Creating a Church Culture

Who do we hope to become? The local church community takes on a
character and culture of its own, but are we intentional about
shaping the people we want to become? Here are some practical
questions to reflect upon as individuals, families and churches about
the culture we are intentionally seeking to create and shape in
ourselves and the lives of those around us:

1) Sharing a life in Christian community, by the grace of God at work
among us, who do we hope to become?
2) How and when will we pray - together, and apart?
3) How will we express our passion for Christ, and our desire to walk
more closely with him, in our work?
4) How will hospitality take shape in our lives individually and
corporately?
5) How will our life together help us fulfill the calling God has
given us?
6) How can our community's life help us commit ourselves ever more
deeply to one another, and so to Christ among us?

Answering these questions will take each of us a long way in creating
a culture at home and together which helps us to become more like
Christ.

*these questions are taken from Renovare's booklet, Explorations:
Rhythms of Life, Series 1, Part 2: Community by Christopher Webb

Reflections on the Atonement

Yesterday, I was in conversation with a friend of mine concerning the Atonement. Now, you might be thinking, what kind of friends sit around talking about the atonement? To which I would say, mine. Each week I have a wonderful conversation about spiritual issues ad theological doctrines. I cherish these conversations. Let me fill you in on some of the eye-opening conclusions we drew:

Typically the doctrine of the Atonement is limited to the the death and crucifixion of Christ. However, this is in error, for if the doctrine is thus limited without reference to the sinless life of Christ, the Resurrection, Ascension and subsequent sending of the Spirit then something less than an efficacious atonement occurred. (This is one of those points where the discipline of systematic theology is lacking by its compartmentalizing of dogma.)

What I mean is this, without a sinless life, Christ was unable to atone for others, much less himself. He would not have been the spotless lamb of God, sent to take away the sins of the world. Nor would he have been a pleasing sacrifice to God, rather his death would have been a just punishment for his sin, a punishment everyone of us should have to undergo an infinite number of times over. But as a sinless man, God was able to accept his perfect life given as an atoning sacrifice for every sin ever committed by any person.

Furthermore, to remove from the doctrine of the Atonement any mention of the resurrection, ascension and subsequent sending of the Spirit would be to cast humanity into a place of powerlessness with no hope of living a victorious Christian life over sin. If these three events are not taken to be integral to the doctrine of the Atonement then what would humanity's resulting atonement look like? I believe that without these three events, humanity would be cast back into a position very much like that of Adam. Sure our sin would have been covered, assuming of course Christ was sinless and died for us, but we would not have any power internal to ourselves to defeat the next temptation to sin. Thus we would perpetually be living a defeated Christian life, intent on reliving the 3rd chapter of Genesis over and over and over again. However, with the resurrection, ascension and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the Christians' atonement is truly efficacious. It is powerful and the power to defeat sin becomes a power internal to our new constitution as a new humanity. We no longer are subject to the temptations and sins of the fallen order, we are now redeemed and able to live the new life, a life able to choose not to sin.

The doctrine of the Atonement is so much larger than simply the death and burial of Christ, it encompasses his entire life, so that it can affect our entire life. Live on in the power of the Spirit. ...Read more

Socrates on Prayer

"Our prayers should be for blessings in general, for God knows best what is good for us." - Socrates

True enough, true enough - but does not Christ dwell in us and teach us to ask for the Kingdom to come, to ask for our daily bread, to ask for deliverance...?

The wisdom of the world always stops short of the wisdom of God, and fails to take the leading and guiding of the Holy Spirit within humanity seriously.  Ask for blessings in general, but also ask for those specific things God has directed his people to pray for as well.

Martin Luther on Public Education

"I am very much afraid that schools will prove to be the great gates of hell unless they diligently labor in explaining the Holy Scriptures, engraving them in the hearts of youth. I advise no one to place his child where the Scriptures do not reign paramount. Every institution in which men are not increasingly occupied with the Word of God must become corrupt."

