I've Been Thinking About This…

Here’s a story I used to tell the confirmation class:

Imagine that you are in high school and best friends with someone who is a superb athlete. It could be any sport – we’ll say football. This friend has speed, power, stamina and brains. It’s obvious to everybody that he’s not just good – he’s exceptional. His plan is to get a football scholarship through a big-league college and then turn pro; and while for other people you’d just think it was a dream, for him everybody is convinced that it can be accomplished. He’s just that good! He’s also friendly, confident, approachable and popular.

He’s so good that the whole school turns out to watch him play. He’s so good that the whole community comes out. He’s so good that the college scouts have visited. Then one day in his senior year, he is hurt – deliberately and brutally. He’s hurt in such a fashion that he will never play ball again. He won’t get a football scholarship. He won’t turn pro. He can barely walk.

This premeditated attack was made by a person he recognized, and he took his attacker to court. As his best friend, you are with him in court. The evidence is presented, and it is irrefutable. Witnesses saw the attack, and they give testimony. There’s no question in anyone’s mind that this person will be put away for a long time. Further, he’s enormously wealthy, and will be able to pay for the mounting medical costs. The jury gives their verdict – guilty on all charges.

The time comes for the judge to pronounce sentence. He says something along these lines: “It’s very clear that this attack was deliberate and premeditated. It’s also clear that the attacker is very young and foolish, and that this is his first offense – this must be taken into account. He has shown remorse in court for his actions – this too must be taken into account. I have therefore decided that his punishment shall be limited to a written warning and probation. He will not be put away, and will not be liable for payment of any fines or fees.”

Everyone sits there stunned! It’s inconceivable! Slowly the courtroom empties. Your friend hobbles painfully out on his crutches. The room is empty except for the defendant and the judge gathering up his papers. On your way out through the door, you overhear the defendant say to the judge, “Whew! Sure dodged a bullet there, Dad!”

What do you think of this judge? Do you have any shred of respect for someone who should have recused himself before the trial began? Any respect for someone who perverts justice to that degree? We expect someone who has the authority of a judge to uphold the law – no question, no deviation from the absolute rightness of the matter.

Yet we expect God to go easy on us because we are His creation. We are so taken with – so indoctrinated with – the idea that ‘God is love’ that we expect all law-breaking, all failings, all sin to be forgiven and glossed over. For everyone.

I guess what that says is that we have lost respect for God. Because although we are told that God will judge us at the end of our days, we’re assuming that He will say, “No problem. I forgive you. I won’t look at all the wrong-doing you’ve committed. You won’t be put away from my presence, and there doesn’t need to be payment of any fines or fees.”

We hear so much in church today that reinforces this view:

• God will forgive everybody for everything.
• Live a fairly nice life and be fairly nice to others.
• What matters is that you mostly do your best.
• Be sincere.
• Just believe in God.

People have acquired such distaste for ‘Hellfire and brimstone’ sermons that the priest or minister believes the very mention of sin from the pulpit will empty the church – so he doesn’t speak of it. And in the avoidance, he does his congregation a great disservice, for a warning now and then is essential if we are to counteract the view that the world has of a wussie conflict-avoiding God.

The truth is, God does want to forgive us. He understands better than we do why we commit each sin. He doesn’t want to condemn us, and He wants us to live forever in a loving relationship with Him. But He’s not just Love; He is also Holy, and Righteous, and Perfect. And there will be that reckoning at the end of our days.

A judge that would say “I’ll just forget about your crime” is a judge who cannot be worthy of our respect. He merits no glory, no praise, no honor. He is the kind of judge in the story. God cannot cover up our crimes; He has to punish wrongdoing – to fail to do so would be to be untrue to the righteousness and Justice that is His nature, and He cannot be that. But the punishment that should be exacted is a punishment so complete and eternal that no one could ever be in relationship with Him.

