Blessings!

In this Psalm, Davidmakes many astounding claims about God’s character and attributes, including God’s personal involvement in the formation of the human body-David’s body, to be precise!  Despite its location in the womb, his body was not hidden from God.  As a matter of fact, Davidstates that God had seen David’s unformed substance.  The ramifications of such a truth are startling.

Your eyes have seen:  God Himself, the Creator who exists without beginning and without end, personally looked upon, viewed, took into account and noted, David’s unformed substance.  This unformed substance is the basic, material elements which, with conception and growth, would become a human body, David’s body.  Think of it!  While still in its unformed, or, unassembled, state—God saw and recognized the unique person that existed in them—David, the future king of Israel.  The simple word my tells us that this unformed substance was not simply molecular components without identity to God, but that it was a person, known and seen only by God, but still a person.  I’ve often wondered why, given the truth of Scripture concerning this issue, we Christians have found ourselves debating and arguing and struggling to determine the exact point of the beginning of a human life.  According to David, the human life begins at the instant it is recognized by God, and God recognizes human life before it even exists in a form that humans themselves can discern!  Could it be that we’ve been seduced by arguments and microscopes into thinking that life formally begins at the moment we determine it does, through our limited powers of observation, and not when God says it does?

On January 22, 1974 the Supreme Court of the United States of America decided that the formed substance of the child in the womb was not worth fighting for or protecting, and that the alleged “right to privacy” of a mother trumped the rights to life of that child.  Almost all state and local laws that protected the life of the unborn from elective abortion were overturned.  The supreme lawmakers of the most powerful nation on the planet formally determined that they were unwilling to recognize the dignity and value of a living person, simply because the size, substance and stage of development of the child were beyond their limited powers of observation and comprehension.  God sees the unformed substance—people and judges cannot.  And so, many children today live in one of the riskiest places on earth—the human womb.

Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do, and if they do know what they’re doing, have mercy on us all.

“Indeed, we dislike hearing that we are saved by grace and by grace alone.  We do not appreciate that God does not owe us anything, that we are bound to live for his goodness alone, that we are left with nothing but the great humility, the thankfulness of a child presented with many gifts.  For we do not like at all to look away from ourselves.”

2 Corinthians 8:13 For this is not for the ease of others and for your affliction, but by way of equality– 14 at this present time your abundance being a supply for their need, so that their abundance also may become a supply for your need, that there may be equality; 15 as it is written, “HE WHO gathered MUCH DID NOT HAVE TOO MUCH, AND HE WHO gathered LITTLE HAD NO LACK.” 

In the same way that a family functions in meeting the physical needs of its members—our churches are to relate to each other as a big family household.  Paul quotes on verse from the Old Testament book of Exodus (chapter 16), where the nation of Israel, at what was perhaps its most needy state ever, was starving.  They had no food, and many, many people to feed.  God promised to send them “bread from heaven,” which they later called “manna.”  For six days of the week they would go out from their tents and gather up this white, flakey-type substance off of the ground, and prepare it for their families.  Exodus 16:18 tells the reader that once the manna had been gathered (about a bushel for each person) it was found that both families with few members and families with many members were all equally satisfied.  The former did not have too much, and the latter did not come up short of food.  The manna was shared, naturally, within the family.  It appears that one person would go out to gather this “bread from heaven”, bring it home, and it would be prepared for the entire family.

I have always viewed Paul’s meaning in quoting this verse to be that churches with more resources and wealth should contribute to poorer churches out of their abundance, and then when those poorer churches had more wealth they in turn would contribute to the needs of the (formerly) rich churches, who now had become impoverished.  (Kind of a divine insurance plan for churches:  “You’re in good hands with Jesus…”)  I had heard of the concept described as the natural flow of the tide—bringing a high water level to one place while another place far away experiences the levels of a lower tide.  When things were flush for one church, it would share with the poorer church, and when/if things got tight, that poorer church would kick in to meet the needs of its former benefactor.  But I was missing the point that I believe Paul was making, and missing the significance of his referring to the Exodus manna distribution as a pattern for church giving today…

Paul’s point is that we churches today wherever we are in the world—are a family.  We’re not to view ourselves as a collection of families who are called to share our “manna” with those “families” across the world—those churches who are in poor, impoverished countries.  The picture is not of one church sending funds to another, usually across the world and far away from the giving church, in the same way the Smith family might send a casserole across the street to the Lee family when they’d come upon troubling times.  No, we are to share our resources with our brothers and sister churches in the same manner as a Mom or Dad passing the mashed potatoes (still have the manna picture in my head!) across the table to a member of the family.  The needy churches we share with are not to be seen as separate affiliates (this is the crime of denominationalism, I guess…), but as beloved members of our family.  And no person would ever tolerate living in a house with a family member who is starving because either they aren’t being given any food by their own family, or perhaps aren’t being called to the table for the meal!

