Equal in Essence, Distinct In Function: A Response to Gordon Fee's Exegesis of Galatians 3:26-28

The following is an article I wrote last month in response to Gordon Fee's chapter entitled "Male and Female in the New Creation," which appeared in the collaborative work "Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy." My hope is that reader interaction would result in a humble and Scripture-centered examination of this crucial issue.

Introduction
Gordon D. Fee is Professor Emeritus of New Testament Studies at Regent College. He is a prolific author and articulate theologian, whose exegetical skills have been frequently utilized, most notably in his contributions to the New International Commentary on the New Testament. He is an ordained minister with the Assemblies of God, and received his Ph.D. from the University of California.
The classic exegetical argument for egalitarians who believe all ecclesiastical offices and functions should be open to women has its foundation in Galatians 3:26-29. Based on this text, evangelical egalitarians contend that Paul is eliminating all social and ceremonial distinction within the body of Christ and therefore, is eliminating any barrier to service based on the criteria listed in the text. Since the distinction between “male and female” (v. 28) is among the barriers Paul seeks to remove, the classical egalitarian argument has been that to prohibit women from serving as pastors is tantamount to replacing the very wall of separation in Christ’s body that Paul himself sought to tear down.
Evangelical complementarians have historically responded to this rationale by affirming the soteriological implications of gender equality delineated in this passage, while simultaneously contending that the Pauline rationale behind the Galatian correspondence does not address the particular gender functions within the body of Christ. In short, the complementarian hermeneutic of this passage is that while the soteriological principles contained therein require the elimination of distinctions, Biblical principles of ecclesiology place both genders, equal in essence, into distinct functions within Christ’s body. These functions are not described in detail in Galatians because, say complementarians, the primary focus of this letter is not ecclesiological. To discover gender role distinctions in the church, the appropriate place to look is the Pastoral Epistles, which deal more particularly with church order. In short, complementarians contend that while the Galatians passage indeed makes all of humanity equal in Christ, this equality is only truly realized when men and women work within the church, within their Biblically defined roles. More succinctly, Galatians teaches equality in salvation, while the Pastoral Epistiles teach complementarity within the church.
Yet in his article entitled Male and Female in the New Creation, Fee seeks to overturn the classic complementarian argument by asserting that Galatians is in fact a primarily ecclesiological work. His own egalitarian views are in fact informed by his view that “the specifics of this passage itself indicate that this text has to do with Paul’s ecclesiology” (184). The process by which Fee arrives at this conclusion, and an exegetical response to his contentions, are the subject of the rest of this paper.
Summary
Fee begins his chapter by introducing the crux of the exegetical debate; namely whether the Galatians passage is “limited to the justifying work of Christ alone, or does it include other aspects of life in the believing community as well?” (172). With this question in view, he proceeds with an isogogical analysis of the surrounding texts as a way of making the case for his view of the primary issue Paul addressed in the letter. Galatians, according to Fee, is Paul’s response to the crisis of “Christian ‘agitators’” who “had infiltrated these Gentile churches insisting that men be circumcised . . .the crucial item of a larger agenda of Torah observance that would have included the Sabbath and food laws as well” (173). On this point evangelicals of both the complemetarian and egalitarian viewpoints agree.
The first point of contention, as Fee sees it, is the particular historical lens through which this text is received. “Traditionally,” he states, “it [the strategy for reading Paul’s response] has been to read it through the eyes of Martin Luther” (173). Fee of course is referring to Luther’s monolithic understanding of Galatians 2:16 as applied to his own 16th century historical context. To view the Galatian correspondence only in this light is, according to Fee, “a slightly skewed reading strategy” (173). While Fee sees the theological concept of justification by faith as a primary theme of the letter, he views this theme alone as insufficient to procure a correct reading of the entire epistle.
As Fee sees it, the larger issue pressed in the letter is that of bringing together Jew and Gentile as one people of God. According to Fee, the bigger crisis in Paul’s mind “has to do with whether Gentiles get in on the promise to Abraham . . .without also taking on Jewish identity; especially those marks of identity that specifically distinguished Jews from Gentiles in the Diaspora (circumcision, Sabbath, and food laws)” (174). In other words, the issue of Justification by Faith is to be viewed within the larger framework of the inclusion of non-“God-fearing” Gentiles among the people of God. To make his case, Paul argues in a two-fold way for the “temporary, thus secondary, nature of the law” (175), and then concludes his argument with the passage currently under consideration, contending that the true heirs of the Abrahamic promise are those who have become “one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28b).
After making his case for the primary purpose of Galatians, Fee then proceeds to cast what he sees as the primary issue of this letter within the larger theological motif of the “new creation.” If Jew and Gentile now relate to God on the same terms, then this reality is grounded in Paul’s own conviction “that Christ and the Spirit have ushered in God’s promised ‘new creation,’ which is now awaiting its final eschatological consummation (Gal 6:15)” (177). Fee proceeds from this point to describe new creation theology, and then moves to draw implications of this theological method for the gender issue under consideration in his article. Primarily, Fee contends that new creation theology implies that “equality” not only applies to salvation, but to the entire created order. Thus, “one must begin by taking Paul seriously with regard to ethnicity, status and gender no longer being relevant for constituting value and social identity in the new creation” (179). Furthermore, Fee asserts that this new order has a strong eschatological tone, which would have been “the primary way the earliest believers understood their existence” (179). Such thinking, Fee contends, is largely foreign to the Western mind, which is mostly accustomed to a culture of equality and thus, unfamiliar to a large extent with how radically counter-cultural Paul’s statements would have been to first-century readers. Fee states that the “nature of this affirmation, its counter-cultural significance, the fact that it equally disadvantages all by equally advantaging all—these stab at the very heart of a culture sustained by people’s maintaining the right position and status. But in Christ Jesus . . .all things have become new; the new era has dawned” (180) Fee then spends the next several paragraphs extrapolating from “new creation” texts (such as that found in 1 Corinthians 7) how these implications affected the Christian culture of the first century. Within the body of Christ for example, no preference is to be given for kosher meals, and no disadvantage placed because of one’s status as a slave. Such distinctions “mean nothing in the new creation” (182).
Fee then applies the aforementioned new creation principles to the relationship of male and female, and in so doing, begins moving back toward the text under consideration with this assumption. In the newly created and Christ-centered home, the wife is no longer merely a member of the husband’s home, but is “in relationship to him” (184). Because they are both members of the one body without distinction, Fee contends that husband and wife are, “first of all brother and sister in Christ” (184). Fee’s conclusion on this basis is that “either may prophesy or teach (1 cor. 14:26)—which are matters of Spirit gifting, not gender—as long as some cultural norms that distinguish male and female were maintained (1 Cor. 11:2-16)” (184). In short, Fee’s logic is that if one is not disqualified from certain church offices and functions because he is a Gentile, or because he is a slave, then neither should a woman be disqualified based merely on her gender. He concludes this chapter by asserting that “to give continuing significance to a male-authority viewpoint for men and women, whether at home or in the church, is to reject the new creation in favor of the norms of a fallen world” (185).
Critical Analysis of Fee’s Exegesis
Before noting the many points of disagreement with Fee, it serves to point out the many places where Fee and other egalitarians find much common ground with their complementarian counterparts. First of all, there is general agreement regarding the overall theme of the Galatian correspondence; namely, the call for understanding that the people of God, Jew or Gentile, are all “one” in Christ. Though it is an oversimplification to claim this as the central theme, Fee will find no complementarian in disagreement with the notion that because of Christ, all distinctions, social and otherwise, become of no advantage or disadvantage. Paul’s declaration that “you are all one in Christ Jesus” (v.28) emphasizes a truth found in both didactic and narrative literature throughout the entire New Testament corpus; all ground is indeed level at the foot of the cross.
Second, Fee is to be commended for his strong emphasis regarding the essential equality of male and female. In Christ, gender is “no longer . . .relevant for constituting value and social identity in the new creation” (179). Though the Scriptures clearly delineate functional distinctions between male and female in the home and church—distinctions which will be defined and discussed later—Fee emphasizes well that because of the Gospel, one’s gender does not add or take away dignity or value, nor is one gender rendered inferior to the other. Contrary to Fee’s assumptions, complementarian theologians gladly stand with him in this contention.
Furthermore, though he apparently (and wrongly) believes that the complementarian viewpoint is one which generically places men above women, Fee is to be commended for reminding the body of Christ that the Biblical “chain of authority” is never to be understood as all women being subject to all men. Such a contention should serve as a solemn reminder to complementarian thinkers that maleness in and of itself does not warrant authority in the church or in the home. The insipid chauvinism this writer has witnessed in a few evangelical churches is a by-product of this misunderstanding, and those within Christ’s body who subscribe to and apply such a faulty hermeneutic should be strongly rebuked.
Third, complementarians can applaud Fee’s emphasis of the first-century, counter-cultural nature of Pauline thought. “It is difficult,” states Fee, “for us to imagine the effect of Paul’s words in Galatians 3:28 in a culture where position and status preserved order through basically uncrossable boundaries, and where attempting to cross those boundaries brought shame instead of honor” (180). Indeed, even in the Pastoral Epistles, in the very texts where complementarians make their case for male headship, Paul insists that women “learn” and establishes a discipleship paradigm in which younger women turn to older, seasoned, and theologically-inclined women for instruction. The Gospel injected into a “male-only” culture like that of the first century gives the due respect and honor to being female, and Fee is to be commended for reminding us of this Pauline value.