In our place, in an act of extraordinary Grace, He sends His infinite Son as payment of any fines or fees for our sin, so that we won’t be put away from His presence. And all He requires in return is that we own up to our own sin and acknowledge Him as our Savior. The debt is paid in full; we get a new start. We’re not even expected to be perfect (we are expected to try, though) – and in the new life we have His strength and His guidance.

Send article as PDF to

I never liked cats. They’re standoff-ish; independent; cold. They move fast in a preemptive strike and the next thing you know you’ve got a scratch across your cheek. So when my wife said she needed to go back to the pet shop because she forgot to get dog-food, the last thing I was anticipating was a plot by my wife and daughter and an ambush by a half-pound kitten. (Warning number one: she only went to the pet shop in the first place to get dog food; how come she forgot? I ignored that point, rather than question my wife’s mind. It may not have been a good call — I paid for it later.) Into the pet-shop we walked; surrounded by the smells of fish food and happy puppies, I was an innocent being brought to the slaughter. We picked up the dog food.

My daughter said, “Oh, just look at the kittens!”

I said, “They’re Tribbles, and they’re Trouble. Come on, we’ve got the dog food … Chloë’s hungry; let’s go.”

My wife said, “We have time to look at them. We’d like to see that orange one there, please.” (This last to the clerk.) Warning number two: she was too specific, but the bell going off in the back of my mind still wasn’t loud enough. Out came the kitten.

She said, “Just hold it. No, really, it’s purring. Feel how soft it is on your cheek.” She touched the loudly-rumbling kitten to my face — it didn’t lash out and scratch me. (I realize now that the cat was in on the plot as well.) She put the kitten in my hand. The whole of that tiny body lay there, purring enormously, exuding contentment as the tail hung gracefully down. I lifted it back to my face — he reached out and touched me on the nose, paw velveted. It was an amiable gesture; there was an enormous contentment in holding him so. My daughter put up her hand and gently stroked it. (Warning number three: my daughter should have wanted her own kitten to hold at the same time. Went right over my head.)

“How much is he?” my wife asked the clerk.

“Thirty five dollars.” came the reply.

“Honey?”

“No!”

“But Dad, he’s so cute, and small, and all alone!”

“Which part of ‘No’ didn’t you understand?” (But already I was weakening under the onslaught of this insidious purring.)

“Chloë will love him.”

“They’ll fight.”

“He’s a lover, not a fighter!”

“Don’t quote McCartney to me.”

“It was Michael Jackson, and it’s true.”

“Absolutely not. Your mother and I will talk about this, but the answer’s still going to be ‘No’.”

And we left. Yes, it’s true; we walked out of that pet store and drove home. And when my wife was talking, all I could hear was that purring reverberating in my ear. Promises were made about who would look after the cat, change the litter, get the food ready. But when we got to discussing who would name it, and how we’d each get a vote, I realized I had lost. A lifetime of cat-less-ness surrendered to a tiny marmalade Tribble.

We got back into the car and went back to the pet shop. As we walked through the door, somebody else was holding my cat! Thank heavens, she put him back in the cage, and walked out of the store. I went to the counter and put down my thirty-five dollars. As we walked out, the woman was coming in with her husband, saying,

“I forgot to get the dog-food; it won’t take a minute.”

Send article as PDF to

Mike Kendall’s blog entry today reminded me of a thought I had years ago which I’ll drop off here:

Temptation can only occur when there is opportunity to fall, an exploitable weakness of spirit, and desire to commit. Opportunity, exploitable weakness and desire. Satan isn’t going to waste his time in convincing you to do things you know are impossible, or in fighting areas of strength; nor will he attack you in areas that you don’t care about. If it doesn’t excite you to gamble, you won’t feel the urge to do so. But if you have a hard time resisting shopping, that will be a temptation even when you have no money to spend – think ‘credit card debt’.

That being the case – and it’s a pretty obvious case, I think you’ll agree – the question that has to come up is, “How was Jesus tempted?” Perfect God and perfect man, He could have no wrong desires, so how could He ever know what mankind goes through in temptation?

