Monday, January 12, 2015

Bro. Deacon, Go Take Care of It

The sermon topic on Sunday was “The Qualifications of a Deacon.” I’ve been discussing the topic for the whole of my post-adolescent life, but it takes on a different meaning now that I am a deacon, rather than just a student of the Word. But more than the qualifications of deacon, I find that I am more interested in the role of deacons. I’ve been given this responsibility and I want to fulfill that responsibility the best I can, without overstepping my authority and without leaving anything out.

Interestingly, though the office of deacon is important enough for Paul to state detailed qualifications in his letter to Timothy, the Bible doesn’t tell us a whole lot about what the deacons are supposed to do. There are many different ideas, from deacons only serving tables, to being pastors in training, to being the ones responsible for making decisions for the church.

Aside from knowing that the word deacon could also be translated as the word servant, if there is anywhere in the Bible that tells us what a deacon does, it is Acts 6:1-7, and perhaps the verses after that as well. But some scholars question whether these men were deacons. I believe they were. We might also consider the work of the priests and the Levites in the old testament, as it appears to be a similar work structure, though Jesus’ sacrifice put an end to much of their tasks.

Some people might point to the task the original deacons were given and say, “See? They were just supposed to wait tables.” But let’s think about this. The first church had many thousands of people. When you consider that McDonald’s hires one person for every 144 customers per day, we would expect these men to be able to serve 1000 meals per day, if that’s what they were doing. So, I don’t buy the “they were just waiting tables” theory.

It would be speculation on my part to say how they solved the problem of the Grecian widows going hungry. But my impression of this passage is that the Apostles, who were near overwhelmed with the work they needed to do, laid their hands on these guys and said, “Go take care of it.”

From what I have seen of deacons I respect and from what I see in this passage, that seems like the most important job of a deacon. “Go take care of it.” A pastor has a great responsibility to his church and is often the first person people call when they need help, or they need someone to listen, or they have problem, or someone is causing a problem. It is part of the job, but a pastor’s primary responsibility is to preach the Word as the Lord intends for it to be preached. If a pastor is pulled in too many directions, his sermons will suffer. A pastor needs people he can call and say, “Go take care of it.” Once he puts the phone down, he should be able to push whatever “it” is to the back of his mind and go back to preparing his sermon, or spending quality time with his family, or whatever, because he knows that someone else is figuring out what needs to be done and taking action.

I’m not opposed to deacons meetings. They serve their purpose. For all I know, the seven original deacons may have had a meeting and discussed how to solve the problem with the daily distribution before they recruited some people to help with it. But when I see what Stephen and Philip did in the passage following their selection as deacons, what I see is two men who are actively involved in taking care of it without needing someone to tell them what to do.

Not every deacon is going to be a gifted preacher like Stephen and Philip. Every church has different needs at different times and different deacons are gifted in different things. There’s a leak flooding a bathroom? Go take care of it. A member needs a visit? Go take care of it. The pastor can’t find a preacher to fill in on short notice? Go take care of it. A member is about to have the electricity shut of? Go take care of it. A church member is grumbling and causing trouble? Go take care of it. The widows are going hungry? Go take care of it. Someone needs someone to tell them how to be saved? Go take care of it. Whether working as a group or independently, whether doing it themselves or recruiting others, the responsibility of a deacon is to go take care of it.

Friday, November 7, 2014

Our Job When God is Angry

Why did God destroy Sodom? That seems like a simple question to answer. The Lord himself said in Genesis 18:20, “because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous.” Then in the next chapter, we see some of that sin when the men of the city come to Lot’s house, intent on raping the messengers of the Lord. Many people would answer the question by saying that it was because of the sin of the city and especially the sin of homosexuality.

Now another question, why didn’t God destroy Nineveh? Again, the Lord gave us the reason why he should destroy the city when he said in Jonah 1:2, “for their wickedness has come up before me.” Nineveh was very much like Sodom and I expect you would’ve seen some of the same sins in both cities. But the path of the two cities took went in opposite directions. The Lord sent Jonah with a warning for the city of Nineveh and in Jonah 3:10, we see why they weren’t destroyed. “And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way. And God repented of the evil that He had said that He would do unto them, and He did it not.”

