Category: Christian Living/Church Related

Kierkegaard on Reading Scripture

Had I ever become a seminary professor, I would have made all my students read For Self-Examination and Judge for Yourself! by Sǿren Kierkegaard.  Either book is a good place to begin for anyone who is unfamiliar with my favorite “melancholy Dane” and wants to start reading Kierkegaard on their own.

Both books, published in 1851, only 4 years before his death at age 42, are a clarion call to genuine Christian living.  Kierkegaard particularly focuses on the centrality of Scripture, not simply as a book to be read or studied, nor as a source for Sunday sermons, but as a compelling Word from God that must be obeyed.

The only sufficient goal of all Bible-reading is personal transformation, and transformation only happens for those who surrender to God’s instructions by DOING what scripture says.  Reading without response is like a single person pretending to be married while eating alone every night.

Here is Kierkegaard’s advice (from For Self-Examination) for anyone whose Bible-reading has stalled because of its many difficult, hard to understand passages:

“…perhaps you say, ‘there are so many obscure passages in the Bible, whole books that are practically riddles.’ To that I would answer: Before I have anything to do with this objection, it must be made by someone whose life manifests that he/she has scrupulously complied with all the passages that are easy to understand; is this the case with you?…

 “In other words, when you are reading God’s Word, it is not the obscure passages that bind you but what you understand, and with that you are to comply at once.  If you understood only one single passage in all of Holy Scripture, well, then you must do that first of all, but you do not first have to sit down and ponder the obscure passages.  God’s Word is given in order that you shall act according to it, not that you shall practice interpreting obscure passages.  If you do not read God’s Word in such a way that you consider that the least little bit you do understand instantly binds you to do accordingly, then you are reading God’s Word.”

Michael Gerson, The Boiling Frog that Finally Jumped…Maybe

Perhaps you know the parable.  How do you boil a frog alive?

Don’t throw the frog into boiling water.  It will jump out.  Rather, turn a stove burner on to low heat.  Fill a kettle with water at room temperature.  Put your wiggling, green frog into the kettle.  Set the kettle onto the burner.  Wait…

Supposedly, as the water temperature slowly rises, the frog – being a cold-blooded creature – will enjoy the sauna without alarm.  Eventually, the cooperative frog allows itself to be cooked alive without ever objecting to the rising water temperature.

I have enough of a conscious that I’ve never tested the truth of this parable (have you?), but it serves as a popular warning against the dangerous allurements of compromising one’s conscience.  How many compromises does it take before principle and morality become waterlogged labels tossed by deceased idealists into the world’s pragmatic stew called “the ends justify the means?”

I don’t know.  Maybe Michael Gerson could tell us.

Gerson, now a columnist with the Washington Post, has become one of president Trump’s most vocal, conservative critics.  And I admire him for taking up the cause of repeating out loud that this president has no clothes.

Gerson prints what few other Republicans are willing to say out loud (except behind closed doors).  He appears to be working as a conservative conscience (in a kinda, sorta way) for an otherwise fetid Republican party that misplaced its public service conscience years ago – undoubtedly lost in the fancy parlor of some corporate contributor.

A graduate of Wheaton College, Gerson is noteworthy because he claims the mantle of “evangelical Christian” while openly condemning the boot-licking, brown-nosing antics of those religious-right leaders and their millions of followers who boast about their elevated status on Trump’s White House guest list.

In this regard, Gerson certainly has his head screwed on straight.  Perhaps he learned a lesson or two from his own time of service in the Bush White House.

GWB : 1630 : Speech Preparations – State of the Union. Oval Office

Gerson was chief speech writer for George W. Bush from 2001 to 2006.  From 2000 to 2006 he was also a White House Senior Policy Analyst and a member of Bush’s White House Iraq Group.

The primary purpose of the WHIG was to advance the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld plan “to sell” the American public on the imaginary threat of Saddam Hussein’s non-existent WMD program.  In other words, Gerson was on the president’s marketing team charged with candy-coating one of the most catastrophic, illegal, immoral wars in the history of American foreign policy.

Everyone on that team knew exactly what they were doing.

Here is Paul Waldman’s assessment (in a very cogent article published in

President George W. Bush speaks about Iraq and Afghanistan, January 4, 2006. Standing with Bush from left are National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Vice President Dick Cheney. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque – RTR17RZC

This Week) of the work accomplished by Gerson and his associates in the WHIG:

“What the Bush administration launched in 2002 and 2003 may have been the most comprehensive, sophisticated, and misleading campaign of government propaganda in American history.”

That’s what Gerson helped to accomplish.

Gerson is widely regarded as the author of the “smoking gun/mushroom cloud” fear-mongering metaphor that became the most effective rhetorical trick used by Bush officials in promoting the Iraq War.  (Check out Gerson’ Wikipedia page for some interesting anecdotes told by his fellow speech-writers [with citations]).

I have always wondered what happened to Gerson’s Christian conscience during those crucial years in the Bush White House.

In 2012 Gerson gave a public lecture at Calvin College.  I was there.  As he often does, Gerson talked about the formative influences of Charles Colson and Senator Jack Kemp, two Christian leaders with whom he worked closely as a young man.  He credits them for positively shaping his Christian social and political conscience.  He also talked briefly about his years with George W. Bush, but had precious little to say about his work in the White House.

