Author: Dave Burchett

While out walking one day a local pastor noticed a young boy trying unsuccessfully to reach the doorbell of a house. The pastor decided to be a Good Samaritan so he walked up behind the boy, put his hand on his shoulder, leaned over and firmly pushed the door bell. Crouching down to the boy’s level the pastor smiles warmly and asks, “Now what, young man?” The boy looked at him and said, “Now we run!” That is how I feel about today’s topic. I am going to post and run.

In recent weeks I have written about the Biblical requirement for forgiveness and I have found out that not everyone agrees with my views. Some didn’t forgive me for saying you have to forgive! I am going to violate the principle espoused by humorist Will Rogers who said that “when you are in a hole, quit digging.” Today I am going to suggest that we all need to examine ourselves to see if we are getting trapped in victimhood. Some of the following thoughts were also explored in my book Bring’em Back Alive (look for it in fine bargain bins everywhere).

Some of you were abused by pastors who should have restored but chose to condemn you (or worse). Some of you have been neglected by churchgoers who should have cared enough to seek you and return you to the flock. But we must also acknowledge (time to duck and cover) the real possibility that sometimes we choose to remain victims. I am not going to deny that we are often victims of sinful, selfish and hurtful acts from those in and around the church. One of my prayers and goals for this daily blog is that we honestly search our hearts and prayerfully evaluate if we have, in fact, made a decision to embrace woundedness. 

It is an incredible waste of our spiritual potential to fixate on how things could or should have been different. It took me about forty-five years to figure out the following information that I am going to pass along to you (at no additional cost) for simply reading this post. Are you ready?

Things are not different.

We can usually make a case that would persuade any jury that our treatment by other Christians should have been different. We can obviously make a solid case from the wisdom and conviction of scripture that things would have been different if Christians applied His words consistently. And yet there remains the unflinching fact that things are not different. No amount of time spent dwelling on how another churchgoer hurt me or should have done something different changes my situation. But the most natural thing to do is to focus on those unexpected wounds.

Imagine if you were shot and rushed to the emergency room. Would you spend all of your time worrying about who shot you? Or do you think your first concern might be to survive? I am pretty sure my priority would be to seek help and healing. Who shot me would be the least of my worries at that point. After healing I can concern myself with the shooter and whether justice is done.

Still, when we are victims of a shot from other Christians (or people in the church) we do seem to dwell on the shooter, not the healer. This is another strategy of the enemy who knows that healing is available. The last place Satan wants us to visit is the emergency room of God’s grace.  In the case of Christians the act of healing allows us to leave justice in the hands of God and takes us out of the process. That is exactly where I need to be.

All of us can acknowledge intellectually that the offending pastors or churchgoers will be held accountable for their actions before a Holy and righteous judge. But that is a difficult concept to embrace when you are hurting. And there is that other factor that we cannot forget. C.S. Lewis wrote that we tend to treat Satan one of two ways…we either take him too seriously or we ignore his influence altogether. In this case I am going to suggest that we need to be aware of one of Satan’s great strategies. And that tactic is to keep you and me firmly in the grip of victimhood. Eugene O’Neill wrote that “Man is born broke. He lives by mending. The grace of God is glue.” Satan would have us forget that being broken is an integral part of God’s process and that God does, in fact, “mend us with His grace”. The Apostle Paul who begged for the removal of his affliction or thorn in the flesh came to an important realization.

“and then he told me, My grace is enough; it’s all you need.
My strength comes into its own in your weakness.
Once I heard that, I was glad to let it happen. I quit focusing on the handicap and began appreciating the gift. It was a case of Christ’s strength moving in on my weakness.  2 Cor. 12:9 (MsgB) 

Paul’s insight is critical when he writes, “I quit focusing on the handicap.” Sadly, we often choose to stop at the point of being broken. And the point of resignation is often heartbreakingly just short of healing. Emotional and spiritual hurts seem to engender a response unlike any other wound. With physical hurts we immediately seek help to heal. With emotional and spiritual wounds it seems difficult to move past focusing on the injury.

My prayer is that each of us will make the choice to focus on the Healer and not the shooter. It is a choice I am having to make in my life right now. But the truth is that God’s grace is enough. His grace is all we need. Would you make a commitment to focus today on His amazing grace?

Hit post.
Run.

 

 

A story in the Dallas Morning News today confirmed one of my deepest beliefs. The biggest problem with kids sports is adults. As the father of three sons; I have seen the effects of the traveling squads and elite teams. Sure, some scholarship athletes come out of those programs. But the unseen consequence is that we (alleged adults) have sucked the fun out of childhood sports for a large percentage of the participants.

