Al and TIpper Gore

I'm just going to say it. I feel bad that the Gores are splitting up, but if I have to watch one more news organization play the video of their kiss from the Democratic National Convention, I may be ill.

Woes

Wow, Wade Burleson nails it.

Jesus Pronounces Eight Woes on the Southern Baptist Convention (Matthew 23)

It's easy to preach texts when we think Jesus is talking about others in the abstract. It's not near as easy to preach texts when we believe Jesus could be talking about us. This modern edition of Matthew 23 is adapted to cause me to look within myself.


Then Jesus spoke to the Southern Baptist Convention saying: (2) The pastors and self-proclaimed leaders of the SBC have seated themselves in positions of authority; (3) Do not imitate their actions; for they say things that they themselves will not do. (4) They create heavy burdens and lay them on the peoples' shoulders for them to carry, but they themselves are unwilling to even lift a finger. (5) What they do in terms of acts of service they do only to be noticed by the world; for they lie on their resumes and take great pains to dress as the epitome of success.

(6) They love the place of honor at national events and want to be seen next to the powerful politicians, (7) and they cherish being respected and powerful in the eyes of others, even demanding that they be called "Dr." by those who know them. (8) But you, do not allow yourself to be called "Dr." by others, for One is your Teacher and you are all equal in honor. (9) Do no call anyone on earth your "Father" for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. (10) Do not consider yourself a leader; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. (11) But the greatest among you shall be your servant. (12) Whoever promotes himself will one day be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will one day be exalted.

(13) But woe to you, SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders, hypoocrites, because you emphasize the building of your own kingdom and shut people out of the kingdom of heaven. (14) Woe to you SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders because your love for money causes you to devour the widows' income for your own gain and yet for pretense purposes you act as if your motivations are all spiritual; therefore, you will receive greater condemnation.

(15) Woe to you SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders, hypocrites, because you travel internationally to share your global causes and urge others to partner with you; but when you convince someone to join the efforts of the SBC you make him twice as much a recepient of God's judgment as yourselves.

(16) Woe to you, blind guides, who say, "Whoever participates with evangelicals is doing nothing for the kingdom, but whoever does things purely Southern Baptist is truly godly." (17) You fools and blind men! Which is more important, your convention or my kingdom? Without Me, nothing you do is holy.

(18) And you say, ‘If anyone participates in ministry without giving financially to the church, the service is nothing, but if anyone gives generously to the church, then he is the one we desire to promote to leadership." (19) You blind men! For which is greater, the gift given or the the person? (20) So whoever puts the person first, then everything is in order. (21) And whoever understands that my kingdom is about people, understands kingdom principles. (22) And whoever has his eye on relationships has his eye on the very throne of God and Him who sits upon it.


(23) Woe to you, SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders, hypocrites! For you emphasize giving, giving, and giving, but you neglect the weightier things: justice and mercy and faithfulness. Don't neglect these things while you seek the dollar! (24) In your blind greed you are straining gnats and swallowing camels.

(25) Woe to you, SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders, hypocrites! For you clean up the outside of your churches, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. (26) You blind pastors! First focus on the gracious spirit needed inside the church, then you can focus on the exterior beauty.

(27) Woe to you, SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of spiritually dead people and ungodliness. (28) So you try to appear outwardly righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness for you do not even love your own brothers.

(29) Woe to you, SBC pastors and self-proclaimed SBC leaders, hypocrites! For you exalt other pastors and you build monuments to their legacy, (30) saying, ‘If we had lived in the liberal days of our forefathers, we would have helped them them in turning around our convention.’ (31) Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered your brothers. (32) Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. (33) You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to judgment yourselves?

Creedal Baptists - An Oxymoron

Wade Burleson says it well. Here is his article entitled "Perception is Reality - The Continued Slide toward Independent, Landmark, Fundamentalism." When I think of the SBC, it's just sad. The church I grew up in was a gospel centered, Bible loving, People loving place. People met there who disagreed on politics and other issues, but they loved the Church and the Church pointed toward Christ. People who loved the Word though they had a more moderate stance about various Biblical issues (not true Liberals) loved the Church as did Fundamentalists. Once upon a time, the SBC (and the Church I grew up in) was a unifying place. But no more.

I was a young person when this all started to change -- about 1979. I pick that date because I know the history, but it all really started to change when I was entering High School! - just in that time.

Was it really Adrian Rogers' nomination in 1979 that signified the change? No. But that signaled the time where we took a confrontational stand -- and the unintended consequences led us down a path that . . . . today we revere what men say about the Bible more than how they actually treat the authority of the Word. Wade's post says it all. The SBC is a shadow of it's former self and in the eyes of the general population, it appears to be slouching, mediocre, overweight, and and narcissistic.

Burleson vs. Denison on Muslims

Dr. Jim Denison was the best professor I ever had at SWBTS (that's saying a lot! I had a great number of great professors).