When it came time for the audience to ask questions, I took my place in the short line forming behind a public microphone.  I don’t recall my exact words, but this is essentially what I asked Mr. Gerson:

Torture at Abu Ghraib prison

“You have talked a lot about how your Christian conscience has directed you through your life in politics.  Yet, your political career includes working for an administration that legalized and carried out the torture of other human beings.  Your White House also violated our Constitution with its warrantless, mass surveillance of the American people.  When asked, the president you worked for knowingly lied to us about that fact.

The man packed in ice is Manadel al-Jamadi, an Iraqi prisoner who died while being tortured in Abu Ghraib prison

 “How did you, how do you, reconcile all of that with your ‘Christian conscience?’  How could you do that?  What do you have to say?”

Gerson’s answer was a disheartening example of double-speak and evasion.  He never answered my question, not really.  And I was surprised that he didn’t have a more polished response.  Certainly, he had been asked this question before?

I have no idea if Mr. Gerson has ever answered that question within himself.  If he felt ashamed or had experienced any regret over his years of deliberate, knowing collusion in clearing a path for one of the greatest American crimes of the 20th century, he gave no indication of it.

Though I strongly disagree with almost all of Gerson’s policy positions, I am pleased to see him take up the pen and use his position with the Washington Post to shed some sensible, moral – perhaps even somewhat Christian – daylight onto the sweaty, belching, obnoxious, moral turpitude that is the Trump administration.

Apparently, the water temperature in this current White House is too hot even for Michael Gerson.  But his previous ability to flourish at criminally high temperatures causes me to bite my tongue as others commend him for his Christian cajones.

My understanding of Christianity says that redemption first requires confession of and repentance from sin.  Public sins demand public confession.  We may have learned a little about Gerson’s tolerance of the current heat in Washington, D.C.

I am not convinced that his current opposition to Donald Trump tells us anything at all about Gerson’s Christian discipleship.

I am still waiting to hear a public confession of his past, political sins.

Why Erasing “In God We Trust” Would be a Good Thing for Everyone

Genuine Christians don’t trust in God.

Real Christians trust in the eternal, heavenly Father of the resurrected and ascended Lord, Jesus Christ.  There is a difference, a BIG difference between these two deities.

Trusting in God does not require anything of us, because God-trusters always make God in their own image.

The generic God of the God-trusters is a God of convenience.  And what is America today if not the wasteland of endless, ad nauseum convenience?

Idolatry’s promise of religious convenience is at the heart of why God-trusters embrace their ever-convenient God.  Like all idolatry, trusting in the God of American civil religion is easy-peasy religion, because that God is always on our side.  What’s not to like?

Who wouldn’t want to be on God’s side when you already think you know that God’s side is always your side?

The angel of American manifest destiny

He is always, predictably, the God of our nation, our history, our wars, our empire, our manifest destiny, our foreign policy, our political party, our consumerist lifestyle, our race, even our skin color, if and when appealing to such racial niceties becomes necessary.

How nice it is to believe in an agreeable God who wants for your nation what you do, who believes in the rightness of your cause just as you do, who excuses the world-wide bloodshed caused by your country for the same reasons you do.

How insufferably convenient to embrace a religion of such logical redundancy.  Clear-headedness is never expected of anyone.

This is always the way with idolatry.

This In-God-We-Trust God emerges from our own selfish desires, hopes and priorities.  For even when we fail to achieve our desires, this God of the God-trusters is flexible enough to adopt failed outcomes as the deepest desire of his heart.  So, America can do no wrong, even when she fails abysmally and wreaks havoc among those who suffer from her miscalculations.

On the other hand, if there is one thing the Bible tells us about the one, true God, Yahweh, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the eternal Father of Jesus of Nazareth:  God is never convenient.

Following Jesus of Nazareth is not convenient, not at all convenient.  That’s why so few people really do it, consistently, day in and day out, for a lifetime.

When Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778) devoted a chapter in his book, The Social Contract (1762), to the centrality of civil religion in the modern nation-state, he emphasized the civic dangers of Christianity.  In fact, he believed – rightly, in my opinion – that the gospel of Jesus Christ, when embraced by true believers, posed the single greatest threat to the long-term survival of any modern nation-state.  He even went so far as to insist that the Roman Catholic church (the only form of Christianity he knew) be outlawed if the nation-state hoped to survive.

Rousseau’s fears can be boiled down very simply:  The Christian God was not controllable.  The Christian God is neither predictable nor convenient – at least, not from a human point of view.

Jesus Christ can never be relied upon to cast his vote for “my side.”  And he always demands an allegiance transcending national, political and social loyalties.

The atheist Rousseau understood Christianity better than most American Christians.

If we understood the import of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Christians would be the first to ask that idolatrous phrases like “In God We Trust” be erased forever.

We would abandon the silly, meaningless conflicts over state-sanctioned “prayer” in public schools.

We would shun idolatrous ceremonies demanding that we “pledge allegiance” to a flag.

We would laugh hysterically whenever we hear the next televised nattering nabob boast about winning some war over saying “merry Christmas” in the public square.