Martin Luther: b. 1483-1546

A New Movie that we all need to see

The Blind Side is an upcoming movie that looks well worth seeing. View the trailer now:

Federalist Paper #31 - Taxation

There are a series of papers written by Hamilton on the general power of taxation conferred upon the legislative branch of the government. In the 31st paper, Hamilton repeats the argument of those opposed to this general power. Here is their argument,

"But an indefinite power of taxation in the latter (Federal govt.) might, and probably would in time, deprive the former (State govt.) of the means of providing for their own necessities; and would subject them entirely to the mercy of the national legislature. As the laws of the Union are to become the supreme law of the land, as it is to have power to pass all laws that may be NECESSARY for carrying into execution the authorities with which it is proposed to vest it, the national government might at any time abolish the taxes imposed for State objects upon the pretense of an interference with its own. It might allege a necessity of doing this in order to give efficacy to the national revenues. And thus all the resources of taxation might by degrees become the subjects of federal monopoly, to the entire exclusion and destruction of the State governments."

Unfortunately, Hamilton dismissed this critique as speculatory writing, "It should not be forgotten that a disposition in the State governments to encroach upon the rights of the Union is quite as probable as a disposition in the Union to encroach upon the rights of the State governments. What side would be likely to prevail in such a conflict, must depend on the means which the contending parties could employ toward insuring success. As in republics strength is always on the side of the people, and as there are weighty reasons to induce a belief that the State governments will commonly possess most influence over them, the natural conclusion is that such contests will be most apt to end to the disadvantage of the Union; and that there is greater probability of encroachments by the members upon the federal head, than by the federal head upon the members."

Has this dismissal proved true? I would submit that it has not, federal taxes are greater than State taxes, and how does the State make up the difference, by appealing to the Federal government for special funds, be it for Transportation projects, Education projects, Social welfare projects or whatever else is needed. The States do not support themselves. In fact, quite the contrary, if the Federal government were to cease providing funding to the States, much of the so called "projects of social benefit" would dry up, for the people would refuse to vote for such legislators. It is only in a Federal government that has subjected the State and the State government that has aligned itself with a great funding source that produces the inefficiencies we see in our present system. Sure, I concede that the system is not as bad as it could be, but neither is it what was envisioned either.

What do you think? ...Read more

Reflections on my struggle to pray

As I was reading an article challenging me to take seriously the warfare which occurs in a life of prayer, the author closed with 3 questions. One of them I hope to address here. The question is, "What strategies does the enemy use to keep you from praying?"

It would be easy to answer that question in the generic, but that would fail to bring it home personally and thus would allow me to continue in my struggles to pray. So I will answer it based upon my reflection. Busyness is the chief strategy employed against me. Since my life is available to others as a pastor, I frequently am up late reading or researching questions related to individuals and my church. This in turn causes me to be tired and unwilling to wake up early in order to pray. Then the day gets going and fills up with many appointments or tasks - visiting folks, studying for sermons, preparing for meetings, etc. Each of these things, I see as more important, or having a more immediate bearing and more fruitful harvest than prayer.

That observation leads me to the second strategy. The enemy has deceived me into thinking that activity is more important and beneficial than prayer. I have become a student of my culture and learned exactly what it has taught to me: Productivity is king. Yet this paralyzes a life of prayer, for prayer doesn't always equate to a tangible task being completed today. Rather prayer is a way of expressing dependence upon God and an inability to accomplish the tasks of life without the Father's involvement.

These two strategies have been effective for much of my life in keeping me from praying. But by naming them, and recognizing their use in my life I am becoming more aware and the choice is now clearly before my eyes. Slowly I am choosing a new way of living, a way in which prayer is an integral part of my daily life, but I still struggle. The simple changes I have made to overcome my struggle include ensuring that one meal each day is spent unhurried with my family so that we can pray and read Scripture. Additionally, I have begun carrying a prayer journal with me to record requests and answers and I seek to pray through its pages a few times each week. My goal would be daily, but I am only making it about 3 times each week at this time. Praise God, that is three times more than last year. These two changes are showing their fruit as prayer is integrating itself into my life.

So I close with the question I opened with, "What strategies does the enemy use to keep you from praying?" ...Read more

Graham Dienert on Prayer

"Many people pray as if God were a big aspirin pill; they come only
when they hurt."

A Worship parable

Pastor bc cumings of Mountain View CRC wrote a D.Min. thesis a number of years ago on Worship. The thesis was titled Waterways of Worship. I would like to share one of his parables on worship with you. It comes from page 226 where he is discussing Worship as a rich relationship and not a ritual.

