Archive | January, 2011

Conservative Christians love their gifted leaders. We love inspirational sermons that make us think. We appreciate teachers who can deconstruct arguments and analyze trends. We love leaders who sacrifice. We flock to hear messages from those who have endured loss or lack for the sake of the ministry. And we LOVE great music—good bands, inspirational choirs, or talented worship teams.

But I’m not sure we really love what God loves.

1 Corinthians 13
 1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Paul’s words indict our Christian culture. And it indicts me personally. It indicts me when I am self satisfied by how I articulated an argument, when I applaud my abilities to discern a root issue when I see a spiritual conflict, or when I quietly congratulate myself for a sacrifice I made for the ministry. Paul indicts me, and he indicts our Christian culture that fawns over well spoken, articulate, winners of spiritual arguments. Paul makes it clear that giftedness is NOT enough. Musical talent—not enough. Gifted speaking ability—not enough. Prophetic discernment—N.O.T. E.N.O.U.G.H. Hear Paul clearly. When these giftings are not accompanied by love, it is NOTHING. You are nothing. You gain nothing. Paul’s words, not mine. Your efforts become only disruptive noise in the landscape of the kingdom of God. Just noise.

I lose sight of this so easily. Giftedness so often gets more attention than love, and it is probably the number one thing that undermines all ministries, including mine. A friend from another state brought this to my attention this week after an eloquent analysis of her struggles to figure out how to think about a ministry in which she was involved. The Spirit finally gave her clarity as she read this passage from I Corinthians. Yes, this ministry seems to be making an impact. Sure, leaders there are gifted speakers able to hold the attention of large crowds. The music reflects great talent and gifting. But they aren’t loving. Their ministry is not characterized by the I Corinthians definition of love.

When Paul says that if I don’t have love, then I am and have nothing in terms of accomplishments for Christ, he doesn’t leave us wondering exactly what he means. He then clearly spells out what he means when he uses the term love.

Love is patient. It has a long fuse and is not easily angered. Which implies something has happened in my relationship with the one I am called to love that tempts me to not be patient and to get angry. Something is wrong, uncomfortable, or aggravating. There is an irritant in the relationship. Yet I keep my temper and deal patiently with the one who is angering me.

Love does not envy. There is a situation in which someone got something I want. Or got something they don’t deserve. And I am tempted to despise them for it instead of rejoice with them.

Love is not rude. It doesn’t cut down others with sarcasm. It treats others with the inherent value God has placed on them as created in His image. This is a big one. If someone is gifted enough in how they speak, we often accept very rude behavior from them (until it’s aimed at us). But Paul says here that such rudeness undermines completely the value of their giftedness for the kingdom.

Love does not rejoice in evil. We don’t gloat over other’s mistakes. Love doesn’t keep a record of wrongs. Love is ever ready to extend the benefit of the doubt to someone.

Love, after all, is the greatest command. So it makes sense to me why it is such a deal breaker when we want to accomplish something for God’s kingdom by way of our giftedness. Hear Paul’s warning clearly. Wherever you see your giftings, it will come to nothing apart from sincere love—not token words but the real, deep love for another that causes you to lay down your sword, endure for the long haul in trying circumstances, ever ready to believe the best of the one to whom you are called to love. For gifted Christian leaders, this often means slowing down—in fact, slowing down is inherent to the meaning of patience. Sometimes, you have to slow down and endure for the long haul, which may seem counterintuitive to your vision of your mission. Yet apart from such love, Paul’s warning is sober—you gain nothing of kingdom value. Your efforts just become noise, distracting from mission rather than facilitating it. I recently got to watch a ministry go through this type of slowing down out of obedience to this command to love. It took a great deal of patience, and yet the kingdom results were beautiful to watch.

Now, I’m tempted to end this post there, yet everything in me says that I need to say much more. I know people who are there. I can’t leave you (or me) with only an analysis of the problem. So here is the good news of God’s answer.

When Paul says the most gifted of people ARE nothing without love, a knife goes into my heart. He’s stabbing at our identity and that is a very sensitive place. Yet, he’s exactly right. Your giftedness does not bring you sustainable identity. In terms of identity, you are nothing if you are resting on giftedness alone. But repentance is for such a moment as this. And it works! Repent. Find the sole source of your identity in who you are in Christ, which has nothing to do with your talents or giftings. When you know who you are as God’s adopted child alone, then you are free to face your sin. You were rude, you didn’t bear long in love, and you believed the worst instead of the best of the one to whom you were called to love, all for the “sake of the ministry.” The gospel is for such a moment as this, and it gives us great hope. Simply confess your sin.

