Scofield ScofieldRG III ESV Study Bible from Oxford University Press - First Impressions

Our new church (been attending for about eight months), in which I am also now a newly minted elder, has been using the English Standard Version (ESV) for many years (the ESV was released as a translation in 2001). As a new guy, and one who has little familiarity with the ESV, it was a bit of an adjustment. And while I know firsthand that many folks at the church continue to use whatever version they used previously, I thought that I would officially adopt the ESV as my translation for study and Scripture memorization, after using the NIV exclusively, since I became a believer in 1991. This, of course, is not an easy task, with almost all of my Scripture memorization coming from the NIV. Furthermore, I was just FINALLY getting used to the layout of my trusty Zondervan NIV slimline Bible. I have since retired it, and have been using the very nice hardcover ESV wide-margin Bible that I received when I became a member of our new church in June. However, while I like that hardcover Bible, it is not a study Bible, and I've always wanted to own a study Bible (IMHO, the Life Application Bible is not a study Bible).

A couple of other things to note...I find that with my ESV hardcover, that the margin notes are in the middle and very, very, very small - like, impossible to read small. I was doing some reading and saw that a new thinline ESV leatherbound Bible was coming out in January 2010, and originally had a order placed on Amazon for it, but I've obviously since changed my mind, after reading about the less-than-stellar quality of the binding of Crossway Bibles, not to mention issues with font sizes that people have reported. Crossway, as you may know, essentially "owns" the rights to the ESV. I was hoping to find the ESV from another publisher, but from what I understand, Crossway has an essential monopoly on ESV Bibles.

Enter the well-regarded and long-established Oxford University Press, which happens to be licenced to publish the ESV Bible, but only as a "Scofield Study Bible". I had no idea who this Scofield fellow was, so I did some digging and found out that he was quite the avid dispensationalist. I have also read a few folks who advise others to stay away from Scofield as he was a divorced man (who later remarried) and also he fought for the Confederate army, and he had a drinking problem - but again, if you read his WHOLE story, and not just the parts, you'll see that all of that was before he became saved, and after he was saved, he was quite the different man (sort of like a fellow who wrote 13 or so of the NT books?)

I am nowhere close to be a dispensationalist, but rather than less theological bias cloud my judgment, I figured I can always ignore the notes that have to do with that area of theology. Boy, I am glad I made that decision.

So I ordered the ScofieldRG III ESV Study Bible in hardcover from Amazon, back in June. It apparently was on backorder, so I literally wanted through the whole summer and early fall, and a deep price cut they gave me (after I complained about such long waiting times), only to find out 3 weeks ago that they are unable to get it from the publisher. I found that hard to believe, but what's done is done and they already cancelled my order (it is the only item that I have never been able to get from Amazon.ca, but it was also the most desired item in all my orders. Oh well...so I, still being an avid eBay buyer (not so much a seller anymore due to fees and such), checked eBay, and I found the ScofieldRG III ESV Study Bible in bright blue leatherbound (turns out to be bonded leather, which essentially the particleboard of leather construction). The price was OK, the shipping was high, but it would have still come out to less than what I'd pay in the store or through Amazon.ca (and no retail taxes if I buy from the U.S.), I placed my order. I was relieved to find out it was brand new, still sealed, and that the blue was actually a navy blue, rather than the smurf blue that was on the stock photo.

My trusty new ScofieldRG III leather Bible in navy blue from Oxford Press, showed up today and since I was home with a bad cough and sore throat (and staying up all night due to the cough), it was a welcome addition to my bedside as I was in bed resting anyway... Obviously, I haven't read through it all yet, but I can provide some initial impressions on the Bible.

Obviously, the first thing that anyone experiences with a new Bible is the look and feel. This Bible has about 1890 pages or so and you could feel the weight of the Bible - it was not as heavy as a hardcover, but it was no thinline either. It was also much bigger in size. However, the Bible feels good in the hands, the bonded leather does not look and feel like bonded leather at all (I have many bonded leather Bibles in other translations). There is a thumb indexing system and on this Bible, the tabs are silver and the writing is in black. The overall Bible pages is coated with a layer of silver glitter (or whatever it's called in the industry - I think you know what I'm talking about - collectively the pages are sprayed or treated with a silver looking material).

When I open the Bible, it feels stiff, but not too much so that it stay open properly. The pages are sewn together, not glued, which make for a more long-lasting lifespan (unlike my glued NIV thinline, which has several pages falling out after 13 years).

What impressed me the most was the font size - very readable, even for people with bad eyesight like me. Yet the font is not overly large to make the reader think it is a large-print Bible. In my edition, words of Christ are in red and while I've read some reviews where people have said that it's way too bright read, I didn't find that to be the case. The red text is a neither-here-or-there issue for me, so it really doesn't matter to me either way. The study notes and chain references (on the outer margins) are easy to read and there are tables and charts throughout the Bible. Yes, the dispensationalist theology is there, but it is not rampant like someone would have you believe (I've sampled several chapters already from the Old and New Testaments). Again, if you don't subscribe to dispensationalism, just ignore the notes on it. It is still worthy study Bible otherwise. My one observation for improvement is in the area of balance of notes. By this I mean that at some points in my initial perusal, some books and chapters were heavy with notes, while other books and chapters barely had any. I would have liked to see some balance here, and while I know it's more exciting to talk about more theologically engaging things, even for some of the lesser-known books of the Bible or lesser-read passages (and sometimes there are sparse notes on even well-known passages), some more contextual information would go a long way.

The Bible includes several very colourful maps at the back, made out of thinner pages, so that they don't start falling out like in my NIV Bible. The front of the Bible has a few additional pages which you can record births, deaths, marriages, etc., and this section is done on high quality paper with texturing, so it really does have a old-world, historical feel. Very classy and well done.

The pages are thin, and the accompanying product card said not to use highlighters and such, as they would leak through or bleed through the pages. I can relate, as my NIV did that...however, in using my highlighter already on the Bible, I can tell you firsthand that the pages don't allow for bleeding (that much) and you can highlight to your heart's content - you may see a slight trace of it, but when you turn the page over, you won't see the entire highlighted section bleed through - trust me on this one - of course, it may just be the highlighter I used).

