This fall, I celebrate a milestone of sorts in my personal life. It will have been 18 years since I accepted Christ as Lord and Saviour and while 18 years seems like a bit of an arbitrary number, it is significant when you take into the account than I am 36. I have been a born again believer for half of my life, and I guess I can further say that I have been a Christian for most of my conscious life (unlike some people, I don't remember anything from when I was 2 or 4 years old).
Much has changed since I made that original profession in 1991. You know, at the time, I was going through a period of my life which would have probably put me on a head-on collision with death or being arrested. I was a porn dealer, a drug user, had violent tendencies and just was a miserable person. So it is not lost on me that I could have been in much different circumstances had I not have experienced the love of Christ in my life.
The journey of faith in being a follower of Jesus is not without challenges. Of course, little would I have suspected the degree of hardship which I would have experienced over the years. Just like people who think erroneously that once you are married and have kids, everything is a big old fairy tale, being a Christian carries not guarantee that your life will go well (at least your remaining life on this earth). In fact, I'd hazard to say that the guarantee goes the other way - that you will experience much difficulty in your Christian life. Most Sunday schools and churches try to avoid teaching this, since it can be a bit on the depressing side, but that is really the Biblical pattern, if you look at how God's people weren't exactly popular with the world or its standards of happiness. The good news is that this is all very temporary in the whole scheme of God's plan.
So at this juncture of my life, I thought it would be both interesting and somewhat fun to reflect on the past 18 years of my Christian life. I doubt that this would become as popular of a post as the one I wrote about Toronto protests by the Tamils (about 30 responses as of last count - that has been the most popular blog entry here by far), but this is more for me than anyone else - if you get something out of reading this, then great.
I was driving into work this morning, thinking about all this, and thought about the early years. Recently, at our new church (we started attending March 1, after 13 years at our previous church), our family attended a really nice new visitors luncheon. We happened to end up sitting at a table with one of the church's elders, and he was interested in hearing my testimony, so I gave it to him (actually, I'll write about that very shortly in another post). He noted something which I have never thought about; that is, that he found it interesting (not sure in what way) that I ended up enrolling in Bible school (and was accepted) less than a year after becoming a Christian. Yeah, that was kind of weird, considering the fact that I was on a journalism track, but I have absolutely no regrets whatsoever. At the time, I was deeply immersed in the Word, reading my Bible more than a few times a day and just soaking up Christian literature. It's interesting how this sort of comes full circle, since I'm sort of back in that mindset again (thankfully!) after all these years.
I had no idea what to expect in Bible school, and my Dad didn't expect much, so you can imagine both his shock (and mine too) at the fact that I made Dean's list almost every year that I was there, including 1994-95, when I had the highest GPA in residence. Theological school was very rewarding for me as a new Christian, and while I struggle to answer the question that the occasional person poses to me as to why I am not using the theological degree (I really don't have an answer) but instead worked in the IT industry for the past 12 years), I know that no one - including myself - knows God's purposes, so I'll just leave the planning and life direction up to Him).
Back then, like most new Christians, I was fairly legalistic, not in a Jewish sense, not really in a works-based salvation sense, but more in the "I must produce tangible and visible fruit" sense. In other words, I was petrified when I wasn't visibly manifesting my faith. To a degree, it was almost like a holy show, but my intentions were not really Pharissaical, but more wanting to live a life which was different than my non-Christian counterparts. And such was my first fallacy in understanding the Christian life.
It was only a few years ago that I fully understood that Christians aren't all that different than non-Christians, when it comes to succeptibility to temptation, anger, frustration, relationship problems, and so forth. BUT, Christians stand in stark contrast to non-Christians in that we have hope and we can lean on our Heavenly Father, who will help us in our troubles. That is not to say that Christians don't get depressed - it happens - there were a number of people at the Bible school who had psychological and psychiatric problems. I remember one of the first people I met (like, this is within days of showing up in residence), I accompanied to the hospital as he needed to get treated for an STD that he contracted from his girlfriend. Then there was the friend (a youth pastor major) who told me about his sexual activities with his girlfriend - I later caught him looking at porn one day when I went to visit his room - that was awkward and disappointing). I met another guy who told me the places to go in the school's basement / laundry area, where one can get a "quickie" with one's girlfriend - he claimed to have used that location over 300+ times. All this started to depress me - I guess I had expected better, but I also realized that lot of Christians wore masks.
No one was more surprised as me when I discovered (after I graduated) that my first-year roommate came out of the closet as a very open homosexual later. I started wondering about all the times he jumped on me and tried to wrestle me down on my bed as we were practising WWF wrestling moves. He is apparently now in the U.S. and somehow has gotten "married" to his subsequent boyfriend. I did keep in touch with him for a while and he told me that he was gay, which was a huge shock to me. Things that make you go "hmmmm...."
Unfortunately, five to seven years after becoming a Christian, I started to get a bit depressed in my faith - I realized that it wasn't a works-based faith, but it seemed like no one I knew really gave a hoot about the pursuit of holiness. Christian living seemed to be overshadowed by Christian liberty. At that point, I had switched from my Mom and Dad's church to a new church which was pastored by my theology professor. That was very different at first, since this church was influenced and had split from a United Church. I started to see Christians practise their faith differently, and things like liturgies and such I never saw before. It was interesting.
I remember applying for a job at a Christian school in 1997 to teach computers. I got through the interview with flying colours and they were ready to hire me until they found out that I did not know how to program. I told them that I was clear on this at the outset and that I knew hardware and some operating system stuff. They admitted they assumed that everyone who knew "computers" knew all facets. Bad assumption - guess they weren't IT-savvy. That would have been fun doing that job, but you know, years later that school closed down, so I am glad I didn't take that job.
It is really in the working world that I saw God's hand heavily in my life, and thank goodness for that since that proved to be a huge calming influence in the later years. I ended up with my job in IT (that I do to this day) as a result of not getting that Christian teaching job - so I tell people that even if God may not grant you where you may think you want to go - He has other purposes, and sometimes, you won't know these purposes till a lot later). Anyway, one of my friends in my Bible school recommended me to her boss' boss (a VP) at a large Canadian IT firm. Happens that that VP was a very strong, mature Christian. I was interviewed and got the job and it was a huge learning curve for me, since everything I know at that point was self-taught. But to the company's credit, they sent me on numerous (and very expensive) courses to get me up to speed. Then I met other Christians at the workplace...this was great, since obviously in a non-Christian company, it's nice to know you have people both watching your back and encouraging you. And I saw God's hand at work again when that company folded, and surprisingly, I was the only remnant which survived the eventual dissolution of our group. I was offered a position that made much more money (almost double my current salary at that time) but God had given me a sense not to take it. Turns out that other company went out of business a year later. I was moved to my current job and location where I knew no one and upon starting back in 2000, I remember it was such a nasty, backstabbing environment. Yet, within a year, myself and another Christian from another division of my old company were moved to this account and we really saw God working in us to change both the environment and attitude of our colleagues. Turns out that years later, we found a number of other Christians on our account, and to this day, while due to economic realities, our account staff has been decimated, a number of us Christians remain gainfully employed, despite many cutbacks that we have survived.
Getting married and having kids has obviously changed me - I would think for the better. While it was a steep adjustment for me to have had to learn to live with another person who is not like me at all, my wife has really encouraged me throughout the years, and especially during the last few years, when we have experienced a number of very challenging personal difficulties, to just continue to trust in God. My kids (my son in particular - my daughter's too young to talk) have really been a firm reason for me to try to pursue a life of consistent holiness - that being said, I will be the first to admit that I often come short of the standard which I set for myself, and I'm sure I disappoint God often). I think it was only just this year that we started getting over the hump from all of our financial and medication problems and now I am really glad that we persevered.
