Weekend Review 12-21-08

What an interesting weekend.  The windchill on Sunday morning was more than -10 and the snow drifts were overwhelming.  We actually got stuck trying to get back into our driveway after church.

• I am going to start on a downer.  Clarie Howe passed away this weekend.  The funeral will be on Tuesday.  While this is depressing, in its own weird way it reminds me of Christmas.  It reminds me that the world is not the way that God intended it to be, so he sent His son to bring "shalome" here and begin to make it right.
• It is great to have Jeff back in town to lead our worship.  Our other worship leaders did a great but it is good to see Jeff back.
• I can't really say that I was pleased with my message yesterday.  I knew what I wanted to do, but I just could not seen to get it done.  I always strive to make the weekend before Christmas one of my best sermons and I came up short yesterday. 
  
• Here is why I am saying that; at the end of the message I still had people walk up to me and tell me that the message was exactly what they needed to hear.  I love serving a God who gets His message across in spite of a poor medium.  He had a message that certain people needed to hear and He made sure they heard it.  I should have been better, I should have been more polished, I should have used more scripture, but He was still perfect.
• I am really looking forward to the Christmas Eve service.  Jeff has put together quite an ordeal for the 4:00 and 5:30 services.
  

Amazing video from the former Korn guitar player

Weekend Review 12-14-08

This one will be a bit different from the past two weeks, mainly because I was not at my church.  I had a vacation Sunday left, and I decided to use it to take my family to another church here in town.  Over the past two years I have had the opportunity to worship with two other congregations, and I love this opportunity.  I do it to see what God is doing around our community and to make sure that we are not doing the same things as any other church, because if there are two churches in town doing the same thing, one of us is not needed.  Here are my thoughts on the weekend.

• We are not doing the same thing as the other three churches I have now worshipped with.  What we do is different.  We are a little edgier than the other churches that I have been with.  That is a newer accomplishment.  In years past I felt like we did a very similar service to the other larger churches in town.  this always concerned me.  This past weekend though, I went to this other church and then on Monday I watched the video of our service.  It was refreshingly different.
• I really missed my church.  I am not saying "my church" as though I own it, I am saying that because I feel so deeply connected with it.  Within the first 15 minutes of the other church's service starting, I was "homesick."  I know that they are reaching a particular audience, but I was really wanting to be back here with my FCC Family.
• Sunday night was the elders' and wives Christmas gathering.  It really is a God sighting to see those 18 people from very different backgrounds and ages just enjoy their time together.  God has blessed this church with great leadership.
• Thursday we will be doing two meals, one with all staff and one with the ministers and their wives (well, not Heather's wife, but you get the point).  I am so excited about that.
• Jeff (worship minster) comes back on Thursday as well, and I have no doubt that Friday night's concert will be great.
  

A Ministry Resume

Recently a friend asked me my opinion on what I looked for in a resume, since he was updating his. I though I would share a portion of my answer will all of you, especially those in the ministry. I am not saying that this is what everyone is looking for, but this is what makes it through the first cut of the interview process with me. It is worth what you paid for it, absolutely nothing.

Simplicity, cleanliness, creativity, originality, non-padded and longevity.

Simplicity - If it goes much over one page I won’t read it.

Cleanliness - If it does not have a clean look I won’t read it. (And by that I mean one font, three font sizes with each one being 2 points larger than the other, and enough white space on the page to make it look easy to read.)

Creativity - I need to see some creative outlet in their past and a little bit of their personality shine through the page. This can be done through a catchy one-liner in the middle of a description or it can be through any other number of means, but that one bit of creativity will allow it to stand out.

Originality - Don’t make it look like every one else’s. My least favorite part of looking over resumes was the top paragraph that was usually titled, “ministry vision” or “life purpose” or something like that. Then they would tell me how it is their dream to see people come to Christ by staying true to His Word and living as a godly example in the world.” They might as well have been Charlie Brown’s teacher. That is a waste of my time to read it and I already would not like the candidate. Who doesn’t want those things? What I want to know, if you are going to write something like that, is why you are the right fit for my church (which means you need to know a little about my church and what we are doing and how you will fit in), what makes your ministry unique from all of the other candidates (“I have the greatest collection of colored socks that you can imagine”), and what you intend to do in your ministry in the upcoming years or how your past has prepared you for this ministry (“I was left in a dumpster as a baby in the African Congo, and was raised by cannibalistic baboons. While I didn’t understand it at the time, God was using this opportunity to prepare me for Jr. High ministry).

Non-padded – Look if you don’t have a lot of ministry experience, don’t fill your resume with other jobs that have nothing to do with the job you are applying for. If you do, please show how that job has prepared you for the ministry God has called you to. Show how your extra-curricular activities have been purposefully used in preparation for your job. Something I have not seen someone do, but I would be eager to see on a resume when someone does not have a lot of experience (this is not the case with you Jon, but for others you may know) is a list of personality strengths along with proofs. For example; “Evangelistic – I have baptized 8 people over the past 5 months who had no previous church experience, while I was attending Bible College,” or something like that. Basically it works like this, if I feel that you have padded your resume just to make yourself look better, I will expect you to shirk responsibilities or throw someone else under the bus in your ministry just to save face. Be a man of influence and integrity in every interaction.