Back to the original question, why did God destroy Sodom? Was it because of their sin? Yes, but there’s more to it than that. You recall that in Genesis 18, Abraham pleaded for the city, for the sake of the righteous in the city. He even got the Lord to agree not to destroy the city if ten righteous people were found there. In the end, only three people made it out alive. When you compare Sodom and Nineveh, it comes evident that the reason Sodom was destroyed is because there was no one to humble themselves and cry out to God on the behalf of their city.

We look around us and we see great wickedness in our country and in our cities. Homosexuality is promoted as something to be proud of. People are even proud to be proud. Judges are declaring laws that outlaw immorality as unconstitutional. On television, sex outside of marriage is treated as if it is the way people ought to behave. And if you look around you, some of your friends are doing the same thing. Abortion is treated as a woman’s right instead of the murder that it is. Sin, it seems, has become an unstoppable force. We that fear the Lord keep thinking that the Lord will soon pour judgment down on our land. Though we realize it is deserved, none of us really want to be caught in the crossfire, like Lot was.

What if? What if it doesn’t have to be this way? What if there is something we can do to not only protect our country and our cities from the wrath of God, but something that will turn this thing around. 2 Chronicles 7:14 is a promise from the Lord. This is something you can put your faith in. The Lord said it, so if we do what it says, he will do it. If we humble ourselves before the Lord, repent of our sins, and cry out to him on the behalf of our country and our city, he will do it. Telling people the homosexuality is a sin has its place. Telling people that they are risking judgment has its place. But if we really want to save these people and turn this thing around, what we really need to do is to place ourselves between the Lord and our city. When the Lord looks upon our city in anger, he should see faithful men and women on their knees before him, pleading on the behalf of our city.

But are they worth it? Why not just let the Lord send his judgment upon our city and our country? Again, the Lord answers the question for us. Look at Jonah 4:9-11. “Thou hast had pity on the gourd for which thou hast not labored, neither madest it grow, which came up in a night and perished in a night. And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons who cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand, and also many cattle?”

Think about that. We might question, why would the Lord be concerned about cattle? Aren’t the people of Nineveh going to eat them anyway? Of course we know that the Lord’s eye is on the sparrow, so it shouldn’t surprise us that he is concerned about cattle also, but I think the point the Lord is making is how messed up Jonah’s view of the situation was. Jonah was more concerned about a plant than he was the people of that city. If nothing else, Jonah could’ve been concerned about the little children or even the cattle, since they had done nothing worthy of destruction.

Are we not lot Jonah. If you look at Facebook, there are many Christians who are obsessed with their cats and dogs. These little animals that will bring joy into their lives for a few years and then die. And if their pet was injured, they would pray for that pet, pleading with the Lord to give them a little more time with it. If our pets are worth it, then certainly the people of our city and country are worth it. Has not God made them in his own image? Their worth it. So why don’t we humble ourselves and plead with the Lord on their behalf like we ought to?

Friday, October 31, 2014

Is This a Gift From God?

Apple CEO Tim Cook will go down in history as having said, "I'm proud to be gay, and I consider being gay among the greatest gifts God has given me." For those of us who have studied the Bible, that statement raises our hackles. How dare he say such a thing? Clearly, the Bible says that God is opposed to homosexuality and God doesn’t disagree with his word, so it can’t be a gift from God.

When we look a little closer at what Tim Cook is saying, he says that his experience as a practicing homosexual has given him a better understanding of the experience that minorities have had. I think we all can agree that being able to see things from the perspective of other people is a good thing. I expect that the good Tim Cook has gotten from his experiences, mixed with his belief that he was born homosexual, is why he is attributing this as a gift from God. (We need not debate whether he was born with same sex attraction or not because the truth is complicated and in the grand scheme of things, it does matter. Are we all not born with a desire to eat? And yet, God calls gluttony a sin.) Many people have the idea that if a good thing comes from something, then the thing it came from must be a gift from God.

