The Art of Friendship

I believe that friendship is very important. That's obvious from the title of my sixth book, A Cord of Three which is of course from Ecclesiastes 4:7-12. While that passage doesn't mention 'friendship' directly, it's still obviously about friendship - "pity anyone who falls and has no one to help them up."
Unfortunately, I think contemporary Americans have lost the true meaning of friendship. Rugged individualism (the Marlboro man riding the range by himself), pulling yourself up by your bootstrap, even "man's best friend" (the dog) all indicate a self-reliance that shuns relationship and sees aloneness as somehow better than the interdependence of friendship.
On the other hand, comments like "She's the best friend anyone could ever have. She's always there for me" smack more of the other side of the coin - codependence, the need to have someone who needs you to validate you.
In A Cord of Three, as Ted and Shelly's friendship deepened, they realized that Ted would always need to withdraw sometimes to process what was happening. Shelly needed to learn to not accept feelings of rejection when he needed to do so, which would be easier if Ted told her he needed time to himself.
True friendship (which any romantic relationship needs if it wants to survive 'til death) realizes that differences are good and it not only allows the differences, but it embraces and encourages them. True friendship also sometimes scolds. In 2 Corinthians 7:8-13, the Apostle Paul tells us that sometimes we need to cause those we love to be sorrowful in a godly way. There is a godly sorrow that leads to repentance and salvation. In the end, there is no regret for the sorrow, either from the giver or receiver, because both draw closer to each other and to God through the sorrow.
Too often we're afraid to hurt someone's feelings, but sometimes feelings need to be hurt! Our friendships, whether they be familial, romantic or platonic, all need to be God-centered. We have to have healthy boundaries that allow us to say 'no,' and we have to receive 'no' without being hurt. We sometimes have to scold, sometimes encourage, sometimes walk away and let the fall happen, but never so far that our hand of friendship isn't there to assist in the recovery.
I challenge you to examine your friendships. Do you have honest ones? If not, why not? Are you willing to trust God enough to open yourself to the vulnerability of true friendship?

For country, church or God?

"Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country." President Kennedy said that fifty years ago in his inaugural address. It's a fine sentiment for individuals to live by. It is a dangerous sentiment for governments to live by.
Yes, as Americans we do need to ask what we can do for your country, not what our country can do for us. It's part of that life of service that we were created for. However, when a government asks what its people can do for it rather than what it can do for its people, the government begins to exist for its own sake rather than to provide a safe and orderly environment for the people to enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Then the government decides what it wants to accomplish with no concern for the people it will have to walk over to get the job done. When people get tired of such governments they rise up in rebellion or civil disobedience, forcing a change in the way things are done. Sometimes those changes are good, but sometimes they're bad.
Substitute "country" for "church" in Kennedy's quote, and you have the same basic scenario.
The contemporary church in America seems quite willing to tell its congregants to seek what they can do for the church, but wholly unwilling to ask what the church can do for the congregants. Churches tend to get focused on the big picture, bringing souls into the kingdom and achieving a God-given vision for the church. They forget the individual. Even in those churches who do disciple believers to grow to be more Christ-like, the tendency is to do it so that they will eventually serve in and/or lead a ministry within the church. Most churches are looking for how they can use their members' God-given gifts and talents, not how they can nurture their members to find their calling from the Lord. When they do talk about "calling," most churches do it in the context of their church, not in the context of God's will.
The Apostle Paul made it pretty clear that unless the church is first concerned about the individuals who make up their congregation, they cannot be serving the Lord at full capacity - "But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it." (1 Corinthians 12:24-26)
As church leaders, we must never allow ourselves to get so focused on the mission that we do not nurture the people who make up our congregation. It isn't easy to do that because it means building true relationships, getting to know people in a real way rather than looking at them and trying to figure out what ministry we can stick them in. Their calling from the Lord may give our church no direct benefit, but that doesn't mean we aren't responsible to nurture that calling anyway.
As congregants, we cannot forget that we are responsible not just for using our God-given gifts and talents for our church, but also for finding our God-given calling and serving him, not just our local church. Sure we need to be part of a church, but that church needs to be concerned about us, not just about its mission.
There comes a time when citizen or congregant has to ask not just what they can do in service, but if they are in turn being served. Your first loyalty is to God, not country and not church. If God has something for you to do for him and your church is only interested in what you can do for the church, it's time to reevaluate your membership. It's time to find a place where you can fulfill your calling, not just have your gifts and talents used by the church.
Share what you believe your God-given calling is with a ministry leader whom you already know. If they seem uninterested or talk a good game but never follow through, it is most definitely time to reevaluate where you belong. God's not calling you to open rebellion, but he might want to move you to another flock with a different under-shepherd who will serve you as you grow your calling, not just use your gifts and talents.
If God does call you to leave your church for more fruitful pastures, be sure you calmly explain to your pastor why you are leaving. If you can't do that, then you're not ready to leave yet! Stick around and grow some more. When you can share your concerns with the pastor, without being accusatory, then you'll know that you have grown!