Longevity –This one is huge over the long haul in ministry (this is for future reference more than right now). It is very rare to see a ministry resume with someone staying at one location for more that 4 years as a full time employee. Then they try to convince me that that have 10 or 12 years of ministry experience. No they don’t, they have 4 years of ministry experience 3 times. This is especially prevalent in youth and worship ministries. Suck it up and stick it out, then apply for a new ministry. Show that you can handle the bumps and bruises of ministry, and make sure that when you leave a church, you have a very good reason (and not liking the Sr. Minister is an unacceptable answer because how do I know that you won’t dislike me before long). It needs to be because of the church having a different direction than you were called to go, a theological difference (but make it a big one), or God flat out said it was time to go. I don’t want to hear about how the leadership doesn’t give you freedom, or how they micromanage everything. I don’t want to hear about people being mean and manipulative. I don’t want to hear about how the church was unwilling to change. It would be nice to hear someone say that they were immature and didn’t have the strength to stick it out or how they had not honed their leadership skills enough to know how to influence the church in a godly manner. I want to hear about how my church is more in line with the ministry that you want to be a part of. I want to hear about how you are excited about being able to work under my leadership or the leadership of the elders or beside the other ministers (this is not an ego trip; it is a matter of team cohesiveness).

When I look at a resume I want to be able to see you and how you are the perfect candidate for my church, not how you are the best minister ever. I don’t need the best minister ever. I need the one who is on board with our purpose and values, can be a team player, and is here for the long haul.

I hope that helps.

Weekend Reflections 12-07-08

I have shared this idea before, but I really love the quote of Abraham Joshua Heschel when he said, "I did not ask for success, I asked for wonder . . .".  I have used this quote as sort of a life verse for my ministry and God continues to answer it.  This weekend was a great example of that.

• We are in the second of three weeks without Jeff (our worship minister) as he is out on tour.  So, Larry Smith was our worship leader instead.  In my opinion, it was the best job he has done. 
  
• The team of people who count our offerings every week were very skeptical of Brian Henry's idea to pass out a candy bar to everyone who picked up their offering envelopes this year.  The general idea was that we tried to mail them out last year, which did help, but it cost us @ $1.50 per envelope set.  For $.40 we could give out a candy bar and be able to sign up new people.  It worked in an unbelievable way.  I have never seen a line of people waiting to get offering envelopes before.  That was so cool.
• The big "wonder" moment was the attendance yesterday.  We had 710 people here.  (Please notice that I did not say, "we had an attendance of 710 yesterday," because we did not.  We had 710 PEOPLE because numbers are pointless but people are priceless.)  That is the second most people we have had on a Sunday this year, and only 7 less than Easter.  I don't know where they came from, but
  
• What really amazes me about this is that last year we went way down in attendance during Christmas, so I was kind of expecting the same thing.  And it was very cold, which can leave people in bed, but the first service had more people than the second.
• JR (our student minister) rocks.  He had 97 in The Rush service yesterday.  That is the most people has has seen in his time here.
• We had the congregational meeting last night.  Things went smooth and the snack food was fantastic.
• I am really missing having Jeff around.  I miss his worship leading, his personality and his opinions - not just his skill set (an inside joke).
  

Systems, Rhythms and Accountability

Many people have struggles and troubles in their life, whether professional, personal, or relational and they want to know how to change those items that they do not desire.

Andy Stanley gave a great message a two years ago at the Catalyst Conference (which almost every minister should go to at least once) on the necessity of "systems" within a church.  The basic premise was that if something is not going the way you like it, change the system that it functions under.  Most problems in churches are the result of broken systems, not the people.  One proof text for this is the fact that God has often designed a system to keep things running smoothly, like the circulatory system, the solar system and so forth.  I agree wholeheartedly, almost.

Rob Bell regularly speaks about rhythms.  He would argue that people need more holy rhythms in their life in order to better connect with God, such as a rhythm of Sabbath or daily study times.  His proof text for this would be the rhythm of the day and night, the motion of the ocean, the high and low tide and so forth.  I agree wholeheartedly, almost.

Many other conservative teachers would promote the need for life accountability in order to help us remain pure from the world, and in order to help us survive without losing what we strive so hard for.  I agree wholeheartedly, almost.

If you want to make a major change in your life, or even just a minor adjustment, then it will require a combination of all three of these practices.  You must have a system in place so that the rhythm can properly function and without accountability there is no way to maintain the system.