His article, Opinion: The Fort Hood tragedy and radical Islam in the Baptist Standard clearly states the difference between Radical Islam and Moderate Islam. As only Denison can, he writes with concise and clear appeal for orthodox Biblical thinking that establishes freedom and opportunity to reach others for Christ.

On the other hand, Wade Burleson has written that "Moderate Muslims are the most dangerous Muslims of all." Burleson is quoting Mossab Hassan, the son of the only surviving member of the counsel of Hamas; he is now converted to Christ, speaking about Islam and urging all Muslims to love their enemies. Burleson/Hassan say, in essence, there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim. The implication, if taken at face value, seems to be that we should suspect all Muslims of potential terrorism.

Both Denison and Burleson are respectable, Bible-believing, orthodox reasonable Christians -- yet these two positions are mutually exclusive.

This is an example of how Christians can both present cogent, yet not agreeable positions. I respect both Burleson and Denison greatly. I agree with almost all of what each is saying. Yet, they emphasize different truths. Burleson emphasizes the danger of Moderate Muslims moving toward radicalism while in our midst as is clearly the case at Fort Hood. (If, indeed, Nidal Hasan was ever a moderate instead of a radical in hiding. We may never know which was true). Denison emphasizes the opportunity for sharing our faith if we diligently respect our nation's religious freedom and live out our faith in these dangerous times.

I agree with both truths. Where they differ, I agree with Denison. The First Century was a dangerous time for Christians, but the faith grew like it has never grown since. Do we value more our national security or the opportunity for Christ? Do we value more the freedoms our country provides or the safety we want? (Ironically, to protect "freedoms" we would have to surrender religious freedom if we go the the extremse of the Right Wing)? People seem to be criticizing Hasan for holding to his Islamic faith over and above his committment to the nation. While clearly his Islamic faith was Radical and exreme -- and so comparisons to Christian faith are not analagous, it seems wrong sighted. This is a difficult position for one in uniform to be sure, and I am not, nor have I ever worn a military uniform, but if I have to choose -- my Christian faith comes over and above my committment to our nation.

America is NOT a Christian nation. It is a nation of religious freedom, and that's much more important for the cause of Christ. It should be more important to the people of Christ. It's more important for the security (ultimately) of our nation.

Christians are STUPID

Ok, I probably overstated that . . . call it Many Christians are STUPID.

This article from our local paper says more than 100 people crowded into the basement of Ted Haggard's home for a Prayer Meeting. Nothing wrong with prayer meetings, but from local media coverage, it's clear that Ted is hoping to use this as a new startup of his new church (note: he's saying the opposide -- that he doesn't know where this will go, where "God" will lead, etc., but to anyone with a brain for making inferences or observing evangelical behavior can tell that he is hopeful and optimistic about where this is going). And more than 100 people are crowding into his basement to be a part. This other article says the crowd is likely to continue. The personality cult continues . . .

I'm all about the Gospel of forgiveness. I'm all about picking up the pieces and moving on. I'm all about the Church embracing its fallen members and restoring them -- even to a place of leadership. But that is not what is happening with Ted. This is all about a man reinvigorating his personality cult and building up his own following.

Genius Atheists!

A group of athiests have gotten together to form the POST RAPTURE PET CARE. Ever wonder what happened to the pets after the raptrue takes all of the Christians magically away (that detail wasn't quite covered in the Left Behind series or the movie we all brought people to church to watch in the 1970s - I can't remembe the title).

Well, your pet can be taken care of for you: "Just because we are atheists, doesn't mean we are not animal lovers." For a mere 70 pounds (they're British; don't know if there is an American version yet), you can have your pet taken care of after you are snatched away. Take me there.

I found this post from Riddleblog (one of the best Christian rapture debunkers on the net).

What I've Been Trying to Say about the Christian Right (has just been said by better writers than me)

I've been growing uncomfortable for some time with the way the Evangelical church is now fully in the grasp of the Republican party. They are no more than another constituency to be satisfied. When you are just another group, you don't speak prophetically. You can be bought and sold with favors. Evangelicals have been begging to be treated this way for years. Like the Israelites begging for a king to be just like the other nations, Evangelicals have been begging for a "seat at the table" when Republican party bigwigs are making decisions -- and well, then now have that seat. I wonder when they are going to realize what they gave up by getting that seat.

Two posts, from good writers speak to this issue. The Internet Monk (or just iMonk aka Micahel Spencer) has written, "The Limbaughization of Evangelicals" in which he tells how he has moved from a '90s dittohead to a more thoughtful conservative (I have moved very similarly -- still calling myself a conservative, but VERY uncomfortable with the way the extreme right has replaced all possible ways of having the right influence, but work together with the moderates. Spencer also laments how the Gospel has been LOST by politically influcenced Evangelicals -- the Gospel has been replaced with Culture War rhetoric which further marginalizes the voice of Evangelical Christianity. Everything Spencer writes is worth reading, but this article in particular is excellent. (I may comment and link to his Fall of Evangelicalism articles as well).