Warning…geezer rant directly ahead: 

I remember playing sandlot baseball for hours because I loved the game. I also played in an organized league but my joy and love for baseball came from the hours of camaraderie built around the sandlot games. I learned more about tough negotiations playing in my friend Vic’s backyard than I ever learned in school. For example, we were able to hammer out the Hirn Street Treaty with this rule. Any ball hit into Mr.Moore’s garden is an automatic out because we are afraid of him. And so I learned to hit the ball to the opposite field because of a grouchy old man. When was the last time you drove through a neighborhood and saw of group of kids playing baseball just for fun? What you likely saw was a bunch of dads in bad coaching shorts yelling at eight year olds for being, well, eight year olds.Why do so many of us feel the need to live out our athletic prowess, real or imagined, through our children? 

Geezer rant over…resume normal reading.

I have been one of those dads. I dreamed that one of my sons would be an great pitcher or all state basketball player. Now that I am 50 something I can ask myself the question that I apparently never considered before. Where did I expect my sons to get those athletic genes? I have coached youth all-star teams in a competitive league so I am not naive about the topic. I wonder in retrospect if I allowed them to have enough fun in the process of teaching them the game I love? I wonder if winning was just a little too important? I wonder if I caused any of them to love the game less? The ugliest split I have ever seen outside of church was a group of parents fighting over all-star selections and playing time. It was an early indoctrination to the perils of writing this humble blog. I have had to come to grips with the fact that people will call you names and question the marital status of your parents just because they disagree with your opinions. And the all-star parents were even worse.

So it was with that background that I read about the girl’s version of competition gone wild. This story was about the selection process for cheerleaders at a Dallas area high school. Southlake Carroll high school is in the midst of turmoil over the results of the cheerleader selection process. The controversy has actually reached the school board trustees who are being forced to weigh in on a no win issue. Parents are filing grievances. Classmates are choosing sides.

Fight, team, Fight!
Fight, parents, Fight!
Fight, fight, fight!

Initially fourteen girls made high enough scores to make the squad. A grievance was filed. The school decided to add four seniors. More grievances were filed. Then the school decided to include all thirty-two of the girls who auditioned on the team. More grievances were filed. The parents of the original fourteen argued that their daughters demonstrated the skills required to make the team. Those parents ratcheted up the battle by going over the school administration’s heads to the school board trustees. 

The Dallas Morning News picks up the story. After several hours in closed session Monday, board members ruled 4-2 that the 14 girls who initially qualified for the squad should stay. The rest of the squad will be selected at a later date and time. Some of the original 14 cheerleaders applauded after the board vote. One cheerleader who made the first cut, said allowing everyone on the squad who auditioned “doesn’t teach anyone a lesson. It’s the principle,” she said. “It’s the work ethic behind it.”

There are a lot of lessons that can be taught through life experiences like this. For those who have the attractiveness and skills to make the cut there is the lesson of humility and grace to those who haven’t been so blessed. Some could work just as hard and not make the cut. It is not just about work ethic.

For those who feel the process was biased there is the very real lesson that life is hard and often not fair. I am sure my sons would tell you that if they had five dollars for everytime I told them, “life isn’t fair”, they could likely buy a new car. When we try to protect our kids from life we really aren’t doing them any favors. I have had my heart broken watching my sons go through the often brutal process of adolescent and teenage passage. But as a father, my job was to prepare them to go into a world that is every bit as difficult. So sometimes I had to lay out and let them experience some pain and then help them get through it.

As Christians we make the same mistake. “Jesus is the answer” we say with giant smiles on our face. And He is. He is the answer to the search for significance and to fill the longing of our soul. But He does not guarantee perfect health or a trouble free life. We do seekers a disservice by intimating that following Jesus results in nonstop green lights and blue skies. That is why Jesus prioritized a few things for us.

“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Who of you by worrying can add a single hour to his life? And why do you worry about clothes? See how the lilies of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

Jesus knew that trouble was a part of the process. He also taught us that God will provide our needs. We too often are disappointed at God when we feel He doesn’t provide our wants (that we perceive as needs). Life isn’t fair. The sooner we can teach our kids to understand that truth the better they will be prepared for the journey ahead. Perhaps if we understand the same lesson we will be better prepared to accept the troubles of life and trust God to help us get through them.

 

 

 

Today’s Peanuts comic strip features Charlie Brown’s sister Sally struggling to spread frozen butter on her toast. Finally she exclaims, “Nobody told me life was going to be this hard!”