Each book has an introduction and a blurb about key themes and a layout of the book. The Scofield system does pride itself on helping the reader understand Scripture as a whole, and as a result, I really like how the notes and summaries really aid to this end.

The Bible also comes with the standard strip cloth bookmark (in matching blue). There is also a concordance in the back that, while it is not comprehensive, is better than nothing. Included in the back as well is a summary of the chain references, a Bible dictionary and topical index.

Overall, I am impressed with this Bible greatly. The quality of construction does seem very top notch and the readability of the font and typeset shows favour with this reader. I look forward to using this Bible for many more years to come. My wife opened the package and after inspecting it herself, she wanted one as well. If Amazon did start stocking the hardcover version again, I'll probably pick up one those as well. I would give this ScofieldRG III ESV Study Bible from Oxford Press top marks.

Eldership...Revisted?

My family and I have been attending our new church for 4 1/2 months now, and we are loving it! It's so encouraging to be attending an authentic Bible believing church, which not only teaches sound doctrine, has exceptional expository preaching, and interweaves the Bible into everything from the children's program to upcoming mid-week doctrine and church history classes. It has been more than a decade since I heard a sermon about Hell, man's sinfulness, integrity and moral living, and Biblical study excellence. My wife and I, after a couple of months, quickly realized that this is where God wants us to be and we are being spiritually fed more than any other time in our lives, it was a no-brainer for us to take membership classes and become official members last month. We couldn't be happier - we have entered into some very meaningful friendships with folks in our new community, some of them very deep friendships. We count it joy to entertain, feed, and be hospitable towards our new church family. Our kids have integrated very well - my son just finished an enjoyable fourth day of vacation Bible school / day camp, and for the first time, he is memorizing Bible verses. My walk with the Lord has improved dramatically in that I am spending more and more time in Bible study daily, something that was missing for years (and I have to bear a lot of responsibility for that, in part). My wife's and my marriage is stronger, our kids are getting solid Bible teaching at church and making Christian friends, and through the sheer grace of God, we have discovered fellow church members who are parents in my son's class, fellow parents we have known for years now, yet had no clue that we had a common faith. What really is the icing on the cake are our neighbours and very good friends, whom we met on the first day we attended our new church. It's strange - these neighbours live less than 100 feet away from us, but for the past six years, they didn't know us and we didn't know them and like most people in the bigger city, we all just sort of kept to ourselves. Now, either they are over here daily or we are over there. They just had dinner at our place on Monday, we ate at their place on Tuesday and they were over last night. We watch their kids and they watch ours. They are a solid, solid Christian family and we are just so blessed to have met them and have formed a very, very deep friendship with them even though we've really only known them for 4 1/2 months, but it feels like years. We are vacationing with them in August and are really looking forward to it.

Aside from that, our family has also semi-joined a small fellowship group, where we were made to feel both welcome and accepted. It is so refreshing to not have to deal with drama, pretense, and put on masks. We are part of a community of believers who not only struggle and have good and bad days, but collectively, strive towards understanding the Bible more and practically living out Biblical truths. Now, you may suggest that all churches should be doing this, but that is not the case. Many churches nowadays have become a glorified quasi-spiritual social club, where anything goes. Gossip is not only tolerated, but encouraged, and dependence on God through faith is replaced by self-reliance and pragmatism based on cultural and societal trends. I've been to a number of churches in the past 5 years, either visited or attended, which have personnified the churchy trend to focus on growth and be "contemporary and relevant". It's interesting to read about that behemothic, though misdirected Willow Creek church in the U.S. One of the first mega churches, it prided itself on being bigger, faster, and supposedly better than any other church. Only recently has it published a book detailing what a mistake it was to go in that direction and they are slowly moving back towards a more Biblically-sound model.

Our new church is a considerably more conservative church than any previous church I've attended, and I'm glad for that, since we need back-to-basics teaching. For the first time int he 18 years I've been a Christian, I will be switching Bible versions. Our new church uses the ESV (more conservative, literal version, along the lines of RSV, but not as badly translated as the KJV). When we became members, the church presented my wife and I EACH with a brand spanking new higher-end study Bible (they don't give pew Bibles there, since they want the Bible gift to stand out and as a reminder to the new owner that it was given on a special occasion). I'm OK with moving to ESV, and my Scofield ESV is on its way from amazon.ca (I don't want to use the gift Bible, since I'd rather keep it for home use so that I don't lose it).

I am grateful that I did not attend our new church 5 years ago, as it was embroiled in the same kind of seeker-friendly wishy-washy, lovey-dovey no-meat-on-the-bones "teaching". Doctrine was unwelcome and considered too divisive, but thankfully the denomination sensed the problem, installed a very solid, mature preacher from the outside into the church, and as a result, 400 people left and formed their own liberal-theologically based "church" about 15 mintues away, which cater to "contemporary" thinking by incorporating Nietzsche (sp.), John Lennon, etc. along with Jesus, and considers its worship services "entertainment" (it says that right on their website. Sad, sad, sad. Anyway, our new church is awesome and while we could have moved churches years ago (trust me, we were thinking of it, even back in 2006), I'm glad we didn't - God's timing for us was just right.

Why am I writing all this? In a way, this blog serves in part as a venting point, but at other times, I write here as a means to formulate thoughts and correlate feelings and such, very much like a diary, even though I never kept one growing up (it was always such a girlie thing to do, and in a sense, still is). This is one of the times when I am doing the diary thing.

I outlined the above experiences in a way to really demonstrate to me that not only are there good churches out there, there are excellent churches out there. There is no doubt in my mind that I eventually would have liked to get my feet wet again in serving in the church, but that was the farthest thing on my mind when I received a phone call at work today from the church. I saw it was the church calling on my call display at work, and instantly I thought, "oh man, what happened to my son?", since he was attending a Vacation Bible School or day camp there. Why else would they be calling?