There was a prince whose massive estates were given to the care of certain stewards during an extended time of frequent absence. He was not always absent. From time to time he would return to visit his estates and the people who worked them. Both the master and his subjects seemed agreed that the visits were all too short.

As time progressed, one of the stewards became concerned with the manner in which the common people presented themselves to their sovereign. He took it upon himself to instruct the people as to when and how and in what demeanor they should address the Prince upon his returns. Instruction in protocol was regularly given and became the focus of his administration. He drew up entire books filled with stately etiquette and greetings of carefully worded grandeur. So effective was his training program that the common folk came to believe that they need only repeat the words written in their books of protocol to maintain good relations with the Prince.

On the given days and at the appointed times, the Prince would return to find the workers of this estate well-schooled in their etiquette. With pomp and pageantry they greeted his every visitation. The people came in their finest attire and they read blessings, eulogies, and litanies of great eloquence. The occasion always left the people and their prince with the impression that something lofty, gracious, and beautiful had happened—though perhaps they could not say what it was.

On other of the Prince’s estates, the steward was rather more personal and pragmatic. “I am not so much concerned with show as with reality,” he was heard to say. “Our great Prince deserves rich fruits, not fancy words.”
When the Prince visited this estate, he was greeted warmly and directly by people dressed in working garments. There was no pageantry, no ornate words. In fact, little by way of celebration at all. The work paused only long enough to allow for direct and simple words to be exchanged between the Lord and his people. Once the converse was over, it was back to the work and fruitfulness.

Finally the day arrived on which the Prince came into his kingdom. At his coronation the stewards arrived at the palace, each convinced that his administration of the estate was superior. Each anticipated that the people of his estate would receive the better commendation because of the administration under which they had served. Each secretly looked down a rather self-satisfied nose at the other.

The steward of the regal estates was confident his people were more pleasing to the new King because of the stability, propriety and respect of the words he had composed for them to say. At the same time, he was quite sure that the King would be displeased with the low-brow words and tattered apparel of the workers from the other estate. Certainly, the King of such a rich and influential domain was pleased only by the best of words, ceremonies and apparel.

The steward of the more folksome estates was also confident his people would fare better before the King than those of the other estate. Their words were not lofty, but they were genuine. They had not squandered precious time celebrating the King when he had been a Prince. They had remained at their posts—working the ground and bringing forth fruits for the coronation banquet. None of his people had presumed to read someone else’s greeting to their King. Their words were their own.
But when the King turned to the people of his estates, eh gave preference to neither the regal estates nor the common estates. Instead he judged each person concerning matters of the heart.

To one he declared, “Your words were not your own in composition, but you strove diligently to make them your own in significance. They became to you an occasion for raising the level of our discourse to loftier, more noble things. Well done.”
To another he frowned, “You spoke to me with high and lofty phrases but your heart and mind never rose above the pig sty. Thus your words were false to you and odious to me, filled with disdainful complacency. Was it not worth it to you to breathe life and meaning into your wonderful words and pretty turns of speech? You are unfaithful and fit only for my contempt.”
When the servants from the common estates approached the throne, they too found the King interested in deeper things than the manner of address and decorum they practiced.

To one he smiled, and bid him approach the throne, “My dear old friend, how I treasure the memory of our long discussions over the feed trough. You have no idea the good you did me by your forthright respect and ready service. I look forward to feeding and grooming the livestock with you again and again in the royal stables.”

Yet at the sign of another his face fell, “Oh, you,” He muttered. “You took my visits for granted and presumed to speak with me as if we were equals. Your so-called service to me was a wispy veil for your self-serving attitude. You were careless in your thoughts and actions toward me, I shall take very little care over what becomes of you in my kingdom.”

By the time the stewards approached the throne, their confidence had melted away. The steward of the royal estates had acted in good conscience for his attempts to dignify the communion of his people with their Master by lending them order and nobility. But he was suddenly aware that in the doing, he had traded away the honest and reverent intimacy his people might have known with their ruler. The steward of the common estates was glad for his emphasis upon service and fruitful labors, but suddenly felt denuded and inappropriate in the presence of such a magnificent King.