I can understand Sally’s frustration. Life is hard. This was not in the brochure. Or at least that is what I once believed. In fact that very information is in the brochure. The Bible is very clear that life will be a journey of struggling to spread frozen butter and worse (that is a paraphrase). Much worse. I am going through one of those frozen butter times right now but I have come to understand that those times are part of the journey. God has given us a wonderful gift that we too often leave unwrapped. The gift of laughter. The following excerpt is from my sporadically selling book “Bring’em Back Alive – A Healing Plan for those Wounded by the Church.” 

I believe a sense of humor is one of God’s gifts to help get us to the finish line. One of the things I learned from writing When Bad Christians Happen to Good People is well stated by humorist Dave Barry. “No matter what happens,” Barry writes, “somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.” AMEN, Brother Barry! Some people take and took some of my observations way too seriously. One of my core principles is summarized by Mary Hirsch’s observation that, “Humor is a rubber sword – it allows you to make a point without drawing blood.”

An examination of the life of Jesus would indicate that He possessed a sense of humor. The writers of Scripture did not set out to author a joke book so you won’t find the phrase “a Sadducee, a Pharisee and a Roman walk into a bar.” Still, you find glimpses of humor and sarcasm in the words of Jesus. For example, I can see the humor in this exchange when the disciples came running up and asked Jesus the following question.

“Did you know how upset the Pharisees were when they heard what you said?” Matthew 15:12 (MsgB) 

I can see them looking at Jesus and waiting to hear Him say something like, “Really? I had better go get that straightened out. The Pharisees are some important guys.” I expect the Lord’s answer first stunned and then amused them.

“Forget them. They are blind men leading blind men. When a blind man leads a blind man, they both end up in the ditch.” Matthew 15:14 (MsgB) 

You will also note that Jesus was an oft invited guest at weddings and banquets to the point where those appearances drew the ire of the Pharisees. Think about it. If Jesus was a holier than thou, uptight religious, suck the air out of the room sourpuss would you want Him at your wedding party? A deadly serious, stuffy theologian type would likely not be an “A” list party invitee either. Jesus must have been able to laugh and enjoy the common fellowship of others and he was obviously welcome and desired at the festivities. Let’s join Luke at Levi’s dinner party that included some unsavory people and see what happens.

Levi gave a large dinner at his home for Jesus. Everybody was there, tax men and other disreputable characters as guests at the dinner. The Pharisees and their religion scholars came to his disciples greatly offended. “What is he doing eating and drinking with crooks and ‘sinners’?” Jesus heard about it and spoke up, “Who needs a doctor: the
healthy or the sick? I’m here inviting outsiders, not insiders-an invitation to a changed life, changed inside and out.” They asked him, “John’s disciples are well-known for keeping fasts and saying prayers. Also the Pharisees. But you seem to spend most of your time at parties. Why?” Jesus said,
“When you’re celebrating a wedding, you don’t skimp on the cake and wine. You feast. Later you may need to pull in your belt, but this isn’t the time. As long as the bride and groom are with you, you have a good time. Luke 5:29-34 (MsgB)  
  
I am not trying to be flippant (this time) but clearly Jesus knew how to party in the good sense of the word. He knew how to interact warmly with others and connect with those around Him. And He knew where to find those who needed the touch of forgiveness the most.
  
I also think about the eclectic group of followers that Jesus assembled. They were a fascinating blend of common laborers and professional types. Imagine today if Christ went to the local pier to recruit some fishermen, dropped by the IRS to pick up a follower, then over to the medical clinic and so on. This would be (at least initially) a fairly coarse group. I don’t suspect that the earthy sense of humor possessed by such men was immediately dispatched when they dropped their nets to follow Jesus. Part of any healthy and dynamic group relationship is having fun together. I believe that there were times when Jesus and the twelve told jokes, fish stories and made fun of the Pharisees. I think that Jesus understood that the language and topics of those outside the faith may be a bit uncomfortable. John Wesley once walked through the London market with a young man who desired to join the ministry. The coarse language offended the young man and he clearly wanted to leave. But Wesley told him to, “Stay, and learn to preach.”

So let’s all join in that familiar Sunday School song…

If you’re happy and you know it,
Tell your face,
If you’re happy and you know it,
Tell your face.
If you’re happy and you know it,
Then it seems your face should show it.
If you’re happy and you know it,
Tell your face.

A lack of humor in the church apparently this has been a problem for a while now. Teresa of Avila prayed this simple prayer in 1582, “From somber, serious, sullen saints, save us Oh Lord.”  Amen…and Amen.