Let's play it out like this; your marriage is falling apart and you can't pinpoint one particular issue for why.  On the other hand, you do feel that if something would change, perhaps the relationship could be salvaged.  Perhaps if you and your spouse could just spend more focused time together.  So create a system that says we are going to spend two hours together going through a marriage help book.  That is a system, but it won't save your marriage.

But if you commit to adding a rhythm to the system, where you spend two hours twice a month that would allow the system adjustments to make a lasting impact in the relationship. 

Then if you make a commitment to one another that you will hold each other accountable, perhaps even with punitive results, to making sure this happens, the system and rhythm will be able to continue for any duration of time.

Change in a church works the same way, as does change in your personal life.  If something is broken, create a system to bring healing, they give that system a rhythm and hold yourself accountable to it.

One more example of how this works in an institution.  We were bothered last year that many of our church's people were not bringing their Bibles.  Our fear was that this may cripple them and cause them to become atrophied in knowing how to study for themselves.

We discovered the system flaw was not that our people were not bringing their Bibles, it was that we wrote the scriptures up on the screen making it unnecessary for them to bring their Bibles.  We changed the system by only putting the book, chapter and verse on the screen, but not writing the verses out.  Our rhythm was doing it every week, and our accountability was seen three months ago when I tried to write verses on the screen for a narrative message I was giving where I was not intending to share any specific verse but cover about three chapters instead.  I was questioned before the service by three key leaders to make sure that is what I wanted and had to give clear reasoning behind the system adjustment.

Weekend thoughts 11/30/08

I have never tried this before, but I have been following a few other ministers' blogs who spend a little time each week or so just to share their thoughts on the previous weekend.  It seemed like an interesting way to keep people connected to what's going on.  Plus, it is my desire to see our church have a much greater web impact over the next two years, and part of that will be a more consistent blog.  I figure that this is a great place to start practicing. 

• The music this weekend was done by an all-teen worship band.  This is the first time that this has happened in a number of years.  Normally, we have had at least one adult on the stage with them and have asked them to "back off" on the distortion of "edginess" of their style.  That did not happen this weekend, and I thought it was amazing.  Chance got better with each service of actually leading the people.
• Probably the one thing I appreciate the most about the teens who led the worship this weekend was that they were very open and respectful of my suggestions to them.  With Jeff (our worship minister) being out of town, I showed up at their practices to check on what they were planning.  I shared a few thoughts with them, and they humbly and respectfully did each of them.  Now that is a heart for worship.
• I know that there have been a few times this year when I have put Brian Henry (the other preacher here) in an awkward position by having him give the first sermon of a new series when I may not have fully explained the idea of the series, an issue I am working on.  That was the situation yesterday as we started our Christmas series.  Brian knocked it out of the park.  He simply and actionably (I know that is not a word, but I like it anyway) shared insights from Matthew on how people can prepare themselves to worship Jesus in the midst of the busy Christmas season.
  
• I am so blessed to be in a church where I can preach and yet can still regularly hear great preaching without having to go somewhere else.
• Jeff Bush (our worship minister) is not going to be in town for the next two Sundays and I am a little worried about that, but I know that the Christmas tour that he is on will be used by God to encourage many.
• I was also blown away by the number of new and young families that we had here yesterday.  The first service had a handful of new people even though the service seemed a little "empty".  The second service required us to set up two more rows of chairs.

So there are my candid thoughts on yesterday.

religion and politics pt. 2

There have been a number of people asking me when this week's message will make it online.  Since I can't guarantee when it will be on the church website, I have posted it on my own personal site along with the thank you video from Sunday.  Check them both HERE

Bible pt. 4

Question:
How many Bibles (versions) are there in this day and age?

Answer:
Too many and not enough. 

There are so many translations that many of them conflict with one another as they try to outdo one another.  The main struggle is that so many of these translations are actually trying to push a theological and doctrinal stance while they disguise their arrogance and ignorance as a desire for "scriptural truth". 

There are not enough, because there are still Bibles passages that have not been written in a way that can help the modern reader fully understand what was being conveyed to the original audience.

The more accurate answer to the question is, well over 100.  It is hard to find an actual number because there are so many small publishing companies and online publishing and self publishing to know for sure.

Prayer pt. 1

Question (paraphrased):
What is your opinion on pre-written prayers and responsive readings?

Answer:
While it may only be a two part question, I am going to answer it like a three part. 

Part 1 - prayers that were written by the person praying

When I first started my ministry in Houston, the elders of the church were expected to pray before communion and offering each week.  Most weeks, the elder who was praying that week would stand up and pull out a 3X5 index card where they had written a prayer out and they would just read their prayer in that typical, reading from a card, tone of voice.  It often came across boring and insincere to me.

I questioned the sr. minister about why he allowed it to take place (which is actually a statement in regards to my ignorance of believing that it was the sr. minister's job to dictate every action within a church). 