Finally, Fee’s emphasis on the “new creation theology” of the New Testament and its place in the Galatian correspondence is a necessary reminder that the Gospel brings the male-female roles and relationships into the appropriate balance by redeeming each and setting it back in its intended place. The final application between Fee and complementarian thinkers is very different. Still, Fee’s emphasis on this truth reminds complementarians that the very male authority Fee rejects is given so that men can better fulfill the responsibilities he affirms, and not for the sake of male authority alone.
At the same time, an honest evaluation of Fee’s work on this passage must deal straightforwardly with several inconsistencies and errors. Primarily, Fee’s assumption that the soteriology of Galatians is secondary to its ecclesiology is simply without basis in the text, and when this hermeneutic is expanded, it leads to more error, such as the assumption that the essential equality of male and female in 3:28 predicates the inclusion of women at all levels of service to the church. To be sure, the soteriological themes of the letter naturally have application in the life of the church. At the same time, the letter is written with an almost exclusive emphasis on the restoration of the Gospel at Galatia. How this emphasis informs other issues such as social distinctions and church life are ancillary, if valid, concerns.
Beginning with verse 6 of the first chapter, Paul sets the most serious tone established in any of his letters. In observing the theme of these verses, MacArthur points out the great danger of Jews who had made only a superficial profession of faith, then quickly reverted to Judaism “and sought to make Christianity an extension of their traditional system of works righteousness” (MacArthur 1987, 13). This Judaizing contention that Gentiles must be circumcised was the worst of heresies in the mind of Paul, who cursed those who would promote such a message because it was “another Gospel” (1:6). Thus, the theme of Galatians “is that true freedom comes only through Jesus Christ” (MacArthur, 14). Likewise, the late F.F. Bruce contends that Paul’s aim in Galatians is to denounce the teaching of the Judaizers “as a perversion of the true gospel of Christ” (Bruce 1982, 19). These observations, along with a straightforward reading of the text itself, demonstrate that the main focus of the Galatian correspondence is salvation. Thus, Fee’s belief that a supposed ecclesiastical emphasis grants equal access to all offices and functions of the church to both male and female is without textual foundation.
Secondly, Fee contends that the complementarian approach to the gender issue is tantamount to full capitulation to the reality of the fall. To accept male leadership “in the home or in the church is to reject the new creation in favor of the norms of a fallen world” (185). This assumption is shared by other egalitarian authors like Richard Hess, who dedicates an entire chapter to the view that God’s ultimate aim is for equality in function as well as essence, and that any hierarchy is the direct result of the fall.
More specifically, Hess believes that “God’s judgment included for the woman hard work alongside her husband in addition to bearing children. She would also have a desire to rule him, though he would end up ruling her” (94). Fee shares this sentiment, believing that male leadership “usurps the work of the Spirit not only in the wife and her relationship to God but also in the church—the expression of the new order and new humanity that is already present, even while it is yet to be” (185).
Yet the history of the fall in Genesis 3 is precisely the reason for Paul’s prohibition of women from holding a position of church authority in 1 Timothy 2. Though Paul’s later comments in 2 Timothy and Titus seem to negate the possibility that he was seeking to prevent women from any and all teaching roles, Thomas Lea well notes that the “normative principle behind Paul’s directive is that the woman should not carry out the role of senior pastor” (Lea 1992, 100). Furthermore, Paul’s invocation of Jewish primogeniture to establish male leadership in the home appeals to the created order prior to the fall. Therefore, Fee’s contention that asserting male leadership is equivalent to accepting the “norms” of a fallen world is actually found to be inverse to the very logic Paul uses elsewhere in the New Testament to establish male headship in the home and church.
Similarly, Fee’s view that Paul’s instructions regarding male headship were grounded in the culture of the first century is also suspect upon closer examination. As regards male headship in the home, Fee contends that Paul’s ideal is total equality without hierarchy, yet in the same breath states that Paul was willing to concede on certain cultural issues. If indeed Paul intends to eliminate hierarchical roles in the body of Christ, one might ask why he would be willing, as Fee suggests, to “yield on certain cultural matters so as not to predicate the shame on lesser things” (181)? Furthermore, Fee’s belief that Paul capitulates in certain areas on this issue is to suggest, even if unintentionally, that Paul himself is “settling” for the norms of a fallen world rather than embracing the new creation that God intended.
In fact, the preferred and more consistent way to view texts like Colossians 3, Ephesians 5, and 1 Timothy 2 is to see them as their author sees them. Although Fee rightly points out that Paul “radicalizes” the household norms of the first century, he mistakenly views Paul’s establishment of household hierarchy as instruction grounded in the culture of that day. In fact, Paul’s own words put this notion to rest, and clarify that the reason for his emphasis on male headship is that “Adam was formed first, then Eve” (1 Timothy 2:13). Thus, Paul’s insistence on male headship in the home and church is not grounded in the culture of the first century, or even in the fall. Instead, male headship is grounded in the created order itself, and understood best through the lens of Jewish primogeniture.
Evangelical egalitarianism, unlike liberal feminism, deserves recognition for seeking to make its case under the authority of Scripture. Egalitarians of an evangelical bent have no desire to capitulate to culture merely for the sake of culture. Instead, they sincerely believe their position to be grounded in a sound hermeneutic of God’s inerrant Word. Egalitarian theologians such as Gordon Fee strongly affirm Scriptural inerrancy, the deity of Jesus Christ, the exclusivity of Christ as the only way of salvation, the necessity of the new birth, and the promise of the life to come. And like their complementarian counterparts, they care much about the church as God’s vehicle of redemption in the world, and forward their arguments because they firmly believe such arguments will help mold the church into a genuine “new creation” community.
With this in view, there is much on which complementarians can agree with their egalitarian counterparts. There is much that can be accomplished when these two groups work together on issues of common concern. At the same time, this debate cannot simply be treated as a tertiary theological issue tantamount to one’s eschatology or view of spiritual gifts. The issues under discussion in the gender role debate go right to the heart of the created order, and color one’s view of a wide variety of issues crucial to the life and health of God’s church. Those representing the egalitarian viewpoint in Discovering Biblical Equality, including Gordon Fee, also understand the gravity of this discussion. Hence, the forcefulness with which they each make their arguments. This writer considers it a privilege to interact with a brilliant and dedicated brother in Christ. Yet even more important is that a Biblically-sound response be given so that the church can be led as God intends, and consequently, become the community of “new creation” to which Fee aspires.





BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bruce, F.F. 1982. “The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians.” The New International Greek Testament Commentary. I. Howard Marshall and W. Ward Garque, eds. Exeter: Paternoster Press.
Fee, Gordon D. 2005. “Male and Female in the New Creation.” Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity without Hierarchy. Ronald W. Pierce and Rebecca Merrill Groothius, eds. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press.
Lea, Thomas D. and Hayne Griffin. 1992. “1, 2 Timothy and Titus.” The New American Commentary. David Dockery, ed. Nashville: Broadman Press.
Longenecker, Richard N. 1990. “Galatians.” Word Biblical Commentary. David A. Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker, eds. Dallas: Word Publishing.
MacArthur, John. 1987. “Galatians.” The MacArtuhur New Testament Commentary. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute.

Some things are Just More Important

I'm currently sitting at my kitchen table, listening to my wife talk to her mother, with the faint sound of my three-year-old in the distance, playing with his grandfather. And as I sit here about to write something I've honestly thought of writing for some time now, God is confirming in my heart that what I'm about to write is probably long past-due.

It's time to take a break--a long, long break--from the blogosphere.

Honestly, I've thoroughly enjoyed being able to express my thoughts through this site for over three years. But recently, several things are coalescing in my life that confirm to me that it is time to stop blogging.

1. My Family. I have a wife and two boys that I don't deserve, and spending time here is, I am convinced, time that I've taken away from them. Next year will also be a year for limiting travel, because I have become convinced over the past few months that if I don't make these adjustments, I'm going to miss the most crucial years of my son's lives.

2. My Association. While its been great to hear from many locals in my own area, in the end, I'm not sure my writing here has done very much to help the 53 churches I am privileged to serve. Since they are my primary callling, as well as my primary means of making a living, I owe them some of the time I've spent here.

3. My Life. It just seems as though life has sped up in an almost uncontrollable way the past two years. Over the next couple of months, I'l be adding some additional study/professional development to my agenda as well as another writing project that I anticipate being ready by 2010.

With all this in view, some things simply had to go. Actually, a few things had to go, this being one of them.

The site will remain open. It just won't be very active. It's been great to meet so many wonderful people through this venue. But frankly, some things are simply more important right now. There are plenty of others out there more eloquent than I who will continue to keep the blogosphere busy, and occassionally, I'll check them out and keep myself informed. To those who have read my stuff, its an honor that you considered my words worthy of your time. God willing, as I establish some new life boundaries and "re-set" my priorities according to my gifts, He will continue to encourage and equip others through my work. There is no higher honor than this.

Thanks again for reading!

What Associations were Meant to Be

I have to confess that often I feel a bit strange in my current role as a Director of Missions. I love what I do, mind you. Its just that at one time, I considered Associations to be among the most useless institutions on planet earth...right up there with congress and those TSA guys at the airport.

In fairness, I admit that my strong bias against associations were based largely in negative experiences I had with them early in my ministry. And in truth, some of those perceptions were real, and regrettably, still are in some areas. The charge that the Association is a denominational dinosaur, and the Director is usually nothing more than a washed-out pastor is, as much as I hate to admit, true to a large extent in many areas of the country.

At the same time, two men over the past seven years have convinced me that if its done right, the Association still has the potential to produce a Kingdom synergy unparalleled anywhere else. Churches working together, leveraging their collective influence to extend the reign of Christ in our world is a wonder to watch, and I've never seen them work together with more effectiveness than when they are utilizing a lean, mean, well-oiled, Kingdom-minded Association to do it. The first of these men, Ron Davis, gave me a vision of what the association could be. The second man, my predecessor, demonstrated what it could be by building the association I now lead into a missionally-driven, local church centered entity.

Others have also been "shining lights" in this area, including Mike Day of the Mid-South Association in Memphis and Doyle Braden of Orange County Association, where Saddleback holds its associational membership.

But tonight, I want to talk about the association that I'm currenly the most familiar with; the one I am privileged to lead. While we haven't yet "arrived," I believe we are currently on a trajectory that will end with our being the kind of networking, synergistic, missional organization our churches both need and deserve. The following video was played publicly for the first time today at our annual meeting. It highlights what God has been doing in our midst, and how our association has played a role in His work. In short, this video represents our move toward what Associations were meant to be. Enjoy!

A Vision of the Young and the Old

Yesterday was one of those days that remind me why I live in Maryland, and why I do what I do. Our association, in partnership with Embrace Baltimore and several sponsor churches, helped to launch The Village, a new church in the Hampden borogh, just a few blocks from Johns Hopkins University. Between 70 and 75 people came to this inaugural service, more than half of whom were totally unchurched. The birth of a church is an exciting thing to watch.

But the celebration was more intense because of the way in which this new church came about. About two years ago, we began working through one of our churches with the Hampden Bapist Church. Hampden Baptist is an historical congregation to say the least, started in 1874. Their present facility was erected in 1890, and continues to grace the streets of Hampden with its beauty. The old church grew and ministered effectively for many years, and reached its heyday during the 1940s and 1950s, when the average attendance was greater than 800 people!

The following decades brought enormous change to the city, and the congregation, like many urban churches during this time, watched as the majority of its membership took flight to the suburbs. This decline continued precipitously, and when we began our conversations with the church two years ago, attendance hovered at about 35 people.