 

I am afraid that I offended a fellow blogger with my post about what I believed to be the damage done to the box office totals of End of the Spear  by an Evangelical backlash. Byron Harvey wrote to let me know that I was wrong, that I had misrepresented his intent about his opposition, and that my logic was flawed. I suspect he has also removed me from his Christmas card list.  Byron has a blog called The No Kool Aid Zone (love that title) and he took offense that I had lumped him in with some of the more extreme reactions to the controversy about Chad Allen. I made some broad statements about the treatment the movie and the production company received. I may be a “Bad Christian” but I try to be a fair one. I hope that readers understand that not everyone who disagreed with casting Chad Allen was angry or graceless. Forgive me if I gave anyone that impression. That was not my intent. I am giving Byron a chance here on the big page to respond to my post. I may be overreacting, but I don’t think he liked it.

Dave, I write as one of those bloggers who took issue with the casting of Chad Allen by ETE—but I find some of the characterizations you make to be over-simplifications. I took—and many of my responders took—what I consider to be a quite balanced position on the subject, far from ranting and raving, far from gratuitous attacking.

First of all, I am totally capable of oversimplification and I do believe you when you say your comments were far from ranting and raving. However, I was addressing comments like this one from Kevin Bauder that were, in fact, gratuitous.

“Once again, I have to say that I am not in the habit of calling for boycotts. I cannot imagine, however, why any reflective Christian would want to pay money to view this debacle. If Every Tribes Entertainment hopes to garner a profit, let them get it from Queer Nation and NAMBLA.”

That just makes me cringe. It is not helpful nor does it contribute to the kind of dialog most of us want to achieve.  And that is what I was addressing in my article called Won the Battle – Losing the War?  Blogger Phil Johnson wrote about Mr.Bauder’s comments that the response from many evangelicals was not strong enough.

“While suggesting that Jason Janz hadn’t called for a strong enough response, Bauder injected this droll hyperbole: “Granted, we must not overreact. And it would probably be an overreaction to firebomb these men’s houses. But what they have done is no mistake. It is a calculated strategy.No one who bothered to read any three random blog entries by Kevin Bauder could possibly imagine that his remark about firebombing houses was anything but humor and hyperbole. Ironically, Bauder’s remark was probably meant to lampoon the tendency of some folks who thoughtlessly and habitually overreact to issues like this with fleshly displays of anger.”

Droll hyperbole? I think I have a pretty well defined sense of humor. That is not funny nor is that droll hyperbole. Back to Mr. Harvey’s critique of my post.

If “cyber-flogging” went on regarding the position I took, it was from those who saw nothing wrong at all with ETE’s decision. I was called a Pharisee, a legalist, and even Satanic for raising concerns; my motives were questioned by more than one commenter who was sure that he could look into my heart with certainty. There is no place for judging motives, for name-calling, for attacks—and those who did that on both sides of the question are wrong. But is there no place for the raising of concerns? Is there no place for debate?

I never called anyone a name.  I never claimed to look into anyone’s heart. There is absolutely room for the raising of concerns. I thought that is what I was doing and you were doing when you disagreed with ETE. At the risk of sounding like a bad pop song…it’s only you and me and we just disagree.

Allow me to address several things you say. You begin by saying that the “backlash” accomplished its goal—and then ASSUME that the “goal” of the “backlash” was to cut the movie’s take. Personally, I did not see the movie and said so; at the same time, I did not call for a boycott, and told my church that while I could not endorse it, I wouldn’t presume to tell them what to do. Can’t speak for others, but only for myself. My goal had nothing to do with people seeing this particular movie—or not seeing it. It had to do with raising the issue of how we go about honoring God in the way we as evangelicals do things. 

I believe that when you say that you cannot endorse the movie you have effectively called for a boycott without using the “B’ word. Such a comment from a pastor carries that much weight. I want to make very clear that I do not mean to presume your motives were to hurt box office. My post had to do with the flip side of your argument. It had to do with raising the issue of how we go about honoring God in the way evangelicals disagree about things. 

Paragraphs 3-5 above are a big red herring. You ask, “What is wrong with having a movie that you can take a unchurched friend to and then discuss the supernatural response from the people that this story portrays?”; I ask, “who says that there is?” You launch then into three paragraphs built upon that faulty premise. While there may be some who say that, I didn’t read anyone who had an issue with such a movie PER SE.

Okay, this one made me laugh out loud because of my weird sense of humor. When I produce a red herring it is not just regular size. I give you grande red herrings in my posts! Which got me to thinking. Why do we say that faulty logic designed to divert people from the real argument is a red herring? Turns out that the red herring has a very strong odor and early settlers would drag the herrings across the trail to throw off the scent of the tracking dogs. I don’t think my argument is a red herring but, after all, it is my red herring. So maybe my left brain logical tracking dogs got thrown off.

“Apoplectic”? Please. Perhaps there were some; perhaps certain commenters upon posts (even on my site) might have fallen into that camp. But the posts I read seemed, for the most part, to be well-reasoned criticisms. Then again, I certainly didn’t take the time to visit dozens of sites, so perhaps there were more that were “apoplectic”.