It was the senior pastor's executive assistant. Now, I have gotten to know her fairly well and she is such a friendly lady and has a good sense of humour. I had thought that maybe there was something that got mixed up in a recent tithing cheque, or that perhaps I had left something at the church, for which I had to retrieve from the church office. Maybe she wanted to call and see how I was enjoying membership. Perhaps she wanted to invite our family over for a meet and greet or for a meal.

Little did I expect that I would be hearing these words...I am paraphrasing a bit here as to not use names or identifying information.

"On behalf of the Senior Pastor, I'd like to inform you that he has chosen to nominate you for the office of elder at our church."

First thing I did was grip the phone tighter. Did I just hear what I thought I heard? I asked her to repeat what she just said. She said it again - the Pastor is putting my name in as a candidate to be an elder, and would like to see if I am interested.

Second thing I did was take a breath. And then I reflexively responded, "wow, that's really nice that he is considering me, but I just became a member last month and I've only been coming here for 4 1/2 months..." She paused and said that the Senior Pastor put my name forth.

Now, I should provide some context here. The Senior Pastor is well aware that I was previously an elder at my old church. I don't think I ever shared with him about my experience. But I also did some leadership responsibilities at the church previous to that, running a missions committee and leading a college/career group. Both times I experienced ministry burnout. I think she could sense some trepidation in my voice. I honestly told her that well, I am really honoured that I am even considered, and really, this is totally unexpected, so I'm going to have to pray about it, look to the Scriptures to get some sense of God's direction, and seek Godly counsel from trusted mature Christians.

As I am sitting here typing all this out, I am still hashing these questions in my mind. The first thing I did today was call my wife and told to sit down while I told her about the call. To my surprise, she seemed fairly ecstatic and encouraged me to go for it, and really encouraging me that way - she's really good at that. The next thing I did was email my parents - I know my Mom's a believer, not so sure about my Dad, but I thought I'd include him). They shared some thoughts with me. I then emailed my old boss, and a dear friend and Christian brother who knows the Bible as good as anyone I know - he also shared some thoughts with me. I think that the next order of business is to meet up with another elder at the church (I already know with whom I am going to discuss this) and get his perspective as well as get some insight as to what goes on behind the scenes. And finally, I'm going to arrange a meeting with the Senior Pastor to find out the process that ended with my name being suggested, either by him or someone else.

This is so interesting, because I have a preaching series on eldership that I was planning on starting soon, since I listen to preaching on the way to work every morning.

I am finally, and most importantly, going to spend some time alone with God to seek his voice - I have a really nice place at a local conservation area that I go to to just sit in stillness...it's kind of weird, but really clears out distractions and I can get a better sense of God's direction if I sit quietly. I'll do that next week. And I'll be reading the 1 Timothy and Titus passages on eldership again.

My last foray into the eldership thing left a really bad taste in my mouth. To be quite frank, I had doubts as to my ability to be an effective last time. But I sensed God's calling and proceeded. It was an interesting experience for sure, but what really soured me was two years ago when I led a nominations team and we rejected the name of a prospective candidate. Apparently, it was only the second time in 20+ years that a candidate was rejected, and I was heading the committee that rejected the candidate. In looking back, the right decision was made - the candidate was totally unqualified and showed very little spiritual maturity and fruit. I thought it was a done deal until a couple of other elders and some other meddlers decided to try to reverse the decision and then talk with the people on my committee. Not only was this contrary to our mandate, but it totally undermined our committee. But moreover, it showed the lack of spiritual maturity in these other elders, and while I am not going to start comparing Christian credentials, if an elder is not willing to yield to Biblical standards and qualifications for prospective elders, they probably shouldn't be one in the first place. I saw enough during that process to know that I no longer wanted to be on that board, but since I made a commitment, I tried my best to serve out the rest of the term. Since then, I've seen other things occur at our old church and amongst some of the people there, to unequivocally conclude that there is a serious lack of spiritual maturity at our old church - of course, I am not including everyone in that, since there were some very solid Christians at our old church, but I'd say in retrospect that they were in the minority.

So when I got the call today asking if I'd be willing to stand as a candidate for elder for a church of 820+ people, I hesitated a bit. Did I really want to go through this again? But then again, I know enough about how our new church operates by its fruit that I know that behind the scenes, there are good leaders there. I've actually tested this theory in an unconspicuous way with a couple of elders, asking them some casual Bible questions. I don't expect any elder to be able to answer all Bible questions, but at the very least, you should be able to consider them someone you can ask, knowing that their interest is there. Thankfully, the elders I've talked with showed a very keen interest and understanding of God's Word. You can tell these men take Bible study seriously.

Several people who have provided initial counsel for me so far have commonly re-iterated the obvious point that our new church is a far different church than our old church. In fact, with our old church, it took my wife and I literally years to integrate ourselves into the life of the church: four years to become a member, eight years to actually start forming meaningful friendships, and all in between, we considered trying out another church. With our new church, we became a member in 3 1/2 months, we get to church early every week, have already formed meaningful relationships and are both being fed regularly. I know churches are different, and our new and old church are night and day, but that bad eldership experience really grinds at me to this day. I saw that decisions were oftentimes arrived at discussion only and without really serious prayer - one time, during a congregational meeting, a former elder stood up and suggested that they vote to leave their denomination then and there, that night, due to some denominational authority squabbles. I remember thinking, if a former elder would make a snap decision like that by thinking with his emotions in the heat of the moment rather than logically and objectively, that is not a good sign. I am sure things are done a lot differently at our new church, but to a small degree, I am afraid, since that previous bad experience caused me to leave our old church. I don't want this to happen again.

Then again, I recognize that God is in control and He will place us where He wants us. And that I really shouldn't be thinking of how I feel, but rather whether this is God's will. I also have to keep in mind that just because I'm nominated doesn't mean I'll pass what I am sure will be a much more rigorous selection and interview process. Remember, our new church has about 9 elders for 820+ people (I would potentially be number 10).