The King read the heart of each in their eyes. He said nothing, but under his gaze the stewards turned one to the other and tearfully grasped hands. “We have much to learn from one another,” they agreed.
As they turned to the King, and bowed low before him, no words were exchanged—only the smile of their Master and the prospect of many happy days setting the balance in the kingdom.
...Read more

Sold out for Jesus?

See this great post by a young family sold out to Christ and willing to abandon their life for the sake of those in need. This is one amazing story of Adoption and how God works to change people into his hands and his feet.

Amazing Grace by Il Divo

Here is an amazing 4 minute video of one of the most beloved hymns of all time: Amazing Grace. Watch it.

26th Federalist Paper and Israel's request for a King

Recently I finished reading Alexander Hamilton's 26th Federalist Paper. In this particular text, the argument is made for restraining the powers of a strong standing army perpetually, but not limiting the legislative branch in their ability to call up an army. Hamilton argues that forcing the democratically elected officials to review a military budget every 2 years will bring to the people's attention the question, "Is this army really needed right now?"

He goes on to write,

"Schemes to subvert the liberties of a great community REQUIRE TIME to mature them for execution. An army, so large as seriously to menace those liberties, could only be formed by progressive augmentations; which would suppose, not merely a temporary combination between the legislature and executive, but a continued conspiracy for a series of time. Is it probable that such a combination would exist at all? Is it probable that it would be persevered in, and transmitted along through all the successive variations in a representative body, which biennial elections would naturally produce in both houses? Is it presumable, that every man, the instant he took his seat in the national Senate or House of Representatives, would commence a traitor to his constituents and to his country? Can it be supposed that there would not be found one man, discerning enough to detect so atrocious a conspiracy, or bold or honest enough to apprise his constituents of their danger? If such presumptions can fairly be made, there ought at once to be an end of all delegated authority. The people should resolve to recall all the powers they have heretofore parted with out of their own hands, and to divide themselves into as many States as there are counties, in order that they may be able to manage their own concerns in person."

Obviously Hamilton felt that the answer to each of his questions was "No." However, time would tell that, should our military,police and intelligence establishments decide to impinge on our liberties, their is nothing that the general American could do to repel such an infringement. His last statement stands, our only solution is to do away with representative government and move towards true democracy. But the problem with this is the fickle, changing opinions of people. We are so easily swayed to the left and then to the right, generally based on what serves our best interests. No, the solution is truly to be found in the kingly reign of Christ.

For Christ alone leads us in the way of self-denial, love and peace. He teaches us to give and not take. He alone, can bring us true security even in the midst of military infringements upon our freedoms. Christ is the solution to all our governmental woes, to cast ourselves at the cross and lament our desire to rule ourselves. Hey, this is starting to sound strangely like 1 Samuel 8 and the Israelite desire to have a King instead of allowing the Lord to rule them. Read the story and draw your own conclusions on the path forward. ...Read more

2 Kingdom Theology

Here is a great post on 2 kingdom Theology

Leadership and Decision making

Carl Trueman gives an insightful essay on why leadership must make choices and why cultural postmodernism is destructive to true leadership.

On Christless Preaching

Here are some great quotes from Spurgeon on Christless preaching:

I struggle with this, having seen so very few examples of Christ centered preaching, but this is my goal, proclaim Christ fully. May you be encouraged as you read Spurgeon's thoughts.

Does history teach us anything?

George Wilhelm Hegel, a 19th century philosopher, wrote, "What experience and history teach is this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history or acted on principles."

Is this true in the Christian church?  Possibly for at times the same heresies pop up their heads and large sections of society accept them.  It is at these times that God raises up reformers in order to proclaim the faith again.  In Israel's history this is the position of the judges and the prophets, in church history it was the place of the great councils like Nicea and Chalcedon.  In the 16th and 17th century its was Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards and others.  But yet again, there are heresies arising in the churches: pluralism, salvation by works and others.

Has history not taught us that Christ alone is our salvation and no other faith can save, for no other faith proclaims a salvation by faith apart from works.  Yet, there is a fascination these days with proclaiming that in order to be saved one must be a social justice advocate, or an accepter of other faith traditions or willing to compromise the exclusivity and divinity of Christ.  Yet, historic Christian faith has always denied these.  Why then is the church turning away from it's foundations in Christ?