We would speak up and declare, “No, I do not trust in your God of convenient nationalism.  I trust in the heavenly Father of Jesus Christ; Savior of ALL people everywhere; King of the universe; the Lord whose kingdom of righteousness makes public inconvenience a hallmark of the faithful.”

What Is Christian Worship?  Part 1

This post revisits one of my pet peeves:  the misunderstanding and misuse of Biblical vocabulary.  Today I want to begin looking at how we commonly misuse the word “worship.”

OK, I may be a bit like Scrooge, but I wish that Christians would use Biblical language the same way it’s used in the Bible.  Doesn’t that sound sensible to you?  Instead, we often redefine Biblical vocabulary (without realizing it) and then use it in ways that are totally disconnected from its original meaning.

For example, in a previous post I explained how we do this with the word “praise.”  Christians commonly talk about “praising God” when their actions, whether it be clapping and raising their hands, or repeating the words “praise God” over and over again, actually have no connection at all to the Biblical notion of praise.

Language certainly can evolve and change over time.  That is natural.  But for Christians – who have an unchanging, authoritative Book taken as “normative” (in one way or another) in its descriptions of God and human existence – using words from that Book in ways that are unrelated to their original significance becomes very misleading.  It is far too easy for us to import our modern (mis)understanding of those words back into the Bible without understanding the mistake we are making.  Such unconscious habits all but guarantee that we will misunderstand the Scriptures whenever we encounter those misunderstood words.

No one is thinking clearly or understanding Scripture accurately when that sort of linguistic confusion is going on.  Our modern use of worship vocabulary is one more pesky example of this common, Christianese word mangling.

So, I had been planning to write a series of posts about Christian worship for some time, but I was finally pushed over the edge last Sunday morning at church.  The congregation was coming to the end of the final song when the music leader shouted out, “Come on.  Let’s give God some worship.”

The crowd burst into applause.

Oh, my goodness.  I had to pick my eyeballs up off the floor.  I hope I didn’t groan too loudly.

So, let’s begin with a few word studies.  The word study is an important research method that every serious Bible reader needs to keep in his/her tool box, for one simple reason:  Words do not have meanings as much as they have uses.  Words mean what we use them to mean.  And word usage changes over time.  That is why dictionaries are regularly reissued in new, updated editions, because we don’t use all of our words the same way today as we did yesterday.

Ponder the very different ways we have used the English word “gay,” for example.  In 1934, Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers made a movie called “The Gay Divorcee.”  Astaire played a randy, young heterosexual male who spends most of the movie chasing after a lovely, young lady – certainly not the plot-line this movie title congers up for theater-goers today.

So, the question becomes:  whose understanding of a word is being read into a text?  And is it an appropriate understanding or not?

Now we need to do something called a word study.  Open a good concordance.  Your concordance will list every appearance of every word in the Bible, verse by verse.  A good English concordance (like the NIV Exhaustive Concordance) has sections to help you deal with the complications created by the different English translations of the original Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

Now, open your Bible and read every instance of the word(s) you want to understand.  Look at the wider context of each sentence.  This may take some time.

Look at how the word is used in its literary context.  As you progress in your research, you will notice that the same word is often used in different ways in different contexts.  That is why dictionaries can often list several different definitions for a single word.  You will also notice that a variety of Greek and Hebrew words can be translated by the same English word.  (This may sound confusing, but it will sort itself out as you become more familiar with your chosen vocabulary.)

The New Testament uses 4 different Greek word groups that can be translated into the English word worship.

First, proskunien/proskunētēs – to bow down, prostrate oneself; to kiss; to do obeisance.

Originally, this word meant to show submission or respect to a superior.  The precise significance of the homage rendered depended upon the status of the one being honored.  For example, at numerous points in the synoptic gospels various people “bow down” before Jesus, not to worship him as divine but to honor him as someone able to do great things (like heal their leprosy, Matthew 8:2).

When the object of such homage is divine, then giving appropriate honor becomes “worship,” as people acknowledge God’s worthiness of honor, submission and obedience (John 4:23; Revelation 7:11).

But, there is something very interesting about this word:  with the sole exception of John 4, the New Testament never uses this particular word to describe what Christians do for God, whether individually or collectively.  In other words, New Testament believers are never described as giving worship (proskunien) to the Lord.  Odd, but true.

The ONE place where Paul uses this word in connection with an earthly gathering of Christians, it describes the response of a visiting unbeliever who is convicted of God’s presence by observing the spiritual gift of prophecy (1 Corinthians 14:25).

We will come back to the importance of this observation later.

Second, latreuein/latreia – to serve.

Originally, in the Greek Old Testament (called the Septuagint, abbreviated as LXX), this word was used as a synonym for the “service” rendered to a master by a servant or slave – service of any sort at all.  Eventually, it became more narrowly applied to “one’s service of God.”  Most often it described the specifically sacrificial service offered by an Israelite worshiper in the temple cult where gifts, offerings, prayers and sacrifices were made.  Such temple service was an act of obedient sacrifice (Luke 2:37; Romans 9:4).

St. Francis worshiping with a congregation of birds.

Let’s note a few developments in this piece of vocabulary.  Worship is made an act of service offered in obedience; to worship God and to serve God become synonymous activities.  Worship is an obedient service, and obedient service can be worship.  Thus, the word could be extended to include the broader life of obedience.  For instance, see Deuteronomy 10:12 (in the Greek text), where the Israelites are told “to serve (latreuein) the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul.”  Here latreuein/worship becomes a lifestyle of faithfulness.