Definitely some apoplectic ones. And you are right, some were indeed well reasoned. Some were just heartbreakingly mean.

Personally, again, I accept all concerned at ETE as sincere brothers in the Lord, people trying to do something good, people whose future works I may well take in. I think that that qualifies as “grace”. At the same time, can we not have this discussion, or must their decisions since they are “good, Godly men” be considered off-limits?

Sure. Can we also discuss the reactions to all of this? Should those questions of “good, Godly bloggers” be considered off-limits? Just curious.

Can their thinking/rationale not be discussed (particularly since some of the defenses that were raised by ETE and by Steve Saint were very dubious Biblically)? Can a discussion of this sort, as long as it is carried on in a Christlike way, not be beneficial for future decision-making? Can it not ferret out issues that ought to be considered?

Absolutely. Are you comfortable that some of these comments demonstrate a Christlike way? By the way, excellent use of the word ferret.

I tried to do all of these things—interestingly, my most commented-upon post was begun when I allowed Jim Hanon to post (unedited) anything he wanted to say. We had a gracious exchange about the subject. Further, your logic regarding Steve Saint, carried to its logical end, would suggest that Mr. Saint’s judgment is above the possibility of error; in fact, his rationale for okaying the casting of Mr. Allen was disappointing, involving dreams and imagined conversations with God that could be very easily countered (and I did).

Of course we can have this discussion. Of course you can question their decisions and you did. I am not suggesting that Steve Saint’s judgment is above the possibility of error. I am still suggesting that he has the most ownership because the story is about him and his father.

A further issue is that you seem to make the mistake, as so many have, of confusing the sovereign will of God with His moral will. Sure, He can use all of this to His glory, because He is sovereign! That doesn’t mean that the right choices were made in casting. I guess my final beef with your posting is that there is a pervasive “end justifies the means” context. You cite numerous “negative” consequences that flowed from the decision of some of us to raise these issues. You seem to strongly suggest that such issues ought to be glossed over/kept to ourselves so that a greater good can be accomplished. But the end doesn’t justify the means…we cannot justify just anything done in the name of “evangelism” or “tribal financial support” or whatever good cause.

After being accused of assuming earlier I think I have to throw a flag here. You are assuming (notice the all lower case letters) that I am always willing to accept anything if there is evangelism involved. I believe I was writing about this one movie, this one group of men, and this one story. Are you presuming to look into my heart?  In fact, there were negative consequences to this controversy and I wrote my opinions about those results. I may be wrong. I have been before.

I agree wholeheartedly with speaking the truth in love…

All right…we have reached some agreement here.

but it seems as though some want to smother the truth for the sake of…whatever.

That was short lived.

I believe that long-term good can certainly come out of this discussion. Hopefully, there are some (ETE?) who will take a second look at HOW we go about sharing the gospel—and that goes for all of us, whether we make films, or preach sermons, or write books, or blog, or… The body of Christ in America is badly, badly, badly in need of learning discernment. If this discussion advances the cause of discernment—which IS at the heart of MY “goal”—then a great good will have been done.

I hope and pray that long-term good does come out of this discussion. My goal is to introduce people to the saving grace of our Lord Jesus. I pray that God will bless both of us in our humble pursuits.

The box office run of End of the Spear is likely drawing to a close. The backlash from a number of Christian blogs, publications, and from many  pulpits accomplished its goal. Estimates are that the controversy cut the box office return by one-half to two-thirds. I wish congratulations were in order. But I am simply burdened and discouraged by our choice of battles in the evangelical community.

I should never be allowed near a keyboard when I am angry. But I hope that all who advocated a boycott are happy with the results. Your efforts kept a lot of people away from a movie that has a powerful message. I have not talked to a single person who saw the movie (and that would be dozens) who was not moved by the portrayal of forgiveness and redemption. No one that I know cared who played the role of Nate Saint. Typical response. “Oh, he was gay? (pause) He did a good job.” Just for the record…I go to a conservative church.

What is wrong with having a movie that you can take a unchurched friend to and then discuss the supernatural response from the people that this story portrays? Evangelism is planting a seed and then watering that seed. There is plenty in this movie to accomplish that task. A heavy handed gospel message would have made it much more difficult to get unchurched friends to the movie. If you can’t find enough in End of the Spear to generate a wonderful discussion of the power of the Holy Spirit and the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross then you are just not trying.