Maybe Hegel was right, maybe we don't learn from history.  Then again, maybe he is wrong, maybe we don't know our history and therefore we are unable to learn from it.  I urge you to read about the history of the church.  A great way to start with is InterVarsity Press' Pocket Histories of the Christianity.  There are a number of great titles like: 

 

Augustine and His World (paperback) 

Christianity and the Celts (paperback) 

The Expansion of Christianity (paperback) 

Faith in the Age of Reason (paperback) 

Faith in the Medieval World (paperback) 

Francis of Assisi and His World (paperback) 

Luther and His World (paperback)

2 Great Quotes on Prayer

"To be a Christian without prayer is no more possible than to be alive without breathing." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

"Prayer does not change God, but it changes him who prays." - Søren Kierkegaard

Polyamory, not polygamy

Here is a great commentary on a recent newsweek article concerning the changing tide of sexuality in the Western World.

Polyamory -- The Perfectly Plural Postmodern Condition

Shared via AddThis

Prayer thoughts

It has been a few weeks since I have written on prayer. Personally, I have been struggling in my prayer life, mostly from tiredness. It is amazing how our physical stamina affects our spiritual vitality. At the time when I would seemingly need to pray the most, in my tiredness and exhaustion, I actually pray the least. Praise God for our mediator Jesus Christ, who sits at the right hand of God and intercedes for us when we can't intercede for ourselves.

I am so very grateful for our Savior Jesus Christ and his immense concern for each of us, that he prays for our very union with God, as he is united with the Father. John 17:21-23 says, "21 [I ask] that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."

Will you begin praying for union with God? Will you pray for others to be united to the Father? This truly is the greatest prayer we can pray and even when we aren't praying it, the Son is praying for us. To God be the glory!
...Read more

Hillary Clinton's Speech in Somalia

Below are excerpts from Clinton's recent trip in Africa. While meeting with Sheik Ahmed of Somalia, she stated, "They [Al-shabab] see Somalia as a future haven for global terrorism...Our information is that al-Shabab not only uses foreign fighters and foreign money but foreign ideas in its attack on the people of Somalia," she said. There is also no doubt that al-Shabab wants to take control of Somalia and use it as a base from which to influence and even infiltrate surrounding countries and launch attacks against countries far and near." from NPR Transcript

These statements sound strangely familiar as I reflect on the kinds of language used by the Bush presidency prior to invading Afghanistan and Iraq. Will the Obama administration risk a direct invasion? Likely not, the American public and the military forces wouldn't stand for it, but will we see large amounts of funding and "aid" being delivered? More than likely. This has more of the making of Iran contra than either of the 2 ongoing fronts. What I foresee happening is a large cache of weapons and training being delivered in exchange for help in toppling other 'rogue nations', a government will be established that is initially hospitable to US interests but which will ultimately deteriorate and turn on us much as our others attempts as bolstering failing governments has done in the past - think Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan...

These are some initial thoughts on foreign policy.

Between Two Worlds: Calvin's Death-Bed Charge to Older and Younger Men

Between Two Worlds: Calvin's Death-Bed Charge to Older and Younger Men

Posted using ShareThis

Questioning Classic Christianity #4

Here is our fourth round of emails. the format is the same, my friend's email and my response:

Friend wrote on July 14, 2009

Scott,

Ah summer. So many mountains to climb and so little time to engage in lengthy e-dialogue on matters of theological concern...

In brief, some thoughts on each of your main points.

First off, I have to say I do take scripture seriously and think on one level I approach it similarly to you. I believe that many of the stories in the Bible are powerful and useful for understanding the character of God, the complexity of the human condition, and the difficulty and beauty of our journeys of faith. I try to read it similar to how you describe, with an open mind to how God might be speaking to me in my present situation. That said, on another level, I apply a rigorous and critical eye to scripture and to text in general be it Christian, Muslim, Hindu, secular or whatever. I am an equal opportunity believer and an equal opportunity skeptic.

As far as absolute truths are concerned, I am more convinced of absolute truth than at any point in my life previous. I view faith as a constantly deepening friendship, and as I have befriended God more deeply with the years, I am more convinced of God's reality. And it's not something that I simply hold intellectually in my mind, it's something I know in my heart, and have experienced in my body! I view this knowing as a friendship that grows more and more deeply as God reveals more and more of himself to me daily.

