the most likely place for a king to be born was in the closest palace, so they headed to the palace of King Herod. Sure enough, they got enough information to be back on the right track, and the star re-appeared.

The truth is, that most of the time, I actually do have a Star…not a visual light in the sky, but a written light in the darkness. It says “Love your enemies,” “Give a cup of cold water in my name,” “visit the widows and the orphans,” “Love your neighbor as yourself” and plenty other things, but that’s enough to focus on most of the time.

But what happens when I’m in a place and can’t see the path? Should I be writing this, or should I be writing a note to my mother? The star is a bit too unclear for me. Well, that’s when a wise man would stop, think, make a reasonable decision, and proceed.

That’s all for now, I’m going to write a short note to my mother.

POSTSCRIPT: I sent an e-mail note to my mother a few minutes after this was posted. My brother read it to her that night. She died about 28 hours later. I feel grateful that The Bright and Morning Star led me.

The bad news that makes the good news so good

The “good news” of God’s salvation is really only appreciated when we realize how hopeless we are without it. The good news of the gospel is truly good because it is our only hope. Without the power and merciful justice of God we are all hopelessly doomed. The next section in Romans (1:18 – 32) is important because the bad news is the context that makes the gospel such spectacularly good news.

Ignorance of God’s law, Paul tells us, is not a valid excuse. It is a chosen blindness to some truths evident in what can be seen, namely God’s power and divinity. (It’s arguable that the essence of divinity here is righteousness, in which case there is a wonderful parallel here that God’s power and righteousness form the truths that are evident in creation and essence of the gospel [verse 16,17].)

This chosen ignorance has consequences in our behaviors.
It would be a mistake to read these verses as a simple list of sins.

It is unfortunate that this passage is sometimes used to present homosexuality as chief among sins. So, why did Paul seem to put such emphasis on homosexuality? Paul wrote this epistle to Rome sometime between 2 and 8 years after Nero became Caesar. Nero was by no means the first Caesar to engage in homosexual behavior, but he was the first Caesar to marry a gay lover. In fact, it’s possible to read this passage and find virtually every evil used to describe Nero by his contemporaries. He came to power by deceit and murder of his step-father. He kept power by the same means. His political rivals, including his mother, were murdered by his order. He was the first Caesar to aggressively persecute the Christians and yet he was “Divine” in the state religion. Verse 32 concludes the list with the observation that the ungodly not only do these awful things “but also approve of those who practice them.” Paul could hardly have said more plainly that the approval Rome gave to Nero was proof of a depraved state.

While I suspect that Paul was thinking of Nero, I believe that the Holy Spirit was moving to accomplish a deeper and more lasting objective. The passage lists the results of willful ignorance when God “gives them up.”

The Holy Spirit knowingly makes it impossible for anyone to read this passage and indulge in a self-righteous judgment against others whose sins are more “grievous” than our own. Like everyone I am tempted by certain sins, but not by others. Homosexual activity is extremely tempting to some, but not most. That reality makes it easy for the self-righteous to take prideful comfort in the condemnation of others.

Homosexual sin is one that far too many view with self-righteous contempt. It is wrong, but it’s no worse than gluttony. It’s no worse than telling a “little white lie.” It’s no worse than disobeying a parent. Those who struggle with homosexual urges should not be placed in a category different from any other sinner. To tell them they must stop their sexual behaviors and cease their desires in order to be in good standing is consistent only if you require the glutton to become thin and cease craving sweets to be in good standing. God’s love and His salvation are not based on the actions of the sinner, that’s the Gospel! God’s love and His salvation are based on God’s power and generous justice to treat faith as faith regardless of who has it, and regardless of what sin that person finds tempting.

Lest any of us feel any superiority to those of “greater sins,” the inspired apostle moves the target smoothly between wickedness, murder, deceit, arrogant God haters (all of which are easy for the self-righteous to deny) and the “lesser sins” of envy, gossip, and disobedience to parents.

The clear conclusion of any open-minded reading of the passage is that “I am no better than those I willingly condemn.” This intent of the Holy Spirit is confirmed in the first phrase of the next paragraph.

Therefore you are without excuse, whoever you are, when you judge someone else. (Romans 2:1)

The good news that God’s salvation is applied on the basis of faith alone is good news indeed.