Peace On Earth And Good Will Toward Knuckleheads

Just today, I read an interesting and well-meaning article titled, "5 Ways to Keep Peace During Family Gatherings." It's well-meaning because it comes at a time when families are gathering for the Christmas holidays.  It's interesing because it actually contains some helpful information.  Few of us realize the stress of family gatherings during holidays.  The shopping, cleaning house, preparing for company, cooking, decorating, and everything else that goes into the lead up to Christmas can wear on a person.  A lot of people fret terribly over whether they bought the right present, have the house in order, where everybody is going to sleep, and. . . oh, yes, what are we going to do with the inevitable knucklehead that spoils the peace and joy of it all?

I'll list the author's five points so you will know how she provides help, but I would encourage you to read it for yourself.  Here we go:

• Check the emotional baggage
• Find a neutral zone
• Set boundaries, but stay flexible
• Fun is the ultimate buffer
• Recognize the family culture and build on it

In article, author Sandra Rodriguez Barron observes, "In truth, tensions among family members are often exacerbated by ongoing disputes, rivalry, conflicting expectations for the holiday, disputes over lifestyle, new marriages, divorce or just plain bad manners."  She's on target.  These stressor, and more, can turn a joyous family gathering into a war zone.

As much as I think the article is helpful, I'm going to offer you a "one step" solution.  It's not as visually appealing as Barron's list of five.  It's hard to make bullet points out of a single suggestion.  But here goes:  Don't cause trouble.  That's it.  I know, not so very astounding is it?  I would suggest, though, that it's amazingly effective.

Here's the Bible verse on which I'm basing my one step peace insurance policy: Romans 12:18 (NAS) — If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.

The Apostle Paul doesn't always give us leaway as he seems to do here.  This statement begins, "If possible."  Perhaps he's just being kind.  Of course it's possible!  Otherwise, why even say it.  The problem is that we often think it's not possible because all the turmoil is created by others.  Maybe so.  I've certainly known people, even some family members, who seemed to delight in twisting knots in everyone else's tail.  I think Paul was not giving us an out, he was hoping we'd at least think about what he said.

What did he actually say?  ". . . as far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men."  Thus my, "Don't cause trouble."  My suggestion is merely the negative of Paul's more positive statement.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if every family gathering this Christmas was attended by people who were all, to a person, determined not to cause trouble for anybody?"  That elusive peace and joy finally might settle on families whose holiday season often turns sour and hostile.

So, there you are.  As you head off to Grandma's, or go to see the spouse's kin, or experience one of those multi-blended gatherings that is hard to define, go and don't cause trouble.  Instead, practice all the social arts and graces.  Be kind and considerate.  Speak gently and with compassion.  Try to understand.  Be tolerant.  Smile.  Be agreeable.  Be likeable.  I know, I know.  I said I had just one suggestion.  I do.  But isn't it true that to accomplish the one thing I suggested, "Don't cause trouble," you're going to have to make postive efforts (plural is correct).

Stop right there.  Eliminate those negative thoughts and give it a try this year.  Who knows, if it works, you just might have a good time instead of a bad one.  Wouldn't that be nice?

Peace On Earth And Goodwill Toward Knuckleheads

Just today, I read an interesting and well-meaning article titled, "5 Ways to Keep Peace During Family Gatherings." It's well-meaning because it comes at a time when families are gathering for the Christmas holidays.  It's interesing because it actually contains some helpful information.  Few of us realize the stress of family gatherings during holidays.  The shopping, cleaning house, preparing for company, cooking, decorating, and everything else that goes into the lead up to Christmas can wear on a person.  A lot of people fret terribly over whether they bought the right present, have the house in order, where everybody is going to sleep, and. . . oh, yes, what are we going to do with the inevitable knucklehead that spoils the peace and joy of it all?

I'll list the author's five points so you will know how she provides help, but I would encourage you to read it for yourself.  Here we go:

• Check the emotional baggage
• Find a neutral zone
• Set boundaries, but stay flexible
• Fun is the ultimate buffer
• Recognize the family culture and build on it

In article, author Sandra Rodriguez Barron observes, "In truth, tensions among family members are often exacerbated by ongoing disputes, rivalry, conflicting expectations for the holiday, disputes over lifestyle, new marriages, divorce or just plain bad manners."  She's on target.  These stressor, and more, can turn a joyous family gathering into a war zone.