Probably to everyone's shock, including mine, I was nominated to be an elder in 2005 at our old church. It was an honour to have been nominated, particularly by another elder, and several others; I was very resistant at first, but with some encouragement from my former pastor, friends and wife, I accepted the nomination and was voted in. After three years of doing it and deciding not to sign up for another term, I knew why I was indecisive at first - I should have listened to my gut and declined the first time - I was not elder material - my spiritual life was not as strong as it should be, and I really think that my expectations were too high (and in retrospect, they should have been based on the 1 Timothy and Titus requirements). While I didn't really contribute a whole lot during my time doing this, I was heavily involved in one situation which turned out really badly, and left a very, very sour taste in my mouth. Church politics, I suppose, but moreover, I think it came down to me seeing that some people really did not care about spiritual maturity. That, I think, was the beginning of the end and when I started thinking that I needed to be elsewhere. In retrospect, I think going through the experience was a good thing, since it showed me that despite my meager contributions during my time as an elder, and my hesitancy in taking on the role, deep down, I still had some Biblical standards that I was trying my best to follow. Anyway, enough of that. The past is the past and that's the last time I'll talk about that.
Moving to a new church this year has really helped me spiritually, as I am now back into regular Bible study and have been challenged to look deeply into the Word, and I am approaching it with excitement in my heart and not grudgingly. My wife has noticed a difference in me and have commented such in the affirmative. It was kind of weird how we ended up at our new church, but it has really been a solid place to worship and a place where God's Word is taught in an expository way. It is incredible what our new church has gone through in the past five years, in that it has experienced a large split of people who want to be more "seeker friendly" (Willow Creek model) and be more marketable and draw numbers of young people, simply leave the church - about 400 of them. That is a good thing, since when I found that out a couple of months back, I immediately realized that this church is for me, if it takes a solid Biblical stand against current watered-down church trends, even if it means the decimation of its numbers. I remember once visiting their website and it was slick - like really corporate-looking. Now, with those seeker-friendly types gone, I guess the webmaster went too, so the church website is pretty basic now, but who really cares when you know that the people behind it are solid believers who love the Word and not the world. Our new church has recovered nicely and due to a pastor that refuses to compromise on God's Word (he did not have an easy go of it since there was much resistance to his Bible-centered teaching), God has blessed the church in the past few years. I am not one for a making commitments in a short timeframe, but my wife and I have felt so much at home at our new church that later this month, we are starting to take membership classes there. You know how sometimes, you just know that you're in the right place at the right time? We are there. What has been an interesting blessing is how God has affirmed our decision to move churches (long story), as tough as that was - we had some dear, old friends at our old church which had a huge impact on us, so moving away was not easy, but thankfully we keep in touch). We met, on our first week at our new church, a family that lives within a football toss of our house - they've been there for years, we've been here for years, yet we never knew them. But we met them at church and have really clicked with this young family. My wife and I have now, for the first time, in years, started praying together again and discussing Bible topics - she has listened to preaching sermons which I have, in the past two months, been downloading and putting on CD to listen to on the car ride to and from work every single day. I just have that spiritual fervour that I admit was lost for quite some time. My son and I have very meaningful Bible discussions and I really feel that responsibility on my shoulders to not only model a consistently decent father for him, but also to model a (hopefully somewhat decent) Christian. Again, I often fall short and make many mistakes, but it has been years since I have felt this fervour to immerse myself in the reading of God's Word, and it has been a good 5 years or so since I have felt the excitement and anticipation of going to church on Sunday mornings. Heck, I even get there early, which is unheard of for me, since I generally am very disorganized and am late for everything (that is to my shame and no one else's). I really feel, to a degree, that it's back to 1991-1992 again when I had that zest for my new-found faith. That is not to say that I am like I was back then - I am certainly not. I am hardly as naive as I was back then, and am paranoially cautious about my social relationships as well as about personal safety issues (I must have gotten that from my Mom). I recognize that even though we are Christians in this world, the world is not a friendly place, despite what well-meaning people will want to tell you. I make no illusions about the fact that I can never fully feel at peace, at home, and content in this world. Of course, very few understand this and look at me funny and ask how can I be a Christian, yet own guns. It's not an easy one to explain, so I don't get into those conversations if I can help it.
There is, of course, much more that I can say, and I'm sure I can edit this so it doesn't sound so structurally disjointed, but I'm naturally lazy so I will forego that. I do want to say that my final comments are for those who have just become saved for the first time in 2009. What should one expect? What is the Christian life like? Well, as one who has been there, I can tell you this truth - God is always in control, whether we think so or not, whether we believe it or not. I have seen more evidence of God working in situations and scenarios that will stump even the most ardent of critics of the Christian faith. Despite my own personal hangups, I know that God is a God of forgiveness and second chances.
I also know that God is One who keeps His promises. When He says that, for instance that we can lay our burdens on Him, He means that. To experience God shouldering the load of life's troubles is very satisfying. I can speak firsthand of this, from personal experience (unfortunately, it took many years and many situations before I finally got this one). The question is, whether we choose to dump our load onto His trusty shoulders.
Third, there is no better way of knowing God than to read His Word. I have neglected it for years, despite my theological education. It's amazing, really, how we can read the Bible many times over, and learn new truths and applications for life each time. Sure, some parts are challenging (like reading genealogies or books like Job, which I think can be easily condensed) - but even then, there are passages which will come out and speak to you at a particular time and place - it's weird, but true.
Also, for the Christian in 2009, stand firm. Don't compromise with the world. Even churches will tend to get muddled in worldly theology and practices - resist the urge to conform to the world, but as Romans says, instead be transformed by the renewing of your mind. To that end, I'd suggest a good way for any Christian (especially a guy) to work on their faith is to watch what they take into their mind. Guys like me who have a history of struggling with porn know that there are things that are not wise for me to watch or situations where it is not wise for me to be in. For years, I didn't work as well to guard my mind, but I think that I could have saved myself much trouble if I had developed this sense of discretionary intake of information, in the first place.
I may add more to this posting once I get a chance to re-read it.
Showing posts with label Bible. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bible. Show all posts
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Friday, November 16, 2007
Good and Not So Good Bible Devotionals
For many years, I have been looking for a good Bible devotional for daily reading. Aside from the fact that my own lack of discipline and my absolutely atrocious time management techniques has led to my not really having a consistent devotional life for a year or two now, my other problem is in the fact that I have not found a truly useful daily devotional tool. Now, if you're a regular Bible reader, I know what you're thinking - just read the Scriptures from start to finish, or for those who are really sponteneous, just flip the Bible to a different page per day and read from it. Or read a bit from beginning to end. The problem with this approach, for me anyway, is the fact that I just can't do readings of any sort without some structure or parameters. It would be nice to know when to quit, so that way you are not stopping in the middle of a passage and are left scratching your head. Or you read too much and your mind wanders. Or you read too little and do not feel engaged with the text. Besides, there are some books of the Bible that, although I acknowledge to be part of the Word of God, it is not on the top of my to-do reading list. The book of Psalms is one, and the book of Job is another. But more on those another time.
A couple of years ago, my wife and I tried (and I said tried, because we were not sucessful at completing the task) to use John MacArthur's study Bible (I am a reasonably keen fan of Pastor MacArthur's preaching and teaching, though I don't agree with some of his positions on certain issues). It was an aggressive endeavour, as we had planned to read the entire Bible from start to finish in one calendar year. This was also very ambitious of us, seeing as we had a relative newborn baby at the time who usurped much of our daily attention So in January of that year, we started our nightly Bible study time by reading a bit of Genesis, a bit of Matthew, and a bit of the Psalms/Proverbs, as the suggested study timeline indicated. Not only that, but we ended up reading MacArthur's notes and such. If you've ever tried to do one of these "read the Bible in a year" things, you'll know that you need to read a LOT per day in order to achieve this. The problem was, we ended up going through some pretty confusing passages in the enormous chunk we read every night, and the Psalms parts were difficult to digest, as they always are for me.
For me, a devotional guide not only provides a logical structure of what to read when, but it also follows a theme that provides you an overall picture of the Scriptures. A tremendous asset or selling point would be if the devotional included aspects of a commentary, providing important contextual, historic and language/culture input that people otherwise may not know. Let's face it - few few Bible readers are theologians, so any help is much appreciated. Besides, having commentary value enhances the passage in question, making it more alive and providing a thorough contexual examination of the passage's location in the book as well as in Scripture itself. Think about it: if I were just to look at a simple passage through the lens of normal reading, I would obviously (and perhaps unconsciously) read the passage through the filters of 2oth or 21st century images and word definitions. A commentary would help to unravel some of this and provide some linguistic help.
