HeartQuest 101

On Tuesday, April 20, 2010, there was an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that killed eleven workers, devastating eleven families from Day One. I’ve read this is the worst environmental disaster in US history, but just how big is the spill? Imagine if the spill was in Virginia Beach, how far would it reach? Click here to find out, (or to type in your city and state).

Today, this event in the Gulf is on Day 56, completing eight full weeks of disaster for the Gulf coast. I read an interesting detailed list of the President’s activity during this national crisis. But on a serious and spiritual note, I have a few questions to ask…

How is our sin like an oil spill? Let me suggest that as the oil comes from deep inside the earth and gushes out to destroy life and the environment, our personal sin comes from the deepest and darkest regions inside of us and also leads to a similar destruction of life and family.

How do we tend to deal with that sin? The experts at BP and the US government have tried numerous methods to cap the well and stop the flow of oil. One method after another has failed and we wonder if the oil leak will ever be stopped. What are some ways that we try to cap the sin spillage in our lives? We try one thing after another until we discover that there is only one way to cap the sin problem we have, the perfect sacrifice of Jesus on the cross (John 14:6, Romans 5:8). The bottom line is that we try to cap the well on our own, with little success. When a relationship is breached, the only way to mend the relationship is to follow the prescription of the offended one. We cannot come to him on our own terms.

How can we clean up the mess we have created? BP is utilizing thousands of employees and volunteers to help clean up this oil spill. When it comes to getting rid of sin, if we could clean up on our own, we would not really need Jesus or the Holy Spirit to work through us. The goal of the believer is to conform to the image of Jesus (Romans 8:29) and the Spirit is called our Helper (John 15:26). Let’s work in partnership with the Holy Spirit to conform to the image of the Son. That’s what sanctification is all about, becoming more and more like Jesus in thought, word and deed. So, for those who have trusted Christ, the gospel has effectively capped our rampant sin spillage.

How does sin impact the lives of others? Just as this oil spill has affected hundreds of thousands of people and communities, sin also has a lasting effect on others. Think about how your sin has affected those around you; your relationships at work, with your wife, your business dealings, your peace. The dark oil of sin is lurking just off the coast ready to destroy whatever it can cover. We can set out a boom, but the source of the leak needs to be capped.

Why do we often feel so helpless? Romans 1:16 tells us about the power that is available to us, to save everyone from the looming oil spill of sin. Tony Hayward said in the BP public relations commercial that “we will make this right.” The “good news tells us how God makes us right in his sight.” (Romans 1:17) Praise God that he has been in charge from Day One and gets the job done for those who know they cannot survive without him.

 Print This Post  Email This Post

The President was in South Bend Indiana this past weekend, speaking at Notre Dame’s graduation, and he basically talked about talking about abortion. He evaded the issue and diminished the importance of the debate.  Al Mohler, President of Southern Seminary, brings out a good point, “if the President had actually addressed the issue of abortion (like actually offering a defense or rationale for his position) he would have dignified the issue.  Instead, Mr. Obama issued what amounted to a call for civility.”

One part of the speech really jumped out at me. When the President called for Americans to agree that, while differing on abortion, “we can still agree that this heart-wrenching decision for any woman is not made casually,” he failed to make clear why this is true.  If the unborn baby is not a person who possesses a basic right to life, why is the decision to abort so “heart-wrenching?”  If the fetus is just a collection of cells, why is abortion so difficult for the mother?

As I taught my discipleship class this past semester, Developing a Christian Worldview, and to put this topic in context, we discussed seven other major worldviews. One was naturalism. Regarding life, naturalism embraces the Darwinian teachings of evolution and rejects divine creation of the universe in general and the unique creation of mankind in particular. In essence humans are a product of time plus chance with no intelligence behind the process.