As much as I think the article is helpful, I'm going to offer you a "one step" solution.  It's not as visually appealing as Barron's list of five.  It's hard to make bullet points out of a single suggestion.  But here goes:  Don't cause trouble.  That's it.  I know, not so very astounding is it?  I would suggest, though, that it's amazingly effective.

Here's the Bible verse on which I'm basing my one step peace insurance policy: Romans 12:18 (NAS) — If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men.

The Apostle Paul doesn't always give us leaway as he seems to do here.  This statement begins, "If possible."  Perhaps he's just being kind.  Of course it's possible!  Otherwise, why even say it.  The problem is that we often think it's not possible because all the turmoil is created by others.  Maybe so.  I've certainly known people, even some family members, who seemed to delight in twisting knots in everyone else's tail.  I think Paul was not giving us an out, he was hoping we'd at least think about what he said.

What did he actually say?  ". . . as far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men."  Thus my, "Don't cause trouble."  My suggestion is merely the negative of Paul's more positive statement.  Wouldn't it be wonderful if every family gathering this Christmas was attended by people who were all, to a person, determined not to cause trouble for anybody?"  That elusive peace and joy finally might settle on families whose holiday season often turns sour and hostile.

So, there you are.  As you head off to Grandma's, or going to see the spouse's kin, or experiencing one of those multi-blended gatherings that is hard to define, go and don't cause trouble.  Instead, practice all the social arts and graces.  Be kind and considerate.  Speak gently and with compassion.  Try to understand.  Be tolerant.  Smile.  Be agreeable.  Be likeable.  I know, I know.  I said I had just one suggestion.  I do.  But isn't it true that to accomplish the one thing I suggested, "Don't cause trouble," you're going to have to make postive efforts (plural is correct).

Stop right there.  Eliminate those negative thoughts and give it a try this year.  Who knows, if it works, you just might have a good time instead of a bad one.  Wouldn't that be nice?

Your "Unalienable Rights"

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. -- The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776

Recently, I received a pocket-sized copy of The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United States. It’s surprising in several ways. One is its size. The actual text of both documents takes up about 40 pages of a little booklet that easily fits into a shirt pocket (with room to spare!), and only about 1/8 inch thick. The type size is very readable. I don’t know for sure, but it’s probably 10 point Times New Roman. You’d think such important documents would require a larger booklet. Then again, perhaps one reason they are both historically significant is their brevity and clarity.

I constantly find myself struggling to find a political identity, but it keeps eluding me. I like much about conservatives, but they sometimes drive me up the wall and I opt for a decidedly liberal point of view. About the time I think I must be a liberal, I get fed up with what appears to be sheer ignorance, and I’m back on the side of conservatives. That lasts until I can’t take some ridiculous conservative point of view. I suspect a lot of Americans are like this. It’s probably one reason that the polls keep showing us as a rather middle-of-the-road people. We’re all just bouncing back across the net from one side to the other.

Over the years, I’ve engaged in discussions with people who claimed to be on one side or the other. I find a lot to agree with. I also find a lot to disagree with. If instead of Republicans, or Democrats (or Libertarians, or Tea Parties, or Socialists, or Communists, etc.), someone would start a “Middle-of-the-Road” party, maybe I’d join it. Then again, that would have to be some dull party. Either that, or it would perpetually be under fire for having to swing from one side of the road to the other.

My point here was not to get off on a tangent about politics, so I apologize for weaving. What I wanted to focus on was a simple, but important little concept contained in the Declaration of Independence.

The signers all agreed with the language of the document. They agreed that some truths were self-evident. I suppose such a statement has always been considered as less than agreeable. Some would likely suggest that nothing is self-evident, and others would at least question the things the signers thought self-evident. Still, we must consider their words. What is it they though self-evident? Two things are identified because they were pertinent to the document, but they were obviously not the only two things considered to be self-evident. Those two things are: 1) that all men are created equal, and 2) that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness are particular concerns of the document, but not necessarily the only unalienable rights existent.

