Christ is Risen! Now What? - My Sermon from April 3, 2016

I wanted to let you in on my process for preparing a sermon when I am offered the privilege to preach. My process is far different than it might be if I had to prepare a sermon every week, as Pastor David does. For me, I find out a couple months in advance that I will be preaching, so step 1 of the process is to pull out the lectionary and look up what scripture readings the denomination “suggests” for the sermon topic.

The lectionary is actually a great way to make sure many of the scriptures available to us are covered over a 3 year period. It prevents over-using certain scriptures and ignoring others that might be difficult to preach on. It provides a very “balanced” approach for preachers to take.

In my process, I look up that week’s scriptures and read them. Then I let those scriptures percolate in my brain for a while to absorb some of their meaning.

Step 2 is to ask God to direct me toward the message He wants me to give to the congregation. I try to be completely open to whatever comes because sometimes the message seems a little harsh, or controversial, and since I don’t like confrontation, I shy away from those types of messages. So I try hard to stay open, no matter what the message might be. I look at the prophets of the Old Testament and see that God gave them messages that no one wanted to hear. As a matter of fact, nearly every one of them was killed for preaching those messages. Now, I don’t equate myself to the status of those prophets, but I sometimes find myself with messages I don’t want to deliver. Now that I said that, I trust I’m safe among this congregation.

During my process, I often gain many new insights that I never considered before, because the message is actually different than how I saw it prior to trying to prepare for it. Sometimes the message is tied directly to the scriptures listed in the lectionary, but often it goes a whole different direction. Today is one of those days. The message today has nothing to do with the scriptures suggested in the lectionary. This all came out of my study OF those scriptures, but the direction took a very sharp turn as I prepared for today.

It seems that the message today came from a lot of other directions. The anthem, which by the way, is one of my favorites, pointed me toward speaking on joy. Last week being Easter, pointed me toward speaking on eternal life. The internet pointed me toward speaking on kindness to others. There were so many possibilities in those different places. But a small voice inside of me pointed toward mundane everyday chores. I didn’t really understand why that kept coming back into my mind, day after day. It’s so boring, and trivial. So I decided to follow it and see where it went. So here’s what I found:

For me, Crosswalk.com is one of my favorite Christian websites. You may not know this, but our own Carrie Dedrick is the editor for the website.

As I prepared for today’s message, this particular article from that website fell into my lap. This is an article written by Denise Larson Cooper and was printed on Crosswalk.com. It reads:

“Easter is over. The contents of plastic eggs have been eaten. Hard boiled Easter eggs are now egg salad and only the head of the chocolate bunny remains in the box. Baskets have been tucked away in the basement waiting for next year. And Jesus has been tucked safely back in the tomb.

Wait! What?!”

She goes on to say:

“On Easter Sunday morning churches fill with people to celebrate the glorious resurrection of Jesus Christ. The organist pulls out all the stops (pun intended) to fill the sanctuary with triumphant sounds to honor the risen Lord. Trumpet fanfares accompany the congregation’s voices, which are raised in the singing of Charles Wesley’s hymn “Christ the Lord is Risen Today.” The choir joins in festive songs of victory. Hearts soar and joy fills the souls of the faithful who rejoice in Christ’s triumph over sin and death.

Then comes the morning after. The emotional charge of Easter Sunday has left our hearts. Our soul, which had soared upward into the heavens on the wings of the truth of the resurrection, is brought earthward and burdened with the cares of the day. Our minds exchange meditations on the glories of Christ, for a list of errands and groceries.”

I’ve noticed that at Easter, our sanctuary seems to get very full of people who come to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. There’s something special about that day that draws people in. Many who never set foot inside a church the rest of the year, will do it on that particular day. We see the same thing at Christmas, but today, I am speaking about Easter.

Going back to the article:

“We treat Christ as though his resurrection from the dead is the climax of an Easter play. When the music stops and the church service ends we applaud His performance and leave, remembering that we can catch the same show again next year.”

In reading this, I had to wonder, what is it about the Easter story that draws people in? Is it the promise of new life? Is it all the special activities at the church? Is it a longing to be closer to God, and the additional fanfare makes it seem possible? I really don’t know.

I do know that some show up out of obligation to family. Some show up because they live at a distance and the school system plans Spring Break at the same time, so families can visit, and since Mom and Dad do the church “thing”, they will do it too. After all, it’s just one day out of the year.

But rather than being cynical, I like to think that it’s a time when Jesus can become real for those who have doubts. Or for those who are seeking for meaning in their lives. Or those who are just empty and want to be filled. The resurrection of Jesus was for the entire human race, and we can all connect because of it.

Looking at today’s scriptures that Bob read for us, how did the disciples react when Jesus returned to them after his resurrection?

First they were terrified because they thought he was a ghost. We can do nothing more than imagine what they must have felt when the man that they knew was dead and buried suddenly shows up and talks to them. Even though he spent plenty of time telling them that he had to be killed, but would be raised up again, they still couldn’t wrap their minds around it. This was a discussion our Sunday School class had last week. After seeing Jesus raise people from the dead, most famously Lazarus, they still couldn’t believe that Jesus himself might have been raised.

This passage also tells us that they felt great joy, but they were also disbelieving at the same time. I tried to imagine this myself. I could see myself saying something like, “I am so glad to see you Jesus, but seriously, aren’t you dead?”

So Jesus continues, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you—that everything written about me in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled.”

He continued on saying, “Thus it is written, that the Messiah is to suffer and to rise from the dead on the third day, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And see, I am sending upon you what my Father promised; so stay here in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”

When Jesus is finally taken up into heaven, the disciples returned to Jerusalem with great joy and the continually worshipped God in the temple.

For the disciples, Easter didn’t end because the day was over. Easter was the springboard into great joy and constant worship of our God. There was no returning to things “as normal”. Easter changed how they saw the world. Their lives took new directions and spreading the good news became a daily activity. They didn’t show up for a special celebration and then go home to mundane living. They experienced the resurrection of their Lord and they were changed forever!

Many people who know me, know that I don’t like traditions. I don’t really put much stock into holidays, or celebrations of annual events. But at the same time, over the past few years, I have come to appreciate how other people see traditions and holidays as a way to remind themselves of important things.

So I have to ask, “Do we see our celebration of Easter as a regular event, meaning something we do because, that’s what we do? Or do we see Easter as a reminder that Jesus was raised from the dead, and because of that we live our lives in joy and are in constant worship of our God? Does Easter really mean more to us than something we do every year, or do we allow it to transform us into new creations that want to do nothing but live life for God? Yes, we have daily mundane things to do the day after Easter, but do we allow Easter to change us so that those mundane things can become instruments of worship? Does our approach to our jobs show others that we can be joyful no matter how mundane our daily tasks might be? Does Easter affect you in any way at all?

For me, Easter is so important in my understanding of God. So let me continue by asking a few more questions. Why do we make such a huge production of Christmas in the church, but Easter doesn’t seem quite as important?

Think about it, Christmas is about the birth of Jesus. This is the day Jesus entered our world as a human being. He set down his existence “as God”, and traded that in to become human. Now I don’t want to take away from Jesus’ humanness because our own denomination bases all our service to the world on the actions and character of Jesus. This is a very important aspect of Jesus. But think about this, if Jesus had not suffered and died, and 3 days later been raised from the dead, the church would not even exist. The resurrection of Christ is the pivotal point in human history that changed the entire relationship between God and the human race. The entire church was founded on the very fact that God raised Jesus from the dead. If he had not been raised, the church would not exist today.

I believe that for the church, Easter should be the most important celebration we have. But we tend to follow the world in our “ranking” of holiday celebrations. Obviously, if Jesus was not born, he could have never been raised from the dead later on. But we are all born and we all die. The difference is that Jesus triumph over death is what gives us our identity and our hope of a future, even after death.

So how shall we respond to Easter? Well, Jesus told his disciples how to respond with these words, “As the Father has sent me, so I send you.” So we are supposed to go into the world as Jesus went into the world.

The Church of the Brethren uses the tag line, “Continuing the work of Jesus, peacefully, simply, together”. Our own congregation developed its own mission statement, which is much like the denomination, which reads, “Seeking to be God’s voice and hands of love, we continue the work of Jesus, peacefully, simply, together.”

I like our mission statement. It isn’t that we are just continuing Jesus’ work. We are doing it by seeking to be just like Jesus AS we do it. That is such a powerful statement!

But how can we be like Jesus, or how can we identify with Jesus. After all, Jesus lived, died, and then was resurrected back to life. How can we identify with that?

I’ll tell you how. In Paul’s letter to the Romans, he writes:

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

Baptism is essentially an act of dying to sin, as Jesus died on the cross, and being re-born into new life as Jesus was resurrected from that death. Paul’s letter to the Romans makes it clear, our baptism is when we die and are born again into a new life with Christ. This should not be taken lightly, because this is how we can identify with the risen Lord. We died WITH Jesus, and we are also resurrected with him. THAT’s how we can identify with him.

But we are not to merely to live like Jesus lived, feeding the poor, housing the homeless, visiting those in prison, clothing the naked. Those things are truly noble indeed, but Jesus is far more than just a good example of “how to live”. He is more than “a good man”. Jesus is the Son of God, and we are brothers and sisters WITH him. We share in the inheritance promised by God to His children. When we are baptized into Jesus’ death and raised to new life, we become a true child of God, and therefore an heir WITH Jesus into eternal life.

All this was accomplished with God sacrificing Jesus for the atonement of our sins. I have noticed that a lot of Christians no longer accept that Jesus willingly gave up his life to become the sacrificial lamb to atone for the sins of the human race. I find that to be an unusual position to take as a Christian. Following Jesus, living a “good life” does not make you a Christian. Accepting the grace of God, through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus for your sin, which reunites us with God, is the only way to become a Christian. I have always seen it this way, and from my study of the Biblical writings, I find no reason to understand it any other way. Both Old and New Testaments bear this understanding out.

Peter writes in his first letter, “For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.”

I have been told that I am too “conservative” in my view of the Bible. I need to be more liberal in my interpretations of the Biblical writings. I’m told that since the Bible was written by human beings, they contain human biases. And since the Bible was copied by hand, over many centuries, mistakes have been made in the copying of the texts, as evidenced by the differences in some of the copies of the oldest manuscripts that still exist today. Also, the Bible I use is written in English, so the translation cannot always capture the meaning of the original language.

I totally agree that the Bible may not be “perfect” and may contain some errors. But I also know that many of the “progressive” thoughts on the Bible, and some of the progressive interpretations often require throwing out pieces of the writings to make them true. If there is something in the Bible you don’t like (For example, God telling the Israelites to go to war), that doesn’t mean you get to throw it out. What it means is that you are going to have to struggle with what it means for us today. Throwing something out just because it makes you uncomfortable changes the message God intends for us to hear. We need to figure out what the significance of those passages are, and how they apply to us. Many people question how a loving God can judge someone and punish them at the same time. And I admit, I often struggle with this myself. But we do that with our own children. We love them, but if they do something wrong, we punish them. It doesn’t matter how much you love them, they still need to pay the consequences for their actions.

My best example from my experience as a father was when my children learned to lie. (Yeah, children lie, go figure!) When I caught them in a lie, I gave them a choice. I made it very clear. I would say, “I asked you ‘this…’ and you said ‘this…’. That is a lie because I saw you do ‘this…’ So I’m going to ask you again, and this time, if you say ‘this…’ and continue to lie to me, in return I need to punish you. If instead, you decide to tell the truth, which is ‘this…’ (I even supplied the words), I will help you fix the issue and no punishment will be handed out.” So I would ask the question again. If they decided to continue in the lie, I still loved them, but they got the punishment as promised. If they told the truth, I still loved them, but they received the help I promised. The choice was theirs. I laid out the rules governing the situation, and they got to choose how they wanted to proceed. But no matter what they chose, I still loved them. I just had to do what was required BECAUSE I loved them.

God did much the same thing with us. We are told that Jesus was the sacrifice for our sins, and all we need to do is accept that sacrifice, die to our sin, and be raised up into eternal life WITH Jesus. Our sins are then forgiven and we become children of God. However, if we don’t, we will be cast out of God’s presence and spend eternity in eternal torment. We don’t like to see our loving God as someone who would do such a thing, but I see it as no different from how we handled discipline of our own children. It pained me to my core to see them choose punishment over forgiveness. But BECAUSE I loved them, I had to carry out the punishment as it was promised. Being a loving father does not mean you forgive your child even if they don’t repent, it means carrying out what is required to bring about that repentance, so that you CAN forgive them.

God provided the sacrifice to redeem us and bring us back into His family. It is simply up to us to choose to accept it.

Jesus being raised from the dead, was our key to living in the eternal presence of God. God raised Jesus and promises to also raise us.

I want to finish by reading a little more from the article I began with. Denise Larson Cooper continues to write:

“The church’s existence is proof that Christ is risen. The church lives in the world. The church is not a business or organization but living proof of the Lord’s resurrection. The apostle Paul wrote, “The church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills everything in every way” (Ephesians 1:23). The fullness of the risen Christ fills the church through the person of the Holy Spirit. By His power the living Christ still reveals Himself to His disciples in the world and exhorts and emboldens the faithful to participate in His ministry of reconciliation. As ministers, the faithful are to dispense the duties of the church on Earth: preach the Gospel, forgive sins, baptize, and unite believers in the foretaste of the supper of the Lamb.”

We should not treat Easter as an “anniversary” of something that happened 2000 years ago. As we move forward, we should be treating it as a reminder of how to live every single day.

AMEN.

Below is a link to the full article I referenced in my sermon:

http://www.crosswalk.com/special-coverage/easter/what-happens-the-day-after-easter.html

What are We to do if Our Society no Longer Speaks "Church"?

http://www.crosswalk.com/newsletters-only/weblog-weekly/7-churchy-words-and-the-need-for-clarity.html

The article located at the link above, is talking about how our church “lingo” is losing its meaning in today’s American culture. When the United States was completely dominated by a Christian population, the use of “churchy” words was commonplace. Those words were easily understood by the entire population because the culture was Christian. Like any culture, it includes its own language. Since the United States was nearly all Christian, the language was uniform across the entire nation as it existed then. The problem today is that the majority of the nation is unchurched, even though the majority still claims to be Christian. By “unchurched” I mean they are not actually part of the current Christian culture. They do not attend church on a regular basis, and therefore, have lost their connection into that culture. So they no longer share in the Christian language either. The article addresses this fact and suggests that we may have to drop our “traditional” Christian lingo in favor of a language understood by the non-Christian culture.

While reading through the comments following the article, so many people were offended by the idea that we could possibly think about dropping our traditional words. Some went as far as to suggest that we teach the current population the meaning of those words so that they can understand us. So here’s the question I want to address with the remainder of my article: “Is it the non-Christian’s responsibility to learn OUR language so that we can lead them to Christ, or is it OUR responsibility to adjust and get into THEIR world and use THEIR language to lead them to Christ?”

Words and their meanings evolve over time. That is actually one of the true strengths of the English language. Some languages do not have the ability to evolve. For example, the word "computer" is not found in many languages because there is no way for the language to incorporate it. So it remains in its English form within that language. So if the word "grace" is no longer understood, we need to find an equivalent word that can relay the meaning to those listening to our message, who do not speak our “churchy” language.

Here's another example: many years ago, missionaries working in countries along the equator tried to teach a verse (or concept) such as Psalm 51:7 "Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." Exactly how can anyone, living along the equator, who has never seen or experienced snow, understand what that verse might mean? The missionaries first attempted to explain what snow was. But no one could understand it. Mainly because the native language did not have a word for snow, nor a description of any sort for frozen water, because it doesn't exist there! So they started describing the meaning of "white" in terms that were familiar to the native people. So did they "change" the Bible by using words other than "snow" when translating the verse? The Bible in that language does not use a term for "snow" (since there is none), but uses something else that will make it clear exactly how white you will be after being washed.

We, as Americans, are so stuck up in our Christianity, that we exclude people who are different from ourselves. At one time, missionaries tried to teach people in other countries the English language so they could understand the King James Bible. They found it was far more effective and easier if they translated the Bible into the native language. Also, the use of American hymns in other countries who do not appreciate our style of music. It was far more effective to adapt our messages into their preferred style of music and translate the words into their language.

My two business partners are not originally from the United States. Both of them are from Asian countries. So they have a very hard time understanding American metaphors and many of our phrases. They handle the language just fine, but our style of metaphors and humor is far outside that of simple translation of word meanings. Sarcasm is REALLY difficult for them. So we need to be sensitive to the differences in cultures. That also applies to groups within the United States. Many sub-cultures have emerged and if we want to spread the Gospel message, we need to be aware of the words and phrases we use. If "traditional" Christian words are becoming foreign to many in this country, then it is up to US, not THEM to adapt. Do you really want to tell someone that you have the answer to eternal life with God, but first, they must learn to speak like you, and use the words YOU use?

Let me repeat my original question: “Is it the non-Christian’s responsibility to learn OUR language so that we can lead them to Christ, or is it OUR responsibility to adjust and get into THEIR world and use THEIR language to lead them to Christ?” When you share the Gospel message with the lost, do you use words they don’t know the meaning of? Or do you use words they will understand? How effective is your witness if no one knows what you are saying? Paul says that you should refrain from speaking in tongues, if no one is present to interpret what you are saying. While speaking with “churchy” words is not quite the same as speaking in tongues, I believe his advice is still valid. He said to NOT speak if no one could understand you. It is a waste of time because no one is changed, if they can’t understand you. How is that any different from speaking in English, using words people don’t understand? It is a waste of time because no one is changed, if they can’t understand you. It’s time to stop trying to be catered to, and start catering to those who have not heard the Gospel message.

Apple vs the Federal Government Over Unlocking a Terrorist's iPhone

What has been happening over the past few weeks is a situation where computer/cell phone maker Apple, Inc. has been refusing to comply with the Federal government's requests/demands to hack the iPhone used by a terrorist couple who killed 14 people and injured 22 at a party. The couple was later killed in a shootout with law enforcement after they fled the scene.

I've been thinking about this situation a great deal. We all want to know what is on that phone. Is there any info about other terrorist plots, other targets they were going after, who were they in contact with, etc. We want to know because we're afraid that something worse is brewing. We also say, "well, they're dead, so it no longer matters about their privacy." We hear the cries about national security!!! So WHAT is Apple's problem?

What many people don't seem to realize is that the court order is not for the assistance to get data off of one phone. It is to develop the key (a computer program) to unlock any iPhone of any person who may have one. If law enforcement wants to look at the data on your iPhone, and they have the key to do so, what is to stop them? While I completely support our law enforcement agencies, I also want to support our right to protection against unlawful search and seizure. People, companies, even the President were asking for stronger encryption methods to protect our data from being tampered with, or stolen, but out of fear, due to this one incident, we are now asking for a universal method allowing the removal of that protection. We KNOW that we are not a security threat, so we should be able to protect our data, but the terrorists should not have such protections. The problem is, to remove the terrorist's protection, is to also remove our own protection. You can't have it both ways.

Are you WILLING to give up one of your most basic rights as an American citizen in order to gather data from one phone? Do you fear the enemy so much, that you are willing to throw away the protection against unlawful search and seizure guaranteed to you in the Constitution's Bill of Rights. The document that cost so many lives to guarantee that you would never be subjected to that sort of intrusive government? Would you be upset if the government broke down your door and started going through your private stuff without just cause? Once you give up your right to privacy in one area (out of fear, or emotional distress to help those who are suffering), how long will it be before that precedent is expanded to include other areas of your life?

Personally, there is nothing on my phone that I need to hide from anyone. If it is taken from me by anyone, I have no fear that it will ever cause me to lose sleep over the data stored on it. BUT, what if I have clients and I need to store information that is highly confidential to THEM? Or let's say I keep credit card information of my own, or someone I do business with on it? And I know that there is a key out there that can unlock that information?

Because I wanted ONE phone to be unlocked, out of fear, or emotional distress, is it really worth giving up my right, and that of every other citizen to get that data? There is also a very good chance that there is nothing on the phone that will be helpful if it is unlocked. But we are willing to give up our right to privacy just to find out. We have got to take our emotions out of this equation. I would like to know what is on that phone too. I want to uncover any other terrorist plots it might show us. I want those families who suffer to get the answers they seek. But that is because I fear the enemy. Because I have so much sympathy for the families. Any decent person would feel these emotions. But we CANNOT give up our rights because we "feel" bad. I'm sure it is even worse for those directly affected, but the 4th Amendment to the Constitution was not written so we would feel good all the time. It was written to keep our basic human rights intact. Which includes even when it doesn't seem fair, or because people are suffering because of it.

A new Pew Research study shows that a majority of Americans want Apple to cooperate and unlock the phone. One question they did not ask was, "Do you know what the court order is actually asking for?" or "Have you considered what this means for YOU?"

Let's look at this from a business aspect. I think this whole situation would be easily resolved if ONLY one phone was involved. But the case is much bigger than the majority of people realize. If Apple develops the key being asked for, how much business will Apple lose as people who keep sensitive data on their phones flock to buy a different brand? Once that key is developed, everyone who needs strict confidentiality, or perhaps keeps sensitive data on their phone, will be very aware that they have lost the integrity of the product. For many people, they don't care if Apple loses business, because what is on that phone is a top priority. But if you are an Apple employee, is losing your job worth it? If sales drop, the loss has to be made up somewhere. Personnel is the largest expense in any business, so that's where the company goes first. Has anyone considered the consequences outside of being able to retrieve the data?

So that's my take on this whole situation. I stand with Apple on this one. I am NOT willing to give up my right, as a citizen of this country, guaranteed to me by the 4th Amendment, in order to retrieve the data located on one terrorist's phone. If we give into fear, the terrorists have won. The whole idea behind "terrorism" is to spread "terror". Once you give into it, you handed them their victory. They have accomplished their goal, and we will destroy ourselves from the inside out.

Being a “Peculiar” People Once Again - Sermon from December 27, 2015

Being a “Peculiar” People Once Again

(based on Romans 12:1-13; Galatians 5:16-27)

About a year ago, my phone stopped working. It would not charge, so I went to the Verizon store to see what could be done. I explained very plainly, “the phone was working fine until last night when I plugged it in, it was at 20% charged. I got the message ‘charging’ and I left it to charge overnight. This morning, it was down to 2%. When I plug it in to charge it, it tells me that it is charging, but it doesn’t.”

The person I spoke with asked me some very specific questions. First he asked, “Did you drop the phone on the ground?” My answer was “No.” He then asked, “Did you drop the phone in water or get it wet?” Again, I answered, “no.” I didn’t mind the questions, but as he inspected the phone, he said, “I don’t see any signs of physical damage from being dropped.” So I re-iterated, “I didn’t drop it, it just stopped working.”

Then he asked again, “did you drop it in water or get it wet?” So I said again, “Nothing happened to the phone, it just stopped working.” He went through all his diagnostics, that I also had tried (different chargers, jiggling the connector, resetting the battery, etc.) So then he says, “We’ll have to give you a new phone and send this one back.” I agreed.

Then his remark to my agreement was, “when they receive the phone, they will take it apart. If they find any signs of water damage, they will charge you for the new phone. Are you OK with that?” At this point, I was very upset. I have said over and over that I did NOT do anything to the phone, it just stopped working! Why will this guy not believe me. Doesn’t he know who he’s talking to?

But reflecting on the answer to that question, I realized, “no, he doesn’t know who he’s talking to. In his eyes, I am a normal customer, and apparently, he gets lied to ALL the time. So of course he doesn’t trust my word about what happened.” I was upset, because I felt my reputation was on the line. I feel I’m an honest person. I expect to be believed because I expect the same from others. But because I’m honest, it apparently makes me “peculiar” at the same time. Honesty, is not the norm in our society any more, otherwise, this situation would not have happened. To be "honest", is to go against the world’s way of operating.

Years ago, the Brethren were known as a “peculiar” people. What does that mean? It pretty much means the same thing that it means today. Back in those days, as today, they did not live by the accepted practices of the world. For example, a story is told of farmers who delivered their produce to market. All the wagons of the farmers were stopped at a checkpoint to have their produce weighed or counted. But for Brethren farmers, they got waived through the checkpoint, because it was known that they were delivering what they said they had… “as a minimum”. If they said they had 300 pounds of wheat on the wagon, they definitely had the 300 pounds, but it was probably a little bit more. They were known to never cheat or short anyone in the marketplace. Their word was their bond. No matter what words came out of their mouths, it could be trusted. That’s not how the rest of the world operated. That’s why the checkpoint was established in the first place. The world could not be trusted. The Brethren were “peculiar” because they could be trusted.

Let me ask, what is YOUR personal reputation? Are you known as someone whose word is never doubted because what you say can always be trusted? If you aren’t, may I suggest that you might need to do some self reflecting? Are you living as a representative of the world and the way the world does business? It doesn’t have to be business, it can be any interaction. Do those who know you believe every word you say, because you have proven to always be honest? Are you ok with telling a little white lie because perhaps it prevents someone’s feelings from getting hurt? Or maybe it prevents you from being seen as a failure because you made a mistake? I know people who have taken the “little white lie” to new heights. Actually, for some of them, they are in the “big, black, ugly lie” stage.

So why are the Brethren so “peculiar”? Paul writes in Romans, “Do NOT be conformed to this world”. That means “don’t do things just because everyone else is doing them.” A better rule of thumb might be, “if everyone else is doing it, you probably should NOT be doing it.”

Going against the world’s way of doing things is hard. You usually become the “outcast” of your circle of friends because they are all doing it. If they do something, and YOU don’t, no one understands why. And, if you explain why you won’t do it, it will normally sound like you disapprove of your friends’ actions. Being peculiar is always the best way to become an outcast.

So what are we supposed to do? Be unpopular because we are so disagreeable with the world? Paul didn’t stop with saying, “Don’t conform to the world’s standards”, he continues on by saying, “INSTEAD, be transformed by the renewing of your minds.”

First, what does being “transformed” even mean? And second, how do we “renew” our minds for this “transformation” to even happen? The Greek word for “transformed” is only used once in the 4 Gospels. It is when Jesus is “transfigured” (same word) on the mountain in God’s presence. Being in God’s presence “transformed” Jesus. It changed his physical being. Paul says we need to transform ourselves, by “the renewing our minds”. The type of transforming Paul is talking about goes far beyond modifying our behavior. You can change behavior with never being “transformed”. We see that all the time. We have laws that tell us proper behavior for living in our society. The laws require certain “do’s and don’ts”. You can follow those laws with not believing them to be good or right. Paul is not saying you need to follow a set of rules, he’s saying, “get into the presence of God and let God change you.” Seek God’s will in everything you do. Obey God, not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because you are striving to make those things a part of your very being. You want to renew you mind, or in other words, develop a mindset of always seeking God’s will in everything.

You need to be:

reading your Bible... daily,
praying... daily,
asking God to direct your path... daily,
looking for opportunities to serve... daily,
thanking God for your blessings... daily,
thanking God for your difficulties... daily.

If you keep yourself in the presence of God daily, your will be transformed. Your mind will start seeing things it never noticed before. Create the habit of seeking God every day.

I’ve read from several different sources that when you wake up in the morning, the first thing you should do is thank God for the good things in your life. When you live with a thankful attitude, your entire day will go better. Even if it should be a really bad day, starting with thankfulness will improve it from the get-go. When you start your day with dread, the rest of the day is going to be bad. If you start with thankfulness, the minor inconveniences will not matter to you. Many of the major ones will seem minor.

I don’t like clichés. When I hear someone use a cliché, I dismiss it and ignore it. But clichés actually come about because they started with some truth. For example, this little gem, “your attitude will determine your altitude.” I hear that and cringe. I always believed that many people who use clichés, don’t know what to say, so they fall back on something that sounds nice. But just because a cliché is overused, does not mean that it isn’t true. This one in particular is very true. If you have an attitude of thankfulness, your day is better, you can achieve more. If you have a bad disposition, you will always encounter more and more problems.

A question Paul’s letter addresses is this, people often ask, “how do I know what God’s will is?” Anyone ever ask that question? I used to ask it all the time. It’s a very good question. Paul tells us that the transforming of your mind is required. He says, “the purpose of being transformed by the renewing of your mind, is so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect.”

If you are trying to discern God’s will, but not doing what is necessary to transform your mind, how will you know when you found it? If you don’t know God’s will now, how will you know it, if you never change?

Paul has a few more words in Romans for us. He says, “everyone among you [should] not think of yourself more highly than you ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.”

I have a personal situation where I struggle with this one. Today, I get to stand in this pulpit and speak to you. It is seen by many as a place of authority. When I first started preaching many years ago, I was always tempted to desire people to say nice things about my sermons. I felt I was “better” than those who did not preach. It took a while, but over time, I learned that preaching is not being an authority OVER others, but being a servant TO others. Since I have been granted the opportunity to preach, I have the responsibility to deliver a message that will build others up, not build ME up. Sure I want to do a good job, and be inspiring. But it is not for me that I preach, but for God’s glory and the building up of His people. I am here to serve, not to BE served. The temptation comes because the preacher is the “face” of the service. But really, is that person the only one involved in making the worship service meaningful?

There are greeters, ushers, worship leaders, child care providers, the children’s story teller, the organist, the music director, the administrative assistant who put all our materials together, the persons who take care of the décor, the custodian who keeps it clean, the choir, the acolyte, and I’m probably missing some. But when it’s all said and done, who do you remember? The speaker.

So it can be tempting for me to feel “special”, when in fact, the speaker probably does less than all the others involved. Actually, without all the “unseen” servants, the speaker would be ineffectual. The service would be pretty chaotic and you could never center yourself to listen to the message. When I keep in mind all those who work to make this happen, it’s easy to understand my place among them, and it isn’t “over” them. Paul’s words are not just for preachers, but for everyone. No matter what your place is, remember that you are not better than anyone else. Sure you may have skills or gifts and be better at “something” than someone else, but they have their own gifts and skills that make them better at something else. But even then, we like to think OUR gift is more important than theirs. But like I said, the custodian cleans our sanctuary. Is my preaching MORE important? I could say “yes”, but if this sanctuary were covered in dust and spider webs, perhaps have mice roaming around, would you even pay attention to what I’m saying, or would you be watching out for spiders and rodents? Every gift is of equal importance, no matter how the world might rank them. And THAT refers back to not conforming to the world’s standards.

It may sound like I’m switching gears at this point, but bear with me and you’ll see how all this comes together.

In the Galatians passage for today, the author tells us that “the desires of the flesh are directly opposed to the desires of the Spirit.” He says the reason for this opposition is “to prevent you from doing what you want”. Talk about your wet blanket statements! How would that go over as a marketing tool for Christianity? “Become a Christian. It will prevent you from doing what you want to do.” Do I have any takers?

I pray for God to lead me to the scriptures He wants me to preach on. When I read this, I thought, “seriously? This is the message I’m supposed to deliver?” So, I’ve been pondering on what the author is getting at. The obvious message didn’t seem to click for me, because I don’t believe God doesn’t want us to enjoy ourselves, sometimes. The Bible talks about joy in spite of suffering, but this isn’t about suffering. This is about “choosing” between the Spirit’s desires and the flesh’s desires.

The author lists the “works” of the flesh, “fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these.”

Then he lists the “fruit” of the Spirit, starting with the statement, “By contrast”. So this is how they are different, “the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control.”

As I looked at the list of the “works of the flesh”, I thought, I don’t desire those things anyway, I do struggle with a couple of them, but I don’t desire them, so how does that “keep me from doing what I want?” And as for the “fruits of the Spirit”, of course I want those things, so again, “how does it keep me from doing what I want?”

Since I thought I only have a problem with a couple items on the “flesh list”, I thought perhaps I should go deeper into those few things and see what’s really there. So as I went through this exercise, I thought envy was the best example for me.

When someone has something that I don’t have and I want it, that’s called “envy”. So I am envious of someone and something. I don’t like feeling envious, but I do. I think about how unfair it is that I can’t have it, or because it’s so expensive or whatever, my mind is filled with thoughts about what I don’t have. So my mind is focused on a “thing” and obtaining that “thing”. If I am focused on what I don’t have, how can I be thankful for what I do have? How can I be generous when I know that takes away from saving up for that “thing”? How can I love someone I am envious of?

The idea that you can’t do what you want is not a problem. The problem is that what you want robs you of the things that make life good. The flesh’s desires control you and what you do. The Spirit is in opposition because it frees you to enjoy what God has in store for you. Envy makes you want more and more “stuff”. The more you have, the more you want. Someone will always have more than you, so if you are envious, you will never be satisfied and, like a drug, will be control you and you will become a slave to your fleshly desires. What you want to do in the flesh, leads to destruction. To live by the spirit is to live freely. You can still have nice things, or situations, but as long as you continue seeking the desires of the Spirit, you will not be controlled by the flesh, and therefore open to the joy God offers.

The desires of the flesh keep you from “real” joy that can only be found in God. When the author uses the term “what YOU want”, he does not mean a simple “that would be nice to have”, but an “I gotta have it”. Those who live a promiscuous life often report how lonely they are. But they use sex as the tool to obtain companionship, which in turn leads to more loneliness, because it is connecting only on a physical level. They desire a TRUE deep human connection only to receive a shallow one that quickly disappears. They live by their fleshly desire, not the Spirit’s desires.

So how does all this go together?

Living by the fleshly desires is how the world lives. We can see it more and more in our advertising. As an example, “buy this product and you will get this result.” All advertising feeds into our fleshly desires. Our television shows feed our fleshly desires. Everything we read about seems to be geared against the fruits of the spirit.

Look down the list:

“Love” vs “lust”
“Joy” vs “momentary happiness”
“Peace” vs “constant need of more things”
“Patience” vs “instant gratification”
“Kindness” vs “getting rid of those different from us”
“Generosity” vs “keeping it all for ourselves”
“Faithfulness” vs “anything goes”
“Gentleness” vs “force”
“Self-control” vs “do what makes you happy”

The only way to combat the world and the desires of the flesh is to be transformed through the renewing of our minds. We need to get into the presence of God and let God show us a new way. We need to become a “peculiar” people once again. If we are “peculiar”, others will notice us and take note. If we are able to blend into the world, because we aren’t that different FROM the world, I have to ask, have we conformed to the world? Are we actually living out the Christian life God desires for us? Being “peculiar” can be hard. But the other option is to never experience God’s joy and peace, or any of the other fruits of the Spirit. So you get to make a choice on how you want to live your life.

Can the News Media Lie and Get Away With It? - My Thoughts

So here’s what I’ve been thinking about over the past few days, “NEWS”. Here’s the situation that caused my wheels to turn:

The first report that came to my attention: A “news” service, Politico, reported that candidate for president, Ben Carson, lied about his past. An excerpt from his book was cited within the article. Just on a cursory reading, I realized that this “news” report was “twisting” the words to say something it didn’t actually say.

The second report that shortly followed: CNN reported that they interviewed people from Carson’s past who claim the angry man Carson claimed to have been, is not the same person they knew.

Here’s the problem, Carson fired back at Politico saying that in the cited passage, nowhere does he actually say what the reporter claims it to be saying. So Politico “changes” the headline to “soften” their accusation. CNN got called out by Carson, for interviewing people from his past who knew him AFTER he got his anger under control. His timeline is pretty well documented, so it should be apparent to anyone who actually read his book.

I have said many times that the “news” media no longer reports the news, but rather all “opinion” based on their political leaning. This is on both the “right” and the “left”. The Supreme Court has decreed that the “news media” has special privileges to protect sources, report things that may hurt someone’s career, etc., sort of giving the right to be the “whistle blower” without repercussions. So if they expose someone committing a crime, they cannot be sued for libel. This is an effort to allow fair reporting to prevent corrupt people from destroying the country, or taking advantage of people who cannot defend themselves, etc. I think it’s a very good thing.

But what happens when the reporters start expressing opinions, instead of the facts? As a child (this may be a naïve or even faulty viewpoint based on my age at the time, and the fact it is an old memory), I remember people like Walter Cronkite reporting facts, and NOT opinions. When the news got to the point of giving its opinion, the upper left corner said, “Commentary”. You knew it was an opinion and not a “news item”. They even had a special person appointed to do the commentary, so you always knew it was NOT facts being presented.

So here’s where my thoughts came in. If a media service is continually “reporting” news which is far more opinion than it is news, should they still be protected from libel lawsuits? I looked into the history of the reporter on Politico who claimed Carson lied, and his last 10 stories were on Republicans in the presidential race, and every article was negative opinions on their stances, or trying to say their facts are wrong, or they are lying, etc. Now I know that perhaps he is being assigned the articles he must write, so I looked at the website itself and their “news” items. There were many concerning Democrats as well. But the flavor was actually “high praise” for what Democrats are doing or saying. There was no slamming them for anything they may have done wrong. Now I will admit that I did not read every article, or scrutinize each one that I read to fact check what was there. I just read quickly to get a “feel” for the reporting. If this “news” outlet is leaning that hard to one side, and the news is very much “misreported” or “misrepresenting” the facts, as in the case of Ben Carson, does he have a right to sue them for libel? Would he have to prove that they do not, in fact, report news, but rather opinion? Or prove that they are trying to push an agenda, rather than report the facts?

When the “correction to the article was published, the article was not changed at all. An “editor’s note” was added to the end. So, unless you read the article AND the added note, it is still a smear of a man’s character.

How about the article you are reading right now? Do I have the right to claim myself as reporting the “news”, even though I do not work for an “official” news service? I am reporting things “as I see it”. I admit it is strictly “my opinion”, but many of the things I read on a lot of “news” websites, amount to nothing more than opinion also. So because they “sometimes” report the news, does that “protect” everything they print, even if it is a boldface lie? If the editor at Politico, read the article that was published and did not catch the “obvious” misinterpretation of the cited passage, can we say “it was nothing more than a mistake that fell through the cracks”? Why was the article itself not changed to properly state the facts, rather than an “editor’s note” being added to say “oops”? Perhaps the article should have been taken down completely since they admitted to the “mistake”, or as the Carson campaign called it, “the lie”.

CNN is considered a “legitimate” news source. But watching their handling of all things political, it sure comes across as “yeah Democrats, boo Republicans”. Many news sources slam Fox news for leaning to the right and telling lies, but how is what they are doing any different. I think ALL news outlets should strive for unbiased reporting. I don’t care if they lean left or right, they shouldn’t lean at all. In an interview with CNN, Ben Carson asked about their process to reporting. His main example (as I remember it) was, “you asked people who I went to high school with about my ‘anger issues’, but they didn’t know me WHEN I had those issues. They knew me after that.” So my question is, why did CNN report that he was lying when they did not have anything legitimate to report? AND they reported it in such a way that even though the people they talked to were not people who would have known about his anger issues, as if it somehow legitimized their claim because it was “close enough”.

One possible answer to this situation may be to require doing things how they were done in the past. When you are stating an opinion, mark it as such. State that “based on the facts (and list those facts), it is my/our opinion, that…”

Sometimes I fear it is too late for any type of correction. Many people who are listening to the “news” don’t know that news was at one time facts being reported and you were allowed to form your own opinion. Today, you have to pick a side and then listen to the media outlet that will tell you what you will agree with. I find myself reading the news about America on foreign news sources because they don’t have as much at stake to report the facts. They have nothing to gain or lose by being completely honest, instead of pushing an agenda for some sort of reward. Since our “news” reporters live here, they can push their ideas through the mass media which gives them a whole lot more power than the average citizen. So if they don’t like someone, or that person threatens their position or power or agenda, they have the means to destroy them and call it “news”, and then hide behind the “protection” the news media has from being held libel.

Don’t get me wrong, this happens on both left and right sides. It just happened that the Ben Carson/Politico issue brought it to my attention. I continuously see people putting down Fox News for their reporting from the left, and MSNBC being slammed from the right, but the Carson thing called out a real life example, instead of mere generalities.

As I research things for my blog posts, I often complain that I cannot find unbiased news sources to fact check the topics I am working on. I would like to just get the raw facts and draw my own conclusions. But today, finding “untainted” facts is a hard job. I spend a lot of time trying to find reliable information when I write.

Here’s my question to anyone reading this, what should/could be done to eliminate the constant media bias that seems to be running rampant in our society? Do you even think it’s a problem? How do you select a news source? Do you do it consciously, or do you turn on the TV and whatever is playing will be fine? Again, this is just me searching for answers.

Love and Marriage - My Thoughts

I never thought I would be writing an “advice” article on marriage. I think I am nowhere close to being an expert in this area, but I do have experience that I am willing to share.

I recently finished reading an article entitled something like “How to fulfill you husband’s 5 basic needs”. It was an article written to wives about how to make their husbands happy. The article was sort of “generic”, but the basic point was “give yourself freely to your husband.” It was not an article about sex, though that was one of the 5 basic needs. What disturbed me so much, was not the article itself, I totally agreed with the whole premise, but the comments left by so many women about having their own needs met. They took the idea of “fulfilling his needs” as meaning “being his slave.” Some of the comments were left by women whose photo pictured them kissing their husband (or boyfriend). So I got to wondering, “why are you with this person?” Do you actually love him, or are you using him to fulfill some need?

I should first explain what I believe love is all about. When you love someone, you will desire their happiness over your own. Love causes you to forget about yourself and focus on the object of your love. So, if you love your spouse, you will do whatever is best for him/her, no matter what the cost to you personally. The ultimate love will even move you to die for them, if necessary. I have met people who would die for their children, but not their spouse. So I again have to wonder, “do you actually love your spouse?” Love should be unconditional. If you will only love someone, provided you receive love in return, I believe you do not actually love them. There is no motive in love. You love simply to love. There is no expectation whatsoever of something in return.

For those in an unhappy marriage, whose fault is it? Most, in my experience, blame their spouse. I will hear things like, when we first got married he was so kind and loving and now he thinks only of himself. I do not doubt that may have happened. But I also wonder, “what changed to cause that?” Depending on your perspective, you may hate what I am about to say, but just consider this, is it possible that you stopped making your spouse your #1 priority? Did you stop trying to make them happy? If they lost focus on your happiness, did you in return change your focus on theirs? I’m not blaming anyone with these questions. I am only seeking clarity. How we respond to a situation is entirely up to us. So, if they are pulling back, or focusing on themselves, should your response be to also pull back? Or should it be to confront it and work it out? No one likes confrontation, but if you value your marriage, you will do what is necessary.

Again, I say, “love should be unconditional”. The moment you think, “what’s in it for me?” or “are my needs being fulfilled?” you are no longer loving your spouse. The only reason to fulfill your spouse’s needs is because you love them. What you get in return should not be considered. If you look for some sort of return, you are not loving them, you are simply being selfish. Now let me say, if your spouse has made it clear that they do not love you and they expect a slave and not a spouse, then maybe we’re in different territory… (or are we?)

When something changes in a marriage, it is up to YOU to figure out what it is and deal with it. If you take the attitude, “if my spouse won’t try to figure it out, or doesn’t want to work at it, why should I?” again, you are taking a selfish attitude. Sometimes, only one person sees that there is a problem. Don’t assume that you both see it.

I believe that marriage requires both people to work at making it great. If one starts slacking, the other may have to work harder to hold it together. We all go through stuff that makes us weak, or want to give up, or walk out, or whatever. The trick is to love unconditionally. Look at what that word “unconditionally” means. There are no conditions that will cause the love to stop flowing. So I ask, “under what conditions will you stop loving someone?” If you have a condition that could make you stop loving them, then you do not have unconditional love for them. Most of us have unconditional love for our children, but so many do not have it for their spouse. What’s wrong with that picture? Why do we put conditions on our spouse, but not our children? Are they not also human and prone to failing? Of course your spouse is going to screw up and disappoint you. If you thought otherwise, you need to seek some serious counseling. We know our children will fail us, but we’re ok with that. So why not allow your spouse the courtesy of knowing they’re not perfect? Every spouse is going to fail at some point. Get used to it! If THEY were perfect, why would they be with YOU?

Those who know me, know that I have spent a lifetime dealing with severe depression. Depression causes us to focus on ourselves. It does not make us selfish, but it somehow makes us focus on how miserable we feel. We can’t think about other people when we’re depressed. So how should my wife respond when I cannot even think about her during those times? I’ll tell you what she did. She loved me and supported me and sought to fulfill my needs as best she could. She never once told me that I was failing to meet her needs. She gave of herself fully to aid in my healing. Her own needs went completely unfulfilled. It would have been so easy for her to just walk away, but she remained completely selfless. Many times during the worst of it, I seriously considered suicide. But because of her love for me, I knew it was not the right answer to my problems. Her love was the only thread I was able to hang on to, it kept me alive (literally). It was the key to my healing. Today, I can freely give myself back to her. Yes, she was miserable during the worst stages. I was mean and cranky and would not communicate any sort of love for her. But she always returned love in response. She had to pick up all the slack left by me, because I stopped caring about everything. Her love for me was unconditional. If she required love in return, she would have left me, because it just wasn’t forthcoming.

I can see so many people saying that our case is the exception. Maybe it is. But if you don’t live it out, how will you ever know? Our entire society teaches us to care about ourselves FIRST. Love ourselves FIRST. While I believe we need to love and care about ourselves, I think the idea of that being “first” is wrong. It should be at the same time. When you marry someone, you become a part of a whole. What you do for your spouse, you are also doing for yourself. So if you love your spouse, you love yourself. When you put yourself ahead of your spouse, you are no longer working for the good of the whole and are actually creating a separation between the two of you.

So let me leave you with a couple of thoughts, part of my philosophy if you will:

You cannot receive love, unless you are willing to give it.

You cannot give love, if you expect something in return.

Living Out Your Faith - My Thoughts

As I prepared to teach my Sunday School class today, I had an opportunity to reflect on a few conversations that I have been involved in lately. One was a question posed by a pastor on Facebook. He was looking for a story of healing connected with the anointing service that the Church of the Brethren administers to those who ask for it. I asked for such a service during the worst time of my depression. Another conversation (similar in nature) was the question of using anti-depressants while holding to the belief that God can heal us from depression. And in the final conversation, I told my story of instantaneous healing of tonsillitis many years ago. All these conversations, though closely related were with separate individuals.

The scripture for the Sunday School lesson tomorrow is from Acts. The story is about Stephen, standing before the Sanhedrin, giving his speech that eventually leads to his being stoned to death. As I reflected on my day of these conversations, I had some realizations of what has been in the news lately.


The news item is about a woman who has a conviction of faith to not issue marriage licenses to gay couples. She is deemed a "hero" by some Christians, and a "disgrace" by others. She is also called a bigot by many. So I posed the question to myself, "what would I do if I were her?" This led me to an even bigger question, "what does God want us to do in situations where our duty violates our faith?" 

Whether or not I agree with her stand on gay marriage is immaterial. What matters is HOW I respond to situations based on my faith. If I oppose gay marriage, and find myself in a conflict between my civil duty (my job) and my faith, what am I going to do? In reality, the question is even bigger than that. Should we “fight” for our right to practice our faith without restriction? Should we just give in to public opinion? Should we keep quiet and “suffer”? Well, here’s what happened in this story: She chose to "fight" for her beliefs, which in turn created a situation that I believe damaged her message of Jesus' love. Let me explain that opinion. Rather than "fight", she could have chosen to "suffer" for her beliefs. What I mean by that is, she could have sacrificed her position, her job, her income, and resigned, stating that she could not uphold a law that violated her faith. It probably would have never made the news. But the impact on those few people, who witnessed her actions, may have had a tremendous change in their lives.

In the story I read in Acts about Stephen, he is asked to defend himself against the charges brought against him (in other words, “fight”). Instead, he makes a speech showing how the Christian movement was a continuation of God's plan (out of the Jewish tradition) for the world, and not a contradiction to it. In the process, he showed how his accusers were violating God's will, which was entrusted to them. His speech was only heard by the few who were present, but even after those few helped stone him, I believe his words had to ring in their hearts and minds well after the fact, eventually changing their lives to possibly accepting Jesus as the Christ.

Rather than constantly trying to preserve our "rights" as Christians against a government set on taking them away by "fighting", perhaps we need to live out our faith among those in our immediate influence. If they see God's love in us, and later see us suffer for expressing that love, our oppressors will be seen as the problem, not us. Those of us screaming about how we're being persecuted are seen as ignorant people who believe an outdated old book that contains racist, bigoted messages. What makes its way into the news might be the only encounter many people have with Christianity. And of course, it is all negative publicity. Is there any question as to why we are looked down on as Christians? So we scream even louder about how we are misunderstood and unfairly characterized, and all this screaming makes us look even more ignorant and paranoid. So how do we change it? I am going to suggest a different approach, try being quiet. As you read on, you will see what I mean.

Changing gears for a second, a government that does not have the support of its people cannot stand. "Fighting" against it only creates sides, either you are with us or against us. This is a "top down" approach. Fight the leaders to affect change that will trickle down. History shows us this approach never really works. When Christianity was mandated by a government, it didn’t change people’s hearts, though it may have changed some people’s actions. True change only comes when it affects people’s hearts. You cannot legislate this type of change. You can make non-Christian actions illegal, but you can only change behavior, not intent. To truly change someone’s heart, you need to make personal, one-on-one contact with them. That cannot be done at a high level, it can only be done at the grass roots. You have to get down on your knees and wash the other person’s feet. You have to enter their life and allow yourself to love them without reservation.

All this being said, let’s play out what I’m talking about. Let’s say you have affected many people’s lives by showing God’s love to them (As a Christian, I would hope we are all doing this.) You work a government job that requires you to issue marriage licenses. One day, gay marriage becomes legal and you are now required to issue those licenses. However, you believe this violates your faith, how do you respond? Well, if you fight and refuse to do so, you get hauled into court, speak your piece and get thrown into jail. A national controversy breaks out and some are with you and some are against you. Your co-workers can’t take your side because they can’t afford to lose their jobs. So they fear the power of the government that employs them. That government has the ability to throw them into jail beside you. (What follows is all speculation, but let’s see where it goes.) On the other hand, let’s say, you chose to quietly resign stating that you can’t do something that violates your faith. Since you have shown all your co-workers God’s love through your actions, your resignation will leave a HUGE imprint on their hearts and minds. They see that you are not only willing to talk the talk, but you are willing to walk the walk. They will see how deep your faith really runs. They know you NEED that job, but you are willing to give it up for something you believe that deeply about. They see that you trust God enough to take care of you to the point that you will walk away from a guaranteed paycheck, with only the trust that your God will provide for you. How many of their lives will be forever changed when they face difficult circumstances? Will they turn to God because of your example? We don’t know for sure, but I’m one who would hope that leadership by example is the strongest teacher.

I mentioned that a government cannot stand without the support of its people. In this scenario I painted, who will have the support of your co-workers, the government, or you? Your actions can plant the seeds that one day will turn people against the establishment when “true” persecution comes. If we are just “noisy”, the government will be glad to see us go. But if we changed lives, our persecutors will not be able to withstand a rebellion of their own making.

When we live by the law of love, we create change from the bottom up. Jesus never "fought" the government. He simply showed love to whomever he was around and the change that was created has not only lasted over 2000 years, it has perpetually grown and spread. Jesus’ love changed the people at the bottom. When that happens, change makes its way to the top. Sure, fighting can create change, but the change is only temporary. There is always someone bigger and stronger who will overpower the change. But when love is the weapon of choice, nothing is able to defeat it. So if you feel persecuted, live out your faith. Suffering may be the best way to effect change. “Fighting back” is the “expected” response. It’s so easy to say, “If I were them, I’d be fighting too”, and BOOM you are ignored! But to quietly suffer AND on top of that, show love to your oppressors, there is no way you can be ignored. Not only is it not expected, but it’s considered “insane”, but it is never going to be forgotten. And those who end up in difficult times, will remember your faith and perhaps accept Jesus as their savior, and begin a new life, because the seeds you planted began to grow and bear fruit. As a Christian, everyone is watching you. If you talk the talk AND walk the walk, people’s lives will be forever changed, whether you know it or not.