Jonnel and I were guests at the Easter musical of a thriving, well-known church in another city last week-end. The actors, vocalists, and orchestra were absolutely superb. The story of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection were so powerfully portrayed that I felt tears welling up in my eyes as I watched. I was absolutely transfixed by the power of the events being depicted on the stage.
Then there was the narrator. She was so distracting that it was almost irritating! And it wasn't her fault. She was dressed in black, and she always remained on the outer edges of the action. She had a nice voice and she read her lines with authority. But every time she appeared, I found myself thinking, "Please, go away."
Nevertheless, the musical drama was a jolting, convicting experience. Like most people who were there, I went away grateful, awe struck, and motivated to be more surrendered to the Captain of our Salvation.
It was only after returning home to Northern Virginia, that I asked myself why I was so bothered by the narration. The answer came almost instantly: words can't really capture the impact of that event! Granted, when words are all you have, one has to make do. We can elaborate on the brutality of the crucifixion. Or we can give the mathematical odds against the probability of resurrection. And all those things are adequate when nothing else is available. But when you sense the actual power of the cross and the empty tomb portrayed in live action just a few feet away, words are just a pale shadow- or a cheap substitute.
It occurs to me that when we think about sharing the Gospel, we think almost entirely in terms of words: repentance, faith, confession, surrender. And when words are all you have, one has to make do. But how much more affecting is a witness when it comes in power and spirit, rather than words. It's easy for people to discount theological words, but it's more difficult to dispense with powerful deeds.
I'll confess that I've become quite allergic to the expression, "I witness with my life." The people who use that phrase quite often mean that they don't want to offend lost people, so they hope it's obvious that faith has made them moral people who go to church. Brother, if that's all you've got to show for your faith, you will definitely need some narration to get your point across. By contrast, in a life that embodies the cross and the empty tomb, there is an extra dimension. There is the impact of seeing sacrificial love offered up in diverse circumstances by another human being who obviously responds to life quite differently than you do. There is genuine sacrifice and love that shouts, "There is even more here than meets the eye!" When evangelism becomes that vivid and that moving, words are almost a distraction.
The watching world is not impressed by my avoidance of stimulants or my frequency in worship. Heavenly Father, give me a life that nakedly displays the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Sunday, March 21, 2010
What's Love Got to Do with It?
Back in the 1970's Southern Baptists launched an evangelistic campaign that generated interest with a simple slogan: "Good News, America! God loves you!" At the time, many Americans found the idea surprising. Most Americans still believed they were guilty of something called sin. And the vast majority believed in a God of justice who ruled according to absolute truth. So it was a welcome relief for most Americans to learn that God actually loved them.
Not any more! After four decades of having our self esteem cultivated, massaged, enhanced and affirmed by schools, TV shows and popular books, most Americans expect God to love us all. Why shouldn't he? We're all unique and very special. And God is too cool to get uptight about something as personal as lifestyle choices!
These days just about everybody is convinced that God is loving. That's the good news. The bad news is that we have so warped and corrupted the meaning of "love," that a god who really loves us can no longer be holy!
The man was a prophet. Tell Americans that God loves them, and they'll just shrug. "Duh!" They've known that for years, but they couldn't care less.
For more than a generation now, we've reminded our world that God is Love, and Grace is amazing! But they're not looking for love: they've settled for Twitter. And they're not interested in Grace unless she's a finalist on American Idol.
Today our fellow Americans are looking for meaning. Youth doesn't last. Money can't buy satisfaction. And sex is so yesterday. The malls and bars are populated with attractive twenty-somethings who have already owned expensive cars, lived in lavish homes, eaten at the finest restaurants, traveled abroad, gone to bed with multiple partners of both sexes, and are already pondering cosmetic surgery. And they wonder, "Is this really all there is?"
These jaded young people are our mission field, but they aren't looking for "faith, family and friends." I suspect there's not much that can be done until these desperate, pressurized, over-sexed rebels finally crash to the ground. When they fall back to Earth, some will welcome that old, old invitation: "Come to me all you who are weak and heavy laden, and I will give you rest." When you're flat on your face in the dirt, it's easier to look up and see the feet at the bottom of the cross.
Not any more! After four decades of having our self esteem cultivated, massaged, enhanced and affirmed by schools, TV shows and popular books, most Americans expect God to love us all. Why shouldn't he? We're all unique and very special. And God is too cool to get uptight about something as personal as lifestyle choices!
These days just about everybody is convinced that God is loving. That's the good news. The bad news is that we have so warped and corrupted the meaning of "love," that a god who really loves us can no longer be holy!