My point in writing this post is not to necessarily review a bunch of common devotional guides and critique them; rather, I'd like to share the fact that I have been looking for a good Bible devotional and it just so happened that a good friend of mine recently suggested that I consider the Tom Wright "Everyone" series. The "Everyone" series seems to be, at first glance, a Bible commentary. Each book more or less corresponds in a one-to-one fashion with the associated Scripture book. Thus "Matthew For Everyone" would be dedicated just to the book of Matthew (though in the "Everyone" series, Matthew is split up into two guides). The book of Luke is covered in "Luke For Everyone" and so forth. Anyhow, I managed to read through a good chunk of the book that my friend lent me to consider, and I think I will be buying the rest of the set. This is exactly what I'm looking for.
Tom Wright, if you don't know, is N.T. Wright, an Anglican dude from the U.K., and a theologian which the Christianity Today publication (on which my feelings are lukewarm) considers one of the top five contemporary Biblical theologians in the world today. Now, I've read a couple of Wright's books, including "Who Was Jesus?", in which I had some serious reservations, but when my friend, for whom I have a deep level of respect, encouraged me to consider perhaps using Wright's Bible study set as a daily devotional, I put my personal bias aside and decide to check it out.
Well, I am impressed. I can see how these books can be used as devotionals. For one, it has everything that I expected of a good devotional, and more. The entire book is broken down into much smaller sections, the text of which are included in the book (so you don't need to car a Bible and a devotional around - it's great for the traveller or the person who has limited desk space). In between each section of quoted text are the commentary sections - it discusses historical context, word meanings, and then proposes some application. This is very much like the Life Application Bible (which I really like) style of Bible reading, but instead of constantly flipping back and forth between the text and the small footnotes, the commentary part follows each text section. This way, after you read the passage section all the way through, it is fresh in your mind when it comes to dissecting it. And each reading is maybe 10-15 minutes or so, if not less, so there is no chance your attention span will wane.
The "Everyone" series is meant for exactly that: everyone. It is written from a non-academic, non-technical perspective - much of the theological nomenclature can be found in a supplemental glossary, so as a result, a well versed theological person does not have to wade through elementary definitions in order to continue reading, but the new Bible reader will similarly not have to worry about deciphering endless amounts of technical academic theological language. This makes the book more engaging, and your get right into the Biblical text. If it is for these reasons that I'd recommend that you consider this series if you are looking for a well-rounded Bible daily devotional tool. I don't think it's meant as a daily devotion per se, since it's not split up by days, but I think it's better this way since you aren't focusing so much tracking days rather than immersing yourself into the Word.
Labels:
Bible,
bible reading,
christian,
christianity,
devotional,
study,
theology
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Barriers to Effective Evangelism of the Gospel Message: Language
You know, it's easy to go to evangelism conferences and hear about effective ways to evangelize. Our church, as well as many other churches around the world, have participated in the successful Alpha program/course, which has inevitably helped lead many people to the saving power of Christ's death and resurrection over the years. I have read many books on evangelism and preaching and witnessing, and if you have read this blog long enough, you'll know one of my personal interests is in the whole area of Biblical apologetics; that is, Gospel defence. Now, I will re-iterate that I acknowledge that I shouldn't get my shorts too much in a knot over what happens after the Gospel is presented. After all, at that point, it's up to the Spirit to take over, and our job is more or less done.
You would think that with all the tools available to us, through books, courses, internet tools, etc., that evangelism may be a little too over-analyzed. Perhaps that is true, since if you look at the Billy Graham association (one of the few Christian ministries that I have wholeheartedly supported in my 16 years of being a believer), they really don't use marketing gimmicks or tricks or flashy techniques in order to reach people with the gospel. I really admire that. It's simply taking Jesus' plain words in Matthew 28 to heart, to go into the world and preach the Gospel to all nations. Now, it is easier when you have a massive evangelistic organization with thousands (if not, tens or even hundreds of thousands) of workers in many countries across the world, doing the work of the church. However, what I'd like to talk about today is something that has been on my heart for years; it is much more personal, and it really brings out the fact that my notions and ideas of witnessing may have been over-simplified throughout the the years. Witnessing may not be much of a challenge if you have the natural spiritual giftings to preach or teach. But the Bible teaches in the epistles that everyone has different gifts (I believe 1 Cor. 12 is a good starting point to look at this, though you can find references to spiritual gifts elsewhere).
So here's where my mind is at these days, and I'll give you some context to help frame the discussion. My Great-Grandfather (my Mom's Mom's Dad) lived a very full life and passed away in 1991 at the ripe old age of 102. That is an incredible life lived, especially given today's lifespan where people are fortunate if they get to 70 or so. Seems to me that things like cancer or freak accidents or other illnesses creep up unexpectedly, prematurely cutting short lives. Anyway, it was through a series of events in 1990 that I deem much more than just coincidences (I'll tell my spiritual testimonial later on another posting) that led to my Great-Grandfather accepting Christ as his Saviour, and shortly after that, his health took a turn for the worse, and he died a few months later. That whole process of how my Great-Grandfather became saved, I believe became a catalyst (among other events in my life at that time which were more than coincidental) for the process in my own path to salvation. I really miss my Great Grandfather - he was really a true gentleman - and reminded me so much of the old world mannerisms and way of living - he was from the U.K., always dressed in a top hat, wore suspenders, walked gracefully with a cane (he was fairly tall too) and was always gentle and content, keeping himself in shape in his mid 90s by walking everyday). I am glad that he became saved and I will see him again one day.
Fast forward to 2007 and I've been thinking for many months about my paternal Grandma, who is one of the two Grandmas left in our immediate family (my maternal Grandma is in her late 80s as well and lives in Western Canada). Unlike my maternal Grandma, who has made the decision ot accept Christ as her Saviour years ago, my paternal Grandma, who is 89 or so now, has not make a decision. My wife and I try to meet up her on a regular basis for lunch and visiting to see how she is, something she has told us that she appreciates since she said that not many of my relatives visit her too often. During these visits, aside from sincerely being glad to see her and having see her face glow at seeing our little boy, one of her Great-Grandsons, it has been constantly on my mind how I can possibly witness to her. I believe my role is to share the Gospel message to her and it's up to her to make a decision and for the Spirit to assisting in softening her heart. However, there is one problem.
She does not speak any English. And my Cantonese, while passable in typical basic conversation, absolutely sucks when it comes to talking about anything abstract or theoretical or philosophical or spiritual. Just like any other discipline of knowledge, there is, unfortunately, a set vocabulary or industry nomenclature that goes with the area of knowledge.
There are other problems. My Dad is not crazy about me preaching the Gospel to her. He says that she may want to hear it before she passes, but I also know that not too many people will know when it will be their time. I am not sure if my Dad is saved (I'm pretty sure my Mom is, and neither my brother or sister are), but there is not going to be a huge amount of spiritual support for me to witness to my Grandma. My cousins in Western Canada are all saved as are my maternal Aunt and Uncle, but geographically it is obviously going to be tough to find a way to get my Aunt (whom I would consider a very spiritually wise and mature believer) to come to Toronto. I remember spending about 1.5 hours in a conversation in the basement of my Aunt's house last year, when we went to visit my relatives, where her and I prayed over the situation and she suggested to me that I should just explain the message with the words that I have to use, even if my vocabulary is limited. I think that I am close to doing this and was about to start the process this morning as I called my Grandma to invite her out to lunch today, but she has a friend's birthday party she is attending today, so I made plans to meet up with her next Saturday.
In the meantime, I've thought about a couple of things that may be helpful. My Mom and Dad's long-time pastor (a Chinese dude) suddenly resigned quietly this past year, and as a result, he's not available as a resource. I actually just thought this morning about this and realized that our church's (a multi-ethnic and multicultural church) building is physically connected to a Chinese community church - we share the same building though we have different sanctuaries). They have a fairly young senior pastor there, but I am thinking that I'll make some time to meet up with him to discuss this. I could really use the wisdom of a pastor who has been in both the Chinese and Westernized cultures, who can give me some advice on this.
I could sure use prayer as I go through this process of preparing myself to witness to my Grandma. I would hate for my limited Cantonese to cause problems, but remember that Moses was worried about whether he was properly equipped speech-wise to talk with Pharoh, and God told him to simply follow His lead and He will provide the words for Moses to speak. If God can help Moses overcome his anxiety in speaking boldly, and if God can help give confidence and boldness to timid guys like Peter in the New Testament, surely He can provide the strength and wisdom that is needed to present the Gospel to my Grandma. I'd appreciate your prayers as I ponder and consider this process.