Of course the concept of the equality of all men has likely become something today that it was not entirely at the time the Declaration was written. That’s not a bad thing, it’s just that we’ve had time, opportunity and reason to think it out and see its implications. That the signers of the document may or may not have held the same view of that statement that most hold today is not important. The point is that their statement was correct in its essential point. All men are equal.

It is the next phrase that got my attention anew. all men are not only created equal, but they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. I suggest that we might rush too quickly to a consideration of those Rights, without first acknowledging the basis for the Rights. Rights, according to the signers of the Declaration of Independence, are endowed upon men by their Creator. Rights do not exist apart from a Creator. In fact, Rights are a human concern because they have been endowed upon men (and women!). This is a major consideration.

We are able to express ourselves in words like the Declaration of Independence because there is a Creator, and because the Creator has endowed us with certain unalienable Rights. Take away the Creator, and you take away the basis for the Rights. Take away the basis for the Rights and you may as well end all discussion of Rights. The reason we have such Rights is that they are endowed by the Creator. We do not have these Rights because we fought for them, therefore they are ours to possess. We do not have them because it is philosophically desirable to possess them. We do not have them because of political superiority. They are not ours because successful diplomacy secured them. We did not purchase them. We certainly didn’t create them. No, the unalienable Rights, according to the framers of the Declaration of Independence, are ours because they were endowed by the Creator.

Life, then, is a Right endowed by the Creator. Liberty, is a Right endowed by the Creator. The pursuit (not the possession) of Happiness is a Right endowed by the Creator. Remove the Creator from any or all of these unalienable Rights, and you remove the Rights themselves. Outside of the existence of a Creator, the signers of the Declaration envisioned no source of such Rights.

This remains important today. We still depend on the Creator to endow us with these unalienable Rights. Such Rights do not come from the government. They are not bestowed upon us by any political leader. Rights do not come from military power. Rights are not the product of economy, education, political party or even religious organization. Rights do not rest in the hands of any single person, or in the collective hands of any group of persons. To use another word for Creator, the Rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence come from God.

If all this is true, then any minimizing of God (Creator) necessarily minimizes the unalienable Rights recognized in the Declaration. Be wary of those who, on one hand, argue for Rights, but on the other hand, minimize or dismiss God. If the Creator is ever cut from the picture, the rest is bound to fall. A Right endowed by God is one thing. A Right endowed by a government, a political party, a military, or any other human source, is a right tottering on feeble legs. Understand the source and basis for your unalienable Rights before you get too excited about your Rights.

Making A Better Impression On Unbelievers

I sometimes read articles and only later realize that I read something of great interest, or something catchy, or some unique perspective.  The problem is that it's often hours or even days after I read the article, and I can't remember who wrote it, or where I found it.  I usually can't quote it verbatim, but there's enough of the gist of it to make me wish I was better at writing down what I was reading, or copying bibliographical information into one my several computer resources created just for that task.  It's frustrating, but I've been doing it for a long time now.  I'm explaining all this simply because this morning one of those blurbs ran through my head and I thought, "Wow, I wish I could remember who wrote that, and exactly what the author said."  You will forgive me if I have to "wing it" just a bit.  The thought is no less significant.

The basic idea dealt with the perception held by non-Christians of those who are Christians.  Somebody did a kind of personal survey or poll.  The question was something like, "What is your opinion of people who claim to be Christians?"  Among the more frequent responses was this (in one form or another):  "They are people who are always telling you that you're wrong about something and trying to correct you."

Now from a Christian's point-of-view, we might think, "Well, that's because the problem with the world is sin, and we're just trying to help people understand what the problem is between themselves and God."  Notice I said, "from a Christian's point-of-view."

But what if we were on the other end of the discussion?  Would we think the Christian's point-of-view is good or positive, or would it turn us off?  As much as I hate to admit it, I think it would be a turn off.  I say that out of my own personal experience, and the experiences of many others who have shared similar thoughts with me.  Here's what I mean.