The answer he gave me is the answer that I have held by ever since.  They could stand there and stammer around and worry about all of those people who are watching and listening or they could take the time prior to their "moment in the spotlight" and meticulously pour over every word that they wish to share with the Almighty God.  The question was later posed to me, between those two options, which one is more reverent and reflects an awe for God? 

Then, after the great religious answer, the non-spiritual answer was that it seemed better to have them write out these short prayers than distract everyone as they stumble through some quick quirky prayer.

Psalm 119 is a brilliant, albeit lengthy, prayer to God.  But it was written as an acrostic (at least I think that is what you call it).  The prayer starts with the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the second part of the prayer starts with the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and so on throughout every letter.  This prayer was carefully crafted and yet God though so much of it that He chose to put it at the very center of the Psalms and the center of His book.  The author may have carefully thought out, wrote and rewrote entire portions of the prayer, but in the end it is still a genuine prayer of hope, love, admiration, fear and angst toward God.

Part 2 - reading the prayers of others as though they are your own prayer

This is another idea that used to really bother me, until I started to actually read some of these prayers.

For example, there is the prayer of Francois Feacutenelon who said, "Lord, I know not what I ought to ask of Thee.  Thou only knowest what I need; Thou lovest me better than I know how to love myself." 

Or there is this prayer, usually attributed to Francis of Assisi, "Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace.  Where there is hatred, let me sow love, where there is offence, pardon, where there is discord, unity, where there is doubt, faith, where there is error, truth, where there is despair, hope, where there is sadness, joy, where there is darkness, light.  O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console, to be understood as to understand, to be loved as to love.  For it is in giving that we receive, it is in pardoning that we are pardoned, it is in dying that we are born to eternal life."

There are many others that I hold to (like the Jesus Prayer we discussed in class), but these are a few examples of prayer others have given that I am so moved by that I want to give them also.  I may adapt them or modernize them, but I often pray parts of them because they were stated better than I can state them myself.

Part 3 - responsive readings

This one is pretty simple for me.  Song of Songs is filled with responsive readings.  The Psalms have been used as responsive readings for centuries, even before Jesus.  It is hard to read Psalm 136 and not get the immediate idea of a responsive reading.  I have no trouble with them and often prefer them because they can create a participatory dialogue of worship, not just following the band.

A few years ago I was in Grand Rapids, MI for a church conference and asked our waitress that night if she had heard of the church.  She told us that she had and really enjoyed it.  I went on to ask why, and her answer was that the services were so great and they use so many neat elements, like responsive readings.  I was blown away, this college aged student then went on to tell how her church did not use things like responsive readings and so she felt so distant from the worship. 

  

Prayer pt. 1

Question (paraphrased):
What is your opinion on pre-written prayers and responsive readings?

Answer:
While it may only be a two part question, I am going to answer it like a three part. 

Part 1 - prayers that were written by the person praying

When I first started my ministry in Houston, the elders of the church were expected to pray before communion and offering each week.  Most weeks, the elder who was praying that week would stand up and pull out a 3X5 index card where they had written a prayer out and they would just read their prayer in that typical, reading from a card, tone of voice.  It often came across boring and insincere to me.

I questioned the sr. minister about why he allowed it to take place (which is actually a statement in regards to my ignorance of believing that it was the sr. minister's job to dictate every action within a church). 

The answer he gave me is the answer that I have held by ever since.  They could stand there and stammer around and worry about all of those people who are watching and listening or they could take the time prior to their "moment in the spotlight" and meticulously pour over every word that they wish to share with the Almighty God.  The question was later posed to me, between those two options, which one is more reverent and reflects an awe for God? 

Then, after the great religious answer, the non-spiritual answer was that it seemed better to have them write out these short prayers than distract everyone as they stumble through some quick quirky prayer.

Psalm 119 is a brilliant, albeit lengthy, prayer to God.  But it was written as an acrostic (at least I think that is what you call it).  The prayer starts with the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the second part of the prayer starts with the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and so on throughout every letter.  This prayer was carefully crafted and yet God though so much of it that He chose to put it at the very center of the Psalms and the center of His book.  The author may have carefully thought out, wrote and rewrote entire portions of the prayer, but in the end it is still a genuine prayer of hope, love, admiration, fear and angst toward God.

Part 2 - reading the prayers of others as though they are your own prayer

This is another idea that used to really bother me, until I started to actually read some of these prayers.

For example, there is the prayer of Francois Feacutenelon who said, "Lord, I know not what I ought to ask of Thee.  Thou only knowest what I need; Thou lovest me better than I know how to love myself." 

Or there is this prayer, usually attributed to Francis of Assisi, "Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace.  Where there is hatred, let me sow love, where there is offence, pardon, where there is discord, unity, where there is doubt, faith, where there is error, truth, where there is despair, hope, where there is sadness, joy, where there is darkness, light.  O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console, to be understood as to understand, to be loved as to love.  For it is in giving that we receive, it is in pardoning that we are pardoned, it is in dying that we are born to eternal life."