At the same time, I'm skeptical of the vast majority of bullshit that masquerades as truth from all quadrants of society and which comes out of certain sectors of every religious traditions. I believe that the journey of faith requires both a childlike simplicity and a mature skepticism. I will happily claim the name of doubting Thomas. I need to feel the holes in Christ's hands, and the sensation of his skin for me to be convinced. My measure for accepting truth is whether I can experience it personally and directly, and not have merely to only take another's word for it.

As far as the issue of textual transmission and accuracy is concerned, I certainly have heard and am impressed by the wide proliferation of the Christian scriptures. I would just say that I have no doubt in my mind that the other historical and mythic texts you refer to have drifted far astray from their original textual or oral form. I'd also be interested to compare the numbers on copies of religious texts from the other major religions and see if they in any way compare to those of Christianity.

As for learning Greek, how I would love to if I had a few hundred hours to spare, but don't realistically see it as a priority at the present time.

A few questions for you, since I fear our conversation is really little more than two occasionally bisecting monologues.

By what authority do you accept the Bible as true? So far you've based the authority of scripture on certain scriptures. If memory serves me correctly, that's internal logic, which doesn't go too far with me since I don't accept the veracity of those texts you base your claims off of.

I've been impressed to hear of your cross-church collaborations, which sound like they're bringing a lot of new energy and insight to Hope in Christ. I'm curious what your connections look like across faith lines and whether you're engaged in dialogue and learning with people of other religions?

And I'm interested to learn more about your faith journey in general. What was the turning point in your questioning and searching that led you to the place where you're now at? And what are the faith questions you are still asking and wrestling with today?

I fear we could go on lobbing theological arguments at one another indefinitely and do little more than wear our keyboards out in the process. But to hear about your present journey with God, now there is something refreshing and vital I am interested to hear.

As always, thanks for your patience as I am a great procrastinator when it comes to my email, especially when the temperature reaches about 70. And yes, feel free to post on your blog, and as I come to think about it, feel free to include my name as well if you wish.

Best,

Friend

My reply dated July 28, 2009

Friend,

I appreciate your honesty and your willingness to dialog. Also accept my apologies for anything which comes across as an attack on your struggle with he faith, or a demeaning of your reading of the Scriptures. That said, there is a fundamental difference in your approach and mine. You used the phrase I try to read it to see "how God might be speaking to me." And then you go on to discuss your critical eye of any and all Scriptures. Therein lies, the difference. I come with a fundamentally different belief than you. I do believe this is the word of God and so I also believe that God is speaking to me through the text. This isn't an anthropological text, it is a divinely sanctioned theological text. Sure it describes the complexities of the human condition, and the beauty and difficulty of the life of faith, as you mention, but it is not "useful for understanding the character of God" it is the very revelation of how God has chosen to be revealed. This is fundamentally different.

As you describe your life with God, i am encouraged, but I am also reflective that Jesus said, John 20:29 “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” You draw an unnecessary distinction between faith and experience. For you, as I understand your letter, experience is the final arbiter, but Jesus had a different way of seeing it. He validated the realm of faith without experience, trust without reason. That said, I believe every true believer has both at work in their life.

Which is the set of questions you are asking me. What is the experience I have had to justify my belief. Let me outline it for you, but first a bit of history. I wasn't raised in the church, but came to Christ in late Jr. High after watching my parents accept Christ. There life was radically changed and so I entered in simply with the thought, "I'll give it a try." I began studying the Bible and took it as a self help book able to make me acceptable to God. That turned me into a class A hypocrite. I judged others who didn't make the grade and was lenient on myself. Classic phariseeism. Then in my freshman year of college, while studying and praying I asked God what he wanted me to do with my life. The response was audible and startling, "If you will follow me I will take you to the seven continents and you will have a tough life but you will enjoy it. If you don't follow me, you will just have a tough life."