Most of us have had one religious group or another, sometimes those we might identify as a cult, knock on our door.  Uniformly, all the people I know have responded negatively to such efforts, mainly because the person at the door has always had a message that said (in one way or another), "You are wrong about something, and we're right, so we're here to tell you how to get right."  I know that's a terrible paraphrase, but it's not all that far off.  Do you see what's happening in that little scenario?  In this case, you're the person being told you're wrong about something, at least from the other fellow's perspective.  And we don't like it.

So why would other people like it when we're the one with the, "You're-wrong-and-I'm-right," message?  Yes, we might come across a few people who will listen to what we have to say and eventually agree with us.  But overall, this looms as one of the huge negatives in how outsiders view Christians.  They see us as judgmental spiritual snobs.  I know this disturbs us, and we don't like it, and we resist admitting that any of this is true.  You'll continue to struggle with it unless you understand and accept that I'm referring to the non-Christian's point-of-view, not ours.

Someone is likely to say, "Well, we're right when we tell people they have a sin problem and they need to change their lives in order to please God."  I understand.  But did you understand that I wasn't saying your view is wrong, I said it's not a view that goes over well with outsiders.  I'm talking about how the message is received, not the validity of the message itself.

I believe strongly that the good news message of Jesus Christ is only good in the face of the bad news about sin.  I believe that for anyone to understand the gospel, to understand their problem with God, and to appreciate their need for a Savior then they will have to deal with some things they'd rather not think about.  I even agree that it's our job to somehow penetrate the unbelief and resistance of unbelievers in order to get the good news through to them.  The question is not what we must do but how we should do it.

I'll be the first to admit that I don't have all the answers.  I have far more questions than answers.  But I do think that we've got to do something to alter the negative perspective that non-Christians have of us (as a group).  They need to see more in us than a negative, fault-finding, judgmental, critic.  That view of us is a turn off, and it creates a situation in which it is nigh on to impossible to get the message of Jesus through.

A handful of positives could help tremendously.  Not a one of them is anything new.  Instead, they are thoroughly biblical Christian principles.  We ought to ask ourselves why, if we were actually practicing these things, outsiders do not form their view of us based on these instead of concluding that we're judgmental critics.  These few truly spiritual behaviors could do wonders to change how people see us.

1.  We could do a better job loving one another.  Jesus taught his disciples to love one another, as He loved them.  He went further.  He said that others would know we're his disciples if we have love for one another (Jn. 13:34-35).  The church has known this for 2,000 years but love is still a difficult thing to practice.  Years ago, somebody observed that the church was the only organization that shot it's wounded.  It may not be the only one, but that we shoot our wounded is often too true.  We keep talking about unconditional love, but frankly, that's more rare than a raw steak.  Outsiders see this.  But if we don't do a good job of loving one another, what makes us think we're doing any better at loving those outsiders?  They don't always see a lot of love, and whether we like it or not, people know whether they are being loved.  I certainly do, and so do you.  I can take a lot from people when I know they love me, really love me.  What might otherwise sound negative and judgmental is tempered, softened, and yet no less meaningful when it is delivered in love.  You can change the perspective of people on the receiving end of our message by loving them.  One thing that says is that it might take a little time and shared life together so we can establish a loving relationship.  Prove your love to people, then see if their view of you is more positive than negative.

2.  We could quit pointing our fingers at others like they're the only one with a problem.  Want to know what's true?  We all have a sin problem.  The other guy is not the only one with an issue between himself and God.  One reason a lot of self-help groups are effective is that the whole effort is based on one person with a problem helping another person with a problem.  Perhaps we need to start off our introductions with something like, "Hi, my name is Bill and I'm a sinner. . . ."  It would surely be true, and it might encourage some other sinner to consider listening to what we have to say.  But too many Christians go through life seemingly trying to convince everybody they don't have any sins, and if they did, they were very small ones, and they were present only in the distant past somewhere.  They work hard to leave the impression that don't struggle with the things so common in the lives of unbelievers.  What a pity.  The Bible says that if we say we have no sin then we're just deceiving ourselves and truth has taken a hike (1 Jn. 1:8).  How much better it would be for sinners to know that there really is an answer for sin.  You won't convince them of that if they think you don't relate to their problems or struggle with the things they struggle with.  We would do outsiders a great favor by presenting ourselves as redeemed sinners who know all-to-well the wrongs in their lives.  It would be an encouragement to people with no answer for sin, if they could see in us, not some unstained saint, but one who was as stained as they are, but now cleaned up and made whole.  And even then, to be able to admit to the continuing struggle with temptation and sin, and to know the continuing forgiveness of Jesus is exactly what outsiders need to know because most of them are afraid they'll never be perfect, so why try.