There are many others that I hold to (like the Jesus Prayer we discussed in class), but these are a few examples of prayer others have given that I am so moved by that I want to give them also.  I may adapt them or modernize them, but I often pray parts of them because they were stated better than I can state them myself.

Part 3 - responsive readings

This one is pretty simple for me.  Song of Songs is filled with responsive readings.  The Psalms have been used as responsive readings for centuries, even before Jesus.  It is hard to read Psalm 136 and not get the immediate idea of a responsive reading.  I have no trouble with them and often prefer them because they can create a participatory dialogue of worship, not just following the band.

A few years ago I was in Grand Rapids, MI for a church conference and asked our waitress that night if she had heard of the church.  She told us that she had and really enjoyed it.  I went on to ask why, and her answer was that the services were so great and they use so many neat elements, like responsive readings.  I was blown away, this college aged student then went on to tell how her church did not use things like responsive readings and so she felt so distant from the worship. 

  

where is this going

Question:
Brian, do you have an outline of where this class is going? What are the other "What About's" we can expect? Have you considered "What About" God's Kingdom or Church?

Answer:
I do have an outline. It looks something like this:

Oct

15 Angels-Demons-Satan

22 History of Christianity & the church

29 Worship-Communion-Sermons-Offering

Nov

5 Bad/Good things to Good/Bad people

12 Christian maturity-Priesthood of all believers

19 Salvation (this is the one I am most excited about)

Here is the problem with sharing this, is that I have no idea if this is actually where I am going to be going. Sometimes I just hear God telling me it is time to tackle a different topic and sometimes I have something inside of me that will just cause me to explode if I don't get it out (although I often consider those two things identical).

The other reason that I have not posted this is because of the simple fact that sometimes I bite off more than I can chew. For example, I have every intention of covering the Church and it's history next week, but that is a pretty big topic, and I am not sure I can condense it enough for it to matter.

Grace pt 1

Question (paraphrased):
In class we looked at all of the different ways that the Hebrew word for "grace" is translated.  Sometimes it is "kindness", sometimes "pity", sometimes "unfailing love", etc.  Why are there all of those different words if the word is "grace"?

Answer:
In the modern English language we use the word "love" a lot.  But in the Greek language there were four words for "love." (Stay with me, I am trying to go somewhere.)  Today we might say that we love french fries, we love our cars, we love our home, we love going to the beach, we love our kids, we love our parents and we love our spouse.  If we were to translate those into another language, like Greek, we would have to differentiate what kind of love we are talking about, because no one would actually say that they love their spouse in the same way that they love their cars (at least we would hope not).  While that one word can have different meanings, the basic theme of the word is the same.  It is a word that denotes a deep appreciation that draws us to the object of our affection.  One word with one underlying theme can be used in a wide variety of situations. 

The same holds true for "grace" in the Bible.  The word is used in different contexts with a slightly different understanding.  The translators are attempting to help us understand the context of the word by changing the way it is translated.  So, sometimes they may say "grace" and other times they may say "pity", but the underlying theme is the same. 

The main problem is not in the word usage of the translator as much as it is the definition that we give to word chosen to help us better understand.  Today we have a number of abstract definitions for words that refer to intangible thoughts. 

Let's look at "love" again.  When I say "love," many people today begin to think of the feeling of love, or the way of thinking about a person or object.  In the Hebrew, there was almost no concept of a random abstract thought (that is primarily a Greek philosophical way of seeing the world).  In Hebrew, for a thought to be a reality it must be an action that is driven by the thought.  In other words, (forgive the cheese factor here) love is a verb. 

For love to be true, there must be an action that is driven by the feeling of affection, otherwise it is a lie and empty.  That is how James could say that faith without works is dead.  Faith cannot be a concept, it must be an action. 

A translator can choose to use the word "pity" for "grace" and be just fine, so long as the reader understands that it is a pity that is seen in the action of reaching down and helping someone up.

That is how we find ourselves back to the definition we gave for grace; "God's empowering presence".  If His presence has no power than there is no grace.

If you were not in class and wonder where all of this comes from, feel free to check out my files page where you can download the class sessions.

In case you missed something

Some of you have been unable to attend one or two classes and wanted to be able to get the audio from it.  In order to help, I have opened a new website that is nothing but a file directory so that you can go to that site and download the mp3 (well, one is a wma) file.  It is www.briangorman.org

Sin pt 1

In speaking to a particular group of people, I made a couple of quick comments. They asked me about what I meant, so I thought I would share my answers with everyone.

Questions (paraphrased):

You stated that God hates divorce. Is this because it is a sin in itself or because it alters shalom (peace)? And you said that you did not believe that God puts two people together as the person they have to marry. You said that you thought God did not put individuals together but groups of people together. If so, did you mean ethnic groups . . . racial groups . . . or something else?

