Sit down ladies – God put men in charge!

Well, that’s what I thought – sort of – when I was young and didn’t know better.

I had heard the verses about women being silent in the church, not being permitted to teach or have authority over a man, etc.. It seemed straightforward. Men are in charge! As a man, that worked for me, even though I didn’t really live that way. My mom was a strong woman, and I had no problem with her leadership. My sister was a strong woman in charge of nurses on a hospital ward. One of my college deans was a woman, and I had no problem submitting to her leadership. I even married a strong woman, and kind of liked the fact that she regularly challenged me.

But, in the church, I was resigned to the fact that the men were in charge. That’s what the Bible says, right?

But then I went to my local church one night, and one of my professors was speaking – Dr. Deborah Menken Gill. I knew she was THE resident expert on Biblical languages. But tonight she was speaking on the topic of, “The Biblical Liberated Woman.”

Before I address how her talk enlightened me, let me share an encounter I had in the lobby. I was near Dr. Gill as people were coming up to her, eager for a moment with this esteemed scholar. One man who was there decided this was his moment to challenge her on the topic. The poor guy was so ill prepared to grapple with her intellect, that I anticipated a humorous exchange as his folly was exposed. He espoused his belief that men had abdicated leadership, and that’s why God was using women like her, but if men would step up and take their place of leadership, then all would be better. “What do you think of that?” he asked.

Instead of embarrassing this zealous but ill-advised gentleman, she enthusiastically said, “Oh, I’m going to have my chance to talk in a few minutes up on stage. I’m interested in what you have to say right now!” She did it with a genuine smile and not a hint of the sarcasm that would have certainly come from my immature heart. She was genuine and kind. I was already impressed.

Then, for the next hour, she brilliantly framed the issue of the status of women in creation, after the fall, and through the Old Testament. She then demonstrated how radically different Jesus treated women than did the culture and religious structures of the day. She showed us how women were treated as equals in the early church, and shared the same titles as men, including apostle.

But what about those verses that say women should be silent and not in authority? Well, by this time, it was clear that those “problem passages” were the outliers! Nothing in the Old Testament or the Gospels limited the role of women. Women were active in the early church. Paul even gives instruction on HOW women are to conduct themselves WHEN they speak and prophesy. So, how could he then turn around and tell them to shut up and sit down? There must be something else going on here.

Dr. Gill skillfully led us through several options for interpreting these verses with an openness and honesty that did not run for the first easy answer. She really showed us how to wrestle with these passages.

Finally, things made sense again. Sure, men are usually the ones in leadership positions. Eleven out of the twelve judges were men. Perhaps there is something in our temperaments where men often aspire to lead, while women choose different roles. But for those women who are clearly called and gifted to lead, why would we limit them? Instead, we should celebrate the Deborahs, Phoebes, and Priscillas (not to mention the Elaines, Susans, Carolyns, and Ellens) that God raises up. Honor the strong women!

Because we know the church would close its doors tomorrow if we lost the Marthas!

---

If you’d like to dialogue, please watch the video first. Perhaps, like me, you’ll be inspired and challenged by this brilliant teacher.

Deborah Menken Gill gave this talk at Summit Avenue Assembly of God in April 1991. It had a profound impact on my views, and I later purchased a cassette tape recording. Later I digitized it onto CD and MP3, and now I share it via Youtube.

Let’s Put the Holy back in Halloween!

I’ve been meaning to write an article about this every year, but here’s the TLDR:

The church created Halloween as a Christian alternative to a pagan harvest festival.
Ironically, many churches now hold a Harvest Festival/Party as an alternative to Halloween!

Short version:
-In the 8th Century, the church moved All Saint’s Day from May to November 1st, and the celebration the night before was known as All Hallow’s Eve.
-Many (but not all) scholars believe the church did this to supplant the pagan harvest festival of Samhain.

Slightly longer version quoted from history.com:
“On May 13, A.D. 609, Pope Boniface IV dedicated the Pantheon in Rome in honor of all Christian martyrs, and the Catholic feast of All Martyrs Day was established in the Western church.

Pope Gregory III later expanded the festival to include all saints as well as all martyrs, and moved the observance from May 13 to November 1.

By the 9th century, the influence of Christianity had spread into Celtic lands, where it gradually blended with and supplanted older Celtic rites. In A.D. 1000, the church made November 2 All Souls’ Day, a day to honor the dead.

It’s widely believed today that the church was attempting to replace the Celtic festival of the dead with a related, church-sanctioned holiday.

All Souls’ Day was celebrated similarly to Samhain, with big bonfires, parades and dressing up in costumes as saints, angels and devils. The All Saints’ Day celebration was also called All-hallows or All-hallowmas (from Middle English Alholowmesse meaning All Saints’ Day) and the night before it, the traditional night of Samhain in the Celtic religion, began to be called All-Hallows Eve and, eventually, Halloween.”

All add a few more links to the bottom, but here’s my premise:

Instead of ceding Halloween to Satan as some sort of high day in the satanic church, let’s put the Holy back in Halloween and redeem the day.