3.  We would do unbelievers a favor if we could manage to magnify Jesus and minimize the church (Gal. 6:14).  Don't misunderstand.  I think the church is very important, but only because it is made up of redeemed sinners following Jesus.  The church is not the Savior, Jesus is.  The church can help and encourage people, but it's not the source of inner strength and faith.  The church can teach, admonish, counsel, correct - lots of things.  But only the blood of Jesus forgives sins, and only Jesus mediates between us and the Father.  Jesus is our great high priest, and it is He who continues to represent us in heaven before God.  Outsiders don't want to know how great you and I are.  They want to know if there is a great God.  We don't need to convince them that we're the best thing since sliced bread.  We need to convince them that we know the One who is truly great, truly good, with the power to help us.  We talk about us too much and we talk about Jesus too little.

Right now there's this question rolling around: "So, you think this is all there is to creating a more positive view of Christians among unbelievers?"  I do.  That's not to say there isn't more we could do, or that you couldn't extend this list by several numbers.  There is, and you could.  But these are three huge things:  Love one another; quit pointing our fingers at others; and magnify Jesus instead of the church.  All three are pointedly biblical.  They are the kind of things that make us what we ought to be as Christians.  If we were more what we ought to be, perhaps the view that others have of us would improve.  After all, their view is based on what they see in us.  If we don't like it, give them something else to look at.

Forgive. . . or Else!

Forgive. It's a biblical teaching that is absolutely clear. Read these verses:

12 'And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. 13 'And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.]' 14 "For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 "But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions. (Matthew 6:12–15, NASB95)

21 Then Peter came and said to Him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?" 22 Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven. (Matthew 18:21–22, NASB95)

32 "Then summoning him, his lord said to him, 'You wicked slave, I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 'Should you not also have had mercy on your fellow slave, in the same way that I had mercy on you?' 34 "And his lord, moved with anger, handed him over to the torturers until he should repay all that was owed him. 35 "My heavenly Father will also do the same to you, if each of you does not forgive his brother from your heart." (Matthew 18:32–35, NASB95)

If those were the only verses about forgiveness, it would still be quite clear that God intends that we forgive people who sin against us. There are three questions about forgiveness that deserve consideration. They certainly aren't the only questions, but they are three that touch on the major issues we must work through to succeed at forgiving.

The first question goes something like this: "Since only God can actually forgive sins, is it really our responsibility to forgive anyone?" There is a sense in which only God can forgive sins. Taken this way, it really doesn't matter what you or I do with the sins of other people. If I choose to forgive or not to forgive, what matters is whether God forgives. It wouldn't matter whether or not we forgive at all, except for the fact that the Bible teaches that we should forgive. That alone settles this question. That we are to forgive may puzzle or confuse you as to the reasons or other questions, but scripture is clear that we are to forgive.

The second question reflects variations on Peter's question about forgiveness. "How many times must I forgive someone?" That simplified answer is easy enough. Take however many times you think would be gracious plenty and multiply it by seventy. Even then, most scholars would probably say the point isn't the specific number of opportunities taken to offer forgiveness to a person, but that however often forgiveness is needed, that's how many times forgiveness is to be given. But I said "variations" on Peter's question because other questions about forgiveness are related to this one. For example, there is the question about the nature of the sin and the extent of forgiveness. Here's what I mean. "Isn't that sin so bad, it's just hard to forgive?" It's a variation on the 'how many times' question. There may be other ways to ask this question, but the basic idea is that a particular person, because of the nature of their sins, somehow has gone beyond forgiveness. This is particularly true if the sin has affected us seriously, or if it's one of those sins that we dislike very much.