Let’s look at an example we can better understand. Suppose a woman is raped and as a result she is impregnated. Nine months later, a precious child is born into the world. By the logic that Tim Cook is using, the rape is a gift from God because it produced something good. Of course, this is ridiculous. We know what Romans 8:28 says. That doesn’t mean all things are good, but God is able to use the bad things to bring good things into our lives. So, it shouldn’t be hard to believe that Tim Cook’s experiences with dealing with bad choices has given him the ability to better understand people who have been dealing with similar situations by no choice of their own. This is similar to saying that the drug addict who chose to take drugs has an understanding of children who became drug addicts in their mother’s womb.

As we consider this, we might want to consider whether some of the other things people call gifts from God are truly gifts. I’ve often heard about “the gift of singleness” as being a gift from God and I’ve said that it is the gift that no one wants. It is based on 1 Corinthians 7:7-8. But it seems like people (usually married people) have to work very hard when they try to explain how singleness is a gift. To me, it seems more likely that the ability to handle singleness is the gift, while singleness itself is not. That’s not to say there aren’t things to value about being single. As Paul pointed out, a single person has more freedom to focus on the things of God. If I, as a single person, want to stay up all night working on something, I don’t have a wife coming in and asking, “When are you coming to bed?” If someone calls and asks for my help, I don’t have to say, “My wife has made plans.” In the situation the Corinthians had asked Paul about, it appears that singleness was ideal, but that doesn’t mean that it is ideal right now.

Why would I say that? Well, because there was a reason why God said, “It is not good that man should be alone.” It is a lot easier to explain why that is true than it is to explain why singleness is a gift. It isn’t good to spend too much time alone with your thoughts. They tend to fester into things they ought not to be. It isn’t good to have no one you can confide in. A several years ago, something happened at church. I don’t remember what it was, but it didn’t go my way. It may have occurred in a committee meeting or something and afterward I said something about it to another church member who was aware of what was happening. As far as I was concerned, I just needed to vent. I made my comment and went on about my business. But a short time later, someone in the church leadership (fortunately, I don’t remember who) took me aside to talk to me, because they’d heard, “Timothy’s upset.” So now, I had to explain my position on this thing that I was ready to put behind me and forget. After that, I had to listen as they talked about it. Had I been married, my comments would’ve likely been made to my wife on the way home from church or at the dinner table. She would’ve either helped me see where I was wrong or we would’ve come to a mutual agreement that there was nothing that could be done about it and it would’ve been over. Lesson learned. It is not for singles to vent, if you don’t want people to worry you’re about to leave the church.

Consider the Proverb, “The blessings of the Lord maketh rich, and He addeth no sorrow with it.” (Proverbs 10:22) We should not feel compelled to call things that bring sorrow a gift of God. God is able to use those things to bring us good things, and that is a gift in itself, but the things that bring sorrow into our lives are not gifts from God.

Thursday, October 30, 2014

8 Things Your Pastor Will Never Tell You About the Bible (Or some such nonsense)

Disturbing is the only word I have for it. I stumbled across an article written by an atheist who is a former Methodist minister. It listed several things that the author says your pastor won’t tell you about the Bible. Things like “Unlike Luke and Matthew, Paul didn’t believe in the virgin birth of Jesus.” Really?! Where did this guy get that? He gets it from Romans 1:3-4. The rest were of a similar nature, so let’s look at this one and not waste our time on the rest.

Consider what Paul is saying in Romans 1:3-4. “Declared to be the Son of God…by the resurrection of the dead.” Amazing! You tell me; which more clearly reveals that Jesus is the Son of God, that he was born to a woman who knew no man or that he rose from the dead? That fact that the resurrection of the dead is mentioned here is not evidence that Paul didn’t believe in the virgin birth. If Paul didn’t, then why did Luke? Luke was one of Paul’s closest friends and traveling companions. Based on what we know of Paul, if Luke was teaching something that Paul believed was heresy, they would’ve had a falling out.

What I find disturbing is that atheists are grasping at reasons not to believe the Bible. If this were any other book and they found something that didn’t quite match up from one chapter to the next, they would dismiss it as a simple mistake and accept that it didn’t invalidate the primary truth of the book. The Bible is different because they can’t find stuff like that. Instead, they have to fabricate things by taking verses out of context or by drawing upon assumptions that aren’t supported by the events.