The answer comes when we look at Matt 4:1-11 or Luke 4:1-13, which begin: “Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil.” There are two things we should note in that little phrase:

• It was the choice of the Holy Spirit to lead Jesus into the wilderness. We think that God’s desire is to protect us against all problems. Wrong.  In fact, He desires to expose us to those very problems. It is only through effort and strain that we develop strength and power. He wants the best for His kingdom.
• It was the choice of the Holy Spirit that Jesus endured temptation. We think that temptation is something bad, an indication of spiritual weakness. Wrong.  In fact, temptation is an essential component to our spiritual growth. Temptation isn’t an indication of weakness – rather, the duration of temptation is an indication of strength. (Be careful with that statement. I don’t mean that a really long time of temptation means that you’re really strong. There are ways we can deliberately extend our own temptation – become our own tempter – as we play with thoughts that we ought to have turned our back on.)

The temptation of Christ didn’t happen when he was at a “spiritual high”. Step one was to go to the wilderness. Step two was to fast for nearly six weeks. And at a time when He was physically weaker than He had ever been – desperately hungry – along comes Satan.

Look at the temptations Luke lists (Matthew flips the last two):

1. Turn the stones to bread.
2. Worship me and you can have the whole world to worship you.
3. Throw yourself down to prove to the world that the angels will catch you.

Would any of these tempt you seriously? Can you turn stones to bread? Is it possible that the whole world could worship you? If you jump off a building will you be caught before you hit the ground? None of these challenges are possible (for you), so you’ve never been tempted along those lines. Again, temptation can only occur when there is opportunity to fall, an exploitable weakness of spirit, and desire to commit. But for Jesus these challenges were all possibilities: (1) He turned water into wine – He could have turned the stones into bread. (2) His mission was to “draw all men unto me.” (John 12:32) That mission would be successful if Satan didn’t try to stop it at every turn both during Jesus’ lifetime and ever since. And Jesus wouldn’t have to die on the cross to accomplish that mission. (3) Of all the people in the world, He knew with complete certainty what His mission from God was. And since the mission was not yet complete, He knew He wouldn’t die until “It is finished” (John 19:30). So if He jumped off, the angels would have to save Him (is the apparent logic) – and the world would see the miracle.

For Jesus as God, these were all possibilities and all (or at least we can see that the first two) were desires. That was the function of the wilderness temptation – to tempt in ways specific to His Godly nature. He was tempted at other times in ways peculiar to His humanity – in the garden, for instance: ‘Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.” ’ (Matt 26:39 NIV)

So take heart! Even God Incarnate was tempted in ways that were specific to Him. But He stayed the course because He was stronger than the temptation. We can be too, when we draw on His strength (1 Cor 10:13)

Send article as PDF to

Some books are easy to read – even non-fiction. There are a number of reasons that come to mind: One is that you agree with them completely and spend the entire time saying, “Yes!” to everything you’re reading. These books affirm your point of view on the matter. A second reason is that the book sets out perhaps just one thought – new to you – and spends the rest of the time showing you how you would have come to that conclusion yourself if only you’d been thinking down that path. Books like this are exciting, because it’s as if they’re introducing you to a part of your own mind that you haven’t met yet.

Simple Church, by Thom S. Rainer & Eric Geiger, is a book that appeals for the second reason. It’s a fast read even though it’s not a particularly small book; it’s engaging; it guides through several examples; it bases the conclusion on some solid evidence and its logic is well presented. But above all, the idea is infectious.

The one new thought is this: to follow the true mission of Christ (which presumably all Churches should want to do if they call themselves a ‘Christian’ church) is to be obedient to Matt 28:19 and Acts 1:8. What do successful churches do? They stay focused on their process; distill it down to the minimum to be effective; and protect it. The process that often seems to work best these days is a three-step tool –

1. Step one is to invite people to attend, and provide an environment where they feel comfortable staying.
2. If they stay and eventually accept Christ, then step two is to connect them with others in the church who are more mature and who can help them to grow.
3. Finally, the third step is for these new members to take the lead: to bring their strengths to bear inside the church, and to invite others through the door.