An especially interesting aspect of this particular word in the New Testament, is that – unlike proskunein – latreuein is frequently used to describe Christian activities, but never to describe what Christians do when gathered together.  Hmmmm…

We will need to revisit this important fact about New Testament worship/latreuein before we finish.

Third, leitourgein/leitourgia/leitourgikos/leitourgos – to serve (a particular constituency).  The English word “liturgy” is derived from this Greek word.

Originally, in the Greek Old Testament, it meant “to offer a service” (similar to latreuein), but leitourgein quickly became more specifically applied to the cultic services of the priesthood.  For the Old Testament, leitourgia is the specifically ritual-oriented tasks performed exclusively by priests.

The New Testament retains this sense, for example, in Luke 1:23, “When Zechariah’s time of service/worship was completed, he returned home [from the temple].”  Also, check out Hebrews 10:11, “Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties/worship/service.”

Two important points call for our attention in summarizing the New Testament’s use of the leitourgia word group.

One: it is never used for any particular Christian “office” such as apostles, bishops, elders, etc.  In this New Testament era, offering up leitourgia to the Lord is every believer’s privilege.  There is no such thing as a special Christian priesthood, because the New Testament insists on the priesthood of ALL believers.  Everyone who follows Jesus is now a genuine priest standing before God’s throne.  You don’t have to wear a dog collar or fancy vestments.

A Quaker “worship” service

Two:  this word group is often applied to the whole of the Christian life, much like latreuein.   Only once does it (feasibly) describe what Christians do when they are gathered together in a group.  This single exception appears in Acts 13:2, “While they [the church at Antioch] were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’”

Otherwise, the leitourgia word group never describes what Christians do when they gather together in groups.  At the fear of sounding like a broken record (does anyone use that metaphor nowadays?), this is another curious observation that will demand more attention before we finish this study.

Fourth, thrēskeia – religious service, religion, worship.

For the NT, this is the word used when debating the differences between true and/or false religion.  It is most often used to describe false religion (see Acts 26:5, “the strictest sect of our religion”; Colossians 2:18, “the worship of angels”; Colossians 2:23, “self-imposed worship”; James 1:26, “his religion is worthless”).

On one occasion thrēskeia describes true worship in James 1:27, “Religion/worship that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”  This single exception is most likely explained by the context of debate and the word’s previous appearance in verse 26.

So, one last time…let’s notice something very interesting about this word.  As we have noted elsewhere, thrēskeia is never used to describe the things that Christians do together when they gather collectively.  In the only instance where this word is used positively, thrēskeia describes an obedient, holy lifestyle demonstrated by generosity to the poor.

These are the essential puzzle pieces necessary for understanding how the New Testament uses the vocabulary of “worship.”  Now that they are all out on the table, see what you can make of trying to fit them together.

Next time we will begin the process of fitting it all together and synthesizing the New Testament sense of what it means to “worship the Lord Jesus Christ.”

What Readers are Saying about My Book I Pledge Allegiance

Not long ago a good friend and former colleague sent me a message with encouraging words about my new book, I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America (Eerdmans, 2018). 

She unexpectedly bumped into another friend while they both were marching in a local protest demonstrating against president Trump’s immigration policies.

She passed along these kind remarks:

“…(my friend) mentioned that the men’s book club had finished reading I Pledge Allegiance this morning, and found it really good and deeply challenging in all the right ways – and also that he had been in touch with you to say how superb he finds the book. I’m really glad that he took the initiative to contact you!! He and I have been talking a lot about it recently, and how we need to keep it close by to help us to navigate the insanity.”

I could not be more pleased.  She describes everything I hope would happen when disciples wrestle with God’s word while considering the arguments found in my book.

I am pleased as punch.

If you haven’t yet read I Pledge Allegiance, please join the crowd of those who have and ask the Holy Spirit what He wants you to be doing for the kingdom of God in this world right now.

If Your Pastor is Packing Heat, You Need to Stop Listening to Him

Recently a good friend sent me a selection of articles from past issues of the Christian Century.   They all deal with Christianity and gun control.  More specifically, they contain stories about the ways various churches are dealing with concealed carry laws in their states and whether they allow guns in church. (You can read my previous posts about gun control and guns in church here, and here.)

I may revisit other articles in the future, but for now, I was especially struck by an article from pastor Kyle Childress entitled, “In Texas, Even the Pastors are Carrying Guns in the Pulpit” (3/7/16 in print, 3/16/16 online).

Several years ago I attended a public meeting sponsored by a cadre of local churches.  Several hundred people showed up at the local Hilton Hotel conference room.  At the end of his anti-Muslim rant, the visiting pastor/speaker boasted about the fact that he and all  his church elders carried their guns to every church activity, both inside and out of the church building, in order “to protect their flock.”

Contrast that man’s view of Christian faith with the following story excerpted from pastor Childress’s article:

“The rationale of gun-carrying church members is that they want to be ready to protect themselves and their families if an armed intruder enters the church.  But with the new [concealed carry] law in place, who will know if the person is an armed intruder or an armed visitor?…All visitors are now scrutinized, with every visitor being a potential threat.  At the same time, to demonstrate their enthusiasm for the new law, some churches are posting signs that say — as an act of outreach — ‘Guns Welcome Here.’

