No regrets

Something is being lost in today's churches. One of my cousins made a statement once that she "tried not to regret anything" that she ever did, because at least she could learn something from it.

But the problem is....we're supposed to regret things. We're flawed creatures, and will be until the Lord returns. And when we sin, the attitude of a person with a godly heart will be to repent. Regret is interchangeable with remorse (and, coincidentally, with sorrow), which is required for true repentance.

Now, I've heard the "don't regret anything" story before, but never from anyone who professed to be a Christian. And since that statement was made, I've heard it from other "Christian" sources, as well.

So, my question is: who's teaching this philosophy (even "new theology") in our churches, and why?

I guess the short answer is that its genesis lies in people bringing that idea in from the world, and never abandoning it in light of the truth found in the Bible. After all, people have been doing that to Christianity for nearly two thousand years.

I just hope this one doesn't stick around like some others have....

that's it

I'm officially sick of hearing about the freaking iPhone.

that's all.

the rest of the story

yesterday, my wife and I went to church with my folks (who are members of basically a community church bordering on being charismatic). The preacher/pastor person who spoke seemed to have a good, cohesive message, and used a scriptural example to demonstrate his point. And then he missed the point completely.

His example was of that of Mephibosheth, the grandson of King Saul, who was crippled and exiled at the end of Saul's reign (and life). The claim was that David sought out Mephibosheth and extended grace and mercy to him, even unconditional love. And the comparison was to God's love. The statement that this pastor made over and over again was that "this kind of love is not dependent on the response of the person to whom it is offered" and the message was that God gives us salvation regardless of how we respond to Him.

We all know this is not true. Or do we? I tried to engage my folks in a conversation about this, and they said that it was implied that repentance is part of the story but it just was not explained in the sermon. I know for a fact that several members of my family don't understand the tie to repentance, and I believe very firmly that the importance of repentance is being lost to whole generations (just starting on a second one). So, if those who know just assume that the full story is being told, who will be left in 20 years to speak the truth and tell the rest of the story to those who are lost?

It was just another moment in a sad weekend.....

The cross too graphic?

Something the other day struck me as both curious and mildly offensive. I was discussing movies with a coworker and the subject of the movie "The Passion of the Christ" came up. My position is that it was somewhat revolutionary in that the intent was to depict the graphic violence involved with Jesus' death for our sins. This person is an atheist (most days, agnostic on others), and found the movie too graphic for public consumption. He further stated that, if he had been "on the fence" with regard to religion, the movie would have sent him over the edge the other way.

In hearing this, I came to a realization that this man is one of those whose hearts are basically dead to the gospel. His response ranges from casual disinterest to being abjectly offended by everything at the core of being a true disciple of Christ.

My question is this: at what point, if ever, can we let go of the burden of evangelizing a person, including people such as this? Are we always to carry an expectation that everyone must be and will be saved?

Music revolution

If any of y'all have been paying attention, the RIAA is lobbying to start charging radio stations (historically, their free advertising venues) for playing recorded music. This could change the face of over-the-air radio, because in the past record companies have typically paid radio stations to play their music.
My question is this: why is it so hard for them to just bow to the "supply-and-demand" rules of a capitalist economy? They've kept prices for recorded media artificially high for (literally) decades, and don't see that at least part of the solution is to lower prices. The average cost of producing a CD is (and has been for quite some time, even accounting for inflation) about $1. Artist contracts typically return about $1 to the artist for each album sold. So where does the rest of the $12-$19 for a CD go (that's at least a 600% markup)? To the record company, of course. And record company execs are the ones leading the way with the highly publicized suits and legislation battles. And in this battle, I'm guessing that megacorporations like Clear Channel have previously been sitting on the sidelines. With these monsters going at each other, there is bound to be some far-reaching change coming.

Now, one of the reasons I put this here is that the basis for all of this is, as far as I can tell, simple, unfettered GREED. Record company execs want to maintain their indulgent, hedonistic lifestyles, and they're willing to fight dirty to do it. If all of those folks actually lose their sources of wealth, and the music economy crashes, the bad boys (and girls) of the music world will fade from the public eye and maybe we'll be able to restore some sense and morality to this world.

How do you respond?