A three-step process such as this, say the authors, is also easy to turn into a metaphor and remember – this helps members understand what the church’s drive (focus) is all about. This method has been developed and adopted by some of the fastest-growing churches in North America. North Point calls the three steps “Foyer to Living room to Kitchen”, and several churches (i.e., Cross Lane Community Church in Terre Haute, IN) have copied that metaphor. Saddleback uses a similar one. But it’s just a metaphor. The real key is to simplify church down to its basics and not get sidetracked by the latest, greatest idea. Programming is potentially distracting – instead, push what would have been ‘Yet Another Program’ into the existing process.

I don’t think the three-step process would have worked in mainstream churches 100 or even 50 years ago – the focus in churches was all about allowing people to come to church, not about going to the people. But today, some churches are reexamining the original mission (sort of ‘getting back to the basics’, if you will) and looking for ways to fulfill it more effectively. Again, I don’t get the sense that the authors are saying the three-step process is the only one that works.

What is being said here is, “Clarify your vision; focus on the mission; don’t let yourself get bogged down with programming that takes effort and energy away from the mission; get rid of the pet projects and deadwood that are strangling the effectiveness of your ministry. ”

And that’s good advice for any endeavor.

Send article as PDF to

Wasn’t tired last night and the Biffster wanted to hang with me, so around 12:30 I picked up a new book called ‘The Story of Everything’ by John Kotre. It’s a small book (I was done in about 90 minutes); it’s billed as, “A parable of Creation and Evolution”. I’m throwing in a few spoilers here and there below, but I’m leaving the most significant revelation for you to discover for yourself. His two main characters are Adam – who we follow through the book as he grows from boy to mature adult – and an entity called ‘The Story’.

In one way it’s a sad little tale about a gifted boy who loses his grandfather (he dies), grows up to be a young man who loses his wife and son (she leaves him), then loses his dream – and at the end of his working life is still trying to find the point of it all – to make his mark on life and apply his gift. Or the story could be about the idea that, if you’re an otherwise ordinary person who has been given an incredibly huge gift, it might be a talent just too big for you to exercise.

But I don’t think either of those points are the central theme here – nor, for that matter, is the conflict between the creation and evolution parties in all its stupid, pointless anger, stubbornness, reactionary-ism and iconoclasty-ness.

First of all, Kotre is simply trying to point out that, contrary to popular thought, belief does not necessarily change as our understanding changes. Passionate flat-world thinking gave way to the round earth as we learnt more; an Earth-centric perspective eventually gave way to an understanding of planets in orbit. And in both cases, the church held the former view and fought the latter vigorously. Also in both cases, the change in understanding in no whit lessened humanity’s belief in God.

Secondly, even if belief did change our perception of God and His Purpose and Creation, it doesn’t change the reality of what God, His Purpose and His Creation are all about. In the same way, he says, it may be inevitable that creationist thinking will eventually give way to evolutionary thinking. And if so, then the church, like the rest of the world, will move past this issue and get on with life.

Although it’s clear that the entity called Story is sentient (it has a house and can purchase books and software), it’s difficult to reconcile just exactly what story we’re talking about. When we first meet it, we’re told very clearly that the Story is the Bible. It looks at a very old book it owns and remembers being printed onto the book’s pages. As time goes on, however, it remembers earlier versions of itself, back to papyrus and clay (so it clearly isn’t the Bible, which was never stored in cuneiform on clay), and eventually even to oral traditions. This leads us to the possibility that this could be the story of ‘Everything since the Beginning of Existence’, and the Story simply forgot about the earlier bits; just as for a long time people believed the Bible was the story of everything, so Story went along with them and believed that about itself too. Finally, near the end of the book, we come to find out that Story is really Adam’s – what – imagination? World understanding? The key to making sense of the talent he was given? Something along those lines.