glory to Glory

This morning when I was reading in 2 Corinthians 3, I found something that I'd never noticed before. Do you ever have those surprises? You know you've read that chapter before, but you have absolutely no recollection of ever reading that part.
Of course, you'll need to read the verses before to get where this started, but Paul was talking about how "the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory" (v.7) after he came down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments. This, Paul said, was "the ministry that brought death." Then he said "the ministry of the Spirit [is] even more glorious" (v.8). It is the "the ministry that brings righteousness!" (v.9)
Yes, the glory that Moses brought down from the mountain was great, but it was nothing compared to the glory that Jesus brought to us when he gave us the Spirit. The glory of the giving of the Law was only a temporary glory. The glory of the giving of the Spirit is permanent! It is much, much greater.
Moses shone with the light of the glory he received on the mountaintop. As far as I can tell from reading the Pentateuch, that glory never faded. He was still wearing the veil to tone down the glory when he was standing at the gates of the Promised Land. But that glory is less than what we get when the Spirit dwells in us!
I don't know about you, but too often I discover that I've put on a veil to hide the glory of the Spirit from myself. I get selfish and self-centered and I want things my way. I can't see the glory of the Spirit, much less show that glory to others around me.
But the Spirit is glorious! He comes to remove all the junk that's in me. He takes away the pain, bitterness, anger. He surrounds us with a love that will never go away. He is a life-giving well of joy that should be obvious to all around us.
But we have to learn to let him live in us without hiding from him before we can live without hiding him from others. It's not easy to open up those dark places and let him in, but until we do, his glory won't shine all the way through us, not because it can't but because he won't do it. He wants our willingness to submit to his healing touch.
Are you willing to submit to the healing touch of the Spirit so he can remove all the pain and junk from your life?

True Report Vs. Truth

One of the problems we have with interpreting the bible is that not every word written in it expresses the truth.
Wait! Hear me out before you get all huhu!
There is a difference between the truth and a true report. A true report reports things that actually happened; the truth is what God has done, spoken, he's immutable laws. So, if I say that my son said he did his homework, I am reporting an event that actually happened. That does not mean that he did indeed do his homework. He very well may not have (and probably didn't knowing my son).
The specific thing that prompted this particular musing today was 1 Corinthians 15:29 - "Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?" Is that truth - we should baptize for the dead - or a true report of things that were actually happening in Corinth - people were getting baptized for the dead?
The immediate context tells us that Paul is arguing for the resurrection. Apparently some of the Corinthian Christians doubted the resurrection. The above statement falls in a logical argument for the resurrection. It points out an illogical action - why ever would you baptize for the dead if you don't believe in the resurrection? Paul doesn't say they are right to do it; he says they are illogical when they do it. That's a big difference!
When you find something that raises your eyebrows like this, you have to read the entire context, get a feel for the whole passage, see how it fits in with the passages around it. How does it advance the theme of the book?
The other thing to do is look for other passages that bolster that idea. If there are none (or maybe one or two that might support it), you have to put that idea in the category of a true report but not a truth that needs to be the basis of a doctrine. If there is an abundance of other passages that refute that idea, then you need to firmly put that verse back in its context and never, ever ever read it by itself!