Through a covenant agreement, we committed ourselves to maintaining the current facility for the church, providing pastoral care and a preacher for Sundays. In the meantime, we would begin putting the pieces together for a new church to be born in Hampden. Once we were ready, the Hampden church pledged to work with us to start this church, recognizing that the future would belong, not to them, but to this new church. Their desire to leave a Gospel legacy in Hampden was the motivation for their commitment.

Several months ago, we recognized that the time had come. I called a meeting with the Hampden congregaion to tell them we were ready to start the new church. However, it would need to meet in their building at the same time that they were currently holding worship, and as such, we needed to ask them to move their services to a different time. I did all of this based on the covenant agreement that all parties signed, but I've been ministering in Baptist churches long enough to know that it doesnt matter what people sign. If they don't want to do something, it simply won't happen!

Again, the people of Hampden Baptist Church demonstrated their commitment to a legacy that would outlive them. They quickly agreed to open up their building for use by The Village during the 11:00 hour. But the moment that got to me came after our meeting had closed. A sweet lady in her 90s came up to me, leaned over her walker, pointed back at Dan Hyun, our church planter, and said "I've been praying for him for the past two years. The Lord promised me months ago while I was praying that He would let me live long enough to meet this young man and see this church started. Now that its happened, I don't know how much longer I have, but I am thanking God this morning for the future He is giving us!"

After that statement, no one will ever be able to convince me that 70, 80, and 90-year-olds don't have vision!

During the services yesterday, I approached the lone trustee to ask him what he thought. After all, the worship style is very different, and the music in particular much louder. His very direct response to me was "We were promised this more than two years ago, and its about time!"

God was at work in Baltimore yesterday, and He is using the vision of both the young and old to bring the people of this community to saving faith in Jesus! I pray He continues to move in this way in our area for His glory!

2012 Republican Ticket!

I couldn't help myself! I just had to post this because it is just too funny to resist. My friend and well-known missiological guru Ed Stetzer made a comment on Twitter a couple of nights ago that ultimately resulted in the picture above.

Scary thing is, he might just win! I can see it now; a $10,000 tax credit for anyone who plants a church! Oh yeah!

Then again, he's probably best suited for hiw current role. You can read that statement positively (as in "Ed, you are too good at what you do now to leave that role vacant.") or negatively (as in "Ed, keep your day job dude.")

Of course, Ed already has wa more executive experience than Obama! But he's also probably one of those guys who clings bitterly to his guns and religion.

Thanks for the needed laugh Ed.

Football Season and the Need for "Team Players" in the Church

In addition to the beautiful leaves and crisp air that accompany a Maryland fall, one of the things I love most about this time of year is the inauguration of football season. This season, however, hasn't started off very well. I find myself typing these words the morning after my team's humiliating opening game loss to Alabama. A 4 point favorite going in, the Clemson Tigers looked more like the Clemson Cub Scouts. For the next several weeks I am sure I will be frequently reminded of this sad example of a football game by Crimson Tide friends of mine with whom I shared a vibrant back-and-forth "whos gonna beat who" conversation before the game. Turns out, "trash talk" isn't such a great idea after all.

Anyone who watched this game would conclude that the majority of the blame for this loss is to be placed on an inexperienced offensive line. Clemson is currently picked to win their conference, have a strong defense, and the best quarterback in the ACC, but none of that mattered last night. And as I continue to think about this loss, I see a sharp and clear parallel to what is happening in many churches.

The offensive line simply failed last night, and when that happens, the effects eventually trickle over to every other area of the team. Although offensive lineman get little attention when things are going well in a game, their role is crucial. If they don't block for the QB and other ball carriers, it cripples the ability of the offense to move the chains. Consequently, their lack of blocking becomes the cause of short "3 and out" drives that move all the playing time to the defense. Over time, this wears down the defense, thereby further weakening their ablity to stop the opposing team. This is precisely the scenario that occurred last night.

As I consult with churches, particularly when they are in the pastor search phase, it becomes apparent that most feel all that ails them will be solved if they can only find "the right man to lead us." I think I've found a new term for this sentiment: "Star Quarterback syndrome." It's what Clemson had going into last night's game, and it cost them a humiliating defeat. Churches that don't wake up from this deluson will face similar and more serious defeat at the hands of the enemy.

The answer to this dillemma is for churches to realize that Billy Graham himself can't make a difference in a church where, as Paul would put it, all the parts of the body aren't working together. (1 Corinthians 12:11-13) Having a "star quarterback" in the pulpit will not help the church if the linemen, defensive ends, special teams, and even the managers and trainers are not functioning within their roles in the way God intended. Such is the reason we encourage churches to utilize the interim period to shore up in weak areas before they install a new pastor.

Sometimes, the best thing you can do with a game such as that played last night is simply forget about it. Other times, its good to learn from it. Cullen Harper can't win a football game without the rest of his team, and a "star" pastor can't fix a dysfunctional church all by himself. The members of the body have to take responsibility for their own dysfuncation, repent, and begin to function as the body Christ has called them to be.

I hope Clemson can pull themselves together and have a good season. But more than this, I pray that our churches will truly be the local body of Christ so that others will see Jesus in them.

God and Gustav: A Guest Blog

It was exactly three years ago today when Hurricane Katrina slammed the Gulf Coast and left horrible destruction in her wake. Via a partnership our churches have with the Gulf Coast Association, we continue helping the people of Mississippi rebuild, and now it appears that yet another strong hurricane may very well hit that same area.

Of course,a lot can happen between now and 2 PM Monday. But at its current course, it will make a dead hit at Gulfport Mississippi and travel straight up Highway 49. Lot's of people are, understandably, upset and on edge, and regardless of how strongly you believe in Providence, such convictions are very difficult to apply in these kinds of situations. But I have a friend who seems to be doing a pretty good job at laughing in the face of Gustav, even if he does so with a lump in his own throat.

Unlike most of us who merely watched Katrina from afar, my friend Jack Allen actually lived through it. As such, when he speaks of God's sovereingty and goodness, he's not just waxing eloquent. He has applied such teaching in a very real way in the past. Jack teaches missions at New Orleans Seminary. He is a dear friend, and I asked his permission to share his latest thoughts with you.

As you are reading, pray for the people who live along the Gulf Coast. But more than anything else, pray that the faith of which you read in Jack's post will be present in even more people as this storm moves toward its mainland destination.

Can Gustav Get er Done? (Dr. Jack Allen)
8/27/08
I spent most of this morning doing a hurricane continuance plan for my students. I did this little marvel of strategic planning for several reasons.

(1) Because I love my students and I know that even if they are evacuated in the middle of the night to unknown shores because a terrifying storm is bearing down on their behinds, they will want to know what to read in their course textbooks.

(2) My students will need something to keep them busy so that their minds do not drift to thoughts of The Killer Storm, The Surge, The Flood, The Looting, or The Drowned Furniture (those all sound like great punk rock bands, don’t they?).

(3) The academic boss of bosses around here--Dr. Dallas Cowboy Lemke--told me to do it, and I want to be a joy to lead.