So, how do we do that? First, here’s what I won’t do:

I WON’T
Celebrate witches, ghosts, goblins, or sorcery
The Bible IS clear on sorcery and witchcraft, so that’s really not up for debate.
So, I won’t decorate with skeletons, spiders, webs, white ghost sheets, and witch hats.
But, before you get too concerned about this, wait for the last point!
Also, I won’t try to scare you.
That’s not a theological thing. I just don’t like jump-scare stuff or horror flicks.
I won’t condemn you.
How you celebrate or don’t celebrate is really a matter of conscience.
If you want to dress up, hand out candy, and decorate, I’m good with that!
If you’d rather turn the lights out and ignore the doorbell, that’s fine too!
Lastly, I won’t be afraid or freaked out by the symbols of death.
One of the reasons, historically, for a festival that looks at these symbols is to mock them.
By making cartoonish representations of them, we declare that they are without power!
“Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?”
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.
But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
I Corinthians 15:55-57 NIV

I WILL
Use the opportunity to meet my neighbors.
Hide if you want, but I think it’s a great time to get to know my neighbors and build a bridge!
Bless children with a fun time to dress up in fun costumes and get a bunch of candy.
There’s lots of fun costumes out there that aren’t creepy! Let kids be kids!
LEVERAGE the holiday to share the love of Jesus with my community.
Whether it’s Trunk or Treat, some other outreach, or just working on building bridges to my neighbors,
this is a great opportunity to be SALT and LIGHT, even if we do with SUGAR at NIGHT!

Think I’m wrong? Let me know! Fact-check me at the links below.

More links:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Halloween
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1456/history-of-halloween/
https://www.reformation21.org/articles/halloween-a-distinctly-christian-holiday.php
https://www.christianity.com/wiki/holidays/is-the-origin-of-halloween-rooted-in-a-pagan-holiday.html
This one is so extensive, I haven’t fully digested it: https://calvinistinternational.com/2013/10/30/halloween-creation-recreation/
This one is really good too, and makes extensive use of C. S. Lewis, whom I love: https://kuyperian.com/halloween-a-very-christian-holiday-indeed/
https://younggospelminister.blogspot.com/2022/10/all-saints-eve-case-for-christians-to.html

Cover image from: https://www.heathergillis.com/should-christians-celebrate-halloween/

The “In” Crowd – How to Join the “Club”

When I was a freshman at college, I learned that the cool kids on campus were called “Tuppies.” It was a short pejorative for the clique of Tupperware people – plastic, fake, and closed. They would all each lunch together in a certain section of the cafeteria where there were a few long tables all lined up together; we called it the “Tuppie-table”. You could see this section through a window while you waited in line to punch your card. It was almost like they were on display. These people were envied but not truly hated. It’s just that you felt like an outsider when you looked at this group, all eating together, socializing, and appearing to have a lot of fun as they enjoyed each other’s company. These were the “cool kids”. (cue Echosmith here) We wished we were in that sort of “clique.”

A funny thing happened one day. I was in line getting ready to each lunch in the cafeteria with one of my close friends (he lived across the hall from me in the dorm – you’ll see the irony later), and we came up with an idea. I don’t remember if it was his idea or mine, but we were instantly in agreement. Let’s go sit at the “Tuppie-table!” Such audacity had we two freshman outsiders. We didn’t know these people and we were certainly not part of the in-crowd. In fact, I don’t think I had ever been a part of the “in-crowd.”

Well, as fortune would have it, we were eating a bit early and the Tuppie table was completely vacant. We got our trays and drinks and brazenly marched up to the table and claimed the very center, one on each side of the table. We prepared ourselves for the expected glares as the Tuppies arrived. Would they sit at the far end, or find another table altogether? Or would they ask us to move, like the senior saints at church claiming “their pew?” We nervously waited.

We didn’t have to wait long. In a few minutes, one of the Tuppies was heading our way. He was tall, a few years older than us, and looked full of confidence. We braced ourselves, like seals watching the shark size us up. What would this confident college senior do about our audacious intrusion?

Much to our surprise, he casually plopped down next to us and said, “Hey guys, I’m Todd*. I don’t think we’ve met.” We exchanged names and a few pleasantries. Before long, other Tuppies arrived, and began sitting on either side of us, politely introducing themselves. Before long, the table filled up, from the center out, until we were completely engulfed in a close-knit pack of Tuppies!

I don’t remember how much we participated in the conversation that day – after all, we had no shared history with these legends of popularity. But we came away from it with a shocking impression – these people are nice! They were really nice. They were kind, polite, funny, and had interesting things to say. Not once did the subject of the lowly peasants and their evil scheme to crush them come up! We weren’t just tolerated. We were welcomed and included. Amazing.

Over the next 24 hours, my mind tried to process this unexpected development. In the hallways, I would pass by Tuppies and they would smile and nod. A few of them would say my name, checking if they remembered it correctly. Had I gone from an invisible peasant to welcomed peer in one lunch? It couldn’t be that easy!

Subsequent days and weeks proved me wrong. It really was that easy. We continue to sit at their table, nod and smile in the halls, and on occasion hold a conversation together away from the sacred lunch table. Were these people becoming our friends?

Apparently they were. Not more than a couple week later I received word through the grapevine that people were talking our new friend group – we were now labeled as Tuppies! We had been transformed from lowly unpopular freshmen into a couple of the “cool kids” who ruled the institution. We were “in!”