For example, how about this scene where Mincayani takes Steve Saint to the scene of the killing and he is overcome by his role in the death of Steve’s father. Because he still lives by the rules of the Waodoni he wants the younger Saint to take his life. But the young man says, “No one took my father’s life. He gave it.” This affects the Mincayani profoundly. It’s an effective and powerful scene. Are you telling me you can’t parlay that drama into a discussion of Jesus giving His life on the Cross? How about discussing the story of Waengongi  (God) who once had a Son who was speared but did not spear back? Can’t find the gospel message in there anywhere?

The world is fascinated by the question of life after death. This movie clearly communicates that the warrior Mincayani believes he saw a heavenly host coming to escort Nate Saint and the other missionaries to their reward, or in the terms of the tribe, “jumping the Great Boa.” No way you can dig up a little salt to sprinkle from that scene?

I visited dozens of websites that were apoplectic that gay actor Chad Allen had been picked to play the role of Nate and Steve Saint. Most of these bloggers seemed like the Stanley Johnson character from the Lending Tree television commercial. Nice guys. Wonderful families. Lovely home in the suburbs. But on this issue they just seemed to go a little too far.

Kevin T. Bauder, president of Central Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote this is a column posted at Sharperiron.org.
 
“It is disappointing enough when unsaved, worldly culture-mongers cannot see clearly on basic moral issues. It is even more distressing when professing Christians betray complete moral confusion. That is the case with the new movie from Every Tribe Entertainment, End of the Spear. ETE is supposed to be a Christian maker of Christian films. End of the Spear is supposed to be the film biography of Nate Saint, the missionary pilot and martyr who gave his life to get the message of the gospel to the Auca Indians of Ecuador.”

Comments. First of all, it is not surprising nor disappointing when unsaved, worldly culture-mongers cannot see clearly. That is called sin and that is what sinners do. That is why we are having this discussion to see how we can communicate the gospel to a world that cannot see clearly. I was frustrated by his comment that ETE is “supposed” to be a Christian maker of Christian films. That is just flat wrong. ETE is a group of Christian men and women who are committed to making good stories with a message that can be used to communicate Christian values. They are hoping that people who willing to change out of their judges robes into their “civies” will use these stories to generate salt and light dialogue.

Here is an example of how I think we are fighting the wrong battles. This was a letter that was sent to radio talk show host Janet Parshall.

Mrs. Parshall,

Thanks so much for representing the Gospel and Biblical positions on Larry King Live last night. I was encouraged to hear the truth communicated in your reasonable and articulate fashion.

However, I was discouraged to hear you indiscriminately endorse the film your co-panelist on the program Mr. Allen stars in. By allowing Mr. Allen to play an active role in creating this film, End of the Spear has, I believe, given a platform for the exclusivity of the gospel to be undermined. His activist agenda has been given a wider audience because of his connection to this story. Furthermore, the public response and perception of Every Tribe Entertainment and Steve Saint has been to defend their choice and express support for Mr. Allen, further adding to the public perception of the legitimacy of a pluralistic gospel. I plead with you to reconsider your endorsement of this film. I ask you to call for ETE and Mr. Saint to take decisive and public action acknowledging the grievous error in casting a gay activist in their film. Encourage them to take a public and prominent stand for the exclusive Gospel- to state clearly and unequivocally that Jesus is the only way, and that the only hope for anyone trapped in the bondage of homosexuality or any other sin is to repent and turn to Jesus Christ for deliverance.

In Christ,  A Pastor.

His name is not important and I do wish to throw him under the bus for sincere objections. My point is to look at the opening sentence and then what follows. Janet Parshall represented the gospel well and communicated the truth of the gospel on the Larry King show! What an incredible opportunity and she did a great job. But then comes the dreaded however. If Janet did a great job of communicating the truth of the gospel how about taking the wild tact of praying that her words would fall on fertile ground and the Holy Spirit will work in the hearts of those who heard.

I have had the privilege of sitting with some of the leaders of ETE in recent weeks. These are good, Godly men trying to fulfill what they believe is a calling of the Holy Spirit. Can we allow that perhaps God has called them to something different from your vision and can we allow that the vision may ultimately have a great impact? Can we have enough grace to offer the possibility that maybe they just made an honest mistake in casting Chad Allen? Is it possible to offer grace if you feel that it was a mistake? Can we consider that we should be praying and supporting the mission they feel called to do instead of trying to hurt them financially just because we don’t like how they made this movie? Perhaps their next project will meet your criteria. Is it possible that a Sovereign God ordained Chad to play this role because that influence will change his life and that he will have a great ministry someday? Or do you, like Job’s friends, already know what God is doing? Perhaps we are just too busy icing down our elbows from the stone throwing session to seek the Holy Spirit and pray for these men and women who are actually trying to do something unique in the arena of popular culture.