I strongly believe in promoting unity in the church. More importantly, I believe in promoting unity among "believers," including those who are part of the majority of Protestant christendom. Therefore, I believe strongly in continually striving to persuade others of the falsehood of the Sinner's Prayer. And, yet, there are stumbling blocks in the way that seem impassable.

Recently, my father (in a very accusatory fashion) questioned why my wife and I are not looking outside of the Churches of Christ for a church home. He took offense to it because, to him, it was an implication that all other churches are wrong. I actually do partially believe that, but the complexity of this argument is too broad to pick up for a few moments at a time. My response was a question returned to him: why don't y'all go to a Mormon Temple? And this was the first time that my father seemed to pull up short in pursuing this argument, and it stuck in my mind. My realization was that I basically had to put myself in his place and make it relevant to him in order for him to get a glimpse of my beliefs, my view of the world.

In general, this is true for contending with someone on any subject, and I believe that it's partially captured in Jesus' statement "If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles." (Matt 5:41). It is our job, our responsibility, our commision to effectively convince everyone of the truth of the gospel. That means putting it in context that they can understand. It means striving to overcome years or decades of misconceptions or false teachings. It also means constantly re-examining things to put them in context of the Word, and seeing where there are opportunities to speak the truth to this world.

Yes, it does sound endless. Yes, it does sound tiring. And, yes, it does sound like it's worth every second spent doing it.

Peace be with you

Justifying divorce

In spite of all my years in this world, I am still occasionally surprised by the sinister nature of the human heart. Right now, I'm surprised by how people attempt to justify divorce, and even try to put a "godly" spin on things.

I have a friend who, several years ago, started doing some soul-searching and began looking for the Lord. In the process of entering into fellowship with believers and studying the Bible with them, he somehow came to a bizarre conclusion: he had never loved his wife. Even more bizarre is the fact that he went and told her this after he was converted, adding that he didn't think he would ever love. Needless to say, this declaration tore through their lives like a Kansas tornado. He never recanted his statement, and eventually she (I believe) filed for divorce. He was sorrowful about the whole thing, but never remorseful. A couple of years later, some mutual friends of ours made claims to the effect that, even though the Lord hates divorce, the situation wasn't good, and He had to provide a way out of the situation (the solution being to divorce).

...

The other day, in the process of contending with her spiritual advice (frequently unsolicited) in the past, my stepmother declared that she firmly believed that my dad's marriage to my mom (which ended in divorce) was not God's perfect will for him, and that she (my stepmom) was. Basically, instead of crediting the grace of God in bringing them together after the marriage, she attempted to say that, somehow, the Lord allowed the right thing to happen in the end. The conclusions of her statement also imply that my older brother and I are mistakes here in this world, and that whatever she has done for us has been out of her copious grace and self-sacrificing nature (heavy sarcasm intended).

In both cases, people nullified the power of the Word of God in their lives. They chose to exalt themselves instead of admitting their sinful nature and asking for God's power to overcome it. In the case of my friend, I believe that the Christ-like thing to do would have been to stay in the marriage and learn to love his ex-wife as Christ loves the church. In doing so, he may have won her to Christ in the end. But this is not what happened.

In the case of my stepmom, I believe the Christ-like thing would be to see that they, too, are part of a forever broken family that has at it's center my dad. They should have a pretty acute understanding of how destructive divorce is, and that they are merely survivors of it. And they should do everything in their power to counsel anyone against it and help see them through rough spots in marriage in the future. But this is not what happened.

Before I continue on to my final example, I feel I should state that, though the people mentioned above attend church regularly, the churches aren't Churches of Christ. That shouldn't matter, however. They claim to believe in the authority of the Word of God in the Bible, and that should be enough.

That being said, my final example is one of a preacher I know. He has said on more than one occasion that he knows that God hates divorce - it's in the Bible for all to see. Yet, he has also stated on more than one occasion that he believes that, while divorce is viewed as such by God, it's "sometimes necessary." He wasn't talking about cases of adultery or an unbelieving spouse sending away the believing spouse, either. He has counseled people in his congregation to divorce over matters such as "mental anguish" and other irreconcilable differences.

This is just a snapshot of cases in my microverse. I can only imagine other examples there are out there of such things.

In the end, I have but one question: when my children are grown, who (other than my wife and I) will be there to defend the sanctity of marriage to them? If they hear the clamor of people justifying divorce in such ways, will they even hear the gentle voice of the Lord telling them to stick with it...forever?