While not going into all the details, think about how this works itself out practically. Evolution teaches that humans are nothing special, no more than apes that made it to a higher form and intelligence. All animals have basic instincts that drive them, to eat, find shelter and reproduce. So, when our children are taught evolution as a fact (ignoring a lot of logical debate to the contrary) it is little wonder why teens and young adults participate in immoral behavior… they are nothing more than animals acting on instinct. There is no higher moral standard that would curb their instincts. They have neither reason nor capacity to say no to sexual urges, which in a lot of situations produces offspring.

So, back to the issue of abortion, I see this as the classic example of “survival of the fittest.” Our society can eliminate the most vulnerable of our community based solely on the reason of convenience, or subconsciously believing that the mother is more powerful over the unborn infant. Before you go ballistic, “what about cases of rape, incest or the life of the mother,” I’m not an extremist. That is a debate for another day.

The President of Southern Seminary put it this way: If President Obama had actually spoken of abortion itself, rather than addressing abortion only as an issue of controversy, he would have found himself defending the indefensible, which explains why he avoids this discussion at all costs.  Yet, now that he is President, he cannot get by with claiming that this question is “above my pay grade.”

We don’t allow people to kill birthed infants, why is killing a child a few months younger acceptable in our society? I believe it all comes down to worldview. Someone with a differing worldview simply cannot understand how the other side can justify their position, and vise versa. In our day of relativism, where truth and morality are determined by the individual, there is no definitive objective moral standard or absolute truth that does not change.

 Print This Post

Cal Thomas wrote a provocative piece last week about redirecting the religious right away from failed political solutions toward Christians putting their efforts into the greater power of God’s kingdom, basically living out their faith.  

Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards? Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?

He Continues:

Suppose they (Christians) followed the admonition of Jesus to “love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans,” not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God’s love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?

While I see Christians on both sides of the “isle,” I have emphasized the notion of voting according to worldview much more than being partisan or jumping on a certain band wagon of celebrity endorsements. Each party’s platforms say a lot about worldview.

Case in point: voting by values is not a left or right decision. Which values have higher priority? Both parties can be labeled pro life, because one party holds a value of life in protecting unborn children in the womb, while another party values life through the ending of war. Some hold the value of “peace not war” higher than the value of “life over choice.” Its worldview, no one is going to change their views, so why argue about it? Just agree to disagree. Cal Thomas says we have failed to persuade anyone, so let’s do something else!

I have often wondered if a committed Christian can even be an effective president. Why? How can you live out “love your enemies” or “turn the other cheek” and still be able to lead as Commander in Chief of the military? We might talk about “just war,” but Bonheoffer said it best, “when Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.” Perhaps out of context, but the point is valid, we should give up our rights, look out for the interests of others more than ourselves… our model is Jesus who went to the cross, and Christians through the ages who have died for their faith (after all, the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church).

Trusting in a political solution is to settle for a lesser power, which is really no power at all. Mr. Obama is not the savior and the democratic platform is not divine Scripture. The power of God transforms lives, and the only way we can transform our society is to live out what we say we believe before a watching world. 

 Print This Post

I read this quote from the daily devotional Our Daily Bread (October 23). Does it resemble an issue in our current American presidential election?

In the 18th century, silhouettes (shadow profiles traced and cut from black paper) were a popular alternative to costly portraits. The word took its name from the French controller general of finance, Étienne de Silhouette. During the Seven Years War against England, he tried to raise revenues by heavily taxing the wealthy. Victims of his high taxes complained and used the word silhouette to refer to their wealth being reduced to a mere shadow of what it once was.

The writer goes on to mention that Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians, and then the prophet Jeremiah was lamenting over the city of God being a shadow of its former existence. I pray this will not be the case with the USA.