I also think about my hang-ups - I have a lot of them. I have some personality quirks and sometimes can be impatient or even a bear. I am very opinionated, as you can tell by my postings here, and sometimes have difficulty in coming across diplomatically. But my wife, who knows me best and has seen me at my worse, is encouraging me to let my name stand, or at least that's the way she's leaning...

You may say, what's the big deal? This is a volunteer position, so don't take it too seriously. Well, I do take it seriously since I think the church's leaders will more often than not influence how the church moves forward. I also see this as also a tremendous potential opportunity to serve God in a capacity that I though I could not handle. I take it seriously because the Bible takes it seriously (see 1 Timothy and Titus).

I really do have to pray about this and dig into God's Word to get some direction.

The Dumbing Down of Today's Christians

Just yesterday, at church, our pastor announced that in the Fall, our church will begin an in-depth and comprehensive series, on Christian doctrine and foundational beliefs. I was so pleased to hear this, and it is yet another affirmation that God brought us to the right place, when we changed churches earlier this year (we were at our previous church for 13 years).

This got me thinking last night when I went to bed. I wonder how a typical church nowadays would think of a regular course on doctrine. Though I am not a betting man, I would bet that many churches would not be on board with such a course. You see, when you talk doctrine, you are starting to talk in absolute terms, and I think that the overall church community (at least in North America) has covertly fought against this for years. Even at our new church, as I have become more integrated into it, I found out that it wasn't even five years ago that our church had a major church split, losing 400+ members (who incidentally went and formed their own church). The sticking point? There was a segment of people who did not like the fact that the denomination specifically brought in a sound-doctrine Bible teacher who teaches only from the Word of God (the Bible) and will not compromise on this - this was in response to concerns that the church's former pastor was watering down the teaching of God's Word). Needless to say, this rather large splinter group ended up forming their own church (which like many "contemporary" churches nowadays, don't even use the word "Church" in their name anymore). Now, even before I knew anything about this splinter "church", I suspected that this church had as part of its philosophy one or more (if not all) of the following items:

a) come as you are - no dress code or no expectations of dress
b) this is a non-threatening environment
c) the music here is cool
d) we strive to redefine church - you may be surprised by what you see
e) we have or are open to women in ministry
f) we don't use "stuffy" versions of the Bible, it's Eugene Peterson's "The Message" that is for us, baby!
g) it doesn't matter where you are or what you have done, God loves you

Now, the last point is sticky - it is technically true, but most of these churches don't teach this Biblically; that is, they don't discuss this from a sin and salvation and a forgiveness overall standpoint, but from a "we all have hangups, it's not a big deal and God cares more about you coming to Him than what you are doing"). More on this later.

Now, I took an opportunity to actually visit the splinter church's website and lo and behold, everything on it confirmed my suspicions. I happen to have had some spare time that day, so I thought I'd give them a call and chat with one of the pastors there just to ask some curiosity questions. I asked them some hypothetical questions that if I was looking for a new church, why would I feel welcome there. His answers confirmed all the above criteria of the standard "seeker-friendly" type of church. So there ya go.

Now, what is my problem with all this? Well, I see that such churches are in large part, contributing to a "dumbing down" of Christianity and by extension, of Christians, in today's world (at least in North America, where this phenomenon of the "seeker friendly" church is rampant. This is a big deal for me, since if, as Christians, we are supposed to bear witness to the world of the gospel of Christ, using God's Word as our sole evidentiary mechanism, it is imperative that we get to know the Word intimately, and by this I mean understanding it properly and in context. Is it no wonder that most Christians would poop their pants at seeing a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness at their door, since their recognize that their lack of familiarity with their Bible would not make them ideal candidates to have a frank discussion about theological differences with these groups.

Years ago, I attended a memorial/funeral for a colleague of mine. It was quite a long drive, but I wanted to show my support for him at this difficult time. It so happened that one of my other colleagues, a Christian gal, tagged along for the ride. Now, she is of a completely different denomination than me, but I don't consider our denominational differences to be major - I know she is saved and she loves the Lord and she is a really strong believer. Anyway, on the car ride, we talked about what was then all the rage in modern Christiandom, Rick Warren's "The Purpose Drive Life." She didn't read it yet, but had some reservations about the book based on the title itself (I don't remember exactly what her objections were, since it was many years ago). She asked me if I had read it and I simply said yes. She asked me to elaborate, and so I did. Now, that book, while most of it may be technically correct, is not theologically sound. Just like my above comment on criteria G, while God loves you, there is still action on our part we must take. If we are in sinful behaviour, we must go to God and repent (a word you never hear anymore in churches) and ask Him for forvigness. In fact, in order to be saved, one has to repent and turn away from their sins and accept Jesus Christ as Saviour. It's our sins that put Christ on the cross in the first place! Yet many churches seem to conveniently sweep that one under the carpet, opting to focus on one side of the equation, which is God's grace and love and forgiveness, while ignoring the other, which is our sin and depravity and our response to God. See what I'm saying here? If you teach half the doctrine, you're going to get some misled and confused people. Check out the latest rage in Christian circles (well at least last year), that book called "The Shack" that is making the rounds. If new Christians are being exposed to this, there is no way on God's green earth that they will ever be exposed to the full gospel message, in this politically-correct, spiritually unoffending, feel-good treastise. This sells in volumes on the Christian and non-Christian market because of its lack of discussion about sin and hell and the righteousness of God. It is again, a one-sided "God is love" approach to things, which, if you examine the Bible in its entirety, is not telling the whole story.