Itching ears

In 2 Timothy 4:1-5, the Apostle Paul warned that the time would come when people would "not put up with sound doctrine" but would "gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear." He said they would "turn aside to myths," so Timothy had to "Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction" and "keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry."
Without being specific about why, I feel the need to say that too many Christians are falling into the "itching ears" trap because too many teachers aren't willing to endure the hardship that comes when we "correct, rebuke and encourage."
Today there's a lot of pop theology being preached as if it was gospel truth, but it isn't. Pop theology holds at its center a very valuable kernel of truth, but it goes way beyond what the bible says. It loosely interprets the bible or even totally ignores any interpretation at all and makes up a meaning. Pop theology is unconcerned about correct biblical interpretation and instead seeks to tell people what they want to hear, what makes them feel good about themselves, their church, their culture, their country. It's not necessarily a bad thing to feel good about any of those things, but when you're doing it based upon a false premise, is there true value in the feelings?
As a bible teacher, I want to correct pop theology. Sometimes it makes me hiss like a Navi! The problem is in knowing when I make a direct frontal attack and when I simply patiently show people how to correctly interpret the bible and pray that they find the truth on their own.
One thing I know for sure is that if someone asks me a question, I'm going to answer it to the best of my ability. So, if you have doubts about something you've heard, you can always ask. I'll be more than happy to explore what the bible actually says.
In the meantime, I'll just keep my hisses to myself unless God pokes me too hard!

An Enlightening Conversation

I met a couple of very nice ladies yesterday. They came to my door and wanted to enlighten me about Heavenly Mother. It was an interesting conversation but the highlights were that one of the ladies challenged me to show her just one verse in the Old Testament where the Israelites were called the "children of God." I'm not sure what her purpose was because she was rather surprised when I got out my concordance and found Deuteronomy 14:1 for her. Obviously I shot down whatever the "proof" was that she was going to give me because she changed the subject.
I decided to return the favor, so I asked her to show me just one verse anywhere in the bible where it said we have a "heavenly mother." She said she'd given me the proofs; I told her that she'd taken a few passages out of context.
That's when she realized that I knew a little too much about the bible to be interested in learning about Heavenly Mother, so she told me that Jesus had already returned. I disagreed and offered to look at the prophecies about the Second Coming to show her why that wasn't possible. She got a smug smile and told me that I would see.
In the course of the conversation, she also told me that she has no questions about the bible anymore because Heavenly Mother has revealed all to her. She never questions the leaders of her church because if they're wrong, Heavenly Mother will correct them. She told me Heavenly Mother has to be right because over a million people belong to her church.
I asked her and her friend if they were willing to put their beliefs to the test. She said she had no need to. I said I wasn't afraid to test my beliefs and if she or her friend wanted to come back and explore the bible with me to see who's beliefs hold up, I'd be willing to study with them.
I wonder if either of those ladies will ever question what they've been taught. I wonder if they're willing to have their faith challenged. I know I am. I hope you are. We can never ever blindly accept what the leaders of our church say, the bible is very clear on that. We must examine everything they say, hold it up against the light of the bible and see if it shines true.
It is my earnest desire that every Christian would learn how to study the bible properly and for themselves (though not by themselves).
Do you study the bible properly? Do you know how? Are you willing to learn?

On Trees and Reality

Have you ever heard that philosophical question "If a tree falls in the forest and there's no one to hear it, does it make a sound?"
I remember that the first time I heard that question, I thought it was ridiculous. I was only in junior high school, but I still knew that sound doesn't require a hearer to be sound. Sound is created by waves in the air. Even if no one hears it, it's still a sound. The tree hits the ground, so of course it makes a sound.
When I learned about scientific experiments, I realized the philosophical "value" of the question rested in the fact that there is no way to objectively verify that the tree does indeed make a sound if no one is around to hear it. Even a recording device that will be retrieved later gives the tree a hearer.
That' s not to say that maybe a tree doesn't make a noise if no one can hear it. That just says that we can't objectively verify the truth.
Now, I could go into a rant about how so many things, like God and angels, can't be objectively verified even though they are true, but I'm not going to do that. It would be too obvious. Instead, I'm going to point out how that question illustrates the arrogance of mankind.
As if we are what defines reality!
The truth is that life goes on for other people and animals once you leave the room. Your friends don't go into animate suspension when you're gone only to come to life again in your life-giving presence. Trees do make sounds when they fall in the forest and you aren't there to hear them.
Neither you nor I are the ones who hold the universe together. God is. He's the one who hears every tree that falls, sees every tear that drops and knows every thought that is not uttered. He defines reality, yours, mine and the tree's.
So, if you ever hear some philosophical wiseguy pose that question, just smile and tell him. "It's impossible for a tree to fall with no one to hear it because God hears everything!"