But as we continued to enjoy our new status among the elite, it felt less and less elite. It just felt natural. We had developed friendships with some really great people. These folks didn’t even seem to know they were “the elite!” They were just friendly, positive people who were courteous and careful not to speak negatively about anyone. Instead of being closed and plastic, it turns out they were open and authentic. While they naturally hung out with and socialized within their group, I never saw them deliberately exclude anyone.

Many of them were or became leaders at the school – class presidents, club leaders, outreach group leaders, etc.. It turns out that the positive traits that made them popular also made them great leaders.

Years later I am still friends with many of these folks. I’ve been to their weddings, served in ministry with them, and continue to connect via Facebook. They are some of the nicest people I’ve ever met. Many have gone on to be senior pastors or even denominational leaders on the local, regional, and national levels. Many are natural born leaders.

That experience has served me well in ministry. As a youth pastor, I would hear kids talk about “cliques” in the youth group or school. I’ve been able to help them through that petty envy (which I was shared) and form positive friendships.

In music ministry, I’ve seen people around me, even “under” me become popular because of their amazing gifts. Instead of becoming envious or even spiteful as the flesh would tempt me, I’ve celebrated their gifts and influence.

So, if you’ve ever felt on the outside, here are a few lessons that might help you break into a similar “clique.”

1. Birds of a feather flock together. It turns out that the “popular” people at college were really just positive, optimistic people with great people skills. They tended to gravitate toward like-minded people. As I was welcomed into their group, it caused me to grow as a leader and as a person. It forced me to “up my game” to hang with these great people. If the clique you are envying is like this one, it should be easy to join. If it’s not like this, it’s not worth envying or joining.
2. Leaders are usually leaders because of great people skills. They are kind, thoughtful people who truly value others. It turns out we tend to promote people we like. I’ve met and personally known many regional and national leaders in my church movement. The higher I go, the more impressed I am with their character and love for people.
3. Showing up is one of the most underrated people skills. Remember my friend that lived across the hall? I’m sure a big part of becoming friends was the fact that we basically lived together. We were there for each other. We got in with the popular crowd by just showing up. In ministry, my influence with people can be strengthened or damaged based on how much I am “there” for people. If you see a crowd you’d like to join, show up! Join their cause. Even better, find ways to serve them and “be there” when they need someone. Those are the times you build camaraderie.
4. Envying and tearing down others has never lifted me up. Don’t wast time envying the status of others or wishing you were in the club. It just makes you look petty and small. Either show up or shut up. There are many times in my life I wish I would have just kept my mouth shut instead of uttering some negative comment that revealed my inner pettiness. Negative comments may have gotten a laugh, but they never made me more well-liked.
5. Conversely, lifting others up has never brought me down! If someone is more popular than you, find out why? It may just be that they are a kind, thoughtful person who is really pleasant to be around. I’ve found that lifting them up has actually helped my status with others, because it makes me come across as a kinder, more thoughtful person. Instead of envying try emulating. Be the best version of you and learn from the great qualities in others.

These are lessons I’m still learning today. I’m ashamed to admit that I really wasn’t “worthy” of the Tuppies, but they welcomed me anyway. Over the years, I’ve tried to become the sort of man who is as warm, welcoming, and selfless as these folks. I’m still a work in progress.

And if my association with these amazing people earns me some sort of label, so be it.

Count me “in.”

 

 

*Honestly I don’t recall which person this was. It could have been Todd, or Brad, or Steve, or one of the other guys. If you were there you know these are their actual names.

“Seeker-Friendly” – The Church Strategy People Love to Hate!

What is it about “seeker-friendly” churches that people love to hate? Are those churches lukewarm? Should our churches be unfriendly to seekers? Do people even know what the term means? Or have some churches given it a bad name?

I began pondering this after listening to a message from David Wilkerson that is being passed around on Social Media. I love David Wilkerson and have listened to him since I was a wee lad. But here it appears that Brother Wilkerson is speaking to those that grossly misunderstand the “seeker-friendly” methodology for reaching people with the gospel. His characterization of what it means to be “seeker-friendly” is not even close to the heart of those that birthed this movement.

Let me see if I can briefly summarize the contrast.

The actual seeker-friendly church partners with the members of their congregation to reach people with the gospel. They seek to create a worship service that their congregation would be excited to invite their friends to. Basically, they get ready for company and treat their guests with respect. They strip away the elements of church tradition and use creative elements to reach people with the gospel message of Christ. The message has not changed, only the methods. The stated mission is to “turn irreligious people into fully devoted followers of Jesus Christ.”

Not everyone who aims to be “seeker-sensitive” actually knows what it means! I’ve actually spoken to many pastors who misunderstand this approach. Some have even admitted to me that they thought if they just started a church with jazz pre-service music, short sermons, and skits, that the people of the community would come rushing in the doors. Most of these wanna-be’s fail because they think seeker-friendly is about watering down the gospel, and they lose the power to reach souls.

Wilkerson also appears to be conflating seeker-friendly with purpose-driven when he talks about surveying the community and creating services geared to that culture. It sounds like he’s not a big fan of “Saddleback Sam.”

When we do this overseas, we call it cross-cultural ministry. We used to make the mistake in missions of trying to convert the unreached people groups to be good WESTERN Christians. We put suits and ties on African tribesman, had them sit on pews instead of the ground, and teach them hymns in English. We stood back and took pride thinking, “now they look like real Christians.”