You would think that with all the tools available to us, through books, courses, internet tools, etc., that evangelism may be a little too over-analyzed. Perhaps that is true, since if you look at the Billy Graham association (one of the few Christian ministries that I have wholeheartedly supported in my 16 years of being a believer), they really don't use marketing gimmicks or tricks or flashy techniques in order to reach people with the gospel. I really admire that. It's simply taking Jesus' plain words in Matthew 28 to heart, to go into the world and preach the Gospel to all nations. Now, it is easier when you have a massive evangelistic organization with thousands (if not, tens or even hundreds of thousands) of workers in many countries across the world, doing the work of the church. However, what I'd like to talk about today is something that has been on my heart for years; it is much more personal, and it really brings out the fact that my notions and ideas of witnessing may have been over-simplified throughout the the years. Witnessing may not be much of a challenge if you have the natural spiritual giftings to preach or teach. But the Bible teaches in the epistles that everyone has different gifts (I believe 1 Cor. 12 is a good starting point to look at this, though you can find references to spiritual gifts elsewhere).
So here's where my mind is at these days, and I'll give you some context to help frame the discussion. My Great-Grandfather (my Mom's Mom's Dad) lived a very full life and passed away in 1991 at the ripe old age of 102. That is an incredible life lived, especially given today's lifespan where people are fortunate if they get to 70 or so. Seems to me that things like cancer or freak accidents or other illnesses creep up unexpectedly, prematurely cutting short lives. Anyway, it was through a series of events in 1990 that I deem much more than just coincidences (I'll tell my spiritual testimonial later on another posting) that led to my Great-Grandfather accepting Christ as his Saviour, and shortly after that, his health took a turn for the worse, and he died a few months later. That whole process of how my Great-Grandfather became saved, I believe became a catalyst (among other events in my life at that time which were more than coincidental) for the process in my own path to salvation. I really miss my Great Grandfather - he was really a true gentleman - and reminded me so much of the old world mannerisms and way of living - he was from the U.K., always dressed in a top hat, wore suspenders, walked gracefully with a cane (he was fairly tall too) and was always gentle and content, keeping himself in shape in his mid 90s by walking everyday). I am glad that he became saved and I will see him again one day.
Fast forward to 2007 and I've been thinking for many months about my paternal Grandma, who is one of the two Grandmas left in our immediate family (my maternal Grandma is in her late 80s as well and lives in Western Canada). Unlike my maternal Grandma, who has made the decision ot accept Christ as her Saviour years ago, my paternal Grandma, who is 89 or so now, has not make a decision. My wife and I try to meet up her on a regular basis for lunch and visiting to see how she is, something she has told us that she appreciates since she said that not many of my relatives visit her too often. During these visits, aside from sincerely being glad to see her and having see her face glow at seeing our little boy, one of her Great-Grandsons, it has been constantly on my mind how I can possibly witness to her. I believe my role is to share the Gospel message to her and it's up to her to make a decision and for the Spirit to assisting in softening her heart. However, there is one problem.
She does not speak any English. And my Cantonese, while passable in typical basic conversation, absolutely sucks when it comes to talking about anything abstract or theoretical or philosophical or spiritual. Just like any other discipline of knowledge, there is, unfortunately, a set vocabulary or industry nomenclature that goes with the area of knowledge.
There are other problems. My Dad is not crazy about me preaching the Gospel to her. He says that she may want to hear it before she passes, but I also know that not too many people will know when it will be their time. I am not sure if my Dad is saved (I'm pretty sure my Mom is, and neither my brother or sister are), but there is not going to be a huge amount of spiritual support for me to witness to my Grandma. My cousins in Western Canada are all saved as are my maternal Aunt and Uncle, but geographically it is obviously going to be tough to find a way to get my Aunt (whom I would consider a very spiritually wise and mature believer) to come to Toronto. I remember spending about 1.5 hours in a conversation in the basement of my Aunt's house last year, when we went to visit my relatives, where her and I prayed over the situation and she suggested to me that I should just explain the message with the words that I have to use, even if my vocabulary is limited. I think that I am close to doing this and was about to start the process this morning as I called my Grandma to invite her out to lunch today, but she has a friend's birthday party she is attending today, so I made plans to meet up with her next Saturday.
In the meantime, I've thought about a couple of things that may be helpful. My Mom and Dad's long-time pastor (a Chinese dude) suddenly resigned quietly this past year, and as a result, he's not available as a resource. I actually just thought this morning about this and realized that our church's (a multi-ethnic and multicultural church) building is physically connected to a Chinese community church - we share the same building though we have different sanctuaries). They have a fairly young senior pastor there, but I am thinking that I'll make some time to meet up with him to discuss this. I could really use the wisdom of a pastor who has been in both the Chinese and Westernized cultures, who can give me some advice on this.
I could sure use prayer as I go through this process of preparing myself to witness to my Grandma. I would hate for my limited Cantonese to cause problems, but remember that Moses was worried about whether he was properly equipped speech-wise to talk with Pharoh, and God told him to simply follow His lead and He will provide the words for Moses to speak. If God can help Moses overcome his anxiety in speaking boldly, and if God can help give confidence and boldness to timid guys like Peter in the New Testament, surely He can provide the strength and wisdom that is needed to present the Gospel to my Grandma. I'd appreciate your prayers as I ponder and consider this process.
Labels:
Bible,
evangelism,
gospel,
message,
witnessing
Friday, June 29, 2007
Homosexuality and the Church
Well, I've been doing this for a few months and have readers in both Canada and the U.S. (and who knows where else). I see that my blogs are not searchable over Google, so I must be getting the word out. I've talked about both current issues and my own experiences, but what I really started this blog for, was to give opinion. I've decided that I'm going to start slapping down my views on several issues that, even in evangelical Christian circles, people generally try not to touch with a 10-foot javelin. One of these issues is the whole issue of homosexuality. Many people in today's left-leaning society would take me to task and tell me that there is no issue, and I'm just fanning the flames of intolerance (one of the favourite catch-all phrases of the liberal left). Worse, I would be labelled the infamous "homophobic" label for my views, which I suppose is supposed to somehow be on par with being called a racist.
Let me deal with this one first. Homophobic, is, by definition to mean that one is afraid of homosexuals. I am not afraid of homosexuals, just like I am not afraid of heterosexuals. So let's state that first. I know people who are gay, and I work with people who are gay, and hell, I found out that my old college roommate was gay - I still talk to him. I am not afraid of homosexuals. The problem these days is that if people somehow disagree with some the beliefs or behaviour of another group, they will get labels placed on them (sort of like people who point out that there is a problem with crime in black communities in urban areas - they then get labelled a racist...I tell you, there is no better way to create future racists than to alienate people to voice valid opinions (and yes, I agree, how they voice it matters). Go ahead, throw your darts at me - I'll be happy to absorb them. I've always called a spade a spade, to the chagrin of others, and that ain't going to change any time soon.
Where I draw the line on this issue is that I absolutely, unequivocally do not support what people call the gay "lifestyle". What does this mean? It means that I do not believe in gay romance, gay marriage, gay adoption - in other words, anything that would start eating away at what God has placed as His model of life-long marriage relationships between a man and a woman. Despite what many folks who choose not to have children will say, the fact of the matter is, married people do have a responsibility (obligation is too strong of a word) to procreate and continue to fill the earth. I think that is why God intended to put a woman and man together in marriage (also to satisfy each other, but as we're not doing a study on Song of Solomon, that will have to wait till another time). That is God's design. Men and men and women and women cannot biologically procreate. Men and women also complement each other in terms of personality, able to meet needs mutually (ie. women crave love, men crave respect). I don't believe such a balance can be achieved in a homosexual relationship.