“I’ve been astonished at the level of fear associated with perceived threats that are just outside our doors ready to get us…I keep asking myself where the witness of Christ is in all of this. Many of the pastors who are carrying guns teach and preach a version of the gospel that’s different from what I know.  It is a gospel of everyone looking out for himself or herself, a gospel that says, ‘It’s a dangerous world, so get them before they get you…’

“One of my deacons, the dean of a nearby college, was in a faculty meeting listening to faculty members discuss how they were all getting guns.  The dean said she refused to carry a gun.  It got quiet in the room, then someone asked why.  She said she was not prepared to shoot and perhaps kill someone.  There

Jesus arrested on trumped up charges. Maybe if he had carried a gun…?

was a long pause and then ‘What would you do if someone threatening came into the classroom?’  The dean said, ‘I’d tell them about Jesus and try to show them the love of Jesus.’

“‘You could hear a pin drop,’ she told me later. ‘Everyone looked at the floor, and someone changed the subject.’

“During a sermon on baptism a few weeks ago, I explained why I would not be carrying a gun in the pulpit or anywhere else. ‘It has to do with baptism,’ I said.  ‘When I went down into the waters of baptism, I did not come out to strap on a gun.  I came out entering into the life of the crucified and resurrected Jesus Christ.’  I went on, ‘In baptism our lives are no longer our own.  We belong to Christ.’  I could see and hear some crying in the congregation…”

Our lives are no longer our own.

We belong wholly and completely belong to Jesus Christ to do with as He pleases.

If your pastor is packing heat, I am afraid that he doesn’t have wisdom enough to lead a conga line, much less the people of God.

Stories of Self-Denial, 3

I believe in miracles.  More precisely, I believe that God works miracles today because I have experienced them in my life.

Peter follows Jesus onto the water

Miracles pose a problem for comfortable Christianity.  They require faith.  Faith in the sense of taking a risk.  Faith in the sense of pushing off into the unknown, realizing that if God does not come through for you, then you are sunk, done, in trouble.

Those who have seen God perform such miracles know two things.

First, you venture out in faith because you know it is the only way for you to obey Jesus, not because it sounds cool or would give you a neat story to tell others.  Rather, you are convinced that not venturing out into the unknown would be disobedient.  Somehow or another you simply know that the Lord has told you, “Get going.”

Second, since faith is always a risk – if nothing is ever put at risk, then I am not living by faith – miracles arise from acts of self-denial.  The faithful disciple walks a sometimes crazy-looking path that frequently turns us

Jesus heals a man in the synagogue on the Sabbath

away from security, away from safety, away from comfort, away from things we have always wanted.  Miracles can only happen for those willing to embrace insecurity, discomfort, loss, and sometimes danger in the cause of following Jesus.

So, I have decided to continue my autobiographical account of self-denial by sharing a few miracle stories.  By sharing these stories, I hope to praise God for the great things He has done in my life.  I also hope to enlist my readers in praising the Lord by venturing out yourselves, taking faithful risks through your own obedient acts of self-denial, acts that will demonstrate God’s faithfulness in your lives, too.

Towards the end of my studies at Regent College (check out my earlier posts here and here that bring us to this point) I arrived at the conviction that

King’s College, University of Aberdeen

Jesus was calling me to study for my Ph.D. at the University of Aberdeen, Scotland.  (I will tell that story another day.)

The main obstacle to this plan was our complete lack of money.  Graduate studies overseas would be expensive.  What to do?  Reason told us drop the idea like a hot potato because it was simply ridiculous.  You can’t shove a square peg into a round hole, and you can’t do expensive things without money.

Fortunately, I have never been particularly fond of the idea of limiting myself to a “realistic life.”  In fact, for many years I have regularly recited to myself a little mantra that I came up with – I will only deal with what is real in order to strive for God’s ideal.  (Yes, I wish I had more opportunities to preach in African-American churches.)

King’s College interior courtyard

So, Terry and I began to pray, asking for guidance in two areas.  One, did the Lord really want us to go to Scotland, or was it just my own idea?  Two, if we were supposed to go to Scotland, how would we get there?  We didn’t have any savings and getting enough money in loans was impossible for us back then.  What were we to do?

Terry and I decided to set out a “fleece,” not unlike the Old Testament story of Gideon in Judges 6:36-40.  (Whenever I tell this story to young people, I always insist that they not make this a common practice.  It is not a normative way to pray, but it worked for me, so it is part of my Christian story.)

We began to pray for the money we needed.  Except, we were always praying for money, money to pay the bills, to buy groceries, you name it.  How would Scotland money look any different from our regular money miracles?  We finally decided to pray for lots of money in a short period of time.  We looked into the cost of airline tickets for our family of 4 and decided to ask God for enough cash to buy them.  That would get the ball rolling.  As I recall, 4 tickets were about $2,000 in those days.