We’ve grown smarter. Now we go in, study to understand the culture, and figure out how to reach them in their language. Then we train those who receive Christ how to reach more of their own people by building Bible Schools in the field we’re reaching.

I’m currently preaching through Galatians. I agree with brother Wilkerson (and the Apostle Paul) that changing the gospel, watering down the gospel, making people feel comfortable in their sin, and not preaching Christ crucified is a grave error that God will judge.

However, the originators of both the seeker-friendly and purpose-driven models have found a way to reach people with the true gospel in strategic ways. I’ll say it again: The message has not changed, only the methods!  Until you have actually studied the strategies and heard the heart of the leaders, don’t judge them based on the assumptions and misrepresentations of others.

So why do we “bash” these soul-winning movements?

Perhaps there are churches that have misunderstood the concept and don’t preach the Good News. Those churches may well be worthy of our scorn.

Perhaps we don’t really know what “seeker-friendly” means, and we’ve fallen victim to online memes and misinformation.

Or perhaps we just enjoy comforting ourselves with the idea that we are preaching the “true” gospel. But if we are not actually reaching people for Christ, then we’re missing the mark. Perhaps we should see if we can learn anything from these movements before we throw more stones.

———————————————————-

Follow up:
Since I first wrote this, some comments I’ve gotten have been enlightening. I see some misconceptions about what “seeker-sensitive” means, so I want to highlight those here.

1. Some use “seeker-friendly” as a pejorative for any church that does modern things that they don’t like. The church may not have any roots in the seeker-sensitive movement, but for lack of a better term, “seeker-friendly” works when speaking out against a church we don’t like. Like “Xerox” or “Kleenex”, the brand name of “Seeker-Friendly” has become the term by which we refer to all modern styles of church.
2. Many don’t understand that “seeker-sensitive” services are a doorway, not a destination. It was never the intent that the Sunday morning experience be the final destination. Once people are introduced to Christ and get saved, the goal is to move them into deeper levels of discipleship: mid-week “believers” service rich in teaching, small groups, and ultimately serving in their gifts.

I’m sure there will be more to come.

Beats Workin’ in a Coal Mine!

NOT Pastors

Pastors, here is a perspective that might help you like it’s helped me on those hard days.

In ministry, some days are hard. Some seasons are hard.

Often I read social media posts bemoaning the hardship of being a pastor.

“I’m on call 24/7.”
“They say it’s lonely at the top. Pastors know this well.”
“Expectations are unwritten, yet demand total fulfillment!”
“They expect the pastor to be everything!”
“Who pastors the pastors?”
“A pastor’s family needs to understand how tough it is, especially the wife. Many think it’s a walk in the park.”

There are memes depicting all the different skills a pastor is expected to have, or they show how a pastor ages in the course of a year.

We love feeling sorry for ourselves.

Some great pastors have subtly offered advice for those dealing with the stress, disappointment, betrayal, and pain of ministry.

• “Don’t worry about criticism from people you wouldn’t go to for advice!”
• “Take time off and get perspective.”
• “Have realistic expectations.”
• “Learn to set boundaries.”
• “Get more people on your team!”

Those are good words. Keep them coming.

But at the risk of offending some, I’m going be a bit more direct and say what I really think:

BUCK UP BUTTERCUP!

What? Yes. Buck up. You’re a pastor, not a prisoner. Nobody is nailing you to a cross.

Often when people feel sorry for me because I worked some long hours or had to deal with a stressful situation, I reply…
“Beats workin’ in a coal mine! And my father-in-law actually worked in a coal mine!”

Seriously! My wife’s dad actually worked in a coal mine.
(Side note: I married a coal miner’s daughter, and she doesn’t even sing country music!)

You think your life is hard? Trying being a coal miner in the 1950’s! These guys were so exhausted at the end of the day, their wives would strip them, bathe them, and hand feed them. If they didn’t, they would waste away because they were just too tired to eat enough.

How many pastors have died from black lung disease, or the church caving in? My wife’s father died when she was only 16. My wife’s maternal grandfather died in a mine accident in the 1940’s when my mother-in-law was only 14 years old!

Stop feeling sorry for yourself!

“But you don’t understand what I’m dealing with.”

You’re probably right. I’ve faced some challenges and stress in my 30 years of ministry, but perhaps not to the degree you’ve faced.

But maybe Paul the Apostle understood.

When Paul and Silas were wrongly imprisoned and placed in stocks and chains, they felt sorry for themselves and whined about it on Facebook, right?

No! They broke out in worship!

Paul wrote that he learned the secret of being content in every circumstance. Even when beaten, whipped, betrayed, shipwrecked, or in chains, still he was content.

Paul writes, “Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again, rejoice!” This isn’t a prosperity gospel preaching megachurch pastor with shiny teeth. This is the guy who was given 39 lashes five times! He was beaten with rods. He was stoned! He was cold, naked and afraid.

He was also content and tells us, “Rejoice in the Lord ALWAYS!”

And if Paul isn’t convincing, remember that Jesus was crucified for YOUR SIN!
You think being a pastor is hard? Well I’m sure carrying your cross up Calvary’s hill for your sin was no picnic either!

And that’s what we deserve. We deserve Hell – we’ve earned it!

Instead we get Heaven! So get up, pick up your cross, and follow Him!

