tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-62751838244977325362024-03-13T18:21:35.727-07:00 The View Through My KeyholeHoward Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.comBlogger358125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-7012173176077220612024-03-13T18:19:00.000-07:002024-03-13T18:20:33.557-07:00An Easter Message that is Nothing But Scripture<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiyeB4wUh4VO-tCpz7f2Esg6G5w3JArnVldSXu8lluEo1M179CYYYGf7n5sJXWResUOnsVYbSghr7m-1RteupuANoYGGJRUUp05Nvb9oP0tswguObRxyLW8BndSqRvyWtLWQni3mvbm2t-Lh9tomnnYaDUojRFvfaZXAUpF9IGm_t-eLM25kQQwV3v0VHg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="372" data-original-width="350" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiyeB4wUh4VO-tCpz7f2Esg6G5w3JArnVldSXu8lluEo1M179CYYYGf7n5sJXWResUOnsVYbSghr7m-1RteupuANoYGGJRUUp05Nvb9oP0tswguObRxyLW8BndSqRvyWtLWQni3mvbm2t-Lh9tomnnYaDUojRFvfaZXAUpF9IGm_t-eLM25kQQwV3v0VHg" width="226" /></a></div> I don't know how many times I've heard something like this in my 50+ years of ministry: "I wish you/they/pastors/etc. would just preach the Bible." If you share that opinion, you should be very interested in the message I'll be sharing at <a href="http://woodlandchurchbc.com/">Woodland Church</a> on Easter Sunday.<p></p><p><i><b>God's Story in His Own Words,</b></i> is a message made-up entirely of Scripture. It begins with "the beginning," John 1:1, and concludes with the "Amen" of Revelation. It traces God's plan in between. Most of the message is accompanied with pictures, many of them black and white prints by Gustave Dore' that many of you will remember from your first Bible.</p><p>I first shared this message on Easter ten years ago. Preachers often say that when they preach they are speaking to themselves first of all. I found this to be undeniably true concerning this message. I would have been glad I had prepared and preached this message even if no one else had been there to hear it. I'm looking forward to sharing it again. From time to time it is valuable to get an aeriel view of the whole forest. It will help you understand what you're seeing when you get back examining one tree at a time.</p><p>The graphic below contains information about the Easter Service at Woodland. Below the graphic, I'll share a few more thoughts so you don't get the wrong idea.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXrJq4fumpSVOnnvepEm2ifwrOiKKZICbcJmUrPviCzF5acJtrVLZMtQJWCAIKS39iiEXrJSs86EaUp0gzR6xhnPzX1CO1ob_OzzShJGBXQGpzdL78p5AK7XejnfNqsw9Kz03mg3MLHB66qrhKDFkxAmJpS-PEq14eZOJSCz6faxb6uaG4EpZSf0BYsqY/s576/EASTER2.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="384" data-original-width="576" height="355" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXrJq4fumpSVOnnvepEm2ifwrOiKKZICbcJmUrPviCzF5acJtrVLZMtQJWCAIKS39iiEXrJSs86EaUp0gzR6xhnPzX1CO1ob_OzzShJGBXQGpzdL78p5AK7XejnfNqsw9Kz03mg3MLHB66qrhKDFkxAmJpS-PEq14eZOJSCz6faxb6uaG4EpZSf0BYsqY/w533-h355/EASTER2.jpg" width="533" /></a></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>While I do appreciate the sentiment that preachers should preach the word, I am not saying that every message should be verbatim recitals of Scripture. This message that I'm sharing on Easter Sunday is the only message like this that I've ever done. The messages in Scripture, the Sermon on the Mount, Peter's message on the Day of Pentecost, and Paul's messages in Acts, contain Scripture, are based on the Bible that the speaker had at the time, but they also included the thoughts of the speaker tailored to the need of the moment.<br />What I am opposed to, and warn you against, are sermons like the one Charles Spurgeon commented on. He said something like, "If the preacher's text (the portion of the Bible he claimed to be preaching from) had scarlet fever, his sermon would be in no danger of catching it."<br /><br /></li><li>If you are considering joining us at Woodland Church for Easter Sunday, I need to make something clear. I don't want to disappoint, offend, or needlessly anger someone, so I share the following: Sometimes when people speak about the "Bible" they are speaking about a particular translation of the Hebrew and Greek that they regard as superior to all other translations. In this message I use several translations, The New Living Translation, The English Standard Version, The New International, the New American Standard Bible, and the King James Version. The NLT is predominant in this presentation. It's use of common Twenty-first Century English flows well for this purpose.<br /><br /></li><li>I encourage you to go to your church on Easter. If you don't have a church you call yours, and live in the Fincastle, Troutville, or Daleville area, or just want to take a lovely ride, I encourage you to join us at Woodland. You can find directions on the<a href="http://woodlandchurchbc.com/" target="_blank"> website</a><a href="http://website.">.</a><br /><br /></li><li>Here is a Bible passage that is part of the message, <br /><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #2b00fe; font-size: large;">"Don't be afraid!" he [the angel] said.<br />"I know you are looking for Jesus,<br />who was crucified.<br />He isn't here!<br />He is risen from the dead, just as he said would happen.<br />Come see where his body was lying."</span></div></li></ol><br />Rejoice in that reality.</div><br /><br /><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-85804694676177232502024-02-01T07:10:00.000-08:002024-02-01T07:10:20.479-08:00The Senate Hearing on the Danger of Social Media to Young People<p> I didn’t watch the Senate hearing on social media,
yesterday. I did hear some of the “gotcha” moments captured and broadcast on
radio. I saw a brief interview with one of the committee members in which the
senator was shamelessly political—go figure—but was also undeniably right.