Thirdly, Kotre is saying that this new perspective will change as well; that there will be other passionately-held beliefs that will be eroded and will eventually change the landscape. It’s clear from the central character’s words at the end that this is wisdom he is passing on.

I found the book to be easy to read, well-written from the story-telling perspective. It’s evident that the writer is as fed up with the Creation vs Evolution debate as I am, and he’s trying to put it into perspective with this tale. A parable over-simplifies the reality in order to reveal the core components to explain their true relationship. I think that this parable certainly glosses over much of the complexity to achieve that end. But unlike most parables, it also muddles things up a bit. If Story truly is the Bible then it’s difficult to see why it is saying it was wrong – the Bible, whatever humans believe, claims to be inerrant. Or was Story itself supposed to be evolving here? From the Bible to the story of all Creation? In which case it’s hardly a positive move to go from everybody’s story of Everything to just one person’s understanding of ‘How It All Fits Together’.

I’m also uncomfortable comparing the ‘flat Earth’ belief (which had already been disproven by Aristarchus and is not found in the Bible) to the account of creation (which clearly is in the Bible). I’m even less comfortable with the logic that, since conquering the flat-Earth and Earth-centric views didn’t result in sudden widespread disbelief, then conquering the creationist view won’t either. We’re in a different era from the flat-Earth, and peoples’ irritation over church issues are being inflamed by their personal beliefs over the issue – creation/evolution is not only a divisive issue, it has become a catalyst to division, in a way that the other ideas never did.

However: I thought the first ending (on the plane) was quite interesting – resequencing perception can often lead to deep insights. And the second ending (at home afterward) was good too. I do like a good redemption to a story! All in all, a pretty good read.

Send article as PDF to

Brad Cooper is the student pastor at NewSpring Church in Anderson, SC. He recently wrote a blog about how momentum ALWAYS starts with students. I see a number of reasons why this should be so:

• Teens are driven by a genetic imperative to build an identity that separates them from their parents, so they look for something new.
• Teens are in the middle of the mating dance (also a genetic imperative!) – both sexes showing off and trying to be cool, often by being silly – so again they’re looking for something new.
• Young brains get far more ‘exercise’ – they’ve had to absorb language, safety and culture lessons since birth – and are wired to assimilate, synthesize and communicate. This seems to slow down during the twenties, but during the teen years it’s at its peak.
• Teens have an enormous amount of time and encouragement to socialize – high school is designed to be engaging and fun; they are encouraged to date; they are expected to watch a lot of television and go to movies. Their work load is relatively low – mostly homework and a few chores. Some take jobs, it’s true, but as a whole (and we’re talking about teens as a class here remember) they have a lot of time.
• Kids are expected to make mistakes, so they can afford to take greater risks because they know they will be indulged and forgiven. Some of the trends they start are simply moronic – wearing baseball hats backwards or sideways; pants that look like they’re falling off (don’t you just want to get out your power stapler?); jeans with holes in them – the sillier the better at present, although in 20 years there’s a chance they’ll look back at photographs and wince.
• Parents indulge their children in other ways too, which is why, as Brad notes, vast segments of the economy are tuned to teens – music, electronics, clothing. And in turn, since these corporations are trying to discover and market to the culture leaders among the teens, other teens watch what the corporations are selling so they can get in on those trends and look like leaders.

However, just because we can see some of the reasons for teens’ creativity doesn’t mean we can adapt them for us older folks (sorry!).

Teens are the life-blood of any cross-generation organization, whether we’re talking about a town or a church. And when a town or church fails to invest in their teens and design for them, they will leave. How does this connect with what you’re seeing around you – in your town or your church?

Are you seeing the exodus of the 13-31 year-olds in your church?

Check out Brad’s post here.

Send article as PDF to