I choose the former, not knowing what that meant but thinking I did. That led me to train to become a missionary in Africa. During that training I had a crisis of faith, and began questioning everything about the faith, including whether it was true or not. Here I was, preparing to go and teach people about Jesus and at the same time wondering if the Christian Gospel was true. I began exploring Orthodox Judaism and Buddhism. Both seemed more "achievable" for the disciplined soul and the adherents of each faith were far more moral and enjoyable a people to be around than most Christians. One day I cried out to God in the shower and said, "If I am to be a Christian, you better reveal to me what is true about Christianity before I finish my shower."

Now, I don't advise that line of interaction with the Almighty God, but He was gracious and in that moment I heard His voice again as He expounded the grace of the Gospel and the Love of the Father for me. He revealed how Christ completely atoned for all my sin past, present and future and made me full acceptable in His sight. That revelation, which is entirely consistent with the Bible, changed my person and freed me from having to be something to others. I was free in Christ to be whom God made me to be. I went and spent the year in Africa working with Animists and exploring their teachings and sharing Christ with them. The message is fundamentally different, as any animist will attest and as many did attest to me in the bush of Zambia.

Upon returning to the USA, I had another crisis of faith, mostly because I anticipated staying in Africa for 10 years but due to a variety of circumstances we were only there for 1 year. Sitting in the desert, I cried to God for direction and a future. This time, no voice, but a vision of stained glass which I recognized as my life falling to the ground and shattering, then a hand reaching in and picking up pieces of my life and remaking it into a new stained glass of His making. Not all the pieces were taken, many were left on the ground, but it was a comfort that my ways and picture of life was crashing in order for God's way and picture of life to be born.

Fast forward to the present. What am I learning? I am learning about a heart of thankfulness and seeing all the good that God has made available to us. I am also learning what it is to have God be silent. More than ever I know he is present, but more than ever he has quit answering my questions and is leaving me to simply enjoy his presence. To take direction from his word, for most of my questions can be answered from a study of the Bible. In fact, most of my questions about how to live, what to do or not to do are already expounded upon. Take for instance adoption. We are adopting, but i am questioning whether now is the right time. Truth be told, there is never a right time. But God has called his people to care for those at risk. You can read more about this in my earlier posting on Saul's rejection.

Or take my pride, my struggle with generosity. All of these I know the answer, deference to others and liberality with the gifts God has given. I don't need God to tell me what to do, I need to do it. Or maybe the next great question I have is how to raise my children to love the Lord. How to model a life of prayer to them, when I struggle with praying. These are all the questions I am struggling with. Totally different from you as a single person, I fear, but they are mine.

You ask by what authority I accept it as true. I accept it based on its own authority. Does it claim to be the word of God? Is it able to effect its claims? Yes to both. You may call it internal logic, but the simple truth is we always determine our authorities. One who doesn't claim it as authoritative does so on his own footing, with no more valid reason than his arrogance or intelligence or lack thereof. By what authority does anyone accept any authority as legitimate? It is by internal choice. For you to choose not to accept it means that you have set yourself up as the final arbiter of truth, a dangerous position since the human heart is easily swayed by our own desires, whims and fancies.

As far as current interfaith connections, I must admit that I am currently not involved in any people interactions with others of varying faiths. That is not to say that I have not been in the past. Before moving to Bellingham, I regularly met with 2 New Agers, 1 ex-catholic, and 2 agnostics. We had great friendship and discussion but frankly, we had very little in common related to spiritual faith. It looked like it on the surface, as far as hopes for peace, justice, etc. But the practice of these was vastly different. Peace is very different depending on the faith, and so is justice. Currently I read widely and am getting ready to start reading the Koran which I haven't read before.

As far as the textual history of other faith documents, I haven't done alot of reading myself on this. And I will now that you have raised the point. But my initial search for websites has led me to the following:

Related to the Koran
John Gilchrist's Jam' Al'Qur'an: the codification of the Qur'an Text ...Read more

Supreme Court and Foreign Law

Here is an interesting article on how Supreme court justices are turning to foreign law in order to interpret the Constitution. The two highest profile cases where this has occured are Lawrence v. Texas in which British law governing Sodomy practices was referenced to overturn an earlier Supreme Court decision on the same issue. The other case is Roper v. Simmons in which the execution of juveniles was outlawed.

Whether or not you agree with the outcomes of the cases in question is irrelevant, the issue at stake is whether we should be looking to other countries in establishing our own internal laws.