Notice I did not discuss much in terms of sexuality, but I will now (THE NEXT PARTS ARE A BIT EXPLICIT SO USE DISCRETION)...some people will use the silly smokescreen that they don't believe in gay relationships because of the gay sex part - so let's be quite frank here. Gay sex can only be constituted mainly in two ways: oral sex and anal sex. The problem with using those two sex acts as the determining factor as to why the lifestyle is not acceptable, is that heterosexuals can and do engage in both, yet I don't hear incriminations raining down on straight folks. Now, it is very true that the Bible calls for a man not to lie with a man as with a woman. So basically, men should not be having sexual relations with one another. How it manifests itself is irrelevant, in my opinion. Now, if you want to know my opinion of anal sex, I can tell you - I would probably classify it as not being as "natural" as penile-vaginal intercourse. The anus is not really a naturally lubricated area, and since there is far greater chance of infection and bacteria, it's probably not the greatest place to be (and that is a generalization for men and women).
All that being said, let me generally state that I believe that many churches in North America have not handled this issue properly (with both sides of the coin). I want to focus on this, since much of the opposition to homosexuality is coming out of the evangelical Christian church. I think that churches have not thought this issue through and simply say "it is wrong!" (what is wrong?) and "that is disgusting" (which I can agree with, but I think there's a much more intelligent and logical way to discuss issues rather than name calling and belittling. Conversely, some churches have approached the issue in an effort to not offend and be compassionate and inclusive. I think this is more catering to today's "accept everyone and don't offend anyone" climate. These churches, I believe, are not looking at what Scripture is teaching.
Let me publicly state that I do agree with some homosexuals and lesbians who said that Christians oftentimes are guilty of having a double-standard for themselves and others. They say that homosexuality is wrong, yet they don't condemn gambling (yes, lottery tickets or being in the office lottery pool counts as gambling, folks!), don't condemn as strongly pre-marital sex, don't condemn relationships/marriage between Christians and non-Christians (which Scripture clearly warns against), don't condemn drunkenness, foul language amongst Christians, or even not showing compassion to the less fortunate, as Jesus taught). The same churches which would elevate homosexuality to the gravest of sins will have no problem raising their kids not to marry black people or using the "n" word freely in their social circles. All are great points, and I would absolutely agree that it is hard to take a Christian seriously who condemns homosexuality, yet has their own sins that they seem to place on a different sliding scale.
Here's how I believe churches need to handle the issue: 1) since Scripture clearly indicates that homosexual sexual relations is wrong, churches need to ensure that those who are in such relationships are rebuked (just as they should rebuke common-law relationships between men and women or pre-marital sexual relationships between men and women). 2) Churches need to distinguish that there is a difference between homosexual orientation and homosexual activity. What am I talking about here? I do not believe it is wrong to be tempted or struggle with certain things, including homosexual thoughts. Either acting on them or entertaining them is where it becomes sinful. In this vein, 3) I would have no problems welcoming a person who struggles with homosexual thoughts as a member of my church, so long as they remain chaste (ie. do not engage in homosexual relations or sexual relations), and they recognize that Scripture teaches that homosexual behaviour is sinful). It's no different than welcoming a straight person who struggles with lust, but has it under control). Ordaining a minister who is has leanings toward homosexuality, yet chaste and recognizes that homosexual sex is sinful, is another issue, one on which I haven't come to exact conclusions, but of course, I should let you know that I do not support women in minister positions and I generally believe that senior ministers for churches should ideally be married, so I guess I probably would not support a single man who has struggled with homosexuality, as a church leader, for the same reason that I would not support a married man who struggles with undressing women with his eyes).
Some other items. One, is that the argument is made that so many heterosexual marriages end in divorce, and there are so many heterosexual relationships where the woman is being abused or beaten - surely give homosexual relationships a chance. I can, of course, never conclusively say that it is not better for a woman who is in a relationship where she gets the shit kicked out of her every night, to be in a loving relationship with another woman who doesn't abuse her. But I think we are comparing apples to oranges here. No one in their right mind would support a marriage where the husband constantly physically beats the wife (unless you are from the part of the world known for suicide bombers). But I find the problem in using this argument is you are using emotions in favour of the argument, rather than thinking things through. Agree, the woman should get out of the physically abusive relationship. She can always find another man. But let's say she wants kids and as a father, I know how important it is for my son to have both a mother AND a father. My wife brings stuff to my son which I cannot bring, and I bring stuff to my son that my wife cannot bring. That is God's design. But if you are a Christian, it is good to consider what the Bible says as well, not just your own feelings. Otherwise, what's to prevent a married man who is not happy with his sex life, to go over to the other lady at church who is having marriage problems and getting it on after Sunday service, at a local hotel? Certainly, he is feeling better and is getting his sexual needs met, but is what he is doing RIGHT? Unfortunately, that is the question many Christians are not asking themselves.
There is another argument regarding monogamy, that I find is easier to address. The adherents of this argument claim that it is better to have a monogamous homosexual relationship rather than a promiscuous heterosexual one. I don't accept the premise that this has to be an either/or scenario, since I believe the Bible is clear on the fact that homosexual sexual relations is wrong - and yes, I am assuming that there is homosexual sex involved in my above example - otherwise, it can be constituted as two roommates, nothing more). I agree that being in any monogamous relationship greatly reduces chance of contracting an STD or infectious disease, but again, because I believe that homosexual sexual relations is condemned in the Bible, and I also believe that sexual promiscuity (in any form) is condemned in the Bible - the question for me is akin to asking a police officer, "what is better, me driving 160KM in a 50KM zone, or shooting my pellet rifle at pedestrians from a bell tower?" Both are wrong under the standard by which the police officer enforces, so it's a sham argument, in my opinion.
Another question that people ask that is just a set-you-up-and-knock-you-down question is whether gays or homosexuals can be saved (the questions usually comes out like "can gays go to heaven." Here's my answer on this one, and it applies to anyone in the world - and this is right from the Bible - anyone who confesses Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour, repents of their sins, and commits to live their life from that point forward as a follower of Jesus Christ, will be saved. End of discussion.
Just last week, there was the Pride Parade in Toronto (and around the world). I notice that they have since dropped the "Gay" part out of the equation. Anyway, if you watched coverage of it (I didn't choose to, but it's in the paper nonetheless, even in the more conservative ones), you would have seen many people flaunting sexuality. For anyone to say that there is no sexual focus in the gay and lesbian community is blowing smoke in my face. If it were a heterosexual parade, there wouldn't be as crazy of a display of people in various states of undress and flaunting certain body parts. The straight community do not have bath houses and cottages where men can meet for sex very casually. Yes, there are brothels and what not, but even those are under wraps. I was downtown in the gay district years ago (passing through while doing some shopping) and I went into some bookstore to use their washroom. I'm not kidding you - there was this hole in between stalls and I was like, "what the heck is that"? Thought it was something like some toilet paper dispenser that fell out of the wall. I was mentioning this in a casual conversation with someone a few months later and they said that it was blowjob hole, and I'm sitting there thinking, "you've got to be kidding!" Whether it was or not, I haven't seen one of those anywhere else. Anyway, if you don't think that sex is paramount to the gay community, just check out gay discussion online forums - it is loaded with more sexual stuff than many straight discussion forums. I am mentioning all this to emphasize that it is this whole gay sexualization that I find abhorrent and it is this that I believe the Bible condemns. I work with a gay man, who is one of the nicest guys I know, a very gentle person who I'd be happy to hire to work on my team anyday. He is not one of those "flaunt my sexuality" gay people. It's sad to see that Christians in the past have tossed him aside since he's gay. I am angered by the self-righteousness of certain Christians who seem to think that gays are less-human than anyone else. I think it's important to note how Jesus treats people, and I will leave you with this example, which is often used, but used incompletely.
Jesus found a woman who was caught in an adulterous situation. The crowds, no doubt comprised of a fair amount of "religious" people at the time, wanted her to be stoned, as it said in the law. Jesus simply indicated that the persons who are without their own sin in their lives should cast the first stone. People dropped their stones, realizing that they have their own sinful hangups. Now, don't stop reading here!!! Oftentimes, people will use the above example to cite that we should never judge people and that we should always be compassionate, etc. The story is not done yet! Jesus then turns to the woman and his final words are important, "Go, and sin no more!" Notice that? Jesus did not turn a blind eye to her sin, even though he made the crowds realize they can't simply condemn her. Jesus command her to stop sinning. So I think this is important in how we as Christians minister to our homosexual neighbours, colleagues, friends and family. People oftentimes will say, "love the sinner, hate the sin." (which is a Biblical principle). Let's not forget that there are two parts of that equation.