All that academic strategery aside, there are several people around here who confide in me that THEY ARE SCARED. Those of you who know me, I want you to imagine what level of terror might prompt someone to tell me that he or she is scared of the possibility of another hurricane hitting New Orleans. Was the counseling office closed? Maybe so, maybe they left town! I would sooner go to the checkout lady at Walgreens for a shoulder on which to whine than come to me. But, there they are, all five of them (now six) Facebooking, emailing, stopping me at the coffee shop, calling me for advice. My advice? GET OUT NOW! (Not really.)

It’s curious though. If that many people are asking me what to do, where to go, and if there can be any hope, it probably means that literally tens more are thinking of ending it all and moving to Jackson. Oh please, Lord, bring them to their senses.

Dude, I know you’re scared. Your wife admits, but you’re a Southern boy and think you’ll turn gay the instant you admit fear. You won’t. I’m a little bit scared, and I wear hardly any makeup at all.

You’d be a fool not to be a little scared. I went through Katrina. I lived apart from my students for a year, then apart from my wife and daughter for another year. I do not wish the loss of family time or grandmother’s antiques on anyone.

We prayed and prayed, for that storm to hit someplace it wouldn’t matter, like Lake Charles, but God had other plans. It was our turn to suffer, and we lived through it. In fact, for many of us, our faith grew more in the year or two after Katrina than it did the ten before. I see benefits from Katrina. I got new clothes and new furniture! I am significantly less tolerant of peoples’ junk than I was before the storm. Maybe that’s good. I am significantly more grateful for my wife than I was before the storm (she denies the last statement, but I know the truth), and that is very good. In many ways I am a better instructor now than I was before the storm.

So, I have a counterintuitive plan. I am challenging Gustav to finish what Katrina could not. Come on in brothah! I dare you. Bow up to Cat 5 and waltz right up the Mississippi. I do not care. You, Mr. Hurricane, cannot touch me, this city, or anyone in it without the express permission of your Creator. If He says to have a go at New Orleans, then fine. Otherwise, stop making people scared. We have better things to do with our time.

Isaiah and Immigration The Second; Legal Considerations

You don't have to be an expert in legal matters to conclude that our current immigration situation is a mess. As I said in my last post on this issue, our current system rewards those who break the law, and sends those trying to obey it back where they came from. Laws that create this kind of environment are, by default, unjust, and we have already heard Isaiah speak poignantly and with resolve to God's views of unjust law. But what instruction can we find in his prophecy that will help us chart a more equitable way forward?



Woe to those who enact evil statutes,
and to those who constantly record unuust decisions
so as to deprive the needy of justice
and rob the poor of My people of their rights
so that widows may be their spoil
and that they may plunder the orphan. -Isaiah 10:1-2

By the prophet's own words, unjust laws:
-remove justice from the needy. With regard to immigration, this would, I think,include removing the opportunity for a better life from one who is willing to work, pay his or her share of taxes, and assimilate into our culture. Yet this is exactly the case for thousands of immigrants who are denied the opportunity to make this better life for themselves.

-robs the poor of their rights. When social services, public education, emergency medical care and other wellfare services are given to those who will, because of their illegal status, likely never pay taxes, the result is that many of our own citizens have needed social services "robbed" from them and given to others.

-widows and orphans are taken advantage of. In other words, an unjust law is one which allows the opportunity for government exploitation of the weak. (For some reason, the lottery comes to mind) Yet immigrants, legal and illegal, rather than having consistent law to which they can refer, are instead constantly subjected to the whims of individual INS agents, whose scope of authority in this regard exceeds that of a federal judge. And frankly, if you throw into that mix the absolute incompetence I have personally witnessed from several who work for INS, the picture is one that would rightly frighten anyone trying to immigrate to the United States. Our current system strips immigrants of the dignity they deserve as human beings created in God's image, and replaces the rule of law with the monarchial tyranny of an INS agent.

The challenge then, is to develop an immigration system that is "just," that delivers justice to those who seek it, grants rights regardless of socioeconomic status, and subjects all applicants for residency to the same rule of law; one that is clear, and treats those subjected to it with the dignity God would expect.

What would such a system look like, and how would we arrive at its adoption? Again, I admit being as qualified to write laws as I am to pilot a nuclear submarine. Nevertheless, I would suggest the following general direction, subject to the scrutiny of those who are more competent that I:

1. Totally dismantle the current immigration system, release all employees of this agency and make them re-apply if they want to continue to be paid with our tax dollars. This includes embassy employees worldwide. Its a radical move, I know. Still, Ronald Reagan's words of more than 20 years ago have never been more true than when applied to immigration. Government isn't the solution to our problem. It IS the problem! While I am sure there are many competent and able professionals who work for immigration, the incompetence I have witnessed has convinced me that this move is neccesary. The raw power INS agents have is scary enough. Mix that raw power with ignorance, and you have a real mess!

2. Design a new system that takes into account the current realities we face as a nation. Such a system would include:
-The ability to concentrate manpower on multiple entry points.
-More deliberate and clear guidelines and policies for INS workers, so that the decisions that affect immigrants are based on law rather than the whims of an agent.
-Expedited processing of immigration requests. Responses from the government taking longer than 6 months would result in penalties to those who work for INS. The one exception to this would be below...
-"Red flagging" of anyone coming from a nation known to harbor terrorists (call it profiling if you want, its the right thing to do. In spite of our culture of political correctness, anyone with half a brain knows the people who attacked our country were not of Latin American descent.) More thorough background checks and longer periods of probationary stay would be required.
-Temporary worker permits to all current residents, whether or not they were legal under the former system. Give them 90 days to secure the permit, and one year beyond that to find gainful employment and pay taxes. If they find a legal occupation, keep it, and learn English, after a certain amount of time they can receive a "green card," and a path to citizenship if they want it which would take no longer than five years to obtain. If they fail to secure the permit, or don't prove themselves productive, or add to our crime problems by their behavior, send them packing pronto!

3. After the new system is in place, build tighter security around both borders (not a literal fence. What a silly waste of time and money, in my opinion) Anyone entering the country illegally after this point is automatically deported, with exceptions granted to those claiming assylum as political refugees.

4. Utilize NAFTA and other legal measures to encourage further business investment in Mexico and Central America. Yes, this would cost us at first. But eventually, a prosperous Mexico would mean few illegal immigration problems for the United States, and subsequently, much less of a drain on our own economy. In fact, the eventual American revenue generated from the likely sale of businesses to Mexican and other nationals would create more prosperity on this side of the Rio Grande as well. Two neighboring, prosperous nations will compliment each other, and help each other build a prosperous future.

Human rights. Human equality. Human dignity. All three are mandated by God's Word to every government to whom He allows continued existence. Re-inventing our immigration system is, I believe, an absolute neccesity for our nation to acheive this end. While I am certain others far more knowledgeable than me could devise much wiser plans than I have suggested above, my hope is, in the end, to see a system that is truly "just."

But just laws alone are not enough, nor are they the first priority for God's people. The church and those who make up its membership have great responsibilities toward our immigrant friends that transcend the legal and political arenas, and we sin if we wait for the legal issues to be solved before we seek to fulfill those responsibilities. I'll talk about these in my final post on this subject in the coming days.