I wish there was something we could do to wake them up and show them what they are doing. If they could just see how weak their arguments are. But they don’t see. Until the Holy Spirit shines his light into their hearts, they won’t be able to see. And the bad thing is that some have had the opportunity to see, but they have rejected God. I pray that it is not too late for them.

Monday, October 27, 2014

Didn't the Lord Say...?

"Hath not the LORD God of Israel commanded…?”

Barak gets a bad rap. For one thing, people tend to forget who he is and what he did. (Admittedly, he did bring that on himself.) People are more likely to remember Deborah than Barak, and they certainly can’t forget the actions of Jael when she killed Barak’s enemy, Sisera. We tend to think of Barak as the judge with weak faith, if we remember he was a judge at all, since he wouldn’t go into battle unless Deborah went with him. But when we look at the Hall of Faith in Hebrews 11:32, it is Barak (not Deborah, not Jael) who is held up as our example of faithfulness. It makes me think that we should look a little closer at Barak.

In reading Judges 4:4-7, it appears that the Lord had already spoken to Barak, in some way, before Deborah called for him. It doesn’t tell us how the Lord spoke. It may have been through a prophet or an angel, it may have been that the Lord spoke directly to Barak, but the Lord had spoken and Barak knew the will of the Lord. How like us. How often we know the Lord’s will, but we ignore it.

How do we know that the Lord had already spoken? Because Deborah used the words “Hath not the LORD God of Israel commanded?” She wasn’t telling Barak something he didn’t know, but she was reminding him of his duty. That’s part of why we fail to see the faithfulness of Barak. Somewhere inside of us, we know that we shouldn’t have to be reminded to do what the Lord has asked us to do. If I miss church one Sunday, I shouldn’t need someone to call me to remind me that I should’ve been at church. If I make a commitment to the church or one of the church leaders to perform a certain task, I shouldn’t need someone to remind me of what I’ve committed to do. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t remind people of their commitments. God takes it very seriously when we don’t honor our promises to him, so our reminding someone to honor their commitments may save them from chastening from the Lord. I see this as the role that Deborah played.

But Barak wouldn’t go without Deborah. On one hand, I get this. One of the things I struggle with is serving the Lord alone. More often than not, I don’t have a choice. But Barak didn’t really have the same situation as I do. For me, even though I would rather have someone help me, it is easier to do things alone than to go find someone who isn’t busy with their families. For Barak, even if Deborah hadn’t gone, he wouldn’t have been alone. He was leading 10,000 men into battle. Barak may have thought that he would get out of going because Deborah wouldn’t go. But she did go, and because she did, Barak lost the honor of being the one to kill Sisera.

Where is the faith of Barak? He stood on Mount Tabor and Sisera positioned his host and his 900 chariots. We don’t know how many foot soldiers Sisera was leading, but 900 chariots is a lot, when you consider that Judges 5:15 tells us that Barak was on foot. Think about that. Barak, on foot, led 10,000 men against an army with 900 iron chariots and likely, superior numbers of foot soldiers. Barak had some courage to face a situation in which the enemy had better technology and outnumbered Barak’s army. The thing that makes it faith is that Barak did it because the Lord told him he would succeed. Yes, it took some prompting, but Barak had some faith.

So, Barak should serve as our example and as a warning. Barak is our example in that he trusted the Lord and led the army according to the instructions the Lord gave him. He is a warning to us, because like Barak, when we rely on people to hold our hand or to goad us into doing what we know the Lord has told us to do, we won’t receive the complete blessing that the Lord intends for us to receive for completing the task. Someone else will receive the recognition. Someone else will receive the reward. If we want to receive what the Lord has in store for us, we had better honor our commitments and do what the Lord has asked us to do without the Lord having to send someone to remind us.

Sunday, October 19, 2014

Wolves in Sheep's Clothing

When you see one, you see several. And since I’m on a committee that is the first line of defense against creating a similar situation at our church, I’m paying even closer attention than I normally would. I find it both disturbing and bothersome as I think about what we need to do to prevent it from happening to us.