The other post, is written by Rober Parham at Ethics Daily. Now there is much less that I can totally agree with at this site, and some of what is in this post should be taken with a grain of salt. Parham is a lefty, but when he speaks of separation of church/state, he should be listened to. Spencer has an easy to miss paragraph about lefties who should be warned of Obamification, and both ditches could be avoided by sticking to historic Baptist principles of Church and State separation (which doesn't mean the church abandons the public square -- I'll put a plug in here for the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. Parham's article is entitled, "Is Rush Limbaugh the defacto Leader of Conservative Christians?" It speaks to the depths one will fall when an Evangelicals loses the Gospel (kind of an oxymoron isn't it for an Evangelical to lose the Gospel?

I remember my pastor saying from the pulpit (when I was about in 5th grade) how he wouldn't get actively involved in the fight against abortion because the Gospel was more important. A few years later, the rhetoric of politics took over (and the growth of the church also went anemic). Between SBC politics and Culture War, the Gospel has become are rare commodity.

Both Parham and iMonk have written about the shame brought on the name of Christ by Evangelicals sharing a stage (and radio show) with the likes of Ann Coulter as she MADE FUN OF THE WORDS OF THE VERY WORDS OF CHRIST (perhaps I'll look up and add links later).

Ichabod (the glory has departed).

Politics and Theology

Kim Riddlebarger is perhaps a little harsh, but very percetive with the following quote:

Is it just me, or do both of these guys need to be smacked upside the head? Obama twists Scripture--giving us the critical, moralistic reading of the Old Testament and the Sermon on the Mount. Granted. But James Dobson is a flaming Arminian who hates Calvinism. I'm not sure Dobson can make better sense of the Bible than Obama. Once again, politicians should give up biblical interpretation, and experts in child development should stop trying to be theologians. Ugh . . . And to think we've got five more months of this.

A new Blog to Read

It doesn't take long to tell if someone is going to be worth reading. There is a new member of the Evangelical-Observer blogroll today, and here is why.

I stumbled acoss a link from a blog I read -- Moderate Baptist. I don't think MB is in this blog's blogroll -- I read regulary and they are in my favorites, but their views are so different from mine on certain issues that I guess I just never added them. Well, in one reading, I can tell that -- though I likely differ from Dr. Platypus quite a bit, he deserves to be in the evangelical observer blogroll simply because of the good writing. One post got me curious, so I went to the ABOUT page, and found the post Theological Influences 1-10, and I was hooked.

Read this, from the section Going to Seminary:

I’ve been privileged at various times to be both the token “conservative” in “liberal” groups and the token “liberal” in “conservative” groups. I’ll take the former just about any day of the week. At least in the circles I run in, the “liberals” usually act like they know and love Jesus.

Oh, and this:

It was our own little ecumenical movement, and it taught me never to be too sure
that my own faith was all that different from the faith of anyone else who calls
on the name of the Lord.

I wish I'd had an experience young enough in my ministry to have allowed me to salvage such a open view of the whole body of Christ. Unfortunately, by my time at SWBTS, I was so steeped in fundamentalism, that if you did much different that that which I had grown up in, I was already classifying you as a "moderate" or "liberal" and you had no prayer of being salvaged. Try as they might, the wonderful professors of the time tried to open my mind (while staying very conservative - despite the lies no circulated about them), but I didn't listen (a little to afraid of being influenced. I wish the likes of Munn, Corley, MaGorman, Garrett, Denison, Heflin, etc. had had more influcence on me).

Also in that same section, Dr. Playtypus tells of being at Southern during the 80s when the so-called conservative resurgance was taking over:

I wasn’t exactly a fundamentalist at Southern Seminary, but I wasn’t entirely at
home with the predominant theological attitude at that time, either. Mostly,
however, I came to understand that I didn’t want anything to do with the folks
who were trying to take the place over.

Since I was at Southwestern just a little after that, I have a feeling I know only a little about how he felt. I'm convinced that's why I didn't stay in ministry. Coming from a guy who: (1) is proud to have Russell Dilday's signature on my SWBTS degree; (2) was uncomfortable with the transition at SWBTS to Kenneth Hemphill, but did have him as one of my hero's before Dilday was fired; and (3) and now can't believe that SWBTS is being run by this clown -- I'm glad to no longer call myself a Southern Baptist (though I remain a functional inerrantist, a conservative, and evangelical, a child of the King, a soujourner in this land . . . .).

Welcome Dr. Platypus -- my new blogging friend.

The "Religious Right"

Joe Carter is pretty amazing. I have the feeling that he is the kind of person I could sit down with in a converstation and quickly identify several issues on which we disagree, but it wouldn't matter. We could discuss both the things we agree with and disagree with and both of us could listen and learn from the other. I desperately want more political/christian friends like that.

Joe's post AN OPEN LETTER TO THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT is rather amazing.