Social media, platforms like Tik-Tok and Facebook have created an incredible
and frightening opportunity for harm to young people.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgy8B5Zq5i3enHbILiG33XJz8LFoT_xie83my9Qhn2dUw5io4tzyouHvFFsJamGyTsria4MPNCeYLSsYF4PJTOSq0r_KPP9yoLy8qhwfQWuNzbjXRVngWuCRF8yBLMrNAAaS1PuCPZRCv9qfU5dE17pmP-56840rPis3giH0GuJiTz45ZLaIrHkQdDAmAI" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="1200" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgy8B5Zq5i3enHbILiG33XJz8LFoT_xie83my9Qhn2dUw5io4tzyouHvFFsJamGyTsria4MPNCeYLSsYF4PJTOSq0r_KPP9yoLy8qhwfQWuNzbjXRVngWuCRF8yBLMrNAAaS1PuCPZRCv9qfU5dE17pmP-56840rPis3giH0GuJiTz45ZLaIrHkQdDAmAI" width="320" /></a></div>As parents, as grandparents, as leaders in the moral realm,
we simply cannot ignore this.<o:p></o:p><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This morning I read the transcript of Al Mohler’s daily podcast,
“The Briefing.” You can listen to or read it <a href="https://albertmohler.com/2024/02/01/briefing-2-1-24">here</a>. <i>(A
brief disclaimer: Yes, Mohler does sometimes pull the fire alarm lever when he
ought to pick up his phone and talk to someone, but I do find him generally
helpful as one who watches what’s going on and helps put cultural matters in
the grid of a Biblical worldview.) </i>A couple of significant quotations and
thoughts from his article:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->The “Surgeon General of the United States, Vivek
Murthy, reported just a matter of months ago . . . there is a massive mental
health crisis among American young people.” I wrote about that <a href="https://howardmerrell.blogspot.com/2023/05/looking-at-world-surgeon-general-sees.html">here</a>.
This crisis is not solely the fault of social media, but social media is
clearly involved.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->“. . . social media has created a vulnerability,
a danger, for young people that frankly has never existed before in human
history.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->Those of us of a certain age need to realize
that others much younger than we have never known a world without social media.
They take it for granted.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol; mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol;">·<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-feature-settings: normal; font-kerning: auto; font-optical-sizing: auto; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-alternates: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-position: normal; font-variation-settings: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span><!--[endif]-->“ . . . there is moral responsibility in every
technology . . .. There's a moral dimension to the development of the wheel. [It]
can be used to convey you somewhere . . . it can also be used to crush someone
. . .. [E]ven as ancient technology comes with its own moral dimensions, modern
technology comes with multiplied moral dimensions, because of the
sophistication of the technology, and the immediacy, and the reach.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, who owns this moral responsibility?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Clearly in the case of children and teenagers, as in every
other realm, parents are responsible. And, at<br /> the risk of eye-rolls and
objections I’ll just bluntly say that many parents are grievously avoiding that
responsibility. Giving a child unsupervised access to the internet is a lot
like letting them play soccer in a mine field.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yet, even with allowance for the preening and pontificating
that is part and parcel of a televised Senate hearing, I think the Senators are
right. Those who created and profit from the technology, bear a responsibility
as well. In this regard, Mohler observes a “fishy” phenomenon. Folks who
usually aren’t all that interested in parental rights, suddenly acting like
advocates for parents being responsible to fix the problem. Yes, parents bear
the major responsibility for their children, but others in the community—and in
this case the community is global—bear responsibility as well.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So what?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I’m not a Luddite. The fact that I’m using the internet to
publish my thoughts is evidence of that. But, controls on the power of the web
are appropriate. As someone who is well into his adult years, I personally need
to reckon with the fact that such controls may sometimes be cumbersome. I think
I ought to be willing to pay that price in order to protect the vulnerable. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I appeal to parents. Resist the relentless pressure our
culture puts on you, not to mention the whining of your child. Decide when your
child should have a cellphone not on the basis of what “everybody else” is
doing, but on the basis of what you conclude is best for your child. Do some
listening and research before you come to that conclusion. Think about Proverbs
29:15 on this one. <i>Proper discipline gives wisdom, but a child left to himself
brings his parent to shame. </i>(<i> </i>That’s the HM application paraphrase.