Two days ago, Travis Reed was convicted of fondling a boy. As if that isn’t disturbing enough, Travis Reed was one of the youth workers at his church. About a day earlier, Derek Hutter, a youth minister at another church was arrested on charges of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. I’ll leave it to the courts to decide whether he actually did it or not. (I actually find it just as disturbing that it is possible for a youth worker to be falsely accused.) But I think we can say that we’ve seen enough of these situations to realize that it is possible that he is guilty. What I really want to know is, how can we avoid hiring people like this?

There are some similarities between these two guys. They are both in their thirties. They are both married. They both have one child. In the Travis Reed trial, sixteen character witnesses testified on his behalf. I’m not sure if Derek Hutter will have the same level of support, but he has worked at a number of different churches. I mention these things because they give the appearance of the type of men people expect would make good youth ministers. In their thirties, so old enough to be an authority figure, but not so old that they can’t do things with the youth. Married, so they have no reason to look for sexual gratification elsewhere. Have a child, so their marriage must be a happy one. Well-liked by the people who know him.

But that’s only what we see on the outside. What we really need to consider is what was happening in secret. That’s difficult, because these are things that they may have been hiding from their spouses as well. One youth testified that Travis Reed had looked up his shorts during a mixed martial arts class at the church. I don’t know if anyone from the church was made aware of that when it happened, but that should have raised a red flag.

Derek Hutter appears to have had porn on his computer and he is also accused of online solicitation of a minor. It’s easier to do something with that than an accusation of looking up someone’s shorts. I remember making up some stuff when I was a kid because I knew it would get someone else in trouble. It was nothing of this nature, but kids don’t always tell the truth. We don’t want to ignore what they say, but there are some things that are hard to prove one way or the other. Ironically, things done in the virtual world are more tangible. People who are addicted to porn have trouble limiting when they look at it. If they are looking at it at home, they’re probably looking at it on their computers at church. If they are sending e-mails with their church funded e-mail accounts, they risk and administrator spotting what they’re doing.

While church should certainly try to avoid hiring someone who has a sexual interest in boys or who is addicted to porn, I think there are things churches can do to help prevent things from happening if someone makes it through the initial filter. An open door policy for all who work with youth and children is a good start, but there needs to be more. That open door needs to exist outside the church building as well and it should extend to electronic communication between the youth worker and the student. And when it comes to church assets, such as computers and e-mail accounts, there is value in allowing a trusted third party to have open access to this information.

Monday, September 29, 2014

“I am not ashamed…this is my body”

Without a doubt, this woman will become the lastest poster child for what is wrong with abortion. This woman won’t tell you why she believes abortion is wrong. Instead, she makes the claim, “I am not ashamed.” She demands, “don’t put murder on me.” And the basis of her argument, “this is my body.”


If you don’t watch this video and feel sorry for this woman, something is wrong with you. While I can’t agree with her choices or her argument, she gives us a clear view of a world that is wandering around in the darkness of sin. Jesus died for her, she just doesn’t know it.

The first thing I have to ask is, if she is not ashamed, why does she make such a big point of telling us that she isn’t ashamed. Clearly, she doesn’t want to be ashamed, but that doesn’t mean she isn’t. She doesn’t want this thing that she has done called murder. Somehow, the message has gotten through to her that she has killed a living human being. The government isn’t calling it murder, but she knows it to be so. And yet, she makes her argument. Perhaps this is to convince herself as much as it is to convince others.

“This is my body.” Isn’t that the claim of every sinner? This is mine. It isn’t yours. I get to decide, not you, and most certainly not God. How sad, and yet we all do it in one way or another. Do we not say, “This is my money,” or “This is my time,” or “This is my car?” What we ought to be saying is, “This is God’s money, I will invest it and spend it for his purposes.” We ought to be saying, “This is God’s time, I will use it to serve him.” We ought to be saying, “This is God’s body, it is his to do with as he pleases.”

While the woman in the video is wrong and every bit the murderer that she doesn’t want us to label her as being, she is not that much different from us. She, like us, needs someone to die for her sins. The blood of Jesus Christ is sufficient to cover her sins as well as it is ours. He calls for her to repent of her sins and put her trust in him for salvation, just as he called us to do the same. Jesus can change her life so that she can go from claiming that she is not ashamed to having nothing to be ashamed of.