Churches like the splinter church described above don't believe in "rules". That's good, because I don't either, at least when it comes to faith in Christ. However, I think that churches like the one I described above miss the mark when it comes to this - they are pushing away from a works-based understanding of the Christian life, which is good in a sense, since that's what Jesus railed against when he criticized the Pharisees; however, as many of the epistles will show us (Corinthians, Timothy, Ephesians, Philippians, etc.), and especially James, the Christian, in his or her new life, should, by virtue of his/her obedience to the promptings of the Holy Spirit, show fruit from his/her faith. I think this is what James is saying - while what you do will not save you, your actions as a result of living a new life in Christ, should show some evidence of your new life. Now, I am the first to admit that it is easy to ignore the promptings of the Spirit. Sometimes it's just easier to just do what you want to do, according to the flesh. Heck, I've been guilty of that for years. But over the last little while, I've really given my life back to God for Him to repair, and He has really changed my heart to quite a large degree and I am happy for that; I am still far from perfect (just ask my wife!) but doing better now, thanks!

You know, it's amazing, one of the things which will always elicit a reaction as asking Christians about John MacArthur, who is considered one of the top Bible teachers in the world today and is Pastor and Bible teacher for Grace Community Church in California. Do I agree with everything he says? No. But I think that for one to argue against him, it is necessary to exercise the same amount (or more) of Biblical literacy that he has. Which means that Christians need to go into their Bibles more if you want to counter a point of contention - it's not good enough to just say, "well, I just don't feel...". For the past two months, I've been listening to a Bible Questions and Answers series, which features Pastor MacArthur answering Bible and Chrsitianity-related questions posed from MacArthur's congregation of about 10,000. The Bible Q&A sessions are unscripted and are based over 37 years (there's 55 CDs and counting of pure Bible questions and answers). I love listening to these, not because I like hearing MacArthur's voice, but because he always answers his questions with Biblical support and I learn something new. It also points me back to Scripture and gets me into the Word more than I've been for years. None of his questions are responded with "I think..." unless there is no clear Biblical reference to it. MacArthur has 40+ years of sermons available for download and study and has written 70+ books. To me, this is the kind of love and interest in God's Word that I'd like to have in my own life. Yet, you know, there are a lot of people who don't like MacArthur, which is fine, since I don't expect everyone to agree on everything, but it's always for one of the following reasons: a) he's boring. b) it's too indepth and c) not much contemporary application.

You see what I'm saying here? Today's Christians will find expository preaching boring, you know why? As the Bible says, they are infant Christians in their understanding, and infants drink, what? Infant milk! If these Christians go to a church in which in-depth expository and contextual Bible study is hardly contemplated, much less practiced, they are going to turn out to be not very well grounded on their doctrinal foundations, if at all.

Based on the complaints noted above regarding MacArthur, I have found the reverse to be true when it comes to in-depth Bible study recently in my life. If the study is done properly in understanding the historical context and cultural context and religious context, it really can and does bring the passage to life in that we better understand why it was said the way it was said and why it was said. People nowadays can take any verse out of context from the Bible. Of course, when this is done, no one has any clue as to why this archaic Bible verse is quoted, but their motivation to find out is stymied by their culturally-taught desire not to question anything - so they blindly recite verses without any passion and understanding behind it. A quick example - 1 Corinthians 3:16 is often used on me to tell me that I should have never gotten my tattoos. It says that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and if one destroys the body, God will destroy him. There are two problems with this: a) this verse is not saying this (even though for years I thought it did). If you look at the context of this passage (ie. the chapter before and after as well as the historical context of the Corintian church at the time), you'll see that Paul was writing to the Corinthian church (the body of believers as referenced) about divisions in the church and how some in that church at that time was thinking that Paul was the head of the church or Apollos was, etc.) The church is what is referenced to by the word "body" (and this is confirmed by examining the Greek word's origins and meaning). Based on what the topic was before and after that passage, it makes absolutely not sense why Paul would all of the sudden stop what he is saying and talk about the physical body, when in the context of that passage, body mean "the church". b) I did my tattoos before I was a Christian, so it's not like I knew any better. But regardless, my personal opinion of tattoos is neither here nor there since I don't see it as a paramount theological issue, but I would question Christians who get tattoos of things that are obviously not pleasing to God (such as evil symbols, witchcraft things, sexual things, etc.).

While it is getting a bit off topic, my point about is to demonstrate that most Christians don't even bother (or know how) to look at a passage contextually. And churches nowadays are not teaching this, unfortunately. And I've visted more than a few churches to be able to make this comment with some confidence.

That being said, one of the best sermons I heard at my previous church was preached by the, at the time 30-year-old or so pastoral intern who taught on the passage about the Good Samaritan. I've heard and read that passage many times, but this time, he spent time looking at the context of that passage. At face value, we often read contemporary things into Scirptural text. For me, I always envisioned a straight country road where the guy was attacked. And I just saw that the guys who passed him (except for the Samaritan) were simply arrogant, snobby guys who didn't want to help him. It was until it was told the type of winding angled road and that it was dangerous because of the hiding spots in the areas the road that I started realizing that this was no stroll in the park. And also the relationships that the Jews and Samaritans had was not simply that they didn't associate with one another, but when you discovered why and the societial stigmas that will result, etc., it helps you to appreciate the account better, as well as understand the setting from which our Biblical stories come.

But most churches don't teach this, and if they do they will teach it once in a blue moon. Instead, we get, as I witnessed in 2006 in a church in Alberta, a quick sermon (and these churches always have quick sermons since they seem to think that people have more important things to do rather than study God's Word - if nothing else, they are making their real intentions known) about some lovey-dovey topic that will not cause any offense and uncomfortableness with the congregants. The topic was something like "What If Jesus Had a Blackberry?" What an utterly stupid topic it was, and I remember telling my cousin, who asked me about what I thought of the sermon, that "to be honest, it wasn't very good." Honestly, if you have to start reading your 21st century viewpoint back into the Biblical text, you are in a world of hurt.

The pursuit of a holy life is not taught in most churches today. This is true. I am seeing more and more instances of non married Christian couples vacationing together by themselves. That seems to be OK with other Christians, few of whom speak up. When was the last time you heard of a church talking about waiting until marriage to have sex? Just yesterday, our new church's pastor preached a challenging sermon about integrity and watching what one watches, and watching what they say (ie. slander, lying, gossip). Are those warnings taught in any churches nowadays, especially in light of the fact that the church has historically been a place where such sins are openly practiced? I have found many Christians nowadays to be much more accepting of other Christians who use foul language and swearing - even I have been known to historically use it without anyone really chastizing me. That is not good. As with anything else in the Christian life, it's better to surround yourself in an environment where you don't get exposed to things that are not good for your spiritual health. If you aren't in a good church that encourages you to pursue a life of Godly living, find one that does.