Look it up in your Bible.)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">A general awareness is appropriate. Somewhere between tinfoil-hat
paranoia and clueless indifference there is a sweet-spot. We’ll disagree on
exactly where on the spectrum that sweet-spot is, but isn’t that what responsible
people of faith always do? (See Romans 14) Let’s help each other out. There is
an invasion all around us. Sometimes the invader is pernicious. Let’s not act
otherwise. Yesterday’s Senate gallery was
filled with parents of abused, and in some cases hounded-to-death children. That
is strong encouragement for us to be convinced that we need to link arms on
this matter. We should expect our leaders to do something. We need to be
willing to endure some cost—be it listening to the teenage whining or jumping
through the hoops of proving that I’m not something I haven’t been for more
than fifty years, a teenager.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">We can do better. We have to.<o:p></o:p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-54861785531141138982024-01-18T06:29:00.000-08:002024-01-18T06:29:01.796-08:00The on-going question of cremation versus burial:<p>Here js a brief article that, IMHO, ought to be read by all pastors, and any others who help folks make decisions surrounding the death of a loved one. That includes virtually all of us, sooner or later, so this is a matter that ought to be dealt with as part of a church's teaching. This article touches on a number of points that ought to be further explored and discussed. </p><p><a href="https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/cremation-burial-choice/">https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/cremation-burial-choice/</a></p><p>I encourage you to read the article rather than merely my thoughts about it, but to encourage a conversation, I offer the following:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Justin Dillehay, a Baptist pastor from Tennessee, does a pretty good job of staying in the road on this tough issue. He avoids the extreme of saying what we do with our dead doesn't matter (for the record, I agree with him. I think it does matter). He maintains that for a long time, standard Western burial practice was referred to as "Christian burial," and that this means something. <br />He also refrains from adopting a legalistic tone. "[I]t’s not that cremation is a violation of a direct biblical command." "[T]here’s no moral prohibition on cremation in the Bible."</li><li>There is no doubt that Dillahay, comes down on the side of maintaining "Christian burial" as the norm for God's people. In doing so, he in no way--that I could see anyhow--drifts into the clearly heretical notion that what we do with the departed loved one's body has any impact on that loved one's eternal state. Though he does make the case for burial, he refrains from saying that cremation is devoid of at least reasonable justification.</li><li>One reasonable justification is cost. At least twice in the article, Dillehay mentions this. He even implies, if not flat-out says, that churches ought to be of some help in this regard.</li><li>While Dillehay does not frame it in these words, his article brings out two important facts about sound Theology: 1) A sound Theology is integrated. Every point of Theology touches on every other point of Theology. Dillehay raises the question, without answering it, as to whether humans are ensouled bodies or embodied souls. I'm not sure those binary choices are adequate, but this is a short article. That touches on the intermediate state of the dead and the nature of the resurrection and my second observation about the A sound Theology, 2) Sound Theology leads to right practice. One flows from the other.</li></ul><div>(Concerning the intermediate state, I found <a href="https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_117.cfm" target="_blank">this article</a> that gives an introduction to three views, two of which are quite common. The article does not discuss a fourth view, "soul sleep.")</div><div><br /></div><div>I'll make three comments that constitute some of my reactions to the article.</div><div><ol style="text-align: left;"><li>Dillehay rightly criticizes the "empty shell" descriptions that are often used to describe death, especially in explaining death to children. Yet, he also refers to scriptures that speak of the separation of body and soul. One has to dig deeper on this.</li><li>While Dillehay speaks of the reality of the financial difference between burial and cremation, he doesn't pursue it much. Actually, that might have strengthened his case. (See below) Given the popular impression that people have about the financial difference between cremation and burial, the financial considerations are huge, bigger than the article admits. (More below)</li><li>As Pastor Dillehay indicates this is a question that is worth pursuing. Four times in my career it loomed large for me.<br />Funerals (and burials) are for the living. Dillehay is right. What we do with the body of a loved one (and what we request be done with our own remains) does say something. <br />Fairly early in my pastoral career, a dear saint, someone I look forward to seeing in heaven, died. There were essentially no resources for a funeral, etc. The oldest son, in a very cavalier manner, declared that they would cremate the remains and go on with life. Probably stepping over a line--if not several--I declared that this son might do that to his father, but I wasn't going to allow that to happen to my friend. This man was a loved part of my church and someone who had lived in my home while he recovered from a serious health issue. Even though this was fifty years ago, when cremation was much less socially acceptable, my decision was not that cremation was absolutely wrong. Rather, it came from a conviction that what this son was saying about the worth of his father was definitely wrong. My church stepped up, and while I don't remember the details, my friend was properly honored and buried (not saying he couldn't have been properly honored had his body been cremated).<br />Several years ago my wife and I served as missionaries on two different islands half a world away. What my wife would have done had I died "out there," or what I would have done had she died out there obviously remains an unknown. I told my wife, "If I die while we are out here, my recommendation is to have my body cremated. That way you carry my remains back home in a suitcase." Since then I've been told that is technically illegal, though it is often done. Transporting a body by air is quite expensive. <br />The other two experiences have to do with my Mother-in-law and my Mom. Both of these dear Christian ladies died as widows, away from the place where they and the rest of the family wanted them to be buried. Burial was the family consensus in both cases. I knew enough to know that the cost difference between cremation and burial consists not so much in the actual cost of the two procedures but in the cost of the "services" associated with "Christian burial." In both cases, family members transported the body from one state to another themselves. This was done legally and respectfully. Both were buried in inexpensive containers, the industry equivalent of a "plain pine casket." For each, a graveside service was conducted for only close friends and family, while a memorial service sans the body, and a time of visitation, was held at their respective churches. The casket was draped with a cloth out of respect not only for the deceased but for the mourners. At the visitation and memorial service, a picture was in place of the usual casket and body. All was handled with full respect. In fact, concerning one of these women who was known for her thrift in life, the fact that she was buried economically was an honor to her memory. The bottom line was there was little difference in the cost of the burial and what the cost of a cremation would have been.