The third question begs a difference between our sins and the sins of others. This is reflected in the story Jesus told about the two servants. The first owed a debt to his master that he would never be able to repay, yet the master forgave his debt. That servant was owed a much smaller sum by another servant, but the forgiven servant was unwilling to forgive his fellow slave. Instead he demanded that this fellow pay up. Because of his unwillingness to forgive as he had been forgiven, the master ultimately withdrew his forgiveness.

Possibly, this third problem is the greatest of all. Not that either of the first two are minor in any respect, but the idea of comparing one's own sins to the sins of others is a huge problem. Each of us wants to view our own sins as minor, but the sins of others are enormous. It's the way we tend to look at things. I've offered this idea on several occasions and often it has been met with skepticism. It seems that people would rather deny that it's true. Even if they accept the basic idea, they prefer to think that other people may have this problem, but not them. I would humbly suggest that we think hard on this one, and be willing to accept something we don't want to admit.

We struggle with each of the three questions. We all would like to think it doesn't matter whether we forgive or not. After all, God will take care of all the forgiving that's needed. Well, except for the fact that God himself teaches us that's not true. He expects us to forgive. Yes, God's forgiveness will ultimately matter far more, but it doesn't mean our forgiveness is without purpose.

We also struggle with variations on the theme of 'how many times must I forgive.' After all, some people just don't seem to deserve it, or have exceeded any reasonable expectation of being forgiven, or they've stressed us to the breaking point and we feel we don't have any forgiveness left. Whenever we reach that point, remember to multiply your forgiveness efforts. That is what Jesus expected.

We also struggle with thinking that our sins are minor and other's sins are major. Because of that, we struggle to offer to them the forgiveness they need. We don't seem to recognize the nature of sin. We love to categorize sins into big ones and little ones. Read passages where sins are listed and quite often you'll see some that we consider minor right beside others we consider awful. Division into big sins and little sins is an artificial thing.

I can illustrate from the Ten Commandments. One of the commands was to remember the Sabbath Day and keep it holy. Two others are do not murder and do not commit adultery. Those last two are huge. The first doesn't seem nearly as bad. Failing to observe the Sabbath Day and keep it holy was on par with murder. Listen to James' observation on violating the Law:

10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. 11 For He who said, "DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY," also said, "DO NOT COMMIT MURDER." Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. (James 2:10–11, NASB95)

All I did was use one of the other of the ten commands. The point being simply that each sinner ought to consider the serious nature of their sins. We all need forgiveness. We cannot excuse ourselves as less needy, when our sins result in the same need of forgiveness. If God is willing to forgive us, why are we so unwilling to forgive others? Is it because our sin is less offensive than theirs?

Here's the bottom line on forgiveness according to the Bible: either we forgive or we will not be forgiven. Stated another way, It's forgive, or else! Perhaps forgiving is more important than we think.

Community Of Sinners

I wrote a CrossTies article that will appear in our upcoming Sunday bulletin, and then published to the CrossTies mailing list .  In it I used a quote from Eugene Peterson.  I want to reuse that quote here and write in a slightly different direction.  I think he has identified a major issue for today's church.

The biblical fact is that there are no successful churches. There are, instead, communities of sinners, gathered before God week after week in towns and villages all over the world. The Holy Spirit gathers them and does his work in them. In these communities of sinners, one of the sinners is called "pastor" and given a designated responsibility ... to keep the community attentive to God.  –  Eugene H. Peterson, Leadership, Vol. 9, no. 4

I think we know that Peterson is correct when he calls churches, "communities of sinners."  But I'm not sure we practice this community of sinners thing nearly like we should.  Instead, it appears that many Christians work overtime to deny the truth that we are redeemed sinners, and that we are people who still struggle with sin.  At the very best, a church, any church, is a group of sinners seeking help.  We're lost, condemned people looking for salvation.  We're wrong-doers who have hurt ourselves and others.  We're the ones who violated God's will, and any guilt or consequence God sends our way is just and right.  Despite the common attitude that prevails among people today, we're really not victims, we're perpetrators.