And from there, be encouraged to know that love is not a work that you have to muster up in yourself. It is a FRUIT of the SPIRIT. Love in your life will be the overflow of your connectedness to God and understanding of HIS love. Connect to the root, grasp what His love looks like, and then watch it flow out of you as a fruit of this healthy connection you have with Him. Meditate first on God’s love for you, which is definitely most obvious when contrasted to what you and I deserved instead. And from understanding His love, you will be equipped to really love those in your life – not fake, poser love that is a happy smile when all is going well but fades into hopelessness or condemnation when things go south. I Corinthians 13 love is by definition for when things go south – when conflict comes, when all is not well, when you are provoked, when life is not easy, when annoying long term problems continue week after week, month after month. Love “always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.” And love IS possible, but only through our union with Him.

*I’ve linked to this sermon before, but here is a great message on the fruit of the Spirit, love, that has its origins in God Himself.

A story involving sexual child abuse that came to light last year opened the door to the underbelly of Christian fundamentalism in which I spent a number of years in my teens and twenties. The topic hasn’t been well addressed by fundamentalist leaders, and it’s a ticking time bomb for them in my humble opinion. Many have argued (correctly) that all brands of religion and even life in general are sullied by child abuse, but my firm conviction is that it’s the bomb in your own backyard that will most wound you and those around you and from which you have the best chance of rescuing people. So this post reflects my burden for friends that are still in Christian fundamentalism and are now in positions of leadership and influence.

I wasn’t personally abused during my years in Christian fundamentalism. In fact, it provided much needed structure at a time when I lacked self worth, self confidence, or any kind of personal security. What disturbs me deeply now is that I knew people who were abused (I was actually very good friends with a few), but both they and I somehow felt that whatever they got at the hands of the fundamentalist authorities in their life, no matter how unreasonable or harsh it seemed to us, must be OK. Why? Because the authorities around us who weren’t the abusers seemed OK with the ones who were. Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” I don’t really care to speak to abusers in this post. Instead, it is the SILENCE by others that I want to address.

To clarify, I’m not talking about general oppressiveness when I use the term abuse. I am talking about genuine physical and sexual abuse, especially of children. I didn’t have just one friend so abused, but several, four that are particularly on my mind as I write this. From different states. Beaten bloody and/or bruised by their parents. Sexually abused by parents or siblings or church leaders. And most disturbing of all, telling the appropriate Christian leaders in their lives about said abuse and either being put off and ignored or told that they shared the blame.

In particular, while working at a respectable fundamentalist Christian camp, I had a camper share with me (in repentance, trying to repair her reputation with me), that she didn’t mean to have sex with a guy. That she hadn’t dressed provocatively. In fact, she had had holes in her undergarments when their sexual encounter took place. Obviously, sex with him wasn’t on her mind when she got dressed that day. And she had even protested and said no. But at some point, because of her moral weakness, she gave in. At least, we both kind of accepted that view of it. And she was brought up for church discipline with the guy. She “repented” and was left with a reputation she worked hard to repair.

Now, with the maturity of an adult living in the real world, I think of that with a cold knot in my stomach. She was caught by surprise and embarrassed by the poor condition of her dress that day. She said NO. She was underage. This wasn’t sexual immorality. It was rape. But her sexual abuse from her past and the acceptance of it all as her fault by the authorities in her life (her fundamentalist parents, her Christian school, her pastor, camp counselors, and so forth) led her to truly believe it was her fault, as did I. She was CHURCH DISCIPLINED for it.

I say all that simply to establish that there is a problem, and that I’m not speaking from gossip or hearsay on the issue. Children were physically and sexually abused, and when they came forward, they were told it was their fault. Then they were the ones held accountable while the authorities in their lives who either did the abuse or allowed others to do it were not held accountable.

As I’ve written in other posts, authorities are ALWAYS the one held to the higher standard, the greater accountability. They are called to restrain their authority and use their power as a force for the abused and oppressed. Many leaders in Christian fundamentalism have not held authorities to the higher standard. In fact, the exact opposite seems the norm (and I deliberately chose the word “seems” because I do not know what conversations among fundamentalist leaders are going on in the background, and I am hopeful that genuine change on this issue is taking root privately).