We further decided that we would not share this particular prayer request with anybody, not with friends, our Bible study group or church.  It was between us and the Lord.  So, we prayed daily that if this cockamamie idea was, in fact, God’s will for our lives, then He would give us $2,000 dollars in big donations within 4 weeks.  If this didn’t happen, then we knew it was not God’s plan for us, and we would pursue something else.

Before the first week was over, I opened our post office box in downtown Blaine, Washington one afternoon and saw a large, white envelope looking as pregnant as a white envelope could possibly look.  I opened it up to find $1,000 in cash.  To this day, we do not know the identity of our generous benefactor.  But that’s OK because the Lord Jesus knows exactly who it is, and their reward is waiting from them in heaven.

I ran home, showed the envelope to Terry, and we thanked the Lord for His wonderful generosity.  It was a large donation in a short period of time, no doubt.  But I also reminded Jesus that if he wanted us to go to Aberdeen, he had only answered half our prayer.  We still needed an additional $1,000 within the next 3 weeks.

We continued to pray for guidance.

To make a long story short, before the month was over we received 2 additional, large gifts from out-of-state friends that brought the total amount to $2,500.  It certainly appeared to be a clear answer to our prayers.  So, the decision was made.  We were moving to Scotland!

But we only had enough money to buy the airline tickets, which we promptly did.  We also needed money for tuition, living expenses once we arrived and, first of all, a student visa.

If there is one thing I have learned about following the Lord, it is to take the journey one step at a time.  Rather than worry about tuition and living expenses, I tackled the visa issue first.

I sent a letter to the British embassy applying for my student visa.  At that time, student visa applications required documentary proof of adequate funds for at least one year’s living expenses and tuition.  We had no money at all.  We hadn’t prayed for that much money yet.  But, I figured since God was leading me to Scotland that I would mail in my application anyway.

Imagine my disappointment when my visa application was denied.  How could that be?

There was only one thing to do.  I needed to explain to the ambassador what was at stake.  So, I sat down and wrote a letter to the embassy.  I wish I had kept a copy for myself.  Let me give you the gist of what I said.  It went something like this: “Dear Mr. Ambassador, I am a Christian.  I believe that Jesus is calling me to study in Scotland.  I may not have all the necessary funds now, but I know that the Lord will not ask me to do something that He will not also finance.  Don’t worry, the money will come as needed.  If you continue to deny me the visa that I require, you will be standing in the way of God’s will for my life.  I don’t think you want to do that.  It never turns out well.  Sincerely, David Crump”

Voila.  Guess what.  My next letter from the British embassy contained a student visa!  Don’t tell me God doesn’t work miracles.

I could go on and on.  For the next 3+ years we watched God perform one big miracle extravaganza.  There are too many stories to tell here.  I will only say that I was annually required to meet with British immigration officials when I applied for next year’s visa.  I never had sufficient funds to meet their requirements.  I never had a year’s worth of living expenses to prove that I would not be working illegally.  With the exception of one year when I was awarded a national fellowship, I never possessed a year’s worth of tuition.  All I could do was enter every interview believing that Jesus was giving me another opportunity to share the gospel with someone in the British immigration service.  I would praise my Savior by sharing the latest miracle stories describing how the Lord Jesus continued to meet our needs.

For the next 3 years my interviews all went something like this:

Agent:  Show me your papers, bank statements, etc. please.

Me: I put my papers on the table, such as they were.

Agent:  Is this all?

Me:  Yes. That’s all.

Agent:  You don’t have enough money to live here for another year.  What are you doing?  What’s your plan?  How will you survive?

Me: I am a Christian, and the Lord Jesus takes care of my family.  We pray for what we need, and he gives it to us.  I would then tell him a few of our most recent miracle stories to illustrate my case – and to praise the Lord.

At this point, the agent had every reason to withhold my visa, tell me that my time of study was over and then evict us from the country.  But that never happened.  Year after year I listened to an immigration official say something like this: “I have never heard anything like this before.  But whatever you are doing seems to be working for you.”

He would then hand me my new visa and call for the next student.

Yes, I earned my Ph.D. from King’s College, University of Aberdeen, Scotland.  We enjoyed life in Scotland for slightly more than 3 years.  The Lord kept all of his promises to us.  I wish I could say that Terry and I floated from one miracle cloud to the next while living carefree, blissful lives. But I would be lying.

At times, those years also felt like God was putting us through a faith-meat-grinder.  I am not a perfectly faithful person.  We experienced some of the most stressful, worrying, difficult periods of our lives, times where we lived with tears, anxiety and headaches (literally).  Our faith was tested in ways we never anticipated.

We learned firsthand that hardship is also a common feature of miracle stories.  Since tests are an essential ingredient of God’s strategy for strengthening faith (James 1:2-8; Hebrews 12:7-11), and faithful risk-taking is essential to the appearance of miracles, few if any miracles will ever occur that fail to stretch our faith, seemingly to the breaking point.

Praying for miracles is not for the faint of heart.  Obedient discipleship is not always a bed of roses.  But oh, my goodness…nothing in this world could ever tempt me to trade in my front row seat to witnessing the awesome, unbelievable work of God, the overwhelming measure of His loving kindness, and His perfect faithfulness to someone like me.

 

P.S.  Which also reminds me of this important lesson:  faith has more to do with the decisions we make and how we act than it does with the way we feel.

How Do We Choose the Right Church?