Do you want to be miserable? Focus on how hard your life is. Focus on how wronged, mistreated, and misunderstood you are. Focus on that mean deacon or apathetic presbyter. Focus on what you “deserve” or what OTHER people enjoy that you’ve been deprived of.

But it’s a lie. Nobody owes you anything.

Do you want to be content and happy? Focus on the goodness of God. Be thankful. Count your blessings. Sing a worship song in the middle of suffering. Thank God for Heaven instead of Hell. Learn to love the difficult people. Learn to pray for your leaders. Get up and serve someone. Pick up the phone and encourage a pastor in a situation even worse than yours.

And pastor, if this life of ministry is really too much to bear, stop whining and go do something else!

But if God has called you, you’ll be miserable pursuing anything else. So buck up and thank the Lord that He called you to serve his Church.

It reminds me of when Jack Parr quit The Tonight Show. He got up in the middle of the program and stunned the audience, producers, and viewers by saying: “I am leaving The Tonight Show. There must be a better way of making a living than this.” He walked off the set.

Less than a month later, he reappeared and said, “As I was saying before I was interrupted…” After a long applause break he continued… “I believe my last words were that there must be a better way of making a living than this. Well, I have looked… and there isn’t.”

I feel blessed to be a pastor. I did ministry long before I was paid for it. I’ll keep doing it until I die, paycheck or no paycheck. It’s what I’m made for. It’s my calling.

And it’s awesome! I get to work for God! I get to serve people! I get to lead people in worship. I get to study and preach the Word! This is the BEST job!

And even on my worst days…

…it still beats workin’ in a coal mine!

For further reading / viewing:
Dennis Prager – The Key to Unhappiness

“Evolving” Faith

Allow me to share a cautionary tale.

Lisa Gungor, wife of Michael Gungor, the other half of the CCM group, “Gungor” shares in Relevant Magazine about her “evolving faith.”

https://relevantmagazine.com/issues/issue-94/the-evolving-faith-of-lisa-gungor/

The short version is that both she and her husband have evolved their way past Christianity, and they’re cool with it. They’re a little disappointed when churches aren’t as excited about booking atheists for their Christian music needs, but hey, those small-minded folks who haven’t yet “evolved” just don’t get how cool it is to be a Christian singer who doesn’t believe in God.

Her story is that growing up, she had doubts she wasn’t able to express and questions she wasn’t allowed to ask. I have a hard time believing that’s what really happened. I remember asking lots of questions growing up. My friends asked questions. We didn’t get in trouble for asking! We had lots of great discussions and debates. We weren’t the first and we won’t be the last to ask the hard questions. By the time I graduated high school, I read everything C.S. Lewis ever wrote wrestling with these questions.

Now that Lisa is older and has been asking these questions, she sees evil in the world and unanswered prayer as evidence that perhaps God isn’t all he’s cracked up to be. God hasn’t given her sufficient answers to these problems, so she’s done believing. So sorry God, but you’ve clearly been underperforming, so we’re going to have to cut you.

I don’t mean to be flippant. She’s sincere. She is also deceived.

This is the inevitable result of humanism – self is on the throne of judgement and God had better give a good explanation for himself. We’ll sit back and see how he does, but it’s not looking good for him.

The truth is, there are good answers to the problems of evil, pain, unanswered prayer, origin, textual criticism, seeming contradictions, etc.. If you start with the mindset that perhaps you don’t know everything yet and are not the center of the universe, these answers are easy to find and very satisfying. If you have started down the road of humanism, then these answers don’t seem to stem the tide of your growing doubt.

I went to see Gungor several years ago at a local college. His music was wonderful. But he also felt the need to philosophize with this simple Christian crowd at a Christian school. He shared with us his viewpoint that evolution was the instrument through which God created everything. Biblical creation is a nice myth, but not true. He didn’t see this as a contradiction with his Christianity. He went on to express lots of other “hip” ideas that, convinced of his own brilliance, we should be enlightened to hear.

When Christians reacted negatively to his “hip” views, he lectured us and called for unity. How dare we say he is a heretic leading others astray? How dare we question his faith!

Well now his faith is gone – his faith in God that is. His faith in himself appears intact. And now his wife has finally “evolved” with him. And they’re still lecturing us.

It never fails. I’ve seen it too many times. When people have cool, hip, non-orthodox “takes” on Christianity, it quickly devolves from there. Creation is a myth and evolution is settled science, right? (Read EVOLUTION – Man’s best attempt at explaining where he came from without any help from a supernatural creator for more on this.)  Once we’ve explained how we got here without God, now we can do away with hell, the Bible, and eventually God himself.

And so now self can sit securely on the throne of judgement, with no pesky “God” to whom one must give an account. This “evolved” faith (in self instead of God), is far superior, as it is more loving, compassionate, and “tolerant” (of everything except orthodox Christianity.)

There’s nothing new under the sun.

Here is the caution:

Doubt creeps in when you listen to the enemy saying, “Did God really say…?”

Which voice are you listening to?

The voice of the One who says you are created in the image of God?

Or the snake that would have you to believe that you know better?

Thoughts and Prayers

Lately it’s been grieving me to hear people mock the idea of sending “thoughts and prayers” to families experiencing a tragedy. But do they have a point? Is there a positive message behind their mockery?