In light of all this, I have been praying a very specific prayer—that leaders WITHIN fundamentalism will start leading publicly on this issue. I’m praying for a few of you by name, though I won’t name you here. I’m praying specifically that Christian fundamentalist leaders would do a few important things.

First, I pray that God will move leaders to clearly name sexual abuse as sin (and the disciplining of abuse victims as sin) and especially that they would clearly affirm that statutory rape is still rape. That should be obvious, and I’m disturbed that I even have to write it. Yet, apparently it’s not obvious to some. It needs to be stated clearly and boldly.

Second, I pray for leaders within the movement that would clearly teach the origin of sexual abuse as the heart of the abuser. There is an emphasis on women’s dress in Christian fundamentalism that teaches that men lust because women dress provocatively. The only problem is that some men are still lusting over girls in denim jumpers and turtlenecks. Lust is a heart issue. Period. This is not to say that a wise woman will have no restraints on how she dresses. Modesty is a very real concept in Scripture, though I have rarely heard it taught correctly in conservative circles. True modesty flows from a woman’s heart that is confident in her standing in Christ, the well loved daughter of the most trustworthy Father of all. She has nothing to prove with her dress, but I’ll write more on that another day. My point here is that to directly correlate hemlines and necklines with lust and sexual immorality is naive and unbiblical. Which is why 50 men can walk by the same attractive woman and have a variety of reactions in response. They likely all notice her (For Women Only has a good discussion on this topic) and even admire her. But for some it stops there. For others it becomes sin in their minds. And a smaller group won’t just think it but actually act out on it. What causes the difference in their responses? You could argue the difference was simply opportunity or accountability. But the Bible says the difference is our HEART. That’s why underdeveloped girls in denim jumpers get raped in the back seat of a car. It’s not how they were dressed but the heart of the perpetrator.   Fundamentalist leaders need to boldly take the emphasis off of women’s dress on the issue of sexual immorality.

Third, I pray that leaders would understand and teach how to minister real grace to the victim. I won’t go into details because, honestly, it takes a lot more training than I’ve had to get a good grip of how that looks. I will say that it begins with an honest affirmation of the truth of what the victim experienced and feels as a result. If you don’t know what else to say, at least teach your congregations to say a genuine “I’m so very sorry” to the victim followed by a sincere embracing of them.

Fourth, I pray that leaders would build a culture that gives potential abusers an avenue to get counsel and help BEFORE they act out on things. We attach so much shame to even having these thoughts, that we set up abusers for failure sometimes. Again, I’m getting past my education and experience, so I won’t say more on this except that it’s a need.

Fifth and maybe the most important of all, I pray for leaders who will teach the value of authentic REPENTANCE. There are many well known situations floating around that leaders seem more interested in deflecting, excusing, and generally talking their way out of than facing head on and eating it. Just REPENT. Just say, “Yes, under my watch, this specific thing did happen. It was wrong. And I did not protect the widow and orphan. I participated in injustice. And I am very sorry.” Then CHANGE. Do things differently. Repair what you can. You know what?! That very gospel we talked about so much in fundamentalism (at least in the schools, churches, and camps that I knew) empowers us to face our sin head on, to admit it, to lay it at the foot of the cross, and to walk away changed. It equips you and I to get up and go in a new direction without shame. Christ’s death frees us from the chains of our own sins. And His life applied to our account lets us walk forward in the truest righteousness of all–HIS!

In summary, simply REPENT, CHANGE, and REPAIR.

Oh, fundamentalist Christian leader, if you happen to be reading this, take up the call in Isaiah 1 that is echoed in James. Right wrongs. Correct injustice. Protect widows and orphans. Defuse the bomb in your own backyard before it blows up in your face. The true gospel really does equip us to do this!

If you are not familiar with the term eisigesis, here’s the wiki definition (poorly edited, by the way, yet it at least communicates the basic idea).

Eisigesis means reading into the (Biblical) text; which means that while reading the text, one would understand the text in accordance to his (or her) own presupposition and agendas. Eisigesis is widely used to prove a point rather to search for the truth. On the contrary to eisigesis, exigesis means reading out of the text. That means putting aside all presuppositions, agendas, and ideas, and looking for the truth of the matter, although it might be something we disagree with.