Yeah, I know. I need to get out the paper sack and breathe into it for a few seconds. But I am angry at many of my Evangelical family. I am an Evangelical but I am not a particularly proud one over this debate. You see, I live in the secular world and I know how all too well how Evangelicals are perceived. And we just added plenty of fuel to that perception fire with this ridiculous overreaction to who played Nate Saint. Have you thrown away your VHS or DVD of Chariots of Fire yet? Two key roles in that powerful movie (including the part of Christian runner Eric Liddel) were played by gay actors. Tossed your Lord of the Rings trilogy in the trash? Gandalf was played by an actor who has been a gay activist. The only difference with those movies was that we did not know or, at least, it did not create controversy in the blogosphere.

I read outraged comments from bloggers and readers who seemed to feel they owned the story of the slain missionaries because their parents had read it to them when they were kids. This is not your story! This is not my story. This is God’s story. If this particular story does belong to anyone on this planet that person is Steve Saint. If Steve Saint is okay with the person who played his Dad then I am quite prepared to quietly drop my stones and slink slowly away.

Others were criticizing making this story as a for profit movie. They did not take the time to research that half of the profits were going to tribal missions. So what is the sum total of our high minded cyber flogging of End of the Spear and Every Tribe Entertainment? Thousands and thousands of people did not see a story that could have helped them see how forgiveness looks. Maybe thousands more lost a chance to be moved by the power of redemption. The financial contribution to the tribes will be reduced and that will impact the outreach. The people who worked so hard to make this movie have been wounded by the attacks (and some of the commentary was far less than graceful) of their brothers and sisters in Christ. But I know they will press on. Because I have looked in their eyes and I have seen the conviction of their calling. I know that many will disagree with me on this issue. But I am going to suggest one thing before we react to the next “crisis” in the Kingdom. Can we stop down, pray, and see how the Holy Spirit would have us communicate. Jesus communicated the truth in love. We must seek  His Spirit to do the same.

So we have won another battle. The evangelical community has won many battles in recent weeks. But my fear is that we continue to lose the war.

 

 

 

 

Americans apparently know more about “The Simpsons” than they do about the First Amendment. Only one in four Americans can name more than one of the five freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment (freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition for redress of grievances.) But more than half can name at least two members of the cartoon family, according to a survey according to a story released today by the Associated Press. The study by the new McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum found that 22 percent of Americans could name all five Simpson family members, compared with just one in 1,000 people who could name all five First Amendment freedoms.

The survey found more people could name the three “American Idol” judges than identify three First Amendment rights. They were also more likely to remember popular advertising slogans. It also showed that people misidentified First Amendment rights. About one in five people thought the right to own a pet was protected (it’s not?), and 38 percent said they believed the right against self-incrimination contained in the Fifth Amendment was a First Amendment right. I’ll bet that is why defendants take the “fifth” when testifying and not the “first.” That is the kind of intellectual prowess you get from this humble blog.

The telephone survey of 1,000 adults was conducted Jan. 20-22 by the research firm Synovate and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. So, to be fair, we may be slightly less or slightly more stupid.

So what do we make of this? I think it is really sad that so few know the essence of these amazing documents. This embarrassing and even dangerous lack of civic knowledge also finds its way into our Christian journey. I wrote a tongue-in-cheek ode to our Christian ignorance in When Bad Christians Happen to Good People. I did a little rewrite of the lyrics of Sam Cooke’s classic song “Wonderful World” and came up with this.

Don’t know much about theology,
Don’t know much Christology.
Don’t know much about Leviticus,
Don’t know why they had the Exodus.
But I do know that God loves you,
And I know that if I’m real good too
What a wonderful faith this would be. 

You have to buy the book to get the rest of my lyrical genius. But buried in the light hearted poke at our lack of knowledge is a very serious problem. That same ignorance discovered in the AP story above infiltrates the church. And I would suggest that a part of the struggle of the church in America is that we don’t really have a clear understanding of what we believe. George Barna has done considerable research on this topic and the results are appalling. For example, here are some examples of widely held beliefs among Christians that are clearly in opposition to the Biblical view. Barna found that 74 per cent of respondents (apparently no one with a two year old in the house) thought that when people are born, they are neither good nor evil; they make a choice between the two as they mature. Forty two percent believe that when Jesus lived on earth, He sinned like other people. Fifty nine percent thought that Satan was just a symbol of evil. The list goes on and on but it identifies a major problem. When Christians don’t have a fundamental and basic understanding of Biblical theology we go through the buffet line of beliefs and select what looks or smells good.