Evangelicals and the Political Process: A Conversation with Brian McLaren and Richard Land

Believe it or not, Richard Land and Brian McLaren had a cordial conversation! Though its hard to believe, these respective representatives of conservative and progressive evangelicalism spent more than a half-hour on issues of agreement, and in the end, I think the church will be better for having listened to it.

Make no mistake, I'm still no fan of McLaren's theology (though every time I've been around him, he makes it very difficult to dislike him personally), nor do I find myself in unanimous agreement with Land. But through my friend David Phillips, I was made privy to the recorded conversation below, and I was positively challenged by its contents. Given that I'm in the middle of a few posts on political issues such as immigration, I thought this video would serve as a great primer going into the coming election season. Some highlights (with which I strongly agree) were:

-Political parties are, by their very nature, Machiavellian, and thus, only as "good" as they have to be to garner votes and retain power.
-Evangelicals should not be committed to any political party unconditionally, but instead, should demand that political parties committ to evangelical ideals regarding the sanctity of life, traditional family values, poverty, social justice, and religious freedom.
-While "conservatives" and "liberals" can (and should) divide over a number of issues, there are also many issues on which we can (and should) stand shoulder to shoulder.
-Labels (such as conservative/liberal, etc.) can be helpful in identifying positions and vantage points, but too often are used to stereotype and malign individuals.
-Overall, the media is not your friend, regardless of your political or theological persuasion.

Have a look for yourself! The video is about 40 minutes in length, and it really is worth your time, especially if you want to think more deeply on the relationship between evangelical faith and politics.

Isaiah and Immigration

With the recognition that we are a nation built on immigrants, I find it ironic that the current immigration debate has become so vitriolic on both sides. What I find even more paradoxical is that a nation of immigrants presuming to live under the rule of law is seemingly losing its respect for both immigrants and the law. Thankfully, the prophet Isaiah, though he lived more than 2500 years ago, has more wisdom than either the Democrats or the Republicans.

I've been thinking about the immigration issue for some time now, due to my own intimate dealings with the subject matter. I say this to point out that the immigration issue, for me, is not merely an abstract, academic discussion, but rather, one that I deal with on an almost weekly basis. Every Sunday, our churches worship in six different languages. More than 25% of our member congregations are non-Anglo and non-English speaking. As such, many of the pastors of those churches are not American citizens, and consequently, part of our service to our churches is to help immigrant pastors navigate through the legal jaggernaut that is the US Immigration and Naturalization Service. In fact, our office keeps a close relationship with an immigration attorney, whom we often consult for just this purpose.

After more than five years of dealing with this issue in both South Carolina and Maryland, I've come to the conclusion that the problems which permeate the current immigration debate have their roots in the immigration system itself. And here is where Isaiah speaks pointedly and prophetically:

"Woe to those who enact evil statutes
And to those who constantly record unjust decisions,
2 So as to deprive the needy of justice
And rob the poor of My people of their rights,
So that widows may be their spoil
And that they may plunder the orphans.
3 Now what will you do in the day of punishment,
And in the devastation which will come from afar?
To whom will you flee for help?
And where will you leave your wealth?"

Sound a bit strong? Not if you have had much experience with our immigration system, which has itself produced the following problems:

1. A nation awash in lawbreakers. Organizations like casa de Maryland here in my state actually encourage immigrants and employers to break the law, and are strong advocates for granting to illegal immigrants the same social benefits my father has worked more than 40 years to obtain. Marches have been held in Montgomery county, not far from my home, where illegals, with the help of this organization, demand their "rights," which strikes me as funny. Were I to go to France, stand outside a government building and demand the same rights, privileges, and social benefits as those who have lived and worked legally in that nation for decades, I suspect it wouldn't be long before I was given a complimentary ride in a French police car to the nearest American consulate.
But overall, illegals themselves are not the problem. Many in fact do not "demand" rights. They only want a fair shot at being able to make a life for themselves in the US, and are prevented from doing so by a system that is complicated, intimidating, and hopelessly unclear. In short, while a loud minority of arrogant lawbreakers make the news, a huge number of illegals wish to be legal, but are made to be criminal by a system that gives them no chance of a normal American life.

2. Mistreatment of those who try to do the right thing.. I have seen it over and over again. Even in my own association, immigrants who try to obey the law are hassled, harrassed, delayed, stonewalled, and mistreated. While thousands cross our borders illegally every week with INS looking the other way, simultaneously, good people trying to obey the law are sent packing.

In other words, the lawbreakers are being rewarded, while those who try to obey the law are being punished. Laws that create this kind of environment are, by default, unjust laws, and therefore fit Isaiah's descrpition. Our current system of immigration deprives the needy, the widows, and the orphans by stripping those who have worked, paid taxes, and invested in our nation legally from their right to continued residency, while simultaneously granting these same benefits to those who are here illegally, thereby depriving American poor, widows, and orphans.

Part of the problem, of course, is the antiquated nature of our current system. Originally set up to accomodate a mostly European population entering the nation through Ellis Island and San Francisco, our curent system cannot possibly be expected to accomodate immigrants from all over the world, coming through multiple entry points.

But to solve these, and many of the other issues with our current system will take more than the "get rid of them all" approach of many Republicans, or the "ignore the law" approach of many Democrats. It will require a Biblical conviction to write and enforce laws that are just, and an American church that understands our responsibility to minister to "aliens and strangers" (Leviticus 19:34). To treat our foreign-born friends with dignity means that we have laws that are fair to them, while simultaneously holding them accountable to obey those laws.

How do we do this? While I'm far from a legal expert, I'll try to offer a few ways to "move forward" in the coming days.

The Atonement Applied

Evangelical Christians rightly confess that Jesus Christ is God, who came in the flesh, came into the world through the womb of a virgin, lived a completely sinless life, died as a substitute for sinners in a bloody mess on a Roman Cross, was raised bodily from the dead, ascended into heaven, and is personally coming back. Any message that includes less than the above is not the Gospel.

Still, we often have trouble making application of these precious truths beyond the challenge to "be saved." In the end, the world responds to the statements above, not so much with disbelief, but instead with a resounding "so what?"

Mark Driscoll's newest book gives as clear an answer to that question as I have heard in some time.

Death by Love is a thorough exposition of the atonement of Jesus, and how the truth of His sacrifice changes lives, purifies hearts, removes guilt, and overcomes the myriad of struggles we all face. The book will be out early next month, but you can get a sneak peak if you want. It is practically pastoral, deeply missional, connected to the real world, and most important of all, faithful to the Biblical Gospel.

Also, check out the video below that tells just a few of the stories behind the book.

In Memory of a Colleague

Dr. Bruce Revel was a friend, and cherished colleague. As Director of Missions for Eastern Baptist Association on Maryland's shoreline, Bruce had a heart and desire to see that entire area changed by the Gospel. The last time he and I sat down together, he was planning to launch a huge ministry to the deaf in one of his churches that he envisioned would multiply across his association, and even the state. That meeting was on July 17, just days before I left for vacation. I had no idea it would be the last time we would speak in this world.