This morning I came across an interesting online review in Christian Century discussing Jamie Smith’s book Awaiting the King.  (You can read my review of Jamie’s book here.)

I was particularly struck by the author’s observations  on the depth of political polarity within the American church.  His explanation of this destructive division is the simple sociological observation that people, including Christian people, naturally hang out with others like themselves.  If you are familiar with church-growth literature, you will recognize this as a simple application of the “homogeneous principle.”

Here is the most relevant paragraph:

“People select churches based on the convictions in which the culture has already formed them. Those formed primarily by the liturgy of the flag will choose a Southern Baptist church where they know their values will be mirrored, while those formed primarily by the liturgy of individualism will opt for a mainline church where they know inclusiveness will be a shared value. We choose churches the same way we choose political parties. This is why so many Christians know so few Christians who disagree with them. It’s why our ecclesial culture so neatly replicates the polarization in our wider culture. And it’s why so few mainline pastors thought it odd that, when the Festival of Homi­letics was held in D.C. this year, Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker spoke but no Republican politicians did.”

Of course, the author is absolutely correct.  Sadly, he is also making an observation that reveals the immaturity of so many American Christians.  After all, the point of Christianity is not to remain who we are naturally.  Nor is the goal to be comfortable.

Even more sadly, this selection process not only works for individuals selecting a new church, but also for congregations selecting whom they choose to welcome and embrace.  Not only do insiders look for insider churches, but outsiders are regularly rejected by insider congregations.

When Terry and I retired and moved back to Montana we knew that we were immersing ourselves into a rural culture that, by and large, embraced values very different from our own.  I am not a bit surprised to see over-sized pick-up trucks rolling down the street sporting bumper stickers proclaiming “God, Guns and Guts Made America Great! Let’s Keep It That Way”  Montana voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump, the candidate who often encouraged his supporters to punch his nay-sayers in the face, then promising to pay their court fees.

If we were average church-goers we might have prioritized finding a church — probably a very tiny church meeting in someone’s basement after dark (I am joking) — filled with others like us, politically avant-guarde with a progressive social conscience, where we could be socially comfortable.

But this not what we did, not because finding a comfortable church may have been difficult, but because it would have been wrong.

No, we searched for a church that was living out what we believe the church is supposed to be. (For a fuller discussion of what I mean by this, read my book I Pledge Allegiance: A Believer’s Guide to Kingdom Citizenship in 21st Century America).  Here is a short list of the qualities we looked for:

  1. A preacher/teacher who taught from the Scriptures, both practically and authoritatively, as God’s Word for us today.
  2. A church where the leaders and the congregation were outwardly rather than inwardly focused, where the emphasis was on helping those who are hurting and reaching out to the lost with the good news of Jesus Christ.
  3. A church that was primarily growing because new people were coming into new relationships with Jesus, not because disgruntled church-goers were transferring from neighboring congregations.
  4. A place where we could be involved, use our gifts and make a contribution.
  5. A place where we could confidently bring our friends trusting that they would encounter the Holy Spirit.

We set out in this search knowing full well that we would probably find ourselves surrounded  by folks who would not agree with our politics…and with whom we, too, would seriously disagree.  (Of course, there are necessary limits to such tolerance.  I would never attend a church where I judged the teaching to be an idolatrous Christian nationalism, or racist, or rabidly Zionist.)

In fact, that is exactly how it has worked out.  Thus far, I have disagreed with the politics of almost everyone who has shared their political positions

Members of the community join hands during a Black Lives Matter prayer vigil in front of the First Baptist Church, a predominantly African-American congregation, in Macon, Ga., on Monday, July 11, 2016. The pastors of both First Baptist Churches in Macon are trying to bridge the stubborn divide of race against a painful and tumultuous backdrop: the 2015 massacre at a historic black church in Charleston, South Carolina; the much-publicized deaths of blacks at the hands of law enforcement; the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, and the sniper killing of white Dallas police officers. (AP Photo/Branden Camp)

with me.  And, unfortunately, a few of them have made it clear that they aren’t especially interested in getting to know more about us after hearing my own thoughts on the issues of the day.  (I have only had one true confrontation when I had to challenge a new friend on his blatant anti-Semitism.)

Yes, I do believe that my fellow worshipers are wrong, and that I am right on these things.  But hanging out with fellow “X” (replace the X with whatever political party you like) is not why I go to church.  The purpose of the Body of Christ is not to provide a safe place (oh…how I have come to dislike those two words) where I will be coddled in my own preconceptions.

The purpose of Christian community, rather, is that we all become transformed into the image of Christ.  And there is one thing I know for certain about Christ’s image — no one on this earth looks exactly like Him yet, including me.

The all-to-common failure to recognize these important distinctions is further evidence of the spiritual immaturity endemic to American Christianity, including evangelicalism.

So, here is the challenge — take a step or two to change this situation in your sphere of influence today.

A Journalist’s Code for Christians

One of the bloggers I always enjoy reading (while not always agreeing with her) is the freelance journalist Caitlin Johnston.  Caitlin recently wrote a post reflecting on a tweet from Tim Black, host of the YouTube program, Tim Black at Night.

