Are we better at facing death than living life?

In my three short years as a pastor I have preached a couple dozen funerals. Almost all of them have been celebrations of the life of the deceased. I have been amazed at how well family members and loved ones have handled death. Each time grieving is a part of the process, but so often I have seen a confident hope on display that reminds me of Paul’s encouragement not to grieve like those who have no hope (1 Thess 4:13). In fact, I have often thought that we as Christians show a lot more faith and hope in God when facing death than we do in living life. Sometimes the same person who is scared to step out on faith in sharing the gospel will readily trust in God’s future resurrection of a loved one. So why is it that we easily trust God with our eternal destiny, but we are so hesitant to trust God with our daily lives?

In The Hole in Our Gospel Richard Stearns said, “This gospel– the whole gospel– means much more than the personal salvation of individuals. It means a social revolution.” In that context, he was claiming that too often we have presented salvation as personal fire insurance from hell, and rarely have we presented salvation as life transforming here on earth. If we are presenting a gospel mostly about personal salvation in the future, perhaps we should not be surprised that Christians are most faithful and filled with hope when facing death. And if we are not proclaiming that the gospel is about life transformation here on earth, perhaps we should not be surprised when we see people’s faith wavering when it comes to sharing their faith with someone else.

We as Christians love to blame others for the way the world is. Surely we couldn’t be to blame for immaturity in the church today. But if we are preaching and teaching a gospel that only saves us in the future, maybe we shouldn’t be surprised to find so little life change in the present.

Why I’m a Foster Parent (Part 1)

Recently Lisa and I became licensed foster parents through the Harrison County Department of Human Services. We have had four wonderful children living with us for the past 3 months. I thought I would share a few of the encounters in my life that led us down this path.

Sometime during my later high school years, my mom and dad invited a teenage boy to come and stay with us for a few weeks. His mother was in the hospital with a very serious illness (she passed away not long after), and he needed a place to stay. At the time this was not necessarily a positive experience for me. He and I were every different. He went to the school down the street from my school, a school known for being rough and rowdy. He and I never really connected, in part because I never tried.

My brother and I shared a room from the time he was born to the day I left for college. Two was company, and for those few weeks three was a crowd. Part of me resented another person being shoved into our lives in such an obtrusive fashion. Didn’t my parents consider my feelings and my conveniences before they invited someone else into our home?

As I recall how put out I felt, I think back to how he must have felt. I’m sure he wanted to be there far less than I could have imagined. His mother’s illness and his expulsion from home were certainly not part of his plan for that month. Yet all I could see was my puny side of the story. If I could talk to him today, I would apologize for not receiving him with open arms and a welcoming spirit, but the experience taught me to see the world through his eyes, through the eyes of a child forced to leave home under tragic circumstances.

I don’t remember his name. I don’t remember how long he stayed with us. I don’t remember what he was like. I don’t remember many of the details of the story. What I do remember is the lesson I learned. When a child is in desperate need of a place to stay, you invite them in.

All things to all people…

or a church for every kind of person? One of my biggest problems with the way churches are transitioning today is the movement toward niche churches. As pastor of a traditional church in a changing neighborhood, some say, “there are many groups of people your church will never be able to reach.” They say the solution for our church is to focus on reaching the people we are good at reaching. And the solution for reaching those other groups is to start new churches that are good at reaching “those” kinds of people.

This sounds well and good. We could end up with more churches and more people in church. How could that be bad. If our traditional style is keeping some people out of church, why not start a church with a style that suits them? Then we can all have our own church that “fits” us and allows us to be comfortable. Rich people won’t have to worry about greedy, poor people bothering them after church, and poor people won’t have to go to church with rich snobs looking down their noses at them. Old people won’t have to put up with loud, obnoxious music, and young people wouldn’t have to tolerate stuffy, lifeless songs from years gone by. Well-cultured people wouldn’t have to worry about rough-and-tumble bikers at church, and white people wouldn’t have to worry about black people or Hispanics (who probably aren’t legal anyway) at church. And what a wonderful world it would be (hoping the sarcasm comes through).

And conveniently Paul supports this view of church. Right? He became all things to all people so that by all means he might save some (1 Cor. 9:22). Doesn’t Paul support a niche-church movement? But I can’t past Galatians 2:11-14. When Peter refused to eat with Gentiles due to Jewish “peer pressure,” Paul “opposed him to his face.” Peter and those who followed his example were not “living consistently with the truth of the gospel.”

The issue for Paul was obedience to the Jewish law. Did a Gentile have to become a law-abiding Jew to live an obedient Christian life? Paul’s answer is no. Salvation and obedience to Christ come through faith, not through the Law. So, there is no Jew or Greek, no slave or free, no male or female, because we are all one in Christ (Gal. 3:27). In our day, there is no rich or poor, young or old, black or white, because we are all one in Christ.

So can God use a niche-church model for His glory? Sure. But shouldn’t our churches reflect the fullness of God’s kingdom? Or with so many things already dividing us (from denominations to race), do we now need to add lifestyle and preference to an already crowded list of differences? If we follow the niche-church model, we may gain church members, and hopefully members of the Kingdom, but if we are not careful, we will raise up immature Christians who will only grow as far as they are comfortable.

Getting Started

I’ve thought about starting a blog for a while. I’m nothing if not behind the times. My theory is if you are not on the cutting edge (think of my wardrobe), nobody will make fun of you for what you did 10 years ago that is now hopelessly out of date (think of the 80s). But it seems that this internet thing is gonna catch on, and I thought a blog might be a good place to get some personal interaction, even if in an impersonal way. Living the Christian life requires Christian community, and if we want to establish community today, we may need to use all of the resources at our disposal.

I know many pastors are using blogs to disciple and encourage others, so I decided to look at a few to get some ideas. What I found most interesting in my quick survey was that while many of my pastor friends have blogs, nobody reads them. At least judging by the comments, nobody was invested enough in what was said to offer their thoughts. Perhaps Facebook is already putting an end to the blog, but as anyone at GMBC on a Sunday morning can tell you, being brief is not always my gift.

So perhaps all of this will only be for me, my own little place to express myself or vent. Whatever the case, here we go…