Many churches nowadays are not teaching doctrine (they say it's divisive, which is true, but that's by design - no one will be convicted of anything if there's no objective standard by which to measure their behaviour). Their challenge is whether they will be obedient and submit to God's authority in the Bible, even if it makes them uncomfortable. Case in point - one of the reasons we left our previous church was their hiring of a female pastor. My wife and I felt that God's Word is clear on this issue and while there were many things which we could tolerate (and even that I reflect, is probably not good as we probably should have gone with our convictions earlier), I think this issue was really what did it for us, though it was one of a few other doctrinal and Biblical issues. To me, I think many people on this issue (and not just at our previous church, but in churches around the country) want to appeal to a worldly sense of equality and not offend the feminists out there. They will always tell you that the passages in Timothy and Titus that deal with pastors are outdated or antiquated, or it doesn't fit their secular, feminist interpretation. For us, even when we ultimately did not agree, I think it was more important for us to maintain peaceful relations with our old church and not rail on them but simply say that we disagree and move on and wish them the best. Personally, it has been almost 3 months now and I am glad we made the switch, for our spiritual health's sake.

Going forward, I don't expect churches across Canada and especially across the USA, to change to a Biblically focussed, expository preaching-based system, where God's Word is studied vigorously and properly. But if there is some encouragement to glean, it can be seen in how the once seeker-friendly Willow Creek church, in the past few years, recognized in a published paper, that they were trying to "run church" all the wrong ways, opting to lure people in by marketing gimmacks and a watered-down gospel, rather than preach the Gospel with all of its challenges to the status quo and its call for changing how one thinks and behaves. People nowadays often cite the situation where a woman who was caught in adultery was brought before Jesus and how Jesus said, "He who is without sin cast the first stone." What these same people conveniently leave out is Jesus' charge to the woman near the end of the discourse, to "Go and sin no more". Jesus challenges our works-based mentality but also indicates that action is required on our part and the first step is to humbly come before God and admit our shortcomings and our sinful actions and attitudes.

Reflections on Being a Christian in 2009 And My Journey To Here

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.

The Shack by Wm. Paul Young - A Book Review

As a general rule, I tend to stringently avoid books in the mainstream Christian realm, which have gained either secular acceptance or are touted as something that is akin to an addendum to the Bible. Sometimes, my curiosity gets the better of me and I will reluctantly pop down a few bucks to buy a used or at worse, extremely cheap-priced copy of the book. It happened with the whole "Purpose Driven Life" phenomenon a number of years back, and I thoroughly regretted dropping even a dollar for that utterly theologically-devoid tome. I have since come across people who consider that book a treastise of great theology, and I simply conclude that they obviously have not had much formal theological training to appreciate substance. While it is beyond the scope of this review to comment on Purpose Driven Life, I will simply say that it re-inforces my long-held belief that if a Christian book is popular in the mainstream market, something has gone wrong. Fact is, the Bible has always had opposition from the secular world, but that is to be expected, just like how the Bible teaches that the Christian life is not easy and that Christians will (not may, but will) be persecuted.

Fast forward years later and once again, I hear of a massive promotion of the latest Christian cross-cultural book phenomenon, "The Shack." Heck, our church is in on the action, as is many churches, both promoting the book for study, reflection, or personal enjoyment. The book is selling at Costco, Chapters, and anywhere else that sells best-selling paperbacks and hardcovers. Christian media is discussing this book as a fresh, much welcome inclusion for any believer's library. And both Christians and non-Christians are commending the books on its inherent ability to make one think deeper about faith, if not actually promote life-changing behaviour. Based on all this, and the fact that I am an occasional sucker for hype, I thought I'd drop ten bucks or whatever it was to snatch a copy of the book, despite the fact that it is recommended by Eugene Peterson, who is, on my list of Christian writers, near the very bottom, in terms of theological consistency and doctrinal objectivity. I first gave it to my wife, who tends to devour books much more quickly than myself. Ensuring that she was not to give anything away, I asked her for her opinion of the book, and to my surprise, she rated it as so-so. So last Friday, I decided to crack open the book and check it out for myself.

Now, setting some context here, without going into painstaking detail. Two Thursdays ago, my wife and I experienced our second miscarriage. We have two beautiful little kids, but the loss of another child was both disappointing and devastating to us, particularly when the second miscarriage occurred exactly two years to the day the last one happened (October 30, 2006). I was a complete mess the first time, and didn't fare much better this time, especially given the fact that my wife experienced a lot of complications which required multiple hospital visits.

In all of this, I experienced raw pain and all of the frustration with not understanding why God allowed this to happen to us, all came to the surface once again. So I thought it was somewhat of a strange coincidence that the book that I had planned to read dealt with a father who lost a child as a result of a gruesome murder, and who is now angry and deliberately distant with God. Hey, I could relate, and since I had some time at night to reflect, on these things, I thought I'd give the book a whirl.

Well, I am not one to beat around the bush, so here is my candid opinion of the book, and I will deviate from the standard review format (noting positive elements first, followed by negative elements - I am deliberately not doing it this way because of structure and flow of how I want to present my opinion). The first 80 pages were fabulous. I thought it was well written (for a Christian book - what a shocker!) and the rising action and pace of the story kept me turning the pages, well into the night. I really felt the main character, Mack Philip's, pain, despite the fact that he lost a six-and-a-half-year-old girl to what turns out to be a serial killer. I was pleasantly surprised by the vividness of the descriptive language of scenery, people, etc., and was enjoying the plot. At around page 80, I thought to myself, "OK, I can see why this book is so highly regarded by a number of different Christian folks".