Answers:

1. The actual word for “divorce” in the text is a word that means “put out”. The image is when one spouse puts the other spouse out of the house the safety of a home. God “divorces” Adam and Even when He puts them out of the garden, and He actually claims to have given divorce papers to the northern tribes of Israel before the Assyrians come in and take them over. So if the act itself is a sin, that would mean that God has sinned. Since that can’t happen, that means that the vandalism of shalom that occurs in and around a divorce is what God hates. There are very few acts that are sins purely by themselves. It is the damage to God’s plan that is the sin. That is why a person can actually be committing a more heinous sin in trying to rebuke another sinner than the sinner they are trying to rebuke, as Jesus teaches in the parable of the speck and the plank.

2. Okay, now this one may need a little backtracking. When I said that God puts groups of people together, what I meant was that God made each person to live in a particular time period with all of the other people of that time period. He then chooses to put certain people within close proximity of others. And occasionally He even has them “rub shoulders” together, but He does not force them to actually meet and connect with one another because that would be an invasion of free will. It is similar to the way you may introduce one friend to another friend whom you believe will get along wonderfully. You have done the introduction because they are bother in your group of relationships, but it is their choice as to whether or not they actually connect with one another.

Bible pt 3

Question (paraphrased):
I feel as though I trouble "connecting all of the dots" of how scripture passages relates to one another. How can I learn to better connect the dots?

Answer:
After my last few posts which have been rather lengthy, I will keep this one short. I like movies. I will watch just about any movie. (I even saw Sense and Sensibility in the theater, which neither made sense nor created any sensibility.) But there are certain movies I watch almost every chance I get. I saw Dark Knight twice, I love the Usual Suspects, Signs was cool in my opinion, Citizen Cane was amazing, and (perhaps the greatest piece of cinematography ever made) Tommy Boy.

I love these movies (with the exception of Tommy Boy) because of all the twists and turns, and the foreshadowing. Throughout the movies there are scenes and statements made that allude to something that is going to happen in the future, but you usually don't catch them the first time you watch the movie. The more you watch, the more of those moments you begin to pick up on.

The Bible is very similar, the more you read it, the more you will find these threads of thought that flow through the book.

Now for my even more opinionated opinion. Once someone is a follower of Jesus, I believe that they do themselves a disservice to spend the majority of their time reading the New Testament. If God wanted us to spend all of our time in the NT then He would not allow so many trees to be destroyed just to make His book look bigger with the inclusion of the Old Testament.

Genesis, Exodus, Joshua, 1&2 Samuel, Judges, Daniel, Jonah, Nehemiah, et. al. are all great books that help the reader make more sense out of the New Testament. Then move on to Deuteronomy, Leviticus, 1&2 Kings, Isaiah, Malachi and you will see even more of the New Testament come to life.

Without reading the Old Testament, then reading the New Testament will be like walking into a great film when there is only 45 minutes left to watch. The movie just won't seem as good that way, until you watch the whole thing.

Bible pt 2

Question (Paraphrased):
It seems as though there is no easy answer in the Bible. To find the truth requires time and study to truly understand it. Why is this, and is what can we do to make it simpler?

Answer:
The apostle Paul writes, "For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love."

Without trying to come across argumentative, there really are some easy answers in the Bible, you just won't get the whole answer.

For example; is Jesus the savior of the world? Yes. Admittedly that does not explain what it means to be the savior of the world, but that understanding is not needed in its fullness to follow Jesus.

Is Jesus the only way into heaven? Yes. That does not answer how he is the only way or what it means to experience heaven, but Jesus is the only way.The Bible is simple enough to get started on your journey with God, and it is complex enough to never find the fullness of all the questions. Only the most brilliant author could write such a simply complex book.

My wife and I were discussing the essentiality of baptism a few weeks ago (please don't get the idea that these are normal conversations at my house. My wife is normally bored out of her mind when I start talking about these things.)

She had heard me trying to explain the power of baptism to a mutual friend. I shared with them why, biblically, this is a requirement of a complete relationship with God in order for Him to make us into a new creation. My wife felt that I failed our friends in my explanation. She felt that all I really needed to share was that Jesus said that baptism is something Jesus commands us to do, so we should do it. He teaches that we must be baptized and learn to obey all that he taught in order to be a disciple. What more do they need to know.

Misty is right, that is all that is needed for many people. I was baptized at an alarmingly young age because I knew Jesus said to do it and had no idea what I was committing to. As I grew older I began to question whether or not there really any value in baptism so I was forced by my curiosity (and I believe God's calling) to search for the "why" of baptism. That is when I began to see the way God always makes a new creation by a breaking or a parting of water. That is even the phrase we equate to going into labor with a new baby.

Misty was right in her answer, and I was right in my answer because they both came to the same conclusion, it was just the road we took to get to that answer that was a bit different.