The problem?  Many "good Christians" sit in the church assemblies on Sunday, dressed in their finest, and acting as if they are above it all.  "Sin?  Oh, yes, well that's something we might have done at one point in our lives, but even then it wasn't really that bad."  They seem to work hard to leave the impression that they have left it all behind, small and insignificant as it was.  I have known people who openly, verbally, claimed to have no sin.  They firmly believed that they no longer did anything wrong.  While making that claim, they could be some of the most unloving, hard-hearted people you'd ever want to meet, but don't bother telling them.

Could this be the problem when churches become overly concerned with the "kind" of people we want to be members of our congregations?  I've heard the comments made.  "Well, we just don't want 'those' people in our church."  Sometimes that was said because "those" people were of a different race, but just as frequently it was said because "those" people were of a different class, or lifestyle, or some other distinction that involved the way they lived.  In other words, there was something deemed "sinful" about "those" people that made them undesirable.

Here's what I know about the church.  The church is made up of saved people.  It's impossible to be a part of the church Jesus died for, unless one has been saved from their sins.  Oh, you can attend services, and maybe even get your name on a roll somewhere, but I'm talking about real membership.  Only sinners can be saved, and only the saved make up the church.  Of course, scripture makes it clear that all of us fit into the category of sinner, and so we're all eligible for membership, but we're talking about one's perception of themselves that doesn't always match reality.  So, if you're a member of local church somewhere, and a member of the larger body of Christ, something is true that you need to acknowledge.  You are a redeemed sinner.

I know something else about redeemed sinners.  While following Jesus should, hopefully, lead you into a life in which you put away the sins you find present in your life, you will be in a constant and continuing struggle against both temptation and sin.  We need to wrestle with passages like this one:

1 John 1:5-10 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth; but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us. NASB95

We need to deal with the text here.  First, nobody should expect to purposely "walk in the darkness" and be in fellowship with Lord.  That makes a mockery of our redemption.  The ideal would always be that Christians live a sin-free life.  The problem is not in any effort to avoid and live a sinless life.  That is always the God-desired, ideal life.

But the Bible is also practical.  John knew the reality of human life.  That's why in the next breath, John says, "if we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us."  In other words, it's possible for a people who are walking in the light to sin.  The difference between the one in the darkness and the one in the light, is that the one in the light recognizes his/her sin and keeps seeking forgiveness from the Lord.  Forgiveness here is for those who confess their sins, not for those who hide or deny their sins.  John goes on, "If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us."  That last statement ought to get the attention of every Christian who puts on the front that says, "Sinner?  Oh, no, not me.  You must mean those other people."

The church is a community of sinners, but it's much more.  It's a community of redeemed sinners!  It's a community of hope.  The church ought to be the one group of people to whom anyone might look, not for solace or pity, but hope and an answer for sin.  We are the ones who ought to say to anyone, "Sin?  Oh, yes, I know all about that.  Let me tell you what God has done for all of us!"

See that guy in the three-piece suit?  See that lady with the cute hat and wearing the designer dress?  They're sinners.  Did you see yourself in the mirror this morning?  You're a sinner too.  Are you wondering about me?  I'll tell you quickly and truthfully, I am a sinner.  Oh, yes!  But there is hope for us all.  It's found in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.  It's found in his resurrection from the dead.  He knows we're not perfect.  He wishes we knew it, and admitted it.  Jesus does his best work in people who acknowledge their problem.

So, community of sinners, what shall we do.  Continue to treat the church like it was a social club of some kind, or treat it like what it is?  We're really a community of sinners.  Redeemed to be sure, but a community of sinners nonetheless. 

Passing the Torch: Honoring the Preachers Who Were My Greatest Influences

My good friend, Les Ferguson, Jr., reminded me of another friend's blog challenge in which he asked for us to say a few words about preachers who have influenced us along the way. The only problem with this idea is that I'm sure I will forget someone. I've known a lot of preachers. Many of them have influenced me in some way or another, but I'll try to mention a few that stand out.