- A loving god cannot have absolute, inflexible truths by which he judges the Earth. According to the New Age Gospel, he must allow us to choose our own way.
- A loving god cannot tell us that some behaviors are wrong, immoral, or sinful. Anything we really want to do must be natural, which means it's perfectly okay.
- A loving god cannot allow those he cares about to suffer. We no longer believe that parents can spank their children. We certainly don't believe a loving God could discipline us or allow us to suffer to refine our character.
The man was a prophet. Tell Americans that God loves them, and they'll just shrug. "Duh!" They've known that for years, but they couldn't care less.
For more than a generation now, we've reminded our world that God is Love, and Grace is amazing! But they're not looking for love: they've settled for Twitter. And they're not interested in Grace unless she's a finalist on American Idol.
Today our fellow Americans are looking for meaning. Youth doesn't last. Money can't buy satisfaction. And sex is so yesterday. The malls and bars are populated with attractive twenty-somethings who have already owned expensive cars, lived in lavish homes, eaten at the finest restaurants, traveled abroad, gone to bed with multiple partners of both sexes, and are already pondering cosmetic surgery. And they wonder, "Is this really all there is?"
These jaded young people are our mission field, but they aren't looking for "faith, family and friends." I suspect there's not much that can be done until these desperate, pressurized, over-sexed rebels finally crash to the ground. When they fall back to Earth, some will welcome that old, old invitation: "Come to me all you who are weak and heavy laden, and I will give you rest." When you're flat on your face in the dirt, it's easier to look up and see the feet at the bottom of the cross.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Breaking News: The Missing Girls Are All Dead
I couldn't believe my eyes when my copy of The Economist came in the mail last week! The cover of the left-leaning, European magazine featured a tiny pair of pink baby shoes on a stark black background with this bold headline: "Gendercide: What happened to 100 million baby girls?" Was this prominent, liberal magazine about to question the morality of abortion?
The cover story expresses grave concern that in nations like China and northern India, it is common for pregnant women to abort little girls. The authors cite three forces which have created the perfect storm for unborn baby girls: a) an ancient preference for boys; b) the desire for smaller families; and c) medical technologies which inexpensively identify the sex of an unborn child. For this reason, in places like China and India, only 100 girls are born for every 120 boys. The result is a growing epidemic of young men who resort to crime and bad behavior when they are unable to find wives and settle down. Meanwhile, women in those nations suffer from kidnapping and female trafficking, and even elevated suicide rates.
The editors confess their own bias in favor of abortion ("..safe, legal and rare.") But later they make this astonishing statement: "It is no exaggeration to call this gendercide." Any time a word ends with those four letters, it generally denotes murder. There's homicide, suicide, genocide, etc. etc. So is this well known, left leaning publication finally coming around to support the sanctity of life? Of course, not. Abortion is the holy grail of liberals in Europe and America. They could never cry out that we must stop this madness.
Instead they suggest attitude changes and better education. "All countries need to raise the value of girls," they opine. "The world needs to do more to prevent gendercide," they conclude.
In the Church, we abhor the destruction of all unborn human beings. This had been our unchanging position since the first century when followers of Jesus Christ became the first to denounce the abandonment and murder of unwanted infants- most commonly little girls. We have never felt inclined to elevate something as vague as "choice" above something as sacred as "human life." We have always known:
Little girls will never be safe in this evil world until nations re-learn two ancient truths. First, we must recognize that abortion is criminal because it destroys human life. And secondly, we must once again celebrate the ultimate value of the qualities most unique to women. Little girls are not valuable because they can be trained to compete with little boys. Even when they are not in the job market, they retain their most unique and empowering gift: birthing and nurturing the next generation.
Homicide and "gendercide" are what happens when we destroy unborn babies. And suicide is what happens when a nation values the workplace over the home.
The cover story expresses grave concern that in nations like China and northern India, it is common for pregnant women to abort little girls. The authors cite three forces which have created the perfect storm for unborn baby girls: a) an ancient preference for boys; b) the desire for smaller families; and c) medical technologies which inexpensively identify the sex of an unborn child. For this reason, in places like China and India, only 100 girls are born for every 120 boys. The result is a growing epidemic of young men who resort to crime and bad behavior when they are unable to find wives and settle down. Meanwhile, women in those nations suffer from kidnapping and female trafficking, and even elevated suicide rates.