God wrote His book in such a way that we can learn everything we need to know to survive by simply reading it and allowing Him to speak through it. And we can learn more about Him by diving deeper and deeper to see how far the rabbit hole goes.And when you feel that you are looking at the words on the page of your Bible, and it is just like trying to read a thesis on the power of mathematic theory in daily life (which, for me, would quickly begin to look like one of those picture-inside-a-picture things from the 80's and 90's when you were supposed to be able to see a sailboat or a scooner or something by looking through the dots), then fall back on the words of Paul who tells us to have the faith to keep reading and pushing through, the hope that God will reveal Himself to us through His book, and the love of Him and the love of people because of Him.

Now for the simple answer; read the book a lot more and the hard answers will start to become more simple.

Bible pt. 1

Question (paraphrased):
So what is the deal with the Apocrypha?

Answer:
Before we go to far, we have to set the parameters for the discussion. Often times when people today refer the The Apocrypha, they are referring to the collection of "books" (sometimes it is only a chapter or two) that the Catholic church has chosen to include in their Bible. In reality, there are a large number of apocryphal books; including Christian apocrypha, Jewish apocrypha, Judeo-Christian apocrypha, and a few other catchy names.

For the purpose of our study, we are going to focus only on the apocryphal books found in the Catholic Bible (many of them prefer the term deuteroconanical rather than apocrypha). These books include:
Tobit
Judith
additions to the book of Esther
Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
The Letter of Jeremiah
additions to the book of Daniel
1,2,3 &4 Maccabees (1 is actually a pretty good read and is where Hanuka comes from)
1 (sometimes 1&2) & 2 (sometimes 3&4) Esdras (sometimes additions to Ezra and Nehemiah)
Psalm 151
Prayer of Manasseh

The title "Apocrypha" is actually a transliteration of the Greek word apokrupha, which loosely translated means "hidden things". The actual author and the authority that these books were written with are hidden and unsubstantiated. We have a hard time tracking down the exact time, place and author, making them "hidden". Many Catholic scholars prefer "deuterocanonical" because they view them as a "secondary (deutero) listing of psudo-sacred writings (canonical).

First we will look at their background and what they are, and then we will look at why we don't have them in the protestant Bible.

The best correlation that I can find in the modern world to the ancient apocryphal writings are found in the Left Behind series or The Purpose Driven Life. Left Behind and Purpose Drive Life became immensely popular among Christian readers and some none Christian readers. These two books have been found in an overwhelming number of homes, but no one today (hopefully) considers these books to be great sacred texts on par with the Bible itself. They are good books (depending on your definition of "good) that many people have found profitable and good but not sacred.

That is a basic understanding of how the Jewish community of Jesus' day viewed the apocryphal books. They were good to read, there were some nice ideas in them but they were not the inspired word of God. When the Jewish scholars translated the Hebrew scriptures into Greed (the Septuagint or LXX) they included all of the books of the Catholic apocrypha with the exception of one. They were at the end of the scroll so as to not be confused with God's Holy Word.

After the Jews were massacred in AD 70 many of the faithful Jews that were left decided to burn and destroy their apocryphal books because they felt that reading and following them was a form of idolatry, and one reason why God would choose to punish them so severely.

When Jerome decided to translate the Hebrew Old Testament into Latin he chose not to add the majority of these books because he could not find any Hebrew texts. You see, these additional books have only been discovered in Greek, which speaks to their authenticity.

It was not until 1546 when the apocryphal books began to be seriously considered as equal to scriptures at a church council called the Council of Trent. They chose to include them for a number of reasons, but two seem to stand out.
1. By this point in church history, there was a lot of teaching that was not purely biblical and these councils demanded loyalty from the churches. The best way to command loyalty was to make an edict that said any decision of the council, and any other council in history, was considered to be on equal par with scripture as being binding. To come to that conclusion also opened the door for other writings to be equal to scripture as well.
2. In 4 Esdras there is a reference to texts that are to be hidden by only the wise until the appointed time, which is similar to Daniel 12:4,9. These apocryphal books were considered by some to be those hidden texts. Ironically this portion of the apocrypha was never even included when the Jews added the others into the Septuagint translation.

The King James Bible did include these books once more, but there were put together as a collection of writing between the Old and New Testament because they still felt the books were "profitable and good but not sacred". Today's modern Catholic Bibles often include them as equal parts of the Old Testament.

Now for some of the reasons these books are not included in the protestant Bibles.
1. Since almost all of the discovered texts were written in Greek (and one in Latin) it raises questions as to the validity of the sources. Many of these books are titled in such a way that they claim to be authored by some great biblical hero, but the text and writing clearly shows this not to be true.
2. Jews never considered them sacred, good but not sacred.
3. There are numerous false doctrines that are found in these books which have since become a vital part of modern Catholic teachings; such as purgatory, the immaculate conception of Mary, and the idea of giving money as way of buying your way out of suffering in purgatory.

Now that we are all thoroughly confused, next time I will try to keep it simpler.