I’m not a political activist or a spin guru. I’m just an average guy living paycheck to paycheck trying to make ends meet (like many of you). So, with Joe the Plummer taking the heat for asking a simple question about how the Obama tax plan will affect him (and perhaps millions of other hard working Americans), I have cause to fear what the repercussions of this post might bring! But I see a couple of insights regarding Obama and a silhouette:

1. A silhouette is a creative and beautiful shadow of the real thing. Obama has been great at winning over younger voters, but do they really know where he stands on the issues, or does it even matter? Many black Americans may vote for him because he’s half Kenyan, many 20-somethings may vote for him because he’s not a “geezer,” others may be voting for change, any change, not realizing the not all change is for their benefit. I love this video piece from Peter Doocy during the Democratic National Convention this past summer. He makes a remarkable parallel between this generation voting for president (many for the first time) and voting for their favorite American Idol.
2. A silhouette is outlined in detail, but the core of the image is hidden. Who knows the real stories behind several issues: “spread the wealth,” involvement and influence in ACORN, apparent discepancies in his birth certificate(s), his Indonesian Islamic school record indicating his nationality as Indonesian (and religion as Islam, which was likely the faith of his mother’s husband at the time – I do not question his faith in Christianity), government run health care as pseudo-socialism, championing the cause of common working class people yet forsaking the basic right to life, the shadow of the whole “associations” issue with Ayers, Rezko, and his mentor and pastor Jeremiah Wright.
3. The original Silhouette heavily taxed the wealthy. Do we see a parallel here? Perhaps research into this 18th century event would reveal the extent of the complaints of the affluent. According to Wikipedia, Silhouette was “criticized by the nobility including Voltaire, who thought his measures, though theoretically beneficial, were not suitable for war time and the French political situation.” So, raising taxes on the wealthy was not good during a time of war? So, it looks good on paper but does not work out in reality?

And don’t get me started on swing states and undecided voters! People are way to fickle… it’s all about me, if Obama is going to pay me a $1000 rebate, or provide me a job, or pay my health insurance, I’ll vote for him, who wouldn’t? Unless you vote according to principles and your worldview. You either stand for something and vote your convictions or you sell out to the highest bidder for what you get out of it.

There are just way too many Obama issues that go against my worldview. I don’t have to agree with everything about McCain to vote for him, but I sure don’t agree with Obama, no matter how attractive he is, or how many celebrities talk him up. Another thing, if the democratic trinity of Pelosi, Reed and Kennedy are for him, I know I can’t stand with him!

 Print This Post  Email This Post

Texas pastor Voddie Baucham participated in a CNN interview with Margaret Feinberg. Is he serious about female leadership in the community? Notice, it’s not just spiritual leadership within the church, but for a woman to be in leadership at all.

[ Watch it and listen for yourself. ]

So, the woman’s place is in the home (Titus 2:4-5)? And one could assume a woman should keep her head covered, at least keep her hair long (1 Corinthians 11:6) but not braided, nor should she adorn herself with gold or pearls (1 Timothy 2:9)! Do the women of his congregation take the Bible that literally? For fear of sounding liberal, I have a problem with his interpretation. 

For one, if Sarah Palin is going to lead spiritually, Voddie Baucham might have a point, but since she has the potential to lead politically, I don’t get it.

Secondly, if women can’t lead in the church based solely upon their gender, those who agree with that position must logically take women out of all leadership positions, like even with children and youth. If women are not to have authority over “a man” (singular in 1 Timothy 2:12, like a husband, not necessarily over the community at large) support for male-only senior pastors might be legitimate. If they are not to have authority over a man because Eve was deceived first (like women may be more prone to heresy) why would we allow women to be in charge of our smallest and most vulnerable community members who can’t discern truth from error?

Third, it seems to me that Rev. Baucham should not have women in any leadership positions in his church. I’m thinking that is not the case. I would argue that his position applied politically might mean we remove women from most any community leadership… military, police, judges, the PTA, high school teachers, college professors. I tend to see God gifting all of His children with abilities to be used in His service. Heaven forbid that women would use the excuse of gender for not “stepping out of the boat” to do what they sense God calling them to do.

I cannot tell my daughter that although God has given her certain gifts of leadership and a passion to make a difference in the world, but she cannot do certain tasks because she did not get the right private parts.

 Print This Post