Let me deal with this one first. Homophobic, is, by definition to mean that one is afraid of homosexuals. I am not afraid of homosexuals, just like I am not afraid of heterosexuals. So let's state that first. I know people who are gay, and I work with people who are gay, and hell, I found out that my old college roommate was gay - I still talk to him. I am not afraid of homosexuals. The problem these days is that if people somehow disagree with some the beliefs or behaviour of another group, they will get labels placed on them (sort of like people who point out that there is a problem with crime in black communities in urban areas - they then get labelled a racist...I tell you, there is no better way to create future racists than to alienate people to voice valid opinions (and yes, I agree, how they voice it matters). Go ahead, throw your darts at me - I'll be happy to absorb them. I've always called a spade a spade, to the chagrin of others, and that ain't going to change any time soon.
Where I draw the line on this issue is that I absolutely, unequivocally do not support what people call the gay "lifestyle". What does this mean? It means that I do not believe in gay romance, gay marriage, gay adoption - in other words, anything that would start eating away at what God has placed as His model of life-long marriage relationships between a man and a woman. Despite what many folks who choose not to have children will say, the fact of the matter is, married people do have a responsibility (obligation is too strong of a word) to procreate and continue to fill the earth. I think that is why God intended to put a woman and man together in marriage (also to satisfy each other, but as we're not doing a study on Song of Solomon, that will have to wait till another time). That is God's design. Men and men and women and women cannot biologically procreate. Men and women also complement each other in terms of personality, able to meet needs mutually (ie. women crave love, men crave respect). I don't believe such a balance can be achieved in a homosexual relationship.
Notice I did not discuss much in terms of sexuality, but I will now (THE NEXT PARTS ARE A BIT EXPLICIT SO USE DISCRETION)...some people will use the silly smokescreen that they don't believe in gay relationships because of the gay sex part - so let's be quite frank here. Gay sex can only be constituted mainly in two ways: oral sex and anal sex. The problem with using those two sex acts as the determining factor as to why the lifestyle is not acceptable, is that heterosexuals can and do engage in both, yet I don't hear incriminations raining down on straight folks. Now, it is very true that the Bible calls for a man not to lie with a man as with a woman. So basically, men should not be having sexual relations with one another. How it manifests itself is irrelevant, in my opinion. Now, if you want to know my opinion of anal sex, I can tell you - I would probably classify it as not being as "natural" as penile-vaginal intercourse. The anus is not really a naturally lubricated area, and since there is far greater chance of infection and bacteria, it's probably not the greatest place to be (and that is a generalization for men and women).
All that being said, let me generally state that I believe that many churches in North America have not handled this issue properly (with both sides of the coin). I want to focus on this, since much of the opposition to homosexuality is coming out of the evangelical Christian church. I think that churches have not thought this issue through and simply say "it is wrong!" (what is wrong?) and "that is disgusting" (which I can agree with, but I think there's a much more intelligent and logical way to discuss issues rather than name calling and belittling. Conversely, some churches have approached the issue in an effort to not offend and be compassionate and inclusive. I think this is more catering to today's "accept everyone and don't offend anyone" climate. These churches, I believe, are not looking at what Scripture is teaching.
Let me publicly state that I do agree with some homosexuals and lesbians who said that Christians oftentimes are guilty of having a double-standard for themselves and others. They say that homosexuality is wrong, yet they don't condemn gambling (yes, lottery tickets or being in the office lottery pool counts as gambling, folks!), don't condemn as strongly pre-marital sex, don't condemn relationships/marriage between Christians and non-Christians (which Scripture clearly warns against), don't condemn drunkenness, foul language amongst Christians, or even not showing compassion to the less fortunate, as Jesus taught). The same churches which would elevate homosexuality to the gravest of sins will have no problem raising their kids not to marry black people or using the "n" word freely in their social circles. All are great points, and I would absolutely agree that it is hard to take a Christian seriously who condemns homosexuality, yet has their own sins that they seem to place on a different sliding scale.
Here's how I believe churches need to handle the issue: 1) since Scripture clearly indicates that homosexual sexual relations is wrong, churches need to ensure that those who are in such relationships are rebuked (just as they should rebuke common-law relationships between men and women or pre-marital sexual relationships between men and women). 2) Churches need to distinguish that there is a difference between homosexual orientation and homosexual activity. What am I talking about here? I do not believe it is wrong to be tempted or struggle with certain things, including homosexual thoughts. Either acting on them or entertaining them is where it becomes sinful. In this vein, 3) I would have no problems welcoming a person who struggles with homosexual thoughts as a member of my church, so long as they remain chaste (ie. do not engage in homosexual relations or sexual relations), and they recognize that Scripture teaches that homosexual behaviour is sinful). It's no different than welcoming a straight person who struggles with lust, but has it under control). Ordaining a minister who is has leanings toward homosexuality, yet chaste and recognizes that homosexual sex is sinful, is another issue, one on which I haven't come to exact conclusions, but of course, I should let you know that I do not support women in minister positions and I generally believe that senior ministers for churches should ideally be married, so I guess I probably would not support a single man who has struggled with homosexuality, as a church leader, for the same reason that I would not support a married man who struggles with undressing women with his eyes).
Some other items. One, is that the argument is made that so many heterosexual marriages end in divorce, and there are so many heterosexual relationships where the woman is being abused or beaten - surely give homosexual relationships a chance. I can, of course, never conclusively say that it is not better for a woman who is in a relationship where she gets the shit kicked out of her every night, to be in a loving relationship with another woman who doesn't abuse her. But I think we are comparing apples to oranges here. No one in their right mind would support a marriage where the husband constantly physically beats the wife (unless you are from the part of the world known for suicide bombers). But I find the problem in using this argument is you are using emotions in favour of the argument, rather than thinking things through. Agree, the woman should get out of the physically abusive relationship. She can always find another man. But let's say she wants kids and as a father, I know how important it is for my son to have both a mother AND a father. My wife brings stuff to my son which I cannot bring, and I bring stuff to my son that my wife cannot bring. That is God's design. But if you are a Christian, it is good to consider what the Bible says as well, not just your own feelings. Otherwise, what's to prevent a married man who is not happy with his sex life, to go over to the other lady at church who is having marriage problems and getting it on after Sunday service, at a local hotel? Certainly, he is feeling better and is getting his sexual needs met, but is what he is doing RIGHT? Unfortunately, that is the question many Christians are not asking themselves.
There is another argument regarding monogamy, that I find is easier to address. The adherents of this argument claim that it is better to have a monogamous homosexual relationship rather than a promiscuous heterosexual one. I don't accept the premise that this has to be an either/or scenario, since I believe the Bible is clear on the fact that homosexual sexual relations is wrong - and yes, I am assuming that there is homosexual sex involved in my above example - otherwise, it can be constituted as two roommates, nothing more). I agree that being in any monogamous relationship greatly reduces chance of contracting an STD or infectious disease, but again, because I believe that homosexual sexual relations is condemned in the Bible, and I also believe that sexual promiscuity (in any form) is condemned in the Bible - the question for me is akin to asking a police officer, "what is better, me driving 160KM in a 50KM zone, or shooting my pellet rifle at pedestrians from a bell tower?" Both are wrong under the standard by which the police officer enforces, so it's a sham argument, in my opinion.
Another question that people ask that is just a set-you-up-and-knock-you-down question is whether gays or homosexuals can be saved (the questions usually comes out like "can gays go to heaven." Here's my answer on this one, and it applies to anyone in the world - and this is right from the Bible - anyone who confesses Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour, repents of their sins, and commits to live their life from that point forward as a follower of Jesus Christ, will be saved. End of discussion.