Then everything started going downhill. I have never read a book like this before, that starts with such a high degree of promise, only to descend to the depths of utter lameness and cheesy dialogue. Where to begin... First, I started recognizing that this book is really not that much of a far cry from Purpose Driven Life. In trying really hard not to given anything away, all I can say is that the book probably resonates with so many people, because it takes the ever-popular "safe" approach to sprituality, emphasizing only part of the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, while ignoring the other parts. Here's a quick illustration to demonstrate what I'm getting at here. Remember when Jesus caught that woman in adultery? The vast majority of people will conveniently quote Jesus' words "let who is without sin cast the first stone." Of course, these same people seemingly glide over the fact that Jesus, in addressing the woman, tells her "go and sin no more". These folks who promote such touchy-feely theology tend to focus more on the loving nature of God, without looking at the righteous side of God as well. And, furthermore, in many of these books, you will never hear any discussion of the nature of sin (it's important, since it's sin that separated us from God to begin with) or repentance (turning away from sin). Instead, what we get is a mish-mash of God as our beer drinking buddy, our friend who overlooks all our faults and will never point out our shortcomings, and a Jesus who just wants relationships, and will accept anyone's behaviour, even though He prescribes otherwise elsewhere in Scripture.

OK, so I'm being a bit vague here by not referring to the book, so I'll provide some specifics here, without revealing main plot points. First, I will come right out and say that this book is about as politically correct as they come. God is a big black woman (his words, not mine), the Holy Spirit is an Asian woman, and Jesus is some middle-eastern guy (at least that's closer than the other two). Now, this is addressed somewhat in the book through the lengthy discourses and conversations that the main character, Mack, has with each of these three characters (think of this book as the Christian version of the David Chilton best-seller "The Wealthy Barber" in which the characters impact financial advice, under the guise of a character conversation in a fictitious environment). The author, Wm. Paul Young, through the characters, indicate that this visible minority focus is supposed to dispel stereotypes, namely that God is an old white man. I personally have never held that view, but I'll play along, just for fun. The problem is, while Young goes out of his way to play up these characters (and a hispanic woman shows up much later as another character), he reinforces his own stereotypes of how each of these minority members act (ie. the smattering of awkwardly-timed ebonics from the black woman, supposedly in the role of God), the submissive, always bowing Asian woman, portrayed as the Holy Spirit, and the exotic beauty of the hispanic.

Now, one may think that this was what Young was trying to accomplish - to get people to stop thinking of God as a man. Problem is, God is not a woman either, so it would have been better to simply make God appear as a voice rather than assign a gender - now, Young later does gender-switch the black woman to be an old white man with a ponytail, but I don't get why he needs to specifically personnify God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit. It certainly did not make it more believeable to me.

Some other observations: there are several points where men are slammed in the book, with the suggestion among the characters that women would be better to run our world, etc. There is the characterisation of the God (as a male) character and the Jesus (male) character kissing each other on the mouth, as a supposed sign of affection. And then there is the expected schpeel about the environment. If you didn't leave the book thinking that Young is trying to pander to special interests groups, then you are either part of those groups or you didn't pick up on those parts of the description.

While the above aspects already lower my opinion of the book, I have saved the best for last: my main beef with this book is that, theologically, it is inconsistent with what the Bible teaches. Now, I know what you are saying - I either have no imagination, or I am part of the structured religious establishment, for which Young indirectly chastises throughout the book. I don't agree with either assessment, since I write a lot of material, so certainly I must have some imagination in order to write excessive blog entries and other stuff, and while I am formally theologically trained, I believe I am one of those people who have taken a closer look at what I have been taught and systematically compare it to what the Bible says, under controlled conditions. Why is this important? Because without proper controls in Bible study, one can make the Bible say whatever they want. And hence, you get a book like this one, which obviously caters to people who are turned off by Christianity or who are angry at God. How attractive is the prospect that God can be whoever or whatever you want him to be? Don't believe me? It is striking that near the end when Mack gets ready to leave the shack, that the God character already packs his car up and Mack starts to think "God - my servant" (no, I am not taking that out of context - check the bottom of page 236 and the top of page 237).

(TO BE CONTINUED)

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.

I Am Not A Christian

A couple of nights ago, on Halloween night, my wife, son and I, as has been our practice every Halloween night ever since we can remember, disconnected our doorbell, turned off the lights, locked all the doors, cleaned up our garage, and made our way to our dinner buffet location. While it is very uncommon these days for any family to refrain from having their kids participate in trick or treating, we decided that that this was something in which we did not wish to participate. That goes against the grain of what society would otherwise preach, and to an extent, even what many Christians may even think. For us, we feel that that night is not honouring to Christ, so for our family, we choose not to participate. I am on the fence about allowing my son to dress up for school, but this year, we decided that dressing up as a fireman, in and of itself was not a bad thing, so we allowed him to put on his fireman outfit. Since I am the one who drops him off and picks him up everyday, I get a chance to interact with several other parents, and a few thought it strange that we weren't allowing him to go out trick or treating. Without getting into a discussion about our spiritual beliefs and convictions, I simply told them that this was not our practice and our choice was go out to dinner as a family. A couple of them said that they respect the fact that we stand for our convictions. One, however, thought that we were depriving our child of something that all the other kids do. "He will feel left out", they said, since "everyone else is doing it." Man, if that didn't get my pulse racing, I don't know what will. I calmly and evenly said to her that "well, this is a great first lesson for him, then, to not simply go with the crowd in life." She nodded and went about her way.