The first one I can remember, unfortunately, goes unnamed. I was in the first or second grade when he was preaching in my hometown of Oxford, Mississippi. I'm pretty sure his first name was Richard. I'm also sure that God will remember him. He had one of those deep, booming voices, though I don't remember that he yelled at people. It's just that his voice carried in the way that some orators manage even without sound systems. I remember two things about this man. First, I had my tonsils out and he came to see me in the hospital. Some might not think that so strange, but I was just a kid, and I could have surely gone unnoticed and nobody would have complained. But he was there. Second, I still remember his hand on my head, and in that deep voice he would say, "You're going to become a fine preacher one of these days, aren't you?" I would laugh and dash out of reach. But maybe, just maybe, a seed was planted.

The next preacher who had an influence on me was Cecil May, Jr. Cecil preached a meeting in my home town when I was a Junior in high school. At that point in time, all my friends at church were already baptized, but not me. I was the proverbial holdout! But in the spring of that year, I signed up for a Bible Correspondence Course from the Billy Graham Crusade, completed every lesson, and corresponded with my teacher in several letters. I had questions. The answers I got were not completely satisfactory. Then Cecil came to town and preached that meeting. I remember the conversation I had with myself, the struggle to choose, decide. Cecil's lessons that week helped greatly. He continued to be a major influence in my life. He sang at my wedding along with a group from the church in Vicksburg. He probably would have done the wedding, but my wife wanted the singers, so Cecil sang bass instead of doing the ceremony. A few years later, it was Cecil who encouraged me to drop my unrealistic desire to attend Harding University and opt for the White's Ferry Road School of Biblical Studies. Not that either of us had a problem with Harding, but by then I had acquired not only a wife, but two children, and financially it was smarter to go to White's Ferry Road. It was a great choice! Cecil has been a continuing influence on me since, in many ways. I'm glad he's been such a great part of my life.

I'm tempted to mention all the men who taught at the White's Ferry Road School of Biblical Studies, but that would take too much room. I will say that every one of them played a great part. I will mention two. Percy Keene was a wonderful teacher and mentor. I met Percy when he preached in Natchez, Mississippi. My brother and his family lived there and attended where Percy was the preacher. He was a kind, friendly man, but I didn't know at the time what a great influence he would be. Later, when I went to visit and check out the school at White's Ferry Road, I discovered Percy had become one of the instructors. Conversations with him proved to be the scale-tipper. Over the next several years, until his death, he was not only a teacher and mentor, but a friend I called on many times. He was full of stories, loved to laugh, spouted great wisdom, and believed that I could do far more than I ever thought possible.

The other instructor from White's Ferry Road is a fellow named Bill Smith. Students in classes ahead of mine would fill you with fear and dread of Bill Smith! I discovered a man who was a true student of God's word, and who challenged his students to think. I learned more Bible from Bill Smith than from anyone I've ever studied under. He killed a few sacred cows, and plowed new ground in my head. He introduced me to a kind of Bible study that I'd never known before. But he was never a source of fear. Those other students either didn't know him, or they were doing what many upper classmen do to the new guys, trying to spook them! Bill has always been a man who wanted his students to know God's word, and to be able to communicate it to others.

Thought I never studied under Richard Rogers in a school setting, Richard was another preacher whom I loved to hear. He taught sessions for something like 25 or more years straight at the Tulsa Workshop, and every year I made it a point to attend his lectures. I bought his audio and video tapes, and books. Richard was one of those men with the gift of teaching and I never heard him speak a word without learning something new, or seeing something old more clearly than before.

There have been many more. Ted Brooks, who preached in Riverdale, Georgia when I preached in Forrest Park was a good friend during a very bad time. We met weekly for lunch and Bible study. We sat together for hours and had those deep, personal discussions that produce a great deal of light. His personal friendship, encouragement and support has always meant more to me than I can fully explain.

I need to make a list because it's late and I'm tired, and I'm sure I could mention others. One thing I know. I've got some great teachers, mentors, and friends who have helped me learn, grow, and even recover from my own desperate mistakes. Without such men, I would never have known that Jesus came to save sinners like me, nor would I have ever been able to share that good news with others without their help.

So, "thank you" goes to many preachers. It just doesn't sound like it's enough, does it? Well, I'll let the Lord see to their reward. His will be far better than anything I could give them anyway.