Barna writes that “because we remain a largely Bible-illiterate society, few are alarmed or even aware of the slide toward syncretism – a belief system that blindly combines beliefs from many different faith perspectives.” In other words we are becoming a society of blended faith. How about three-quarters of Americans believing that God helps them that help themselves is a Biblical teaching? (instead of a quote from Ben Franklin)

I first became convicted of my need to solidify my Biblical and theological knowledge when I realized that I could name the starting lineup for the 1961 National League Champion Cincinnati Reds but I could only name slightly more than half of the Apostles. We must know what and why we believe. The resources are out there. Most of us have Bibles laying all around. And the sad and very convicting truth is that we make time for what is important to us. I spent twenty minutes with the sports page today and yet I am prone to say I don’t have time for Bible study. 

I am not able to take the “fifth” in my journey with Jesus. A lack of theological and biblical knowledge is an incriminating fact that can be changed. If we care to change it.

 
—

 

Thomas Jefferson is an enigma for many. A recent article by Bruce Tomoso in the Dallas Morning News noted that his enemies accused him of being an atheist and yet he started the statute of Virginia for Religious Freedom with the phrase, “Almighty God hath created the mind free.” But he certainly would not have been invited to speak at an evangelical conference to share his beliefs that most clergymen are “soothsayers and necromancers.” You likely have a bigger brain than I do but I will confess that I had to look up necromancers. It literally means one who interrogates the dead. Okay. Not sure what church Jefferson was frequenting but clearly he had some issues with clergy and he believed that most of what they preached was a mockery of Jesus’ teachings.

Jefferson “believed that an authentic Christianity had long ago been hijacked by the Christian Church,” wrote Erik Reece in the December Harper’s. Jefferson decided to just fix the problem. So he took out his scissors and cut out the parts of the Bible that he didn’t believe. “Jefferson,” Mr. Reece wrote, “cut out the virgin birth, all the miracles – including the most important one, the Resurrection – then pasted together what was left and called it ‘The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth.’ ” (Later, he added portions of the Bible as translated into Greek, Latin and French.) Jefferson described his work as separating the “diamonds from the dunghill.” Out went all references to Jesus as divine, all accounts of healings, of walking on water, of making loaves and fish appear out of thin air. What remains? His teachings about helping the needy, shunning earthly wealth and power, treating people as we would have them treat us – in Jefferson’s words, “the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man.”

Mr. Tomoso wrote that “not all scholars are impressed.” Historian Garry Wills, a Catholic, writes that Jefferson’s Gospel, “cleansed of all the supernatural hocus-pocus, is the tale of a good man, a very good man, perhaps the best of good men.” But, he argues, the Jesus of Jefferson is boring, utterly without mystery, “shorn of his paradoxes and left with platitudes.”

It is so easy to criticize Jefferson. What audacity! The incredible chutzpah to modify sacred texts to fit your own views! But then I took a breath and stepped back. Do I do the very same thing at times without the in your face honesty of Jefferson? When I choose to ignore the hard teachings of Jesus I have, in practice, done the same thing. When I say that some command in God’s Word is too hard I have essentially taken my scissors of doubt and cut that teaching out. When I point out that I cannot forgive or love or give because you don’t understand my circumstances I have clipped out the challenge of supernatural living. In my book When Bad Christians Happen to Good People  I wrote a chapter called “This is a Hard Teaching” about the challenging and difficult things that Jesus taught that I tend to mentally, emotionally, and practically excise from my walk. Let me give a couple of examples.

Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven,  Matt 5: 11-12

Do I believe that? Does feeling blessed even cross my radar if I feel insulted? Do I rejoice? Or do I simply pull out the scissors, clip, and concentrate on the ones I am more comfortable with like this.

Blessed are the merciful,
      for they will be shown mercy. 

That’s better. I can live with that. But when I read words from Jesus like this I start to squirm again.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[h] and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies[i] and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?

Are you kidding me? Love your enemies? Pray for them? Scalpel please…that must be removed. I often feel like the disciples of Jesus who struggled with His teaching about the bread of life.

On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?” 
 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you?

That is the bottom line isn’t it? Sometimes the hard teachings of Jesus offend me. Or at least annoy me.  I don’t want to forgive the unforgivable or love the unloveable. I don’t want to serve the least of these because it is inconvenient, messy, and hard.  But I have a choice to make. I have to accept the entire Word of God and be open to allowing the Holy Spirit to move in every area of my life. Or I have to take the scissors of my lack of faith to His Word. As for cutting out the miracles and just making Jesus a profound and amazing teacher. I don’t think that He gave us that option. He clearly let it be known that He was the Son of Man sent by His Father in heaven. If that is not the truth then Jesus was not a great man and teacher. He was, in the famous words of C.S.Lewis from Mere Christianity, a liar or a lunatic.

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about him: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon and you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

So I am praying for the grace to embrace the hard teachings and leave the scissors in the drawer.