Here is an excerpt from Caitlin’s blog:

“Last night, one of my callers said we needed journalists and commentators willing to die for the truth,” Black tweeted. ‘I disagreed. We need journalists and commentators willing to give up their status, quit their jobs and make less money telling truth and sadly to most that’s the same as dying.’

“There’s so much truth in that I just want to unpack it a bit and riff on its implications from my own perspective. What would happen if a significant percentage of journalists got fed up with spoon feeding lies to a trusting populace and decided to place truth and authenticity before income and prestige? Or, perhaps more realistically, what if people who are interested in reporting and political analysis ceased pursuing positions in the plutocrat-owned mass media and pursued alternate paths to getting the word out instead?…

“…as Tim Black said, once you’ve set your sights on climbing to the top of the establishment media ladder, abandoning it can feel like death. And indeed, it is a kind of death: a death of the identity one builds up around the possession and pursuit of the power, prestige and wealth that comes with the realization of that goal. It’s a death of an egoic structure, one that a whole lot of energy has gone into upholding. Serving power has been both financially and socially rewarding for as long as there have been governments.”

Now, reread Caitlin’s post and replace the references to journalists, reporters and political analysts with words like pastors, Christians, and church leaders.  Notice what happens?  We end up with a perfect description of Jesus’ call to Christian discipleship – people who are willing to suffer and die for living a life of faithfulness to the Truth – and his warnings about the many temptations waiting to sidetrack his people – selling your conscience for the sake of ego, wealth, prestige, power and fame.

I am reminded of the message I heard this Sunday at my church.  The concluding text was Matthew 16:24-26.  Jesus says to journalists, reporters, Christian journalists, and Christian reporters of all stripes, as well as butchers, bakers and candlestick makers:

“If anyone would come after me, they must deny themselves, take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it do for a person to gain the whole world, yet forfeits their soul?”

The church in this country is well and truly lost until it swells with genuine kingdom citizens who have so completely “died to themselves” that the prospects of physical suffering, professional loss, private shunning and even death for the kingdom teaching of Jesus Christ is not only considered inevitable, but is eagerly embraced because we know that then and only then have we fully experienced “the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings, becoming like him [Jesus] in his death” (Philippians 3:10).

Good journalists and faithful disciples are like kissin’ cousins.  They both devote their lives to honestly reporting the truth regardless of the cost.

This was the goal of Paul’s life.  It ought to be ours, too.

Following Jesus with Kierkegaard: The Best Apologetics is a Genuine Christian Life

Certain sectors of American evangelicalism are devoted to the study of  apologetics, that is the defense of the Christian faith and the relieving of  doubts.  Some seminaries even offer doctoral programs in apologetics, as if an advanced degree will make anyone a better evangelist, or a more successful resolver of doubts.

Don’t misunderstand me.  I am not opposed to advanced education.  But I am leery of the American penchant for professionalizing normal aspects of the Christian life with advanced degrees and curriculae.

What’s next?  A Ph.D. in spiritual direction?  I am afraid to look, but I fear that somewhere, someplace, someone is already offering degrees in spirituality.

Alas…

In 1851 Sǿren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) published For Self-Examination: Recommended to the Present Age and Judge for Yourself!: For Self-ExaminationRecommended to the Present Age.  These books continue his investigations into genuine Christian discipleship and what true believers must look like in a society where Christianity has degenerated into either a passé, cultural artifact, a mere act of mental assent or an emotional high.

Is the problem that such cultures need more or better apologists to alleviate people’s doubts about Christ?

In Judge for Yourself!, Kierkegaard insists that the best answer to anyone’s doubts about Christianity is an authentic Christian life lived in front of them, a life of obedient discipleship devoted to the imitation of Christ.

He writes:

“Imitation, which corresponds to Christ as the prototype, must…be affirmed again…Without introducing imitation it is impossible to gain mastery over doubts.  Therefore, the state of things in Christendom is such that doubt has replaced faith. And then they want to stop doubt with — reasons…They still have not learned that it is wasted effort — indeed, that it feeds doubt, gives it a basis for continuing. They are still not aware that imitation is the only force that can break up the mob of doubts and clear the area and compel one, if one does not want to be an imitator, at least to go home and hold one’s tongue.

“Imitation, which corresponds to Christ as prototype, must be advanced, be affirmed, be called to our attention.

“…The Savior of the world, our Lord Jesus Christ, did not come to the world in order to bring a doctrine…he did not try by way of reasons to prevail upon anyone…His teaching was really his life, his existence.  If someone wanted to be his follower, his approach, as seen in the Gospel, was different from lecturing.  To such a person he said something like this: Venture a decisive act; then we can begin.

“Venture a decisive act [Jesus says to us]; the proof does not precede but follows, is in and with the imitation that follows Christ.  That is, when you have ventured the decisive act, you become heterogeneous with [i.e. contrary to, standing against] the life of this world, cannot have your life in it, come into collision with it.  Then you will gradually be brought into such tension that you will be able to become aware of what I am talking about. The tension will also have the effect upon you that you understand that you cannot endure it without having recourse to me [Jesus] — then we can begin.  Could one expect anything else from the truth?“

Faith in Jesus is the decisive venture, the ultimate risk, the act of obedience compelling us to live an upside-down, counter-cultural life in a fallen world simply because our Savior tells us to.