I was with my family, on my way back from the Tennessee mountains when I received the call telling me that Bruce had suddenly and unexpectedly gone to be with Jesus this past Sunday. Today, someone sent me the last blog post Bruce wrote before his death. It was surreal, to say the least, to read thoughts of mortaility from a man just weeks before his death. I pray that he was able to reorganize his life in the way he wished prior to his departure for the next world. But even more so, I pray that I can make those same priorities.

This Friday, I will join what I am sure will be throngs of mourners as we lay our brother to rest. He was a very young 59-years-old, which only proves that death is non-discriminatory. I'd encourage you to read his last blog post, and act accordingly.

It's Getting Busy . . .not that anything has changed!

As I type, I'm sitting in the customer service area of my local Ford dealership, waiting on my Taurus to be serviced. Aside from a 10-day vacation from which I just returned, moments like this have been rare over the past couple of months. But its been exciting to see God at work in so many ways!

First, there was a trip to the Eastern Caribbean. I had the opportunity to spend several days on the island of Antigua with my pastors, Jerry Cooper and Rob Stephens, and help them begin to map out a church planting strategy for the island. Less than two months later, plans have moved forward at a fast pace. The first training event for indigenous church planters is next week! Through this trip, God providentially alligned us in relationnships with pastors and laity who share a passion for reaching the island. The long-term vision is for the movement to "go viral." Given the centrality of this island to the rest of the Eastern Caribbean, our prayer is that the Gospel will eventually spread from Antigua to other islands.

Then, there was the Southern Baptist Convention. I know, I know, there are a few of you out there who think the SBC has seen its best days. While I value your friendship, I don't share your pessimism, and this year's convention gave evidence, I believe, that our best days are (potentially) ahead of us. Overall, there was a somber, introspective spirit among the messengers that was reflected in many ways, cheifly in the resolutions. While I personally have always felt resolutions to be a total waste of time, I am unusually perturbed to see them often aimed at people who aren't in the room. This year, things were different. In particular, in the resolution on integrity in church membership, Southern Baptists sent a clarion call . . .to ourselves! And of course, there is always the opportunity to re-connect with old friends. All in all, I walked away from this year's convention very encouraged about our future. In the coming days, I will deliver on what I promised at the beginning of the year with a post on why I'm still Southern Baptist.

Two weeks later, I was on Mississippi's Gulf Coast. Through a partnership we have with Gulf Coast Association, our churches have worked for the past three years to help bring continued relief to this area, which was hardest hit by Hurricane Katrina. With the hurricane now three years removed, it is becoming increasingly difficult to get the needed resources for continued rebuilding. In our "fix-it-fast" culture, it is sometimes hard to fathom that hurricane victims would still need help after three years. But category 5 hurricanes don't leave behind the kind of problems that can be fixed quickly, and thankfully, the churches in my association understand this. 40 volunteers joined us in Gulfport, rebuilt homes, hosted VBS at two churches, and shared the love of Jesus with the people in this area. It was also great to have my family with me on this trip. My lovely wife headed up the kitchen crew, without which we would all have been very hungry!

Now that the fall season is upon us, it looks as if things aren't likely to slow down! The next three Sundays are filled with speaking dates. I'm privileged to speak in a lot of places, but I genuinely love preaching to the churches in my association. My current position doesn't lend itself to close relationships with laity, or to regular Biblical expositional series', and preaching in MMBA churches is the closest I can get to the pastoral role that I so often miss.

September is full as well. The good folks at Southeastern Seminary have invited me to their campus to talk about Maryland/Delaware church planting, along with my good friends David Jackson, and Troy Bush. As an "occassional" professor, I always enjoy being around students, especially those preparing to make sanctified trouble for God's Kingdom. In fact, I'm praying that a couple of future Maryland church planters will be around.

I'm back from North Carolina just in time for our second Frontliner's conference of the year. We held this conference in January, and the response has been outstanding.

Immediately after the conference, I board a plane for Atlanta, where I will speak Sunday at Orange Hill Baptist Church in Marietta. My good friend Spencer Haygood gave me the opportunity to speak to their Missions Conference four years ago, and evidently doesn't think his church has been punished enough! :) It will be great to see the people of Orange Hill again, and it is always an honor to be invited to challenge God's people toward better Great Commission fulfillment.

Oh, and don't tell him, but my son Sam will be joining me on the trip to Atlanta. The trip will be a surprise for him, but I'm also looking forward, in the midst of all the scheduling chaos, to some "father-son" time.

In the meantime, I've had a couple of months to think about a few issues, and although I'm far from a political expert, the upcoming election season provides a great opportunity to address issues the church dare not be silent about. The first item on my list: immigration. More on that later.

Shocking News from Pew Research

I'd comment, but I am simply speechless! This MSNBC segment tells the story.

New Book Podcast

While I'm still taking a brief hiatus from the blog world, I thought I'd share the following with you. This week I had the privilege of sitting down with Dr. David Jackson, who leads Church Multiplication for the Baptist Convention of Maryland/Delaware, to do a podcast on my new book. As always, David and I had a great time together, and hopefully what we put together will be of help to our guys in the field who are doing the real Kingdom work. The podcast is about twenty minutes in length, and you can access it here.

A Summer Break from the Blogosphere

Martin Luther once commented; "I have so much to do today, that I simply must go to bed." As I observe my summer schedule, I think I know how he felt!

This summer is shaping up to be a busy one indeed, and includes the following:

-A Mission Trip to the Carribean: Yeah, I know what your'e thinking. But it really is. Next week I join a couple of our pastors down there to survey the landscape and talk with locals about helping with an indigenous church planting movement. Exciting stuff!

The Southern Baptist Convention: I'll be in Indianapolis June 8-11 for the annual meeting of my denomination.

A Mission Trip to Mississippi: In July, Amy and I will be leading a team of 40 in VBS, evangelism, and construction, as we continue to help rebuild the Gulf Coast area.

A Family Vacation: Because after all this, we are going to need one!

With all this in view, writing here is going to take a "back seat" for the summer. God willing, I should be back around the first of August, and I'll be keeping up with the blogosphere and other news, as always. Hope everyone has a great summer!

Pray for the Chapman Family

For the past two decades I have been one of many who have followed the career of Steven Curtis Chapman. He is a talented artist who loves Jesus and has demonstrated huge spiritual growth over his career.

As an enormous fan of parents who adopt, I am also thankful for Shaohannah's Hope, and International adoption ministry founded by Chapman and his wife Mary Beth. This ministry has assisted more than 1500 families in adopting children.

While listening to the news on my way to the office today, I heard that tragedy has struck the Chapman family. Their youngest adopted daughter was struck by an SUV in the family's driveway yesterday afternoon, and died later at Vanderbilt University Hospital from injuries sustained in the accident. You can find the story here.
As the father of two boys, I cannot imagine the grief that has already engulfed this godly family, let alone the dark days that are coming. Let us pray for God's comfort and grace to be poured out on this wonderful family during this very difficult time.