<br />In other words, I would say that in addition to the Theological considerations, creative economic alternatives to typical funeral home procedures ought to be explored.</li></ol><div>I think your thoughts in the comments could be useful to others who need to guide others through death-related decisions.</div></div><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-10823832230525288262024-01-05T21:46:00.000-08:002024-01-05T21:46:29.784-08:00Tribute to Faithful Servant that Provides a Critique of Missions Philosophy <p> I write this brief post from the guest house on the Campus of <a href="https://amanocs.org/" target="_blank">Amano Christian School</a>, in Chingola, Zambia. My purpose in coming here is to be an encouragement to some <a href="https://www.liebenzellmission.org/" target="_blank">Liebenzell USA</a> missionaries. Kathy and I are involved with LMUSA.</p><p>I've read Kevin Bauder's weekly articles for some time now. During some down-time, here in Africa, I took time to read <a href="https://us3.campaign-archive.com/?e=83b7ba92c8&u=26fc144e4403d2f4c471844a2&id=ec5abf48d4" target="_blank">this week's post</a>. In it, Bauder gives deserved tribute to a faithful missionary who served behind the scenes for many years and, in the end, accumulated a major impact. Likely, like me, you didn't know Richard Redding. However, especially if you are a pastor or someone involved in Great Commission ministry in other ways, I encourage you to read <a href="https://us3.campaign-archive.com/?e=83b7ba92c8&u=26fc144e4403d2f4c471844a2&id=ec5abf48d4" target="_blank">Bauder's piece</a>. In paying tribute to this largely unknown servant, Bauder exposes some troubling trends in current conservative Evangelical mission work, especially regarding who is and who isn't a real missionary.</p><p>I saw this during my years of pastoring and working with missions from that perspective. Now as I'm involved in missionary care I see the impact from a new perspective. I encourage you to read the article, it's not long, and draw your own conclusions. I welcome your interaction.</p><p><br /></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-90942069536742406772023-11-30T07:07:00.000-08:002023-11-30T07:07:15.302-08:00Henry Kissinger and Solomon<p> I just heard on the radio that Henry Kissinger, one of the world's most influential people, in the mid-twentieth Century, died at the age of 100. </p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://img6.bdbphotos.com/images/orig/d/5/d59o248bq17k5do1.jpg?skj2io4l" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="583" data-original-width="454" height="441" src="https://img6.bdbphotos.com/images/orig/d/5/d59o248bq17k5do1.jpg?skj2io4l" width="343" /></a></div>The New York Times called him "mesmerizing." He shared the Time Magazine's 1972 title, "Man of the Year," with President Richard Nixon. It is hard to name a world leader of that era with whom Kissinger was not involved. He dated Hollywood starlets and was often the featured character in the news stories of his day. In fact, he and perhaps the best-known journalist of the day, Barbara Walters, were the subject of gossip column rumors.<br /> In a <a href="https://youtu.be/VKE8lDEhCZs">recent interview,</a> marking his 100th Birthday, Ted Koppel commented, "He remains relevant on a global scale." If memory serves me correctly, once in a conversation with Gold Meir, President Nixon said, "We have something in common. We both have Jewish Secretaries of State." To which the Israeli Prime Minister replied, "Yes, but mine speaks better English." I remember his heavily accented, somewhat mumbly manner of speaking. There was never any doubt, however, that the man was brilliant. Even though I speak more clearly than the former diplomat, I don't recall any two heads of state ever joking about me.<p></p><p>Kissinger's life is an apt illustration of the Bible Book of Ecclesiastes. He had everything, <i>but in the end, he died.</i> </p><p class="MsoNormal"> “<span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">The end of the matter; all has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God will bring every deed into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good or evil.</span>” (<span lang="en-US">Ecclesiastes 12:13–14</span>, ESV) </p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-34638269806330090722023-09-13T07:36:00.005-07:002023-09-13T14:28:48.683-07:00Is 80 to Old for the President of the USA? What About Me?<p> Listening to the news this morning, I heard several talking heads bring up the question about whether the President, Joe Biden, and the leading Republican candidate, former President, Donald Trump are too old to serve as leader of the United States.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1617C/production/_85829409_nuke_cut.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="800" height="201" src="https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1617C/production/_85829409_nuke_cut.jpg" width="358" /></a></div>In spite of the fact that at 73 years of age, I find myself saying, "I resemble that," this is a question that needs to be considered. To put it in the bluntest terms, we don't want someone having a "senior moment" when they push the nuclear button. To push things to the other extreme, though, I sure don't want to give a young hothead the opportunity to start a nuclear holocaust, either. The founding fathers of our republic recognized the need for maturity when they put an age threshold in place for the presidency. Those less than 35-years-old need not apply.<p></p><p></p><p>For the record, according to the National Park Service, "The average age [of those who wrote our constitution] was about 45 years. The youngest, Dayton, at 26, was one of three men in their twenties, the others being Spaight and Charles Pinckney. Eleven were in the thirties, 13 in the forties, and 8 in the fifties. Jenifer, Livingston, and Sherman were in the sixties, and Franklin was in his eighties." Dr. Franklin as he was known, one of the most respected minds in the world of his day, was in the time of life of the two current leading candidates to be our next president. Perhaps a case could be made that half-a-Franklin is better than about any politician available to us today, but that's a discussion for another day. I will say, if Ben were running today, I think I'd have more problems with his dalliances with younger women, to whom he was not married, than about the number of candles on his birthday cake.</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSJ7dm6LqU5cQIzO2oSerKL5raCDBzdWwOJ9A&usqp=CAU" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="170" data-original-width="297" height="170" src="https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSJ7dm6LqU5cQIzO2oSerKL5raCDBzdWwOJ9A&usqp=CAU" width="297" /></a></div><br />Is an 80-year-old, qualified to be president?