I believe that the heart of this demeaning of “hopes and prayers” lies in the idea that we must do MORE than “just” send thoughts and prayers in the wake of a tragedy. We must DO something to make a difference in their lives and to make sure these things don’t happen in the future. While I don’t agree with the cynicism, I do share the sentiment. But while action is necessary, should we really be mocking “thoughts and prayers?”

First let’s look at “thoughts”. What is the efficacy of thoughts? Well, nothing. But the person “sending thoughts” isn’t imagining that their thoughts are accomplishing anything significant. Rather, they are sending their condolences and acknowledging the pain and suffering of the victims. When you have a friend that experiences a loss, you might send them a condolence card expressing your sympathies. You don’t imagine that the card will change the circumstances. You are simply expressing support to your friend.

However, I also think that “thoughts” has slowly crept in as an alternative to “prayers” due to the increasing secularization of our society. It’s not politically correct for politicians and newscasters to say, “we’re praying for you.” “Our thoughts are with you today” is much more acceptable. As a Christian, I see this as as a weakening of our sympathy. But that’s because I believe in prayer.

So let’s look at “prayers.” What is the efficacy of “prayers.” The jury is out, depending on who you talk to. There have even been scientific studies with mixed results. For the most part, these studies will show no effect. Usually, they will measure the effect of strangers praying for people.

On the other hand, I’ve seen prayer answered – sometimes over time and sometimes immediately. I’ve seen things that cannot be explained without supernatural intervention. I believe in the efficacy of prayer. When I send my “prayers” I really believe I am accomplishing something significant.

But the question, “does prayer work?” is the wrong question. It presumes that prayers are like magic incantations that will cause the desired effects to happen. I would assert that prayer ought to be more about aligning ourselves with the will of God. In times of tragedy we should pray to discern what WE should do differently. Tragedy should drive us to prayer in order to seek HIS will.

Modern man doesn’t understand this. Modern man has placed himself on the throne of judgement and if there is a God, he must be called to account for his whereabouts during this tragedy. “How could a good god let this happen?” So we have dismissed him, and we don’t appreciate you bringing him up during this time of tragedy. Keep your prayers to yourself.

So if “thoughts and prayers” are not what we should be doing, then what is the answer? In what shall we trust?

Most of the time when I see the cynical mockery of “thoughts and prayers” it is from people who believe that government should provide the answer. It’s not the people actively caring for victims, giving sacrificially, and volunteering that mock. In fact, it’s usually the faith-based organizations that are the boots on the ground in times of crisis, not the mocking atheists. Those who mock “thoughts and prayers are usually those who advocate for more government control of something. “They” (the government) should DO something. Ironically, they believe their political opinions are helping while they mock “thoughts and prayers.”

So, we’ve lost confidence in God, but we’re confident that the government has the answer, if only enough people will vote the right way?

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. We will offer our condolences. We will pray for those affected. We will give sacrificially. We will serve unselfishly.

Go ahead and mock us, but if you’re putting your hope in a political answer then…

…my thoughts are prayers are with you.

Let the Children Come

Luke 18:15 People were also bringing babies to Jesus for him to place his hands on them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17 Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”

When I was seven years old we began attending Brookfield A/G. It was a church of 800-1500 depending on the era. The pastor was highly respected in the assemblies and was on the platform at General Council. He was a star in the A/G. But I had no idea that was the case while attending. He was so down to earth and approachable that fringe members of the congregation called his home on Christmas because to them, he was their best friend.

On one of the first Sundays we attended they were serving communion. My folks stopped the pastor in the lobby and asked if there was an age or confirmation requirement to partake as I was only 7. The Pastor turned his attention from them, squatted down, and spoke to me at eye level. He asked me about my relationship with Jesus, and with that confirmation told me that was all that was required to take part in communion.

That one conversation made a huge impact on me and still does. This super-pastor of a huge church literally got down on my level to connect with me. He valued my soul and respected my ability to connect with the Lord in a genuine way.

This is how I imagine Jesus connecting with he little children. He blessed those babies, seeing them as fully formed souls. I think with the older kids he smiled, laughed, and enjoyed their genuine hearts.

Let us never discount the work of God in a young soul. I remember this interaction like it was yesterday.

Can Modern Bible Translations Be Trusted?

Every few months I get some variant of this question.

There are articles that circulate on social media warning about the “shocking removal” of key Bible verses from the NIV or other modern translations. They cite verses that they believe have “key” doctrines about salvation, the blood of Christ, baptism, etc.. One post even warns that some of these same verses were ALSO removed in the Jehovah’s Witness Bible! They blame all this on the evil publishers who want to cater to the whims of the world.

At face value this can be shocking. If you pull out an older edition and compare it with a newer addition, you will see that they are correct. Verses are missing!

What is going on?

First of all, let me suggest that the wise student of the Bible will read each translation understanding the history and approach of that translation. You don’t have to go to Bible College like me to get this background. If one were to simply read the forward and other notes at the beginning of the translation, they would discover a lot of valuable information.