Just last week, there was the Pride Parade in Toronto (and around the world). I notice that they have since dropped the "Gay" part out of the equation. Anyway, if you watched coverage of it (I didn't choose to, but it's in the paper nonetheless, even in the more conservative ones), you would have seen many people flaunting sexuality. For anyone to say that there is no sexual focus in the gay and lesbian community is blowing smoke in my face. If it were a heterosexual parade, there wouldn't be as crazy of a display of people in various states of undress and flaunting certain body parts. The straight community do not have bath houses and cottages where men can meet for sex very casually. Yes, there are brothels and what not, but even those are under wraps. I was downtown in the gay district years ago (passing through while doing some shopping) and I went into some bookstore to use their washroom. I'm not kidding you - there was this hole in between stalls and I was like, "what the heck is that"? Thought it was something like some toilet paper dispenser that fell out of the wall. I was mentioning this in a casual conversation with someone a few months later and they said that it was blowjob hole, and I'm sitting there thinking, "you've got to be kidding!" Whether it was or not, I haven't seen one of those anywhere else. Anyway, if you don't think that sex is paramount to the gay community, just check out gay discussion online forums - it is loaded with more sexual stuff than many straight discussion forums. I am mentioning all this to emphasize that it is this whole gay sexualization that I find abhorrent and it is this that I believe the Bible condemns. I work with a gay man, who is one of the nicest guys I know, a very gentle person who I'd be happy to hire to work on my team anyday. He is not one of those "flaunt my sexuality" gay people. It's sad to see that Christians in the past have tossed him aside since he's gay. I am angered by the self-righteousness of certain Christians who seem to think that gays are less-human than anyone else. I think it's important to note how Jesus treats people, and I will leave you with this example, which is often used, but used incompletely.
Jesus found a woman who was caught in an adulterous situation. The crowds, no doubt comprised of a fair amount of "religious" people at the time, wanted her to be stoned, as it said in the law. Jesus simply indicated that the persons who are without their own sin in their lives should cast the first stone. People dropped their stones, realizing that they have their own sinful hangups. Now, don't stop reading here!!! Oftentimes, people will use the above example to cite that we should never judge people and that we should always be compassionate, etc. The story is not done yet! Jesus then turns to the woman and his final words are important, "Go, and sin no more!" Notice that? Jesus did not turn a blind eye to her sin, even though he made the crowds realize they can't simply condemn her. Jesus command her to stop sinning. So I think this is important in how we as Christians minister to our homosexual neighbours, colleagues, friends and family. People oftentimes will say, "love the sinner, hate the sin." (which is a Biblical principle). Let's not forget that there are two parts of that equation.
Labels:
Bible,
church,
churches,
gay,
homosexual,
homosexuality,
homosexuals,
lesbian,
lesbians,
pride,
sex,
sin
Thursday, May 24, 2007
The Pivotal Question In Biblical Apologetics
I have a keen interest in Biblical Apologetics; that is, the practice of Biblical and Scriptural defence. I am hardly a Ravi Zacharias type, but I really find that aspect of my faith life to be one which is edifying and encouraging. That, coupled with my propensity to enjoy a good debate, has gotten me in my fair share of fruitful discussions. It has also, unfortunately, pulled me in arguments which were probably not the best venue for me to participate (only because I can be pretty opinionated, as you can probably tell by reading this here blog).
I would say that the area I will discuss all the time, without exception is Biblical study and viability. Lots of Christians over the years have said that the most important question for Christians to address with non-Christians is "did the resurrection really happen", or "did Jesus rise from the dead?" They say that the whole cornerstone of Christianity rests on that. I suppose that point can be made, but I feel (and this is just my opinion) that the most important question to address to non-believers is, "Is the Bible true?" or "Is the Bible reliable?" If the answer is yes, then that takes care of a lot of the questions with which we don't have answers or some parts of the Bible are tougher to understand. If I believe that the God of creation and the universe and the same God who created me and you, and sent Jesus to die on the cross, authored the Bible, I will be more than happy to yield to what He says in His Word, even if I don't fully understand it. I think that the fallacy of using the question of "did Jesus really rise from the dead?" as the central cornerstone question of Christianity, is that you are assuming that the non-believer accepts or assumes that the Biblical account of the life of Jesus and His subsequent death and resurrection, as told by the Bible. If they don't believe the Bible is accurate, true or authored by God Himself, guess what? It will matter little how you argue the resurrection point - which is why I believe that showing the Bible to be both a historically reliable document, but also showing that it is the Word of God (latter is harder) is the starting point in presenting the gospel message to the unbeliever. I got this sense more than a decade ago when I was doing some personal study of hermeneutics and one night in my bed, it dawned on me, "what is the point of using the Bible to argue points to a non-Christian when they don't believe in the Bible?" I agree - the Bible, as God's Word, can stand up to scrutiny and doesn't need our defending it - but from a logical perspective, I want to avoid the trap of referring to something that someone does not accept as a factual or reliable reference point.
Quick example, a few years back, a colleague of mine here at work, who also happens to be a strong Christian, is very knowledgeable on the Bible and would put me to shame often, in terms of what he can pull up. Well, we had an opportunity to discuss Christianity with a highly philosophical Jewish colleague (and a friend of mine). The Christian guy started to argue the finer points of the resurrection and about Christianity's distinctives. Guess what? The Jewish guy rejected all of the Christian's arguments, saying that they are all from the Bible and he does not accept the Bible as truth. I totally saw his point. The Christian man then totally shocked me by telling my Jewish friend "it doesn't matter whether you agree with it or not, it's still true." I thought that this was more of a defensive manoeuvre rather than an apologetic one - and it completely re-affirmed what I have thought the past decade or so. I took the conversation into a different realm, asking him what problems he has with the Bible, and that discussion went somewhere, where My Jewish friend told me he wasn't interested in talking with the Christian guy anymore. I'm not sure if I was able to convince him of anything, but at the very least, I was able to show that some of his arguments against the Bible's reliability had, at the very least, some flaws. I mean, i'm not Grant Jeffrey, so I can't argue that kind of stuff, but it does seem to indicate that being able to show the Bible as a reliable and trusted reference point is the first step. Which is why I am so gung-ho on Bible study. We can read listen to all the sermons on CD that we want, or read all the Christian books we want or listen to Christian music and attend Christian conferences and even go to Christian retreats - the problem is, if the Christian does not spend time in their Bibles, knowing God's Word - guess what? When they come across the intelligent and philosophical non-Christian who can easily deflect the standard circular arguments and worse, if they no longer can use the Bible as their point from which to make counterarguments, the Christian will be saddled with several problems in the debate.
There are a plethora of reasons to read one's Bible - to hear what God has to say to them personally, to better understand their relation to God, to know the history of their faith, and to capture guidelines and disciplines for living a life pleasing to God. But I think one of the more paramount reasons to read one's Bible is to be able to familiarize oneself with it, in the event the Christian has a witnessing opportunity. I think I can say most Christians would rather avoid having to debate the hard issues with non-Christians and I think this is sad, since that is neither the model nor the practice Jesus did Himself or expected from His followers.
I would say that the area I will discuss all the time, without exception is Biblical study and viability. Lots of Christians over the years have said that the most important question for Christians to address with non-Christians is "did the resurrection really happen", or "did Jesus rise from the dead?" They say that the whole cornerstone of Christianity rests on that. I suppose that point can be made, but I feel (and this is just my opinion) that the most important question to address to non-believers is, "Is the Bible true?" or "Is the Bible reliable?" If the answer is yes, then that takes care of a lot of the questions with which we don't have answers or some parts of the Bible are tougher to understand. If I believe that the God of creation and the universe and the same God who created me and you, and sent Jesus to die on the cross, authored the Bible, I will be more than happy to yield to what He says in His Word, even if I don't fully understand it. I think that the fallacy of using the question of "did Jesus really rise from the dead?" as the central cornerstone question of Christianity, is that you are assuming that the non-believer accepts or assumes that the Biblical account of the life of Jesus and His subsequent death and resurrection, as told by the Bible. If they don't believe the Bible is accurate, true or authored by God Himself, guess what? It will matter little how you argue the resurrection point - which is why I believe that showing the Bible to be both a historically reliable document, but also showing that it is the Word of God (latter is harder) is the starting point in presenting the gospel message to the unbeliever. I got this sense more than a decade ago when I was doing some personal study of hermeneutics and one night in my bed, it dawned on me, "what is the point of using the Bible to argue points to a non-Christian when they don't believe in the Bible?" I agree - the Bible, as God's Word, can stand up to scrutiny and doesn't need our defending it - but from a logical perspective, I want to avoid the trap of referring to something that someone does not accept as a factual or reliable reference point.