If anyone has a wiki account, that definition could use some serious editing. The idea behind the word eisigesis is best understood in contrast to Biblical exegesis, which is more clearly defined among theologians. Exegesis in the vernacular is letting Scripture set the agenda on how a verse or chapter is interpreted and applied. When a pastor exegetes Scripture, he sets aside his personal agenda as he studies Scripture. He looks at the context of a passage. What was the author talking about in the previous section? How do the previous verses inform the passage in question? Who was it written too? How does their background and culture inform what the author is saying to them? What do the actual Hebrew or Greek words mean? Does the author use those same words any where else in Scripture? Is this passage actually quoted anywhere else in Scripture. And so forth. It is reading OUT OF Scripture.

In contrast, eisigesis is projecting ONTO Scripture. Instead of Scripture speaking out to us, we speak into it. We inform how it is read. Our agendas apart from Scripture inform how we interpret and apply it. And it is a horrible yet common sin. It’s a perversion of Scripture. Scripture is God’s revelation of Himself TO us. We don’t get to project our reflections onto it. IT illuminates US. Not vice versa.

The problem with eisigesis is that when we emphasize things Scripture doesn’t, we minimize the focus on what Scripture really does say is important.

After hearing a few sermon series from Old Testament books that were classic examples of eisigesis, I recognize it easily now. But a negative side effect is that I also tense up now when my pastor wants to preach from any Old Testament passage. During a recent sermon from Jeremiah, I sat listening to my pastor trying to figure out why I trusted the applications he was making for today from Jeremiah 29. Why is it that I can hear instructions from 3000 or so years ago on seeking the welfare of some city in the middle east (and not David’s example of cutting off Philistine foreskins or Nehemiah’s scalping of his enemies) and embrace it for me today?

I have particular baggage on that question after hearing a sermon series from Nehemiah a few years ago that was about the worst example of eisigesis I’ve yet experienced. The preacher projected his life onto the story of Nehemiah and allowed his personal experiences rather than a gospel hermeneutic to decide how he applied it. The results were devastating. Years later, when my pastor announced he was going to preach through Exodus, I immediately tensed. But after going through a few Old Testament series taught through the lens of the gospel and life of Jesus, I have come to understand that the difference is really quite simple. Correct exegesis and application of Old Testament passages will never deny New Testament explanations or commands. When you have to deny New Testament instructions to make Old Testament analogies, you are in problem territory.

In the Nehemiah example, the preacher drew the conclusion that going postal on your spiritual opponent is Biblical because Nehemiah did. But that conclusion ignored the distinction between what Scripture DESCRIBES and PRESCRIBES. Scripture describes a lot of things that we aren’t to do, and sometimes it describes it without commentary. Though the guy in Judges cut up his concubine’s corpse and distributed it among the tribes, we know better than to suggest others do that today. Judges described what happened, and be very certain that everything that the Bible describes it does not also prescribe.

In reference to the description of Nehemiah’s harsh reaction to his opponents, it was a good day when I read what Scripture in 2 Timothy 2:24-26 actually prescribes when dealing with your opponent.

And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

Weird stories in the Old Testament are very relevant today. Some simply point to the character of our God. While most of us will never go through the same trials that Joseph did, our God is the same, and what others mean for evil, He uses for our good (Gen. 50:20). That’s His character. Some OT stories point to our need for King Jesus. For instance, the entire book of Judges, which is a compilation of depressing stories summed up with the phrase, “there was no king and everyone did what was right in their own eyes.” We need King Jesus. We need His life lived out before us because apart from His standard of righteousness, the things we come up with as righteous in our own eyes are woefully inadequate and often quite perverse. Then there are the abundance of stories that reveal little glimpses of what King Jesus will look like when He comes. The entire OT sacrificial system does this. The Psalms give us glimpses. Ruth’s story of the kinsman redeemer or Hosea’s pursuit of Gomar all do this as well.

The Bible is the best commentary on itself and the most helpful tool for avoiding personal eisigesis. Once we stop projecting onto the Old Testament, it has so much to project onto us. And it is beautiful and redemptive. I’m very thankful to the godly men (and women) who have pointed me to the cross from Genesis to Malachi.

Our pastor started a sermon series on I Corinthians today with the general theme of Threats to Mission. Today’s focus was how a cult of personality can be a threat to authentic mission. The answer was that, not only is salvation by grace, but mission too is by grace (not personality, or gifting, or vision). If you have 30 minutes and would like to hear a gospel centered message on living out our mission in our culture, this is a very helpful one. The text is I. Cor. 1:1-3, 10-17; 3:1-9.