I’ve attempted to sort versions by their approach to interpretation. They don’t all fit neatly in one category, but this might be helpful as a starting point. Here is a brief overview of a few of some of the more popular versions:

Literal Translations:

• The King James Version (KJV) is probably the most beloved, and for good reason! I grew up reading the KJV and memorized large portions of it. It’s still my favorite version from which to read the Psalms because of its poetic language. When it was published in 1611 it was radical! You weren’t supposed to be able to read the Bible in English, but hear it in Latin. It brought the Bible to the common man.
  Unfortunately, it was limited by the texts they had at the time. It is also very formal and uses the “King’s English”. Even the people of that day didn’t actually talk that way, but it was shocking enough to go from Latin to English, so the most formal version of the language was used. 
• The New King James Version (NKJV) improves on the KJV dramatically and is one of the versions I use when doing serious study or preaching. It keeps a lot of the traditional feel of the KJV while updating pronouns like “Thee” and “Thou”.
• The New American Standard Bible (NASB) is also an excellent translation, and slightly less formal than the NKJV.
• The English Standard Version (ESV), is an excellent translation that employs an “essentially literal” translation philosophy. It is a revised version of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) which is a revision of the American Standard Version (ASV). You could say the ESV is the Revised Revised Standard Version.

These are all “literal” translations, meaning that they attempt to translate the text word for word as much as possible. Note: I say attempt because Greek and especially Hebrew sentence structure is very different than English. This is great for study, but could be confusing for the casual devotional reader. 

For example, glossolalia, the phenomenon of supernaturally speaking in another language, is translated literally “other tongues”. In the original languages, the same word is used for language and the physical tongue. In old English, the word tongue can also have this double meaning. However, except for the rare reference to one’s “native tongue”, the word tongue is not commonly used for “language” today.

Dynamic Equivalence Translations:

• The New International Version (NIV) is a modern translation that updates the language and rephrases some terms so that the text means what the original text meant. It is the work of hundreds of scholars who translated, argued, compared, and worked to get the translation to reflect the text as originally written. It is the most popular version and an excellent translation for teaching and study. I like to compare the NIV, NKJV, and NASB when studying and preparing to preach.
  • Note: The publishers of the NIV also created a “readers version” (NIrV) translated on a third-grade reading level, which is an ideal option for children or non-native English readers.
• The Contemporary English Version (CEV) is a modern translation that takes updated language even further, making the text very easy to read and understand, though it may not be as literal a translation as other works listed above. It’s a great version to read devotionally and may bring out meaning in passages that has previously escaped me.
• The New Living Translation (NLT) started as a revision of The Living Bible (see below), but evolved into a translation from the original languages. It is easy to read and much closer to the original text than the paraphrase it attempted to update. While some might look at the NLT as a paraphrase (which it’s predecessor clearly is), the NLT is the work of over 90 scholars and continues to be scrutinized and revised to ensure accuracy to the Biblical text. This is my “go-to” translation when I want to read the text in today’s common language.

These versions to some degree employ “dynamic equivalence” to render the meaning of the verse as close as possible to the original and avoid misinterpretation.

For example, in the case of “glossolalia” it might be translated or footnoted as “other languages” instead of “tongues” in certain contexts to give clarity. Another example would be “flesh” which might be translated “the sinful nature” when it is not referring to literal physical flesh.

Read here for more background on dynamic equivalence.

Paraphrase Versions

• The Living Bible (TLB) is a paraphrase of the ASV done by Kenneth Taylor in the 1970’s. His effort to put the Word of God into the common vernacular was motivated by a desire to see the Word be accessible to children. His inspiration came from family devotions with his children in which he routinely had to paraphrase the ASV or KJV so his kids could understand it. This version is easy to read and enjoyable, but shouldn’t be relied upon as a primary source for study. The NLT, NIrV, and Message have made this beloved paraphrase a bit obsolete.
• The Message is a recent paraphrase by Eugene Peterson. He takes even more liberty with the text, making it really easy to understand though very far from the literal original writings. It’s another great tool for devotions or as an illustration when explaining certain passages, but not as a tool for in-depth study.

These paraphrases are a great way to hear Scripture in a new way, with modern language, but are not suitable for serious study. They are generally the work of one person, without the benefit of the scholarly scrutiny that serious translation projects enjoy. If you think you hear something new or different in a paraphrase, check it against the trusted translations.

Hard to Classify Versions:

• The Amplified Bible (AMP) gives you lots of options! (some might say too many!) It translates many texts with several different word choices all included in the text or in parenthetical phrases. This version is fun to use as a comparison on individual verses, but it’s a bit wordy for casual reading or memorization. It is also largely the work of only one translator (Frances Siewert) who updated the RSV and added the extra phrases and word meanings to “amplify” the original text. Any insights from the Amplified Bible should be cross-referenced with the more literal versions above.
• The Passion Translation (TPT) is not really a translation at all, but claims to be – which is a problem. If it had purported to be merely a paraphrase, it might be worthy of some consideration. It is the sincere work of one man, Brian Simmons. While he might provide a new “take” on many passages, I can’t really commend the final product. This article by Andrew Wilson does a great job discussing its shortcomings.

So, back to modern translations in general and the NIV in particular.

As stated above, each version has its own approach and I believe each one (with a couple exceptions) is a valuable resource to the serious student of the Bible. Validating a modern version does not invalidate the ones from earlier centuries. 

This is NOT a competition.

We don’t have the original writings of the Bible. We have copies, Greek translations, Latin translations, and other source materials. By comparing these texts, we gain insight into what the original text might have been versus notes or errors inserted by scribes at a later time.