Gospel pt 2.1

Okay, I realized that my statement, "when the ancient rabbis chose to translate the Hebrew texts into Greek they almost always took both of the Hebrew words and made them into the one word euangelion, or some variation of that," is not entirely true. There is a second Greek word that shows up regularly that does refer to "good" that is just a normal (not directly from God) good. The word is agathos. This is where we get the modern name "Agatha" from.

The reason I did not share that in the class or in the other blog is because it is much easier to distinguish in the text than the Hebrew words for good. When the New Testament is talking about "good news" or "gospel" then the word is euangelion but when it is talking about "good" as in 2 Timothy 3:17 when Paul refers to scripture spuring us on to "good works", then he uses the word agathos.

I hope that clears up some of the confusion.

Gospel pt 2

I will try to answer two questions today.

Questions 1&2 (paraphrased):
In the Hebrew there are the words tobh and basar for "good". Tobh usually refers to something that is good from God and basar usually refers to something that is just good. How do those words compare to the Greek translations and how can we determine which word is being used as we read our Bibles in English.

Answer:
When the ancient rabbis chose to translate the Hebrew texts into Greek they almost always took both of the Hebrew words and made them into the one word euangelion, or some variation of that. Ultimately the idea is that if it is good, than it must be from God, so all good was attributed to that one root word. The main reason, it seems, that the Hebrew language would have two different words comes back to the idea that, in Hebrew, an item is inseparable from the material that the item is made from. A wooden post, for example, is not a metal post. They are not considered the same at all other than in general appearance. In the same way, a good that is from God (tobh) is not the same as a good from man (basar). In Greek, it is all just good.

As for how you tell the difference between the two when you are reading in English; you have to get an interlinear Hebrew-English Bible, get some decent translation software, learn how to read Hebrew, or you can just think like a Greek and just consider all good (regardless of the word) to be a good that is from God.

Gospel pt 1

Question (paraphrased):  

If "Gospel" and "Evangelize" are the same work, why are they translated differently?

Answer: 

First I need to admit a mistake here.  "Gospel" and "Evangelize" are not exactly the same word in Greek.  The word "gospel" in Greek is euaggelion, which is sometimes translated "good news". 

The word "evangelize" is not actually in the Bible, but he word "evangelist" is, and it is the Greek word euaggelistës.  They are the same root word with a different suffix.  

The word "evangelist" was basically just a transliteration of the word euaggelistes, which roughly translates into a carrier of good news.

You will also find the Greek word euaggelizö translated as "proclaiming the good news."  This again comes from the same root word.  

Here is the reason for the different translations; God only speaks Old English.

I learned this while sitting in church as a young boy.  There were a few people in my church that I was certain had face to face conversations with God in their own personal tents of meeting.  They were truly brilliant Bible scholars and godly people. 

When they would pray in church, they would go from speaking the language of good ol' southern Indiana farmer and begin speaking like a good ol' southern Indiana farmer in King Arthur's court.  All of a sudden they would begin using words like "Thee", "Thou", "Countenance", "Dost", and other words that I had never heard outside of prayer.  

Obviously if these people prayed like that, it must have been because God only understood Old English.  

(After that completely worthless sidetrack) The word "gospel", as best I understand it, comes from the combination of the  two Old English words god which means "good" and spel which means "news".  Godspel was later lost the "d" (which sometimes happens in a move across centuries. Heck I still haven't found all of my tools after a 10 mile move) to become the word "Gospel".

As for why translators continue to use the word "gospel" rather than "good news" is a matter of the translators' preference.  Most of the times euaggelion is used it is translated as "gospel", but not every time.  There is not a lot of rhyme or reason to it.  As the prophet Mel Brooks taught us, "it is good to be king."  The translators are the one with the publishers, so they win.  

To prove this point, Eugene Peterson decided to use the word "Message" for euaggelion almost every time it shows up in his "Message" paraphrase.  

When I finally take over the world, I will require all Bibles to be retrofitted with "good news", but until then the word "gospel" will be circulated.

My introduction

For now, the purpose of this blog is going to be to further the study of my "What @ . . ." class at First Christian Church. Each week, I will do my best to take some of the questions that have been raised in class and help provide some futher answers and other resources for people that want to go deeper. Or, it could just be helpful for people to see the types of questions that people have. If you have a question that you don't feel we have fully answered here, feel free to send me an email or post a response asking for futher information.

I realize that I will not be able to give exhaustive conclusions to every issue because if it was that easy than these discussions would not have continued for centuries. My hope is to help you in your search for truth, and to know that I and the church, have not come to these conclusions lightly or without study and thought.

Thanks,
Brian

The purpose of this blog

Starting Wednesday, Sept. 3, I will be leading a new class called "What About . . ." I am going to invite members of the class to ask questions on a variety of topics and do my best to create a discussion of what the Bible has to say about them. If there are questions that need to be answered or seem to have gone incomplete during the class time, I will attempt to further the discussion here and at my myspace page. These two pages will be the same, it is just that some people are uncomfortable with using MySpace.