Quick example, a few years back, a colleague of mine here at work, who also happens to be a strong Christian, is very knowledgeable on the Bible and would put me to shame often, in terms of what he can pull up. Well, we had an opportunity to discuss Christianity with a highly philosophical Jewish colleague (and a friend of mine). The Christian guy started to argue the finer points of the resurrection and about Christianity's distinctives. Guess what? The Jewish guy rejected all of the Christian's arguments, saying that they are all from the Bible and he does not accept the Bible as truth. I totally saw his point. The Christian man then totally shocked me by telling my Jewish friend "it doesn't matter whether you agree with it or not, it's still true." I thought that this was more of a defensive manoeuvre rather than an apologetic one - and it completely re-affirmed what I have thought the past decade or so. I took the conversation into a different realm, asking him what problems he has with the Bible, and that discussion went somewhere, where My Jewish friend told me he wasn't interested in talking with the Christian guy anymore. I'm not sure if I was able to convince him of anything, but at the very least, I was able to show that some of his arguments against the Bible's reliability had, at the very least, some flaws. I mean, i'm not Grant Jeffrey, so I can't argue that kind of stuff, but it does seem to indicate that being able to show the Bible as a reliable and trusted reference point is the first step. Which is why I am so gung-ho on Bible study. We can read listen to all the sermons on CD that we want, or read all the Christian books we want or listen to Christian music and attend Christian conferences and even go to Christian retreats - the problem is, if the Christian does not spend time in their Bibles, knowing God's Word - guess what? When they come across the intelligent and philosophical non-Christian who can easily deflect the standard circular arguments and worse, if they no longer can use the Bible as their point from which to make counterarguments, the Christian will be saddled with several problems in the debate.
There are a plethora of reasons to read one's Bible - to hear what God has to say to them personally, to better understand their relation to God, to know the history of their faith, and to capture guidelines and disciplines for living a life pleasing to God. But I think one of the more paramount reasons to read one's Bible is to be able to familiarize oneself with it, in the event the Christian has a witnessing opportunity. I think I can say most Christians would rather avoid having to debate the hard issues with non-Christians and I think this is sad, since that is neither the model nor the practice Jesus did Himself or expected from His followers.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Easter Musings
I was at work today and I guess several people near the cubicle of a cafeteria that we have were wishing each other well for the long weekend (guess they were going to make it even longer by not being at work tomorrow). While I couldn't help by overhear the conversation (since it was the same gabby middle-aged females that seem to always congregate around the muffin area), I did find it interesting to note that their best wishes for the weekend were accompanied by "hope the Easter Bunny finds you well" and "hope your kids get lots of eggs."
Is it just me, or has everyone forgotten what Easter is really about? You know, I've had conversations with my son and he's told me that he knows Easter is about Jesus, but why people don't ever talk about Him. It's interesting to hear that out of the mouth of a four-year-old. It's hard to tell him that not everyone thinks Easter is about easter eggs when he goes to the store and that's all he sees, or the parents of the daycare drop off eggs and say "Happy Easter".
I think even the Christian retail industry, although they have for the most part, not indulged in the secularization of Easter, has not been entirely immune. And I've been told that the truth of Jesus' death and resurrection is too much for a little child to grasp. Perhaps, but for Petes' sake, don't substitute it with something so far from the truth as the freaking easter bunny. I have no problems telling my son there's no such thing as the easter bunny, the same way that I have no problems telling him there's no satan claus. Some have called me a party pooper, but do I really want to bold-face lie to my son about these things? And since I don't care what people think about my views anyway, I just ignore the criticism. I feel that my job in life as a parent is to get enough knowledge to my son so someday, he can make a decision to accept Jesus as his personal Saviour. If he does that, my job as a parent has been done. So, I do try to expose him as much to the Bible as possible - we're not talking home theology classes, but you know, have him seeing his Mom and Dad pray or reading Bible stories to him at night. The one thing I can probably do better on is modelling to him a proper devotional life, something that I must confess I'm not the greatest at keeping. But I really don't want, for any reason, to give in to the cultural dumbing down of Easter or Christmas.
If you really think about it, it is Jesus that bore the brunt of our sin on the cross at Calvary. The Passion of the Christ movie, as Hollywoodized as it is, is a fantastic reminder to ourselves what our Saviour had to go through. It certainly changes our perspective in terms of how we view His life, death and resurrection. I mean, the fact that I (and everyone else who simply accepts Him as their Saviour) have been given a second chance, despite the fact that I am a sinner and continue to sin, yet He is willing to forgive us over and over again if we come repentant, is something that is amazing to grasp. As humans, we usually lose our patience after a while with anything and give up. God, in His infinite grace, has decided that we were worth it to have his own Son die for us. To wash all of our sins away, make us new beings, bear a torturous execution that was drawn out way more than any civilized country these days would allow. And he had the power to turn back and chicken out, but He didn't. Because He loves us so much.
The least that we can do as His followers is not substitue a damn easter bunny or satan claus for our Lord and Saviour, no matter how culturally pressured we are to do so. Christian parents, especially, should have enough balls to tell their kids the truth about Easter, the truth about who Christ is, the truth about what the Word says about the "Six Hours One Friday", to borrow the title of the excellent book by Max Lucado. When kids see their parents fevertly and reverently worshipping the Lord in everything they do, it is probably the best witness of the Gospel that we can give to the next generation.
Is it just me, or has everyone forgotten what Easter is really about? You know, I've had conversations with my son and he's told me that he knows Easter is about Jesus, but why people don't ever talk about Him. It's interesting to hear that out of the mouth of a four-year-old. It's hard to tell him that not everyone thinks Easter is about easter eggs when he goes to the store and that's all he sees, or the parents of the daycare drop off eggs and say "Happy Easter".
I think even the Christian retail industry, although they have for the most part, not indulged in the secularization of Easter, has not been entirely immune. And I've been told that the truth of Jesus' death and resurrection is too much for a little child to grasp. Perhaps, but for Petes' sake, don't substitute it with something so far from the truth as the freaking easter bunny. I have no problems telling my son there's no such thing as the easter bunny, the same way that I have no problems telling him there's no satan claus. Some have called me a party pooper, but do I really want to bold-face lie to my son about these things? And since I don't care what people think about my views anyway, I just ignore the criticism. I feel that my job in life as a parent is to get enough knowledge to my son so someday, he can make a decision to accept Jesus as his personal Saviour. If he does that, my job as a parent has been done. So, I do try to expose him as much to the Bible as possible - we're not talking home theology classes, but you know, have him seeing his Mom and Dad pray or reading Bible stories to him at night. The one thing I can probably do better on is modelling to him a proper devotional life, something that I must confess I'm not the greatest at keeping. But I really don't want, for any reason, to give in to the cultural dumbing down of Easter or Christmas.
If you really think about it, it is Jesus that bore the brunt of our sin on the cross at Calvary. The Passion of the Christ movie, as Hollywoodized as it is, is a fantastic reminder to ourselves what our Saviour had to go through. It certainly changes our perspective in terms of how we view His life, death and resurrection. I mean, the fact that I (and everyone else who simply accepts Him as their Saviour) have been given a second chance, despite the fact that I am a sinner and continue to sin, yet He is willing to forgive us over and over again if we come repentant, is something that is amazing to grasp. As humans, we usually lose our patience after a while with anything and give up. God, in His infinite grace, has decided that we were worth it to have his own Son die for us. To wash all of our sins away, make us new beings, bear a torturous execution that was drawn out way more than any civilized country these days would allow. And he had the power to turn back and chicken out, but He didn't. Because He loves us so much.
The least that we can do as His followers is not substitue a damn easter bunny or satan claus for our Lord and Saviour, no matter how culturally pressured we are to do so. Christian parents, especially, should have enough balls to tell their kids the truth about Easter, the truth about who Christ is, the truth about what the Word says about the "Six Hours One Friday", to borrow the title of the excellent book by Max Lucado. When kids see their parents fevertly and reverently worshipping the Lord in everything they do, it is probably the best witness of the Gospel that we can give to the next generation.
Labels:
Bible,
death,
easter,
easter bunny,
eggs,
forgive,
forgiveness,
grace,
jesus christ,
parenting,
resurrection,
reverence,
saviour,
sin,
truth,
Word,
worship
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)