Ironically, we have better texts to translate now than did the scholars that translated the KJV centuries ago. While the modern versions are further removed from the time of the original writings, they are often more accurate because of the materials they have to work with.

Remember the Dead Sea Scrolls? That is just one example of texts that archeologists have discovered in the modern era.

The NIV is a great translation and is based on the best texts as agreed upon by biblical scholars and experts in ancient languages. The NIV will continue to change as scholars make new discoveries or new, better texts are uncovered. When passages are removed or changed, you will find a footnote indicating the change and rationale.

Example: John 5:4 has been removed. If you look it up in the NIV you will find this footnote:
“a.  John 5:4 Some manuscripts include here, wholly or in part, paralyzed—and they waited for the moving of the waters. ⁴ From time to time an angel of the Lord would come down and stir up the waters. The first one into the pool after each such disturbance would be cured of whatever disease they had.”

That isn’t someone’s attempt to water down the Bible. It is a scholarly consensus that those words were not in the original text, but added later by scribes.

A word about the best biblical scholars:  They are more scientists than theologians. They are  Bible “geeks” who spend hours debating and refining their translations. They aren’t motivated by the doctrinal outcome of their findings. They are passionate about accuracy. What did the original author actually write? What is the best possible translation of those words? Does this translation accurately convey the meaning of those words?

Story time: Back when I was in Bible College, I had a professor who was an expert in ancient languages. He didn’t just know Greek and Hebrew, but also Aramaic, Latin, German, and older versions of German, English, and others. He was an expert in several “dead” languages that only a few people on earth can translate. Other Universities would send him ancient tablets (which were often casually sitting on his desk) to translate.

One afternoon a friend of mine was walking down the hall and heard a passionate discussion coming from this professor’s office. However, he couldn’t understand a word of it so he popped in and asked what they were doing. The college librarian, who is also an expert in biblical languages, was arguing with him. They were arguing the syntax of some Hebrew verbs but they were arguing in German, since the best reference materials were originally written in German.

All this to say, for the most part, biblical scholars are not ideologues pushing an agenda. They are passionate academics working hard on the translation. And they do so in teams, further protecting the final product from doctrinal bias.

So, back to the NIV again…

The NIV is the work of a scholarly committee, not the publisher.  They are totally passionate about publishing an accurate translation that the modern reader can understand. If Satan himself bought the publishing company, he would have a difficult time getting any ill-motivated changes past these guys.

So here’s the bottom line.

We have several great translations of the Bible. We are blessed. For centuries the text of the Bible was inaccessible to the common man because it was in Latin. It was thought that the common man wasn’t capable of understanding the text without the aid of the well-studied priest. The KJV changed all that and, ironically, could be seen as the first “modern” translation. I will forever love the KJV and quote from it regularly.

If you love your translation, you can keep your translation!

Read whichever one you like. For your devotions, try a different version each year. When you study or teach, you should compare translations, read commentaries, and dig into the original languages. Be thankful that you have options. But don’t chastise or alarm people who prefer another version.

It’s still the Word of God.

For Further Reading:

Funny comic explaining Bible translations

Is the NIV Bible Translation Missing Verses and Selling Out to Secular Publishing?

Bill Mounce: Can We Trust Bible Translations?

Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today

What’s Wrong with the Passion Translation?

Does the NIV remove the blood of Christ and deny the atonement?

Great tools for Bible Study:
Blue Letter Bible – easily pull up Greek and Hebrew texts in line with your favorite version.
Bible Gateway – great site to look up verses, see footnotes, and compare versions
Bible Hub – best site for comparing multiple versions of one verse

The Book of Job – Part 3

The Book of Job for People With Short Attention Spans
Part 3

We left off Part 2 with God interrupting the conversation between Job and his friends. His friends were “man-splaining” to Job WHY God was doing this to him.

God interrupted this convo and had begun setting them straight.

And now I bring you the final installment of “The Book of Job for People with Short Attention Spans.”

Part 3:

God addresses Job

God: “Listen up. I’m going to tell you a bunch more about me.”
[God says more stuff about Himself. It’s not bragging ‘cuz, well, He’s God!]
God: “I made the mammoths and dinosaurs, dragons, and even the Loch Ness Monster. And when I call them, they come! Can you do that? I didn’t think so!”
Job: “Wow! I knew you were awesome, but I had no idea HOW awesome.”
God: “Okay, I think you’re getting it. We’re cool now – you still my fav!”
[God and Job fist-bump] (I may have made that part up.)

God addresses Job’s friends

God: “You guys are idiots. Grovel to Job and maybe I won’t kill you. Oh, and bring a bunch of meat for the barbecue. I like mine well done.”

Friends grovel, and bring a bunch of animals to burn up.

Job accepts their apology and prays for them.

Job’s friends and family have a party (they probably smelled the grill) and they all bring him money. (side note: remember the end of “It’s A Wonderful Life” where everyone brings their money to George? They totally stole that from Job!)

God blesses Job’s socks off even more!

Job has more sons and daughters (his daughters were total knockouts!) and being way, way, WAY ahead of his time, Job gives his daughters equal rights to the inheritance. Way to go Job!

Job lives 140 more years! He gets to hang with his great, great, great, grandchildren!

Then, with a smile on his face, Job dies.

The End