I’ve noticed that we American Christians are very motivated when it comes to sending our dollars across the globe in what we call “foreign missions,” and we are also (especially at present) very hot on the idea of local service projects and ministries.  Yet I note a horrible failure on the part of our churches to share wealth with the churches of their poorer brothers and sisters in our faith who worship in the same city as our own, if not the same neighborhood—and sometimes the same building of which we rent space to them.  Is this the way family members treat one another?

I know of a church of over 150 refugees in Portland that is struggling to simply find a place to meet, and has had to cut ministries simply because they can’t afford to pay the bus-fare to get their members to wherever they might be meeting.  Their pastor and his wife are more than sold-out to the church God has called them to—they are sacrificing their lives for it, daily.  I fear for how long they can last, how long before they collapse, financially and physically.  All this is happening within four miles of two major, mission-minded seminaries who are training students to travel abroad (even to the country my refugee friends fled from), and scores of neighborhood churches that sit dark and empty most nights—a growing church of 150, few of whom have jobs or cars, and all of whom are living on public assistance.  It would seem that the best way for churches to receive material assistance from American churches is for them to avoid coming to America!

My church isn’t rich by any means, but we’re starting to ask the questions about our responsibility to see our sister churches as family, and not distant cousins or (worse yet), a “refugee community.”  We give a bit, we share in ministries—but we have a long way to go.   But the first step for us was a change of thinking.  It’s not a matter of how we view the challenge of foreign missions—it’s all about how we treat the members of our family, the church of Jesus Christ.

O little town of Bethlehem, How still we see thee lie!  Above thy deep and dreamless sleep The silent starts go by.

What was the message, the good news of great joy given to the shepherds that night, over two-thousand years ago?  It was the news of the arrival of a Child in the city of David, Bethlehem.  Today, Bethlehem could really use some good news.  I’ve been there a few times, and can attest that the city is not a quaint little village in the desert, surrounded by palm trees and flocks of sheep.  It is surrounded by a 30 foot tall cement wall, designed to keep terrorists contained in the Palestinian Authority lands, and out of the suburbs and city ofJerusalem.  By all standards, it appears the wall has been effective—suicide bombings have markedly decreased since the construction of the wall, which includes a security gate with armed guards and two separate check-points.  The wall has also turnedBethleheminto a type of prison for its residents, with outside travel and commerce becoming increasingly difficulty, if not impossible.  Regardless of what side you may fall on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,Christian, grieve that the city of our King’s birth is now a pathetic, sad, besieged place.

I was going to write today about shepherds, and the Savior, who is Christ the Lord.  Maybe I’ll do that tomorrow.  Today, I ask you to pray to your Lord for the town of His birth—Bethlehem,Israel.  Ask for the peace of that place, for the people there, for the dwindling number of Christians who have the courage to remain living there amidst increasing persecution from some of their militant-Muslim neighbors on the one hand, and a secularized, indifferent Jewish government on the other.  Bethlehem was once a predominantly Christian village—but this is no longer true.  It once boasted a thriving bible college, which now gasps for air to survive.  Its days seemed numbered.

O holy Child of Bethlehem!  Descend to us, we pray; Cast out our sin, and enter in; be born in us today.

Faithful Father, is it the same there today as it was on that night when He was born?  Is it as sad, as hopeless, as dark and repressed?  And if Bethlehem is the same, are people the same, too?  Aren’t we also in such desperate need of such a visit this day?  Show us, as you did the shepherds, the way to hope, the way to peace, the way to our Savior, the Child who has been born to save the world.  Amen.

This post was first published Christmas 2008.

A Reuters news article published the day after the death of Steve Jobs, the iconic, genius founder of all things Apple, revealed the deep regret Jobs carried that he had not been available to his children.