We did explain to our son why we do not celebrate Halloween, and he accepts it and does not make a big deal of it. Honestly, sometimes I think it's the parents who are more of the sh*t disturbers than the kids are. I also wonder how these kids will turn out, having parents who consider societal pressure and expectation as the barometer for how they should raise their kids. *sigh*

On the way to dinner Wednesday night, my wife and I have a discussion in the car, much to the chagrin of our son, who wishes for us to turn up the Transformers 1986 soundtrack CD, with arena rock and all (another indication that left unbiased, children can choose to listen to cheesy 80s Stan Bush music without worry about the antiquated nature of such music). My wife was mentioning to me that she, as part of her daycare practice, brought the kids to an indoor playground a couple times a week, to let the kids let loose, expend energy, and indirectly, give her (and our house) a much needed break from wear and tear. I showed up one time at this indoor playground and notice that errie absence of any male in there. I felt like a sucker that day, surrounded by boundless maternal estrogen (which is clearly different than standard estrogen). It was as if I had just shown up at a lesbian convention. But that is neither here nor there. Anyway, she told me that naturally, the conversation with these other women drifted towards Halloween, and eventually it came out that she did not allow her son to participate, and when she was asked why, she said, "Well, I am a Christian, and I don't celebrate Halloween", and proceeded to outline the reasons. She told me in the car she got funny stares and snickering the rest of the day.

I mentioned to her, by way of some encouragement, that if she gets that kind of reaction, then she is doing her job in witnessing to others. The Bible teaches that followers of Christ will be ridiculed, and possibly even persecuted. That is par for the course, and over time, I have come to accept this as part of my life. That is not to say that we should deliberately go out looking for ways to piss off people; but if, in the course of interaction with non-Christians about our beliefs, we receive a hostile reaction - well, that is just to be expected. The Bible teaches that God's wisdom is considered foolishness to the world, so we shouldn't really be surprised. A few years ago, our home/car, were targeted for Halloween vandals who slashed our tires since it was clear we did not hand out candy on Halloween night. Judging by what I saw the next day, several other people in the community were driving their cars on rims, calling the cops and generally having a miserable November 1 day. I know several other Christian families who were targeted, who do not celebrate Halloween. The cops seemed to indicate afterwards that this happens occasionally where hooligans (usually teenagers or older) decide to mete out their justice for those who do not succumb to pressure to participate in trick or treating. Since then, we have parked our car in the garage every Halloween night, and I have now been regularly scouting our premises late at night, after my wife and son went to sleep. Sounds like an isolated incident that year, but it was sure annoying.

My wife brought up an exceptionally good point, and one that framed the conversation for the rest of the car ride, and has caused an expediting of a world view shift that I've been slowly developing in my own mind. And this may prove controversial, but I believe that there is much truth in the fact that anyone using the term "Christian" to describe themselves, will automatically be lumped into the same camp as televangelists, hypocritical child molesters in churches, closet homosexuals who rant against legalizing homosexuality, and two-faced individuals who lead an otherwise "holy lives" on Sunday mornings, but the other six days of the week are engaged in anything by Godly behaviour. You know who I am talking about - the couple or family who always smiles on in public, and you never see them make mistakes - generally, these folks have the most to hide. This is not an indictment on Christians at all, but simply acknowledging that there is a negative stigma attached to the word "Christian". Now, you may say that I am contradicting myself here, in that I am saying that we should expect persecution, yet we should not carry the label. Personally, I am starting to think calling oneself a Christian comes with some serious issues. For one, does one really need to say it? As my wife and I agreed, it is far better (and in my view, more in line with Scripture) to show that you are a Christian by the way you live. The Bible says "they will know that you are Christians by your love". In other words, your faith is demonstrable; it need not be accompanied by a self-declaration of a label. Augustine once remarked that the gospel should be preached at all times; use words only when necessary. I think there is much truth in all that. Notice that in Jesus' ministry, He referred to Himself in many ways, most of which were metaphorical. He never went around saying, "Look at me! I am God's Son! I am all powerful! I am sinless!" He didn't need to say much. His actions said it all, as did His consistent life practice.

As I delved into this further that evening as I was trying to sleep, I thought about several other reasons why having the label is not a good thing. For one, it creates unrealistic expectations. Like it or not, the overtly "Christiany" Flanders family on The Simpsons TV show accurately depicts, in my view, people's view of Christians. They expect Christians to have it all together, to not use foul language, get angry, make mistakes, etc. While these are in and of themselves good aspects of one's life to strive towards, in pursuit of holiness living, how far it is from the truth, for anyone who has lived the Christian life. The book of Romans talks about the Christian struggling with temptation, sinning when we don't want to sin. The followers of Christ, His original disciples had many personal and character issues. But thank goodness God still manages to find some way to use imperfect people for His purposes and for His glory.

The next thought that I may be a bit harsh, but I'll say it anyway. I personally would refrain from using the Christian name to describe myself, since it conjures up way too much denominational baggage. No one really views a Christian as a "follower of Christ", as it was originally intended. People view Christians as denominationally fundamentalist "shove my beliefs down your throat" types, Roman Catholic (with all the rote, robotic, and oftentimes unbiblical practices that go with following the pope), or unintellectual and unthinking spiritually emotional hippie types who refuse medical attention, exclusively homeschool their kids and avoid contact with the outside world, spending all their time putting their hope in rapture theology that is biblically unsound, at best.

All this equally applies to the ever-growing practice of putting Christian fish symbols, stickers, decals and such on one's car and belongings. I don't begrudge anyone doing so, but I personally won't wear "What Would Jesus Do" armbands, underwear or neckties, since I know that I fall short of what I should be doing many times, and I'd rather not drag the name of Christ into the mud with me.

Why does it matter what people think? It doesn't. But the problem is, you are trying to witness the Gospel of Jesus Christ to someone, and by using the term Christian, you are already erecting a wall of unfounded (but sometimes founded) expectations which makes it harder to share the gospel with someone. Don't get me wrong - I am not against using the term Christian - but I don't think it is necessary. Practice what you preach, and show people that Christians can be real people with real feelings and you know what - we make mistakes too - I think this will go a long way in sharing Biblical truth with them rather than some presumed dogmatic theology that is devoid of any real joy and spiritual fervor. I think if people see how you act and behave, they will eventually draw conclusions about why you are different. They may even guess that you are a Christian when they see you are a real person who makes mistakes, who just happens to have joy and love in your heart, who practices kindness when you don't need to, who practices forgiveness when you don't feel like it, who turns the other cheek when wronged, and who will love others when they laugh at you for being a Christian.