<p></p><p>Leading a nation, or any other organization for that matter, requires not only knowledge but wisdom. We tend to associate wisdom with age. Yet, we all know older folks who have only grown more bitter, prejudiced, angry, and deeper in their rut with each passing year. </p><p>Leadership, likewise, requires knowledge. In our lightning-quick, changing world, keeping up is often associated with youth. I seldom meet someone in their 70s and beyond, who says things like, "Now that I've gotten older, I master new skills more easily," "I find my memory has improved." or, "I'm mentally quicker than I've ever been."</p><p>Yet, on an intellectual level, I have found as I have grown older, that the smartest, quickest, person in the room is not always the rightest. I think the ideal leader is one in whom there resides enough knowledge and intellect to follow and sufficiently understand new situations, problems, and proposed solutions, and who possesses enough wisdom and has a well-enough-tuned moral compass to decide what is best and right. </p><p>If we accept what is obvious to all of us of a certain age, that, slow though it may be, mental acuity like physical prowess declines with age, while if we pay attention and don't let negative emotions dominate wisdom increases, then somewhere in the intersection of those two graph-lines there is a sweet spot. I've yet to meet a 16-year-old who has attained that balance. When I visit the nursing home I meet folks who are well past it. But where in between those poles is the magic age? The constitution says that the lower limit is 35-years-old (one current candidate for president is only 38). In spite of Dr. Franklin's record, is it time to place a limit at the other end of the age spectrum? Some say it is.</p><p>It depends (go with the pun if you want to).</p><p>Rather than focus on how old the president should be, I am thinking more about what do I do, what can I do, and what should I do at the age I am? Maybe some of you can help me with this. Maybe we can help one another. Here are some thoughts. I offer them in the hope that my mind is still acute enough to make sense and that my heart is wise enough to understand what really matters and sort better from not-so-much.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>This one applies to both the young and old. I ought to live my life--especially the part of my life that has to do with learning and self-improvement--in such a way so that when I am older and my knowledge-izer begins to deteriorate or deteriorates more, there is still a reservoir from which my wisdom-ificator can draw. I need to depend on that.</li><li>I very much need to know the difference between things that are new and better and those that are old and essential. As an older guy I think I'm better off focusing on the latter.</li><li>I may need to admit that in certain areas I can't keep up anymore. I need to have others--probably younger others--who can tell me what I need to know about the latest and <i>maybe </i>greatest. I may choose not to go there, but I need to know that wisdom and curmudgeonliness are cousins. Go with wisdom.</li><li>As my ability to hold on to things diminishes, I need to be more careful about what I hold onto.</li><li>I need to know that it is wise to consider new ideas. For as long as I can, as much as I can, and as effectively as I can, I need to keep learning. I should not, however, waste that precious ability on the trivial.</li><li>In the same way that I have started using stair rails, I need to have intellectual assist devices. For instance, a search engine provides a quick check for spelling, correct names, dates, and other points of knowledge. It is wise to know that I may not be as smart as I used to be. I need trusted/trustworthy people who can help me on this. </li><li>When possible, I ought to maximize collaboration--by the way, I think the same is true for you youngsters. Wouldn't you love to listen in on the conversation that Franklin and those twenty-something constitution writers had?</li><li>An article I read several years ago suggested that guys like me need to turn loose of the reins of leadership and embrace the mantle of sagacity (those are my words of summary).</li><li>I need to know when to quit.</li></ul><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>I need to know when to quit!</li></ul><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-34604620288805056132023-08-31T07:31:00.004-07:002023-08-31T07:34:51.506-07:00No one but the rebuked should know when you rebuke. Everyone should know when you praise.<p> My wife is a John Maxwell fan. She listens, just about everyday to his "Minute with Maxwell" spot. When one particularly strikes her, she shares it with me. It's just one of the many reasons that I love, admire, and appreciate Kathy.</p><p>She sent me one today in which guest speaker, Joe Mamby, emphasizes what I regard as absolutely essential part of good leadership--Praise in Public, Admonish in Private. Joe links the concept to another trait that is also key to leaders--a proper understanding of patience. I hadn't thought of that connection, at least not in the way Joe presents it.</p><p>The "Praise in Public, Admonish in Private" concept is really a "duh" rule of leadership. It is so obvious for several reasons.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>We all vicerally react against a leader who dumps on a subordinate in a public setting. It's like the eighth-grade bully picking on a skinny sixth-grader just for the sick fun of it. What is the skinny kid supposed to do, or what can the unfortunate subordinate do except act like a duck in the rain--just duck, let it rain, and hope that at least some of it will roll off.</li><li>The above reason is just one of the reasons why the violation of this fundamental leadership principle is toxic to the long-term success of an organization. We don't like that kind of leader. We dread the day when we will trip the tirade trip-wire. We tend to keep our heads down in that environment. We are unwilling to take a chance, or be creative even if we are convinced that to do so would be to the benefit of the organization. Sometimes even that doesn't work. On occasion subordinates get a public dressing down for not being more bold. When a worker can't win he/she is likely to quit.</li><li>The public tirade almost never leads to constructive instruction. The end of the dressing down is usually something like, "Go forth and figure out how to do better." Sometimes--in my opinion, rarely--the humiliated worker will go on a self-education program and actually improve. More often he/she will just learn to duck and hide more effectively, that, and, start working on their resume.</li></ul><div>It is obvious, yet frequently forgotten or ignored.