My Preferred Half of Romans 14

One of the most annoying experiences of ministry often comes, interestingly enough, after I've preached a message. It's that moment when I'm standing in the back of the church shaking hands, and someone comes up and says "great message Dr. Rainey. I wish _________ could have been here to hear it. They need it!"

Honestly, it's hard in moments like that to keep my temper at bay. I want to ask, in righteous indignation, "don't you need it too? What's wrong with you that you see faults in others before you see them in yourself? Haven't you read Matthew 7:1-5?? Are you an idiot?? . . . .

. . .but just before exploding, the Spirit reminds me that often, I too, am an idiot.

For example, many folks on my wife's side of the family come out of a Holiness background. Because of this, they hold strong convictions that I don't hold. I remember early in our dating life when Amy would say "don't talk about movies we have seen around the relatives. They believe going to the theater is sinful."

Of course, my instant reaction was to appeal to Romans 14. After all, Paul has given us clear instruction regarding how to relate to each other on "debatable" matters. There is nothing . . .absolutely NOTHING in Scripture that forbids me from seeing a good movie, especially one in which there is lots of gunplay, fast cars, and buildings blowing up in a hopelessly gratuitous fashion. There is liberty in Christ, and where "movies for guys who like movies" are concerned, I aim to exercise my liberty!!

Furthermore, those who would object to my affinity for fast cars and bullets on the silver screen should consider carefully the following verses from Romans 14:

" . . .and let not the one who abstains pass judgement on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him." v.3b
"Who are you to pass judgement on the servant of another?" v.4
"Why do you pass judgement on your brother?" v.10
"Therefore, let us not pass judgement on one another any longer." v.13a

Wow, if only my "weaker brother" were here to read these verses. He sure needs it!

Problem is, in quoting my preferred half of this text, I've totally ignored (i.e. violated) the parts that are addressed to me in an effort to point out those parts that are addressed to my weaker brother. Talk about irony!

As a "stronger brother" in this regard, I should instead be looking at the following passages:

"Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains. . ." v.3a
". . .but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother." v.13b
"For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died." v.15
"It is not good to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble." v.21

Do such texts mean that I should totally abstain from "Ironman" this weekend? Not neccesarily. At the same time, it probably means I should keep quiet about it around certain folks out of deferrence for their convictions. OF course, they have their responsibilities as well. But I'm not responsible to fulfill my weaker brother's responsibilities. I'm responsible to fulfill mine.

The same is true for any other debatable issue. My denomination, for example, has, on the whole, very strong convictions about alcohol consumption . . .convictions that I share to a large extent. So when it comes to beer, I switch teams. I'm no longer a "strong" brother. Now, I'm a "weaker" one.

The thing that interests me about any debatable issue is that most folks are just like me . . .they have a propensity to appeal to those verses in Romans 14 that are addressed to their opponents. The problem with this approach is that it not only ignores those texts most applicable to you, but it also violates the spirit of the very texts to which we appeal; a spirit that is best summarized by Paul's contention that "the Kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to god and approved by men. So then, let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding." (vv.17-18)

Appealing to my "preferred half" of Romans 14 is never conducive to the kind of peace and Kingdom thinking that Paul describes. To pursue peace, I have to appropriate the other half . . .the half that describes my responsibilities when it comes to debatable issues.

With this in mind, maybe I don't need to judge my brother who participates in activities I find I can't participate in without sinning. Conversely, perhaps I need to resist colorful descriptions of "Ironman" in front of certain family members.

Maybe, just maybe, if we all practiced such things, righteousness and peace and joy would be seen more clearly in us by those who need to know Jesus. Just maybe, this is what Paul had in mind when he wrote Romans 14.

The Increasing Need for Ethnic Churches

Yesterday I was invited to participate in the ordination service of Rev. Vyacheslav Paliy (he graciously let's me call him Slav). The service, held at the New Way Russian-Ukrainian Baptist Church, a church we helped start three years ago, was a beautiful example of the power of the Gospel, and the wisdom of contextualization. Though I understood very little that was said, it was still a very special time spent with my Russian brothers and sisters.

After the service, I drove less than 5 miles up the road to the First Hispanic Baptist Church of Reisterstown, a church we helped start in 2006. So it goes without saying that yesterday was definitely a multicultural experience for me.

Our association is culturally, racially, and linguistically diverse. Appropriately, our churches are also diverse. Every Sunday morning our churches worship in six different languages. One of every five of our churches proclaims the Gospel each Sunday in the Korean language alone. Still, when compared with the more than 60 languages that are spoken in our area in the school systems alone, we are way behind the curve.

Years ago, Oscar Romo stated that America, "hardly the melting pot described by history texts, has been a land that from its beginning was marked by diversity, not homogeneity." I live and walk in the reality of that statement almost daily, and yesterday I was reminded of how much work remains to be done. North America is becoming more and more unchurched everyday, but not just in terms of population alone. Just as the church is behind the curve in terms of reaching our growing population, we are also behind in terms of reaching all the people groups that now exist on our home continent.

Distance can no longer be used as an excuse of why we are not reaching the nations (not that distance was ever a legitimate excuse to begin with). God has literally brought the nations to our front doorstep. In light of this, I challenge every brother and sister in Christ to do the following things:

1. Research your own area: Just a quick look at peoplegroups.org, and you will likely be shocked at the vast linguistic and cultural diversity in your own backyard. I just discovered not long ago in Westminster Maryland, a small, socially conservative, largely white community, there was an active Cameroonian church! The world is literally all around you and your church. Do a little research to determine who is there, and who needs the Gospel.

2. Contact your association/state convention for help: If you aren't Baptist, then contact your own denominational agency, or network with whom you are affiliated for help in determining what your church can do to reach out to those you find in your area.

3. Do whatever is neccesary to bring the Gospel to the people: You may need to work with others to bring in an indigenous church planter, provide office space, and part of a salary. Or, it could be just as simple as allowing an ethnic group the use of your worship and education space.

At the end of the age, John tells us that the church will be made up of people from every tribe, language, people, and tongue. The fact that so many ethnicities in my area are without a church is evidence that Jesus is not yet worshipped to the degree that He deserves here! In your area, I am sure the situation is similar. God has now arranged it so that reaching these people doesn't require an overseas plane ticket or immersion into a foreign culture. It only requires seeing these precious souls the way Jesus does.

Back to Pulpit Basics

Sometimes, in the midst of talking strategy, style, and approach (which are all important), we seem to forget substance. To be sure, change is a constant. I speak about cultural change a lot. But one thing must never change if the church is to be what she ought to be, and that is the centrality of the pulpit.

Pastoral care is important. Church Growth is important. Studying culture is important. But nothing, absolutely nothing replaces the regular, deep, faithful, powerful, Spirit-annointed proclamation of God's Word. Such is the preimminent task of the pastor, and without it, the pastor fails at his calling.

I first saw the video below a couple of months ago while at a conference in Seattle. Thanks to Micah Fries, via Timmy Brister, I was able to access the YouTube version, and have imbedded it below. It is well worth four minutes of your time.