The editors confess their own bias in favor of abortion ("..safe, legal and rare.") But later they make this astonishing statement: "It is no exaggeration to call this gendercide." Any time a word ends with those four letters, it generally denotes murder. There's homicide, suicide, genocide, etc. etc. So is this well known, left leaning publication finally coming around to support the sanctity of life? Of course, not. Abortion is the holy grail of liberals in Europe and America. They could never cry out that we must stop this madness.
Instead they suggest attitude changes and better education. "All countries need to raise the value of girls," they opine. "The world needs to do more to prevent gendercide," they conclude.
In the Church, we abhor the destruction of all unborn human beings. This had been our unchanging position since the first century when followers of Jesus Christ became the first to denounce the abandonment and murder of unwanted infants- most commonly little girls. We have never felt inclined to elevate something as vague as "choice" above something as sacred as "human life." We have always known:
- It's irrational to use the term "gendercide" while insisting it's not really murder.
- It's hypocritical to argue that aborting unborn girls is unethical, while aborting unborn boys is perfectly acceptable.
- One of the most powerful steps any nation could take to "raise the value of girls" would be to treasure the unique role of women in bringing forth and nurturing human life. Any young adult can get a job or train for athletics, but only women can literally carry the next generation.
Little girls will never be safe in this evil world until nations re-learn two ancient truths. First, we must recognize that abortion is criminal because it destroys human life. And secondly, we must once again celebrate the ultimate value of the qualities most unique to women. Little girls are not valuable because they can be trained to compete with little boys. Even when they are not in the job market, they retain their most unique and empowering gift: birthing and nurturing the next generation.
Homicide and "gendercide" are what happens when we destroy unborn babies. And suicide is what happens when a nation values the workplace over the home.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Counting in Kazillions
Not that long ago, the number one billion was big enough. There were only four billion people on the Earth at that time. (Even now, there are only 6 billion of us!) In the past, when astronomers wanted to boggle our minds with the number of stars in the sky, writers like Carl Sagan would suggest "billions and billions of heavenly bodies."
So it was a sort of mind numbing experience last year when we began to hear our political leaders talking about trillions of dollars. Suddenly we had started counting at warp speed! One day the entire population of Planet Earth could fit into one digit with nine zeroes! The next day, we were spending $1,000,000,000,000 more than we were bringing in!
I guess a lot of us thought, "Well, that's a lot of money, but it's really only three more zeroes than a billion. What's the big deal? It's just inflation, right?"
A few months ago I came across a magazine article that burst my little bubble of comfort. It has haunted me ever since. The facts are so unfathomable that I cannot get them out of my mind. What's a guy to do? I'll share them with you.
A futurist and researcher named Jack Uldrich explained that a million, a billion, and a trillion are radically different concepts. And the difference is more than just three zeroes. Ponder this:
Q: If I should mention an event that happened 1 million seconds ago, can you guess how long ago that many seconds would be?
A: 12 days ago
Q: Now think in larger terms. How long ago would 1 billion seconds be?
A: 30 years ago
Q: If 1 billion seconds takes us back three decades, how long ago would 1 trillion seconds be?
A: 30,000 BC
What's the difference between one trillion and Eternity? It's simple: God is in charge of Eternity. And, happily, He knows what He's doing. In times like these, we should all listen a lot more to Him, and a lot less to those talking heads on TV. Selah.
So it was a sort of mind numbing experience last year when we began to hear our political leaders talking about trillions of dollars. Suddenly we had started counting at warp speed! One day the entire population of Planet Earth could fit into one digit with nine zeroes! The next day, we were spending $1,000,000,000,000 more than we were bringing in!
I guess a lot of us thought, "Well, that's a lot of money, but it's really only three more zeroes than a billion. What's the big deal? It's just inflation, right?"
A few months ago I came across a magazine article that burst my little bubble of comfort. It has haunted me ever since. The facts are so unfathomable that I cannot get them out of my mind. What's a guy to do? I'll share them with you.
A futurist and researcher named Jack Uldrich explained that a million, a billion, and a trillion are radically different concepts. And the difference is more than just three zeroes. Ponder this:
Q: If I should mention an event that happened 1 million seconds ago, can you guess how long ago that many seconds would be?
A: 12 days ago
Q: Now think in larger terms. How long ago would 1 billion seconds be?
A: 30 years ago
Q: If 1 billion seconds takes us back three decades, how long ago would 1 trillion seconds be?
A: 30,000 BC
What's the difference between one trillion and Eternity? It's simple: God is in charge of Eternity. And, happily, He knows what He's doing. In times like these, we should all listen a lot more to Him, and a lot less to those talking heads on TV. Selah.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)