</div><div><br /></div><div>The Minute with Maxwell spot had barely gotten started before I remembered the most glaring violation of this principle of leadership that I have ever seen. I was involved with an organization that depended for its life on the good will of a regulatory agency. We were enduring an inspection by a team from that agency. In normal circumstances, I think the team members are really nice people. In this circumstance there was such a huge power differential that they came across as anything but nice. In my view, they had an entitlement mentality. They had the power, others were expected to cater to them. One of my associates in this organization was found wanting by the inspectors. There is a pretty serious protocol that this team followed. At the closing meeting of the inspection tour my coworker, a person who bears the image of God, a dedicated servant, one who had worked very hard for the success of this organization, had to sit, without any recourse and listen to the clinical description of their failure to measure up. At the end, when I asked for some time before visiting team left, to give my colleague some time to recover, and make graceful, or at least less ignomious exit, the leader of the team objected. They were in a hurry. We took the time anyhow. It was not only wrong. It was immoral.</div><div><br /></div><div>Joe Mamby links the concept to patience. I think it is a valid linkage. As a leader, I am ashamed to say that there have been times when I was in the place of that inspection team, and I, too, have failed. I should have been patient enough to forgo the perverted feel-good moment of "lording-it-over" (1 Peter 5:3) another. I should be patient enough to go the long route of shephering the person (see the context in 1 Peter). On those occasions when I failed I foolishly and wrongly traded a moment of feel-good superiority, or adherence to an unfeeling protocol, for an opportunity to help someone grow. What is needed is the self-control element of patience. </div><div><br /></div><div>At the bottom of this Praise/Admonish principle is a basic fundamental fact--people are special. They bear the image of God. They are the ones for whom Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice. They are more important than me looking powerful, in control, or ruthless. They are more important than protocol. As a leader I need to remember that. I am responsible to lead an organization to succeed. If a worker is not contributing to that success I need to correct, instruct, encourage, and, yes, on occasion, reassign, or even fire them. But, always with the thought in mind that this is a person who is highly valued by God. Joe's principle of leadership is inline with that.</div><div><br /></div><div>I'm no longer involved in the organization that was being inspected. After the event I described above, I wrote to the person in charge. I was assured that they would look into it. I hope they have. I need to continually look into my practice in this regard. </div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="BLOG_video_class" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rp9rIvVsLbg" width="320" youtube-src-id="rp9rIvVsLbg"></iframe></div><br /><div><br /></div><br /><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-19089290818549670242023-08-28T08:05:00.004-07:002023-08-28T08:05:40.507-07:00Don't Water Down The Homiletical Soup<p> Reading in Jeremiah, this morning, I was reminded of a proverb I have tried to keep in mind all of my ministry life. I'll tell you the proverb in a moment, but first I'll share a portion of the passage that provoked my thought.</p><blockquote><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Is not my word like fire, declares the LORD, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces? 30 Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, declares the LORD, who steal my words from one another. 31 Behold, I am against the prophets, declares the LORD, who use their tongues and declare, ‘declares the LORD.’ 32 Behold, I am against those who prophesy lying dreams, declares the LORD, and who tell them and lead my people astray by their lies and their recklessness, when I did not send them or charge them. So they do not profit this people at all, declares the LORD. (</span>The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Je 23:29–32). (2016). Crossway Bibles.)</p></blockquote><p>One of the guiding principles of my ministry has been, I hope still is, "When I confuse thus sayeth Howard, with thus sayeth the Lord, I dilute the word of God." I think it's a good proverb, though I admit it isn't a Biblical proverb, for all preachers/teachers of the Bible to remember.</p><p>It's a harder concept to live by than it may at first seem.</p><p> First, let me address the critic in the room. "I know that I don't have the power to alter the word of God. I know and fully believe that not a jot or tittle of God's word will perish. It will accomplish the purpose for which God sent it forth." </p><p>But, like so many things that involve the intersection of God's sovereignty and my/your responsibility, it's complicated. In the Old Testament era, the prophets who spoke for the Lord were responsible to speak what the Lord gave them to speak. A few chapters earlier (Jer. 20), we read of Jeremiah's struggle in delivering the word from the Lord when it was an unpopular word. He was tired. He didn't want to do it anymore, but to paraphrase, he concluded that he couldn't not speak God's word. (To a lesser extent I've been there. On the other side of the coin were those who weren't prophets, or perhaps even prophets who didn't have a message from the Lord at that time. They were responsible to be quiet, or if they did speak to make sure that they did not misrepresent what they said. "This isn't a word from God. This is what I think. I offer it only as personal advice." It takes thought, dedication, and care to keep it straight.</p><p>In my case, toward the end of a life ministry, I find it perhaps more complicated than it has ever been to live by my proverb. </p><p>I have, by God's grace, been spared from any great scandal in my life as a pastor and missionary. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues in ministry have set the bar for achieving a position of respect pretty low. I find that now in my sixth decade of ministry, people respect what I say. In particular to my fellow seasoned servants, I say, "We need to be careful with this." It is awfully easy to let it go to my head. The term "pontificate" comes to mind. Especially since I don't believe there is really a "Pontiff," I need to watch for that trap. Yes, I have been around the block a few times, and yes, I have by God's grace learned some things from God's word. Yet, in my most honest days--Lord grant me more--I realize that a lot of what I have learned has to do with how much I don't know. In my own little circle, I have gained a reputation as an honest expositor of the Bible. To change the metaphor from the one in my proverb, that gives me an edge. There are people who trust me. It is important that I not dull that edge by spouting off what I think in a context in which people expect me to be telling them what God has said in His Word.</p><p>I find myself using the digital-age shorthand "IMHO" (In my humble opinion) more often lately. There are several tendencies that I observe in my life and in the ministries of others who share God's word that compel me to use this humble acronym:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Categories are tough to keep straight. Is this actually something that the Word of God says, or is it something that I heard someone say that the Word of God says, or, even more troubling at this point in my life, is it something that I think I remember thinking at some time in the past that the word of God says? Or most troubling of all. Is this what I think needs to be said. I'm not advocating for wishy-washy-ness. I am reminding myself and others to follow the Apostle Paul's counsel to Timothy, "Work hard to show yourself as one who accurately handles the word of truth. Then you won't have anything to be ashamed of." (My application-paraphrase of 2 Timothy 2:15.</li><li>Good preaching is giving people a way to apply the Bible to their lives. The application of the Bible, a book written in a different era in a different culture and place can be tricky. It is very easy to make <i>a way </i>to apply a text of scripture sound like <i>the only way </i>to apply it. In the history of preaching that error has resulted in a lot of homiletical water being added to the soup.</li><li>My Theological grid can get in the way. I suppose I still identify as a dispensationalist. Though my dispensationalism has eroded over the years. I try, however, to give preeminence to, "What does this text mean?" over, "Where does it fit on the chart." Sometimes I fail. I observe the same problem with a different label in the ministries of others who have different Theological orientations. Yes, my Theology informs my exegesis, but if my Theology is sound it comes from proper exegesis of the Bible. "Lord, don't let me stand that on its head.</li><li>On some days it seems everybody but me is so sure of themselves. "Howard, why don't you speak more forcefully? Fake it. Nobody will know. You deserve a place at the table of absolute certainty." It's tempting. My gray hair lends credibility. But, alas, it isn't true.</li></ul><div>I'll give Jeremiah the last word. Actually, he was speaking God's word. Concerning those false prophets the Lord said:</div><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><div>
<p class="MsoNormal" lang="en-US" style="font-size: 12pt; margin-left: 48pt; margin-top: 12pt; tab-stops: right 10pt left 20pt; text-indent: -48pt;"></p><blockquote><p class="MsoNormal" lang="en-US" style="font-size: 12pt; margin-left: 48pt; margin-top: 12pt; text-align: center; text-indent: -48pt;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;">“I did not send the prophets, <span style="font-size: 12pt; text-indent: -16pt;">yet they ran;</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" lang="en-US" style="font-size: 12pt; margin-left: 48pt; text-align: center; text-indent: -48pt;">
<span style="color: #2b00fe;"> I did not speak to them, <span style="font-size: 12pt; text-indent: -16pt;">yet they prophesied.</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" lang="en-US" style="font-size: 12pt; margin-left: 48pt; text-align: center; text-indent: -48pt;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"> But if they had stood in my council, t<span style="font-size: 12pt; text-indent: -16pt;">hen they would have proclaimed my words to my people,</span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" lang="en-US" style="font-size: 12pt; margin-left: 48pt; text-align: center; text-indent: -48pt;">
<span style="color: #2b00fe;"> and they would have turned them from their evil way, <span style="font-size: 12pt; text-indent: -16pt;">and from the evil of their deeds. </span></span></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: center;">(Jeremiah 23:21-22) </p><p><b>Lord, deliver me.</b> </p></div><p> </p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-72283371600565594022023-08-10T07:09:00.010-07:002023-08-10T07:19:34.356-07:00To Be Kinda Convinced Is Not Enough, but Be Careful<p> No one who is paying attention at all can doubt that we citizens of the United States live in a very polarized time.</p><p>It's not the greatest TV ever produced, but an old <i>Outer Limits</i> episode, "Hearts and Minds," makes a <br /> point that we would do well to think about. Our current political situation got me thinking about the old TV show. (You can find the episode on Youtube or find a summary <a href="https://theouterlimits.fandom.com/wiki/Hearts_and_Minds" target="_blank">here</a>.)</p><p>The <i>Outer Limits</i> episode is a negative utopia piece. The world is locked in a war over fuel for energy, and the soldiers who make up the characters in the video are hard-core, totally committed to their "us or them" battle. It is a war for the survival of humanity. Not only is the video black and white, the cause for which they are fighting is absolute. The women and men who make up the small squad of soldiers are very human. The enemy is a horrid insectoid race of aliens, carrying a deadly-to-humans infection. The soldiers are equipped with an injection system, not unlike the insulin pumps that make life for many diabetics much easier. Only in the futurist dark fantasy, the medication that is injected into the soldiers' bloodstream is an agent that supposedly protects them from this alien infection.</p><p>The tragic twist that is revealed toward the end of the episode is that in reality the "juice" is part of a system that makes the soldiers see their enemies--in reality as human as they--as "bugs."</p><p>As I say, it is not the best TV programming ever produced, but underneath the heavy-handed, manipulative drama is a very real human tendency that is often exploited by demagogues of various stripes. One of the soldiers expresses it as he confronts a fellow fighter. "You have to hate them." One does not go to war over a trivial disagreement over a minor offense. Over the years I have resisted, and sometimes been captured by this tendency to make ones opponent an enemy, and to go on and make ones enemy something other than human. I succumbed to the "juice."</p><p>Someone once said something like (how's that for precision?), "Madison Avenue (the advertisement industry) is in the business of creating desires for things that didn't even exist a short time ago." It doesn't take too deep a dive into our consumerist culture to see dangers with that, but much more problematic is turning that syndrome on its head, and creating hatreds for causes, movements, and groups of people.</p><p>Hitler wouldn't have been Hitler if his rhetoric had been, "It seems to me, as I examine the economic trends of post-war Germany that the Jewish community may have reaped a disproportionate amount of profit when compared to other sectors." No, the Feurer was a master of what has come to be known as "othering." In our real-world scenario the "juice" is not injected by an implanted pump, but by rhetoric, alignment with movements, and well-crafted media. On the other hand, I have to admit that <a href="https://winstonchurchill.org/resources/quotes/famous-quotations-and-stories/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CNever%20Surrender%E2%80%9D&text=We%20shall%20defend%20our%20island,We%20shall%20never%20surrender!%E2%80%9D" target="_blank">Churchill's rhetoric</a>, often strident, led to what I regard as a good outcome. Balance and caution are needed.</p><p>I'm struck by the contrast that I see in the Bible, particularly the New Testament. (I'll leave the discussion of the imprecatory Psalms for another time.) Never was there a greater contrast than what took place in the passion of Christ--the absolutely righteous human surrounded by a mob that cried out for His crucifixion. Having accomplished their bloody mission, the totally innocent victim of this supreme othering calls out, while suffering the agonies of death on the cross, "Father, forgive them."</p><p>I am not discounting the great importance of the causes that are before us, things like:</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>The sacrifice of innocent children to the total autonomy of the individuals who make the tragic choice to kill these little people.</li><li>The denial of the biological reality of maleness and femaleness, and the demand for total acceptance of, even support for, the futile notion that one can choose ones gender with absolute freedom.</li><li>The deep-seated disagreement over the nature of reality itself--"Is this a world of stuff and stuff alone, or is there a spiritual reality all around it, that is, indeed, more permanent than the stuff w walk of, breathe, eat, and with which we clothe ourselves?"</li></ul><div>Yes, there are clearly issues that are worth contending for, fighting for, even dying for, but if the fight is to be "the good fight," it must be undertaken on the basis of truth. The truth is that even those who hold to polar opposite views than mine, are, like me, human beings. They are, even though many deny it, the special creation of God. Just like me, they owe their existence to dirt, water, and air--the providential work of God Who causes "all things to hold together." As much as I may want to hate them and as often and loudly as some of my co-belligerents encourage me to hate them, I can't. It is not that I'm not able, I am very capable of that hatred. It is that must not. I am a follower of the one who asked for the forgiveness of His tormentors. </div><div><br /></div><div>Let me finish with a few suggestions that flow from this thought:</div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>We have to be careful about hyperbole. Is this really the "most important election in our history," or, "the defining cause of our generation, or "a battle for the life of our nation/way of life/freedom/etc."? Perhaps, but be careful.</li><li>Is there anything right about the position of the person who holds another view? Is the abortion advocate right about the plight of some women? Does gender confusion cause real heartache for many, particularly young, people? Have some elements of our society been wrongly treated for a long time? I'm not saying that the answers to those questions erase the real issues, but rather that asking and seeking honest answers to those questions remind me that on the other side of the debate stage stands another human, not an "other."</li><li>The changing of hearts and minds is a much more long-lasting solution than the wielding of power.</li></ul><div>Be careful of the "juice."</div></div><p></p><p> </p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-5211247653655974262023-08-05T09:42:00.001-07:002023-08-05T09:43:17.574-07:00The Rise and (Fall) of Dispensationalism<p> Putting "Fall" in quotation marks is an addition to the title of the book, by Daniel G. Hummel, which is the topic of this post. The subtitle of <i>The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism</i> is "How the Evangelical Battle Over the End Times Shaped a Nation." </p><p>I'm not writing a review. For that, I point you to Pastor <a href="https://tottministries.org/the-rise-and-fall-of-dispensationalism-how-the-evangelical-battle-over-the-end-times-shaped-a-nation/" target="_blank">Gary Gilley's review</a> of the book. It was his review that brought the book to my attention. Having read the book and then reread Gilley's review, I think he does a good job. Instead, what I am doing, here, is sharing some, somewhat random, thoughts about the book and what the book, intersecting with my background and current place in life, raises.</p><p>I grew up spiritually in an environment in which the notes in the Scofield Reference Bible, were second only to the Bible itself, in authority. I was surrounded by pastors who were graduates of Moody Bible Institute. Both D. L. Moody, and the Bible Institute he founded take up a lot of Space in <i>The Rise and Fall . . . (R&F). </i>I graduated from a Bible Institute that was, in many ways, a smaller clone of Moody. It's Founder and first president was a graduate of Moody. My Theology prof received his doctoral degree at Dallas. He had actually heard Lewis Sperry Chafer lecture. Dwight Pentecost's book, <i>Things to Come, </i>was assigned reading. I also spent two years at a Bible College that was thoroughly Dispensational. The President of that school, at the time I was there, is quoted in <i>R&F. </i> My post-graduate studies were in a school that wasn't particularly known for being dispensational, but it clearly welcomed Dispensationalists on the faculty. Buildings are named after Tim Lahaye.</p><p>I still claim Dispensational Premillennialism as my Theological House, but as John MacArthur is widely quoted as saying, my Dispensationalism might be a bit "leaky." It's not that I have come up with a system of Ecclesiology and Eschatology (in my humble opinion, those are the two areas of Theology where Dispensationalism makes the most difference), rather in my book of <i>Things to Emphasize </i>Dispensationalism doesn't take up as many pages as it once did.</p><p>Some years ago another Pastor and I attended a conference on Dispensationalism. It was one of those conferences in which experts/serious scholars presented papers to their colleagues, who would then ask questions and give comments. We got to listen in. One of my teachers and a schoolmate were among the presenters. The experience could have served as an illustration for the latter portion of Hummel's book. This was a small gathering. While the presenters were brilliant men, with the possible exception of the President of Dallas Theological Seminary, none of them were at risk of being interviewed on national TV. The Theologians at the conference occupied a narrow strip of Biblical real estate between the up-and-coming more reformed scholars and institutions, on one side, and the "Left Behind"ers on the other. I detected the smell of holding-on-for-dear-life.</p><p>Reading the book reminded me of, and strengthened an observation that has informed my ministry for the last thirty or thirty-five years. I heard the point made by a college roommate of mine, who was, ironically enough, working for Moody Bible Institute at the time he made the comment, that no system of trying to systematize the whole flow of Scripture is sufficient to take it all in. Not long after I heard, essentially, the same statement made by a nationally known pastor. At about the same time, I spent a considerable amount of time working through and preaching from the Sermon on the Mount. That series changed me. For reasons I won't go into here, I came to decisively reject the old, extreme, Dispensational "truth" that I had been taught, that the Sermon on the Mount was "Kingdom truth;" it didn't directly apply to the Church. With D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and others I concluded that Jesus most famous sermon was every bit about the here and now.</p><p>I sort of channeled a concept that I had heard powerfully expressed by an old-time preacher from West Virginia. B. R. Lakin began his career riding a mule to speaking engagements. He became a