Steve Jobs, in pain and too weak to climb stairs a few weeks before his death, wanted his children to understand why he wasn’t always there for them, according to the author of his highly anticipated biography.
“I wanted my kids to know me,” Jobs was quoted as saying by Pulitzer Prize nominee Walter Isaacson, when he asked the Apple Inc co-founder why he authorized a tell-all biography after living a private, almost ascetic life.
“I wasn’t always there for them, and I wanted them to know why and to understand what I did,” Jobs told Isaacson in their final interview at Jobs’ home in Palo Alto, California. (Reuters)

While Jobs was healthy, making history in the field of computer industry and development, corporate management, and the new field of computer generated imagery at Pixal Industries, he did not take the time to be present with his three children, in their teens at the time of his death. If we fathers are honest, I believe very few of us would claim have batted 1.000 in this area, either.

Fathers, don’t sell your time short—don’t short-sell your influence with your children. And don’t assume that your last day on earth is far off. It may be this day. Will you need a professional writer to explain to your children why you w

“An energy efficient florescent bulb, three dollars,” the boy’s voice said.

The next scene showed the boy drinking a glass of water from the tap, his father watching.  “A plastic, reusable drinking glass, two dollars,” said the boy.

Next they were in the hardware store being some other reusable, environmentally friendly item.  Perhaps a water-saving adjunct? Again the boy quoted the item and its price.

Then, the camera zoomed in on the faces of the little boy and his father, smiling at one another.

“Making your father a better man, priceless.”

What?!  Using economically responsible light bulbs, not using throw-away drinking cups, using cloth lunch sacks to save our forests, okay.  Those things are good for the earth, smart decisions for those who take seriously the divine will that we humans dutifully care for the world, and leave it in better shape for our grandchildren.  But “making my father a better man”?! 

It seems that American industry has tapped into the environmental ethic and begun to elevate it to the status of family religion.  Morality expressed in environmentalism.  Treat the earth well, don’t burn up too much carbon fuel, and you’re a “better man.”  Drive a pickup or a van, and you’re a profligate, a user, a morally questionable man—a worse man, I guess.  Use a plain, old-fashioned light bulb, and you’re probably setting a bad example for your children.  (Who, according to the makers of this commercial, are in a position of teaching proper, moral behavior to their folks.)

Did I mention the product that this commercial was selling?  MasterCard, the folks who brought usurious interest rates, hidden fees and penalties, and mailboxes stuffed with their “pre-approved” credit lines offered on an almost daily basis to college freshman and to those who have recently claimed bankruptcy.  What does MasterCard have to gain by the fathers of our land going eco-friendly?  Nothing.  Nothing, that is, until those Dad’s use their plastic to purchase re-usable sacks and long-life florescent bulbs.  Tapping into our love of our families, our desires to be good parents and role models, and the legitimate commitment to graciously care for and preserve creation, the guys in suits have figured out yet another way to get their hands into our pockets.  Brother, whenever Madison Avenue decides to weigh-in on how to make you a “better man,” keep your hand on your wallet.

It seems that the trend indicates a growing tendency for these families to “embrace sex-selection techniques, like in vitro fertilization and sperm sorting, or abortion.”  In short, the selective aborting of female babies that I previously wrote about (April 15, 2009) is not isolated to a country or a specific political system, but seems to be a part of a (portable) world-view of life that attributes greater worth to a person based on their gender alone.  The idea is horrid, but understandable in our current materialistic, “success” oriented culture.  In a land like our own, that tragically views children as commodities that are managed and arranged around the life goals of the parents, should we be shocked or incensed that newer citizens would take things a step further, and simply abort the babies that would not (in their estimation) further the goals and aspirations for success of the parents?  This isn’t a sci-fi novel issue, and it isn’t something that is isolated to totalitarian, atheistic cultures.  It’s here, just down the street from you, just over there.  It’s your neighbors and friends.  It’s their children.  If we’re thinking correctly about this issue, it’s actually OUR children.

Perhaps the most puzzling statement quoted in the article was by Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg of Fertility Institutes in California (which does not offer abortions), a clinic that advises couples in the options involved in sex-selection procedures.  “Culturally, there are a lot of strange things that go on in the world,” Dr. Steinberg said. “Whether we agree with it, it’s not harming anyone.”

Anyone, that is, except our daughters.

That is a question that I am sometimes asked about our church.   I give the answer (which is “Yes”) with hesitation, not because I doubt that a consistent literally interpretation of the Bible is the only meaningful, logical way to do it, but because I am rarely given the opportunity to truly understand what they mean by “literally,” and to clearly explain what I mean by the word.  One takes the Bible literally in the same way one takes a stop sign literally–there are no hidden messages in that red, octagon sign on the post–it simply means what it says, “Stop.”  But I also read the Lord of the Rings in a literal fashion, as high-quality fantasy-fiction, with many examples of bravery, cowardice, good, evil, hope, and despair (though all of these are fictional).  The Lord of the Rings is fiction–you can’t travel to Tom Bombadil’s for a chat, and then have lunch at the Prancing Pony.  You’d have to search for a long, long time to find those places…and if you did, you’d probably be able to buy a T-shirt and refrigerator magnet to commemorate your visit!  In the same way, I take the morning newspaper (here, The Oregonian) literally, too.  Its front page is usually objective, propositional truth (although the fact of daily retractions for prior issues leads me to take even the front page with a grain of salt!), I take the sports section pretty literally, especially the bare facts of numbers (scores, hits, runs, averages, etc.).  But the “living” section–now that part isn’t so propositional or objective, nor does it claim to be.  It’s where I find movies reviews, television programming guides, advice columns.  I read this section literally by knowing that it is not claiming to be the end-all truth for my life–it’s just trying to get me to go to a certain movie, or try a new recipe for garden tomatoes. 

Taking the Bible literally involves a reasoned approach similar to the above applications I’ve laid out.  It means assessing and valuing each particular type of literature in it that I am reading, and interpreting it accordingly.  Well, the whole reason I’ve written all this today is to refer you to another site if you are interested in reading and excellent piece of writing on how to interpret the Bible.  I am impressed with the ministry and writing of Dr. James Emery White, Senior Pastor of Mecklenburg Community Church in Charlotte, North Carolina.  Please give this site a read, and let me know what you think!  http://www.serioustimes.com/

Blessings,

Ken

The implications of this verse are chilling.  Joshua is giving his farewell to the nation of Israel.  They have entered into the Promised Land, conquered its armies, and occupied its cities.  The future looks bright for Israel—she finally has her own land, her own place to grow as a nation, and to live out her very unique faith before the eyes of the surrounding pagan, lost world.  But it seems that she has carried with her a dark habit from her distant past—idolatry.  The gods that their forefathers served beyond the River were those of the Mesopotamians, from whom the father of Judaism, Abraham, came.  The gods that their fathers served in Egypt were the idols of the nation that they had been enslaved to for over 400 years, and had been miraculously delivered from just 40 years earlier.  The reason the verse is chilling is because this people, God’s redeemed, covenant people, still had such idols with them as they entered the land of Promise!  The Hebrews had secretly clung to the worship of idols from Mesopotamia for as much as 600 years, and the worship of Egyptian idols for over 400 years.  An idol is something—anything—that people turn to in obedience and deference with the expectation of having their most cherished hopes and needs met.  It seems that the Lord was not fully trusted by the nation, throughout its entire history, and so other gods (little “g” gods) were packed along the cultural suitcases on the trip to and from Egypt.   

What is particularly alarming about such idolatry in God’s chosen people is that the way it must have been, had to have been, practiced and preserved was through the intimate lines of family connections and marriage, through your fathers, Joshua said.  This is the reason for the Bible’s pervasive concern that children be raised in households of genuine faith, and marriages be entered into only by those of the same faith.  It wasn’t the mixing of diverse bloodlines that concerned the Lord, as in cross-racial marriages—it was the ultimate degradation of the one true religion with the idolatry of another.  And so, the problem that Joshua put his finger on was that while God had miraculously delivered the nation from their Egyptian slave masters, many in the nation had chosen to remain enslaved to Egyptian idols—and they secretly practiced their enslavement through the countless family decisions and values that were made and communicated to their children down through the generations. 

Today, such little-g idolatry may exist even in Christian families where the decisions of life (schooling, finances, marriage, time-management, housing, etc.) are made according to the standards and beliefs of our surrounding culture, without consideration and obedience to the Word of God concerning such matters.  For idols aren’t funny looking statues that sit on our mantles, and they aren’t cars, houses, boats, and vacations—they are the ideas and demands that we create and serve  in order to gain the things we want in life, particularly the things that we are unwilling to trust the Lord to provide.  And while such idols do often seem to provide such perishable items and soon-to-be-forgotten experiences, no idol provides what you and your children desperately need—forgiveness for your sins and reconciliation with God.