My intention is to write about what is current – how it affects evangelical Christians, what we believe about it and why. As I look at the news over the past week that leaves me with pretty much only one subject. Government.
Given the recent election, the first thing I must say is that the Bible commands us to pray for and respect our leaders. It does not matter whether you voted for Obama or not. Government is ordained by God and governmental leaders deserve our respect and support.
That doesn't mean we must accept his point of view. But we should hear him out and cooperate with him where we can, and we should respect him, publically and privately, and pray for God's leadership and blessings upon him. And, yes, I am one who did not vote for him and who disagrees with almost every decision he has made so far. But that does not change my responsibility.
As for government in general, it's not only the right but the duty of evangelical Christians to participate by voting, debating and even running for office, should they feel so led. Jesus and the apostles ministered where government cared little for the common man and was actively hostile to their work. In that respect we are blessed. We have the obligation to use that blessing to make the world a better, more godly, place.
The Bible is clear about obeying the laws of the land. The only time we can violate the law without sin is when it forces us to do something that is a sin. We cannot intervene illegally otherwise – even if it means we lose our lives or the lives of those we love.
That's right, no bombing abortion clinics or gay bars. In fact, the fanatics who do that should hope no evangelical is on their jury.
But that's just the start. If the government wrongly executes you, or your child, you should not use force to prevent it. That sounds tough, but the words and example of our Biblical Fathers is only too clear. That's why I say we are blessed by our government. We have recourse to laws that are generally obeyed. That hasn't been true in all times and places.
One item remains – separation of church and state. The Bible is neutral on that issue. Men served God, or failed to, under theocracies and under governments that did not believe in Jehovah God and tried to destroy those who did. However, separation of church and state, as envisioned by the founding fathers of our nation, meant two things.
First, government doesn't support, financially or otherwise, any particular religion or denomination. Second, following any religion or denomination – or lack thereof – denies no citizen of their rights. The Bible is perfectly compatible with that stance.
On the other hand, the Constitution was never meant to restrict the practice of any religion so long as it didn't interfere with or overtly harm others. A government where Christians cannot pray publicly may be acceptable Biblically, but not legally. Not in America. Modern efforts to squeeze Christians out of government or unduly restrict their right to worship trample just as certainly on the Constitution as they do on the Bible.
If you're not a Christian the latter might not bother you, but the former should. If Christians aren't allowed to speak their mind and practice their beliefs, what makes you think you will be?
Romans 13:6, Colossians 1:16, 4:6, Titus 3:1, Matthew 5:13, 10:28, 22:34, 24:9, Mark 9:49, Luke 11:49, 12:5, 14:4
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The Unchanging Bible
It's interesting that those who believe the Bible changes with the current social practices always want it to change in favor of their particular anti-Biblical behavior, even while opposing others who would change it in a different manner. Further, it always seems to change to a more liberal theme.
If the Bible were a document that changed meaning, doesn't it stand to reason it would sometimes become more conservative? If we're going to change it, why couldn't we change it to include segregation, or even support slavery? To make certain laws punishable by death without trial? To give a person who feels they've been wronged the right to simply take what they think is theirs?
Crazy? Of course it is. Yet some people support every one of those ideas. Which brings up an important question.
Who gets to decide what changes are made to the meaning of the Bible, anyway? The Pope? Billy Graham? The President? The political party in power? The Supreme Court? The United Nations? Who?
The fact is, if the Bible changes its viewpoint to satisfy whatever people are doing, it's worthless and unnecessary. The whole effort of the Bible is to draw people closer to God, but the idea of a changing Bible merely makes God more like men. Convenient, but hardly fitting the repeatedly expressed purpose of God's word.
There are those who assert that following the Bible, as written, is worshipping the Bible instead of God. They fail to understand there is no real knowledge of God except what is in the Bible. Thus, to worship God correctly and to follow His will correctly, it's necessary to follow the Bible. Without the Bible as truth we are, as the Bible says, the blind leading the blind.
Anyway, how can something be true yesterday and untrue tomorrow? I mean, we're not talking about new discoveries of Biblical truth, we're talking about discarding or changing parts of it.
We discovered that Earth spins on an axis and revolves around the Sun. We discovered the laws of gravity. But we didn’t change those things – they were true all along. Nor does disbelieving them make them less true.
And please don't bring up the Constitution. It's not a truth, it's an agreement. Any agreement can be changed upon the will of the parties involved.
But if the Bible is not true, then God lied, because He said He is the same yesterday, today and forever. And here's the thing – how many times does someone have to lie to be a liar. They can tell you the truth a hundred times, but if they lie to you once, the trust is broken. So if God changes, He can't be trusted and the whole idea of eternal truth and God's word is a bust.
Some people believe just that, of course. But like those who refuse to believe the Earth spins in its axis, what they believe doesn't change what is.
The Bible is either God's word, or it isn't. It is either true or it's a lie. To accept it as the truth means to accept it as written. To suggest any change has occurred in its meaning, or that some part of it is not now relevant, makes it worthless.
Every person must choose for themselves how they deal with those facts. And every person will be held accountable for how they choose.
I Thessalonians 2:13, II Timothy 3:16, Malachi 3:6, James 1:17
If the Bible were a document that changed meaning, doesn't it stand to reason it would sometimes become more conservative? If we're going to change it, why couldn't we change it to include segregation, or even support slavery? To make certain laws punishable by death without trial? To give a person who feels they've been wronged the right to simply take what they think is theirs?
Crazy? Of course it is. Yet some people support every one of those ideas. Which brings up an important question.
Who gets to decide what changes are made to the meaning of the Bible, anyway? The Pope? Billy Graham? The President? The political party in power? The Supreme Court? The United Nations? Who?
The fact is, if the Bible changes its viewpoint to satisfy whatever people are doing, it's worthless and unnecessary. The whole effort of the Bible is to draw people closer to God, but the idea of a changing Bible merely makes God more like men. Convenient, but hardly fitting the repeatedly expressed purpose of God's word.
There are those who assert that following the Bible, as written, is worshipping the Bible instead of God. They fail to understand there is no real knowledge of God except what is in the Bible. Thus, to worship God correctly and to follow His will correctly, it's necessary to follow the Bible. Without the Bible as truth we are, as the Bible says, the blind leading the blind.
Anyway, how can something be true yesterday and untrue tomorrow? I mean, we're not talking about new discoveries of Biblical truth, we're talking about discarding or changing parts of it.
We discovered that Earth spins on an axis and revolves around the Sun. We discovered the laws of gravity. But we didn’t change those things – they were true all along. Nor does disbelieving them make them less true.
And please don't bring up the Constitution. It's not a truth, it's an agreement. Any agreement can be changed upon the will of the parties involved.
But if the Bible is not true, then God lied, because He said He is the same yesterday, today and forever. And here's the thing – how many times does someone have to lie to be a liar. They can tell you the truth a hundred times, but if they lie to you once, the trust is broken. So if God changes, He can't be trusted and the whole idea of eternal truth and God's word is a bust.
Some people believe just that, of course. But like those who refuse to believe the Earth spins in its axis, what they believe doesn't change what is.
The Bible is either God's word, or it isn't. It is either true or it's a lie. To accept it as the truth means to accept it as written. To suggest any change has occurred in its meaning, or that some part of it is not now relevant, makes it worthless.
Every person must choose for themselves how they deal with those facts. And every person will be held accountable for how they choose.
I Thessalonians 2:13, II Timothy 3:16, Malachi 3:6, James 1:17
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Christian Tolerance
Tolerance is a word that gets tossed around a lot these days. To evangelical Christians, it sometimes seems it gets tossed at us more than it does at anyone else. Typically from folks upset at us for holding positions based on a literal reading and understanding of the Bible.
I looked up tolerance in the American Heritage Dictionary. There were several definitions, but the first one was the one relevant to this issue. "The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others."
As evangelicals, we get labeled as intolerant because we don't agree with others. But nowhere is the word "agree," or any similar word, in the definition of tolerance.
Evangelicals recognize there are points of view other than their own. And they respect the rights of people to take those other points of view. While we may try to persuade people of the Biblical truths, no evangelical wants to coerce them to accept those truths. Freedom of Religion is not merely a political right, it is a Biblical right.
We believe the Bible describes a God of love and forgiveness, else none of us would be free from the threat of eternal damnation. We also see where the Bible describes a God of justice and responsibility who will hold all of us, evangelical or not, accountable for our beliefs and choices. But we neither have nor want that responsibility for ourselves.
We further believe that as a part of God's loving nature, His commandments are given to us not to keep us from enjoying life, but to help us enjoy it more fully and more safely. So while we won't try to make anyone believe as we do, we certainly feel justified, Biblically and politically, in taking part in the governmental process and supporting laws and policies that provide a moral support for society.
On the subject of forgiveness, we believe the Bible teaches that when a person seeks forgiveness and turns from their sin, God forgives them. When they give reasonable evidence they have done so, the church also forgives. On the other hand, when a person engages openly in behavior the Bible describes as sinful – claiming such behavior as acceptable, they can hardly claim they are seeking forgiveness. That situation is compounded if they also demand the church endorse their behavior.
This public acceptance of sin requires a response from the church, lest we compromise our own beliefs and our responsibilities to God, our children and each other.
The particular response varies from church to church, of course. But typically it comes in one or more of three forms – separation from the church, public denouncement of the activity or behavior in question and/or support for laws against the egregious behavior.
None of this is anything we enjoy. We take such action only when there is no choice and only with great reluctance. But we are commanded by God in the Bible to take the stand we do.
You see, it's not just those outside the church whose actions we're afraid of, it's us, too. We, all of us, need structure around us that helps us to live to our best, rather than our worst. One role of religion is to help provide that structure.
So tolerant, yes. We can be, and we want to be, tolerant. But our agreement is reserved for those things with which, to the best of our understanding, the Bible pronounces itself in agreement.
Matthew 19:16-22, Luke 16:19-26, John 8:31-36, II Chronicles 7:13-15, I Corinthians 5
I looked up tolerance in the American Heritage Dictionary. There were several definitions, but the first one was the one relevant to this issue. "The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others."
As evangelicals, we get labeled as intolerant because we don't agree with others. But nowhere is the word "agree," or any similar word, in the definition of tolerance.
Evangelicals recognize there are points of view other than their own. And they respect the rights of people to take those other points of view. While we may try to persuade people of the Biblical truths, no evangelical wants to coerce them to accept those truths. Freedom of Religion is not merely a political right, it is a Biblical right.
We believe the Bible describes a God of love and forgiveness, else none of us would be free from the threat of eternal damnation. We also see where the Bible describes a God of justice and responsibility who will hold all of us, evangelical or not, accountable for our beliefs and choices. But we neither have nor want that responsibility for ourselves.
We further believe that as a part of God's loving nature, His commandments are given to us not to keep us from enjoying life, but to help us enjoy it more fully and more safely. So while we won't try to make anyone believe as we do, we certainly feel justified, Biblically and politically, in taking part in the governmental process and supporting laws and policies that provide a moral support for society.
On the subject of forgiveness, we believe the Bible teaches that when a person seeks forgiveness and turns from their sin, God forgives them. When they give reasonable evidence they have done so, the church also forgives. On the other hand, when a person engages openly in behavior the Bible describes as sinful – claiming such behavior as acceptable, they can hardly claim they are seeking forgiveness. That situation is compounded if they also demand the church endorse their behavior.
This public acceptance of sin requires a response from the church, lest we compromise our own beliefs and our responsibilities to God, our children and each other.
The particular response varies from church to church, of course. But typically it comes in one or more of three forms – separation from the church, public denouncement of the activity or behavior in question and/or support for laws against the egregious behavior.
None of this is anything we enjoy. We take such action only when there is no choice and only with great reluctance. But we are commanded by God in the Bible to take the stand we do.
You see, it's not just those outside the church whose actions we're afraid of, it's us, too. We, all of us, need structure around us that helps us to live to our best, rather than our worst. One role of religion is to help provide that structure.
So tolerant, yes. We can be, and we want to be, tolerant. But our agreement is reserved for those things with which, to the best of our understanding, the Bible pronounces itself in agreement.
Matthew 19:16-22, Luke 16:19-26, John 8:31-36, II Chronicles 7:13-15, I Corinthians 5
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Homosexuality: The Biblical Response
This post is directed primarily to the evangelical Christian community. There are certain issues that tend to set Christians off, such as homosexuality and abortion. But there is a proper way for Christians to respond to sin and the sinner, and we need to keep that in mind.
As part of the writing ministry I have taken on, I have begun what is still a somewhat uncoordinated effort at forum writing. I quickly discovered two things that disturb me. The first is the hostility with which some people view evangelical Christianity. I suppose I am naïve, but I had no idea.
The second thing, which disturbs me even more, is the hostility of some who write from the "Christian" perspective. My heavens, people, have we forgotten that we are sinners, too?
To God, sin is sin and there are no degrees. The only issues that compound sin are when there is a victim, because we sin against others and against God, and when we encourage or entice others to sin – which is always the case with sexual sin. But all sin separates us from God. There are no little and big sins. Jesus made that clear at least three times.
The first time was when he told Peter to forgive those who hurt him seventy times seven. The second was when he challenged the church leaders to cast the first stone. The third was the parable of the Good Samaritan.
We are to love the sinner just as much as we hate the sin. And we are to hate the sin in our own lives just as much as – nay, more than – we hate the sin in other lives.
That does not just mean we should refrain from "Gay Bashing," bombing abortion clinics and similar things – it means we should treat homosexuals (and abortion advocates and everyone else) with all the kindness and courtesy we would show toward our pastor and his wife. It means we should not hesitate to work beside, touch, speak to and care about the homosexual person just as much as we would our own children.
We can't condone misbehavior wherever it's found, of course. We seek to remove it from our own lives and I don't believe we should allow those who eagerly and willfully profess themselves as participants in any sinful activity that brings ill repute on the church to be members of the church or to hold positions in the church. I do support laws limiting immoral behavior – including not only homosexual behavior but other sexual behavior outside of marriage.
But the Bible teaches we should support and obey not only the laws we agree with, but all laws, unless they directly force us to participate in behavior we believe is sinful or bar us from behavior we believe is commanded by God. It also teaches we should treat all persons with respect and kindness, remembering we are no better than they are.
After all, do you recall the story of the woman at the well? What if Jesus had said to her that He didn't want to be associated with sinners? Indeed, what if He had said that to you? Or to me?
We certainly don't merit His love.
Romans 3:23, Matthew 18:21-22,22:21 John 8:1-11, Luke 10:29-37, John 3:16, Luke 6:27-37, 41-42, John 4:7-30
As part of the writing ministry I have taken on, I have begun what is still a somewhat uncoordinated effort at forum writing. I quickly discovered two things that disturb me. The first is the hostility with which some people view evangelical Christianity. I suppose I am naïve, but I had no idea.
The second thing, which disturbs me even more, is the hostility of some who write from the "Christian" perspective. My heavens, people, have we forgotten that we are sinners, too?
To God, sin is sin and there are no degrees. The only issues that compound sin are when there is a victim, because we sin against others and against God, and when we encourage or entice others to sin – which is always the case with sexual sin. But all sin separates us from God. There are no little and big sins. Jesus made that clear at least three times.
The first time was when he told Peter to forgive those who hurt him seventy times seven. The second was when he challenged the church leaders to cast the first stone. The third was the parable of the Good Samaritan.
We are to love the sinner just as much as we hate the sin. And we are to hate the sin in our own lives just as much as – nay, more than – we hate the sin in other lives.
That does not just mean we should refrain from "Gay Bashing," bombing abortion clinics and similar things – it means we should treat homosexuals (and abortion advocates and everyone else) with all the kindness and courtesy we would show toward our pastor and his wife. It means we should not hesitate to work beside, touch, speak to and care about the homosexual person just as much as we would our own children.
We can't condone misbehavior wherever it's found, of course. We seek to remove it from our own lives and I don't believe we should allow those who eagerly and willfully profess themselves as participants in any sinful activity that brings ill repute on the church to be members of the church or to hold positions in the church. I do support laws limiting immoral behavior – including not only homosexual behavior but other sexual behavior outside of marriage.
But the Bible teaches we should support and obey not only the laws we agree with, but all laws, unless they directly force us to participate in behavior we believe is sinful or bar us from behavior we believe is commanded by God. It also teaches we should treat all persons with respect and kindness, remembering we are no better than they are.
After all, do you recall the story of the woman at the well? What if Jesus had said to her that He didn't want to be associated with sinners? Indeed, what if He had said that to you? Or to me?
We certainly don't merit His love.
Romans 3:23, Matthew 18:21-22,22:21 John 8:1-11, Luke 10:29-37, John 3:16, Luke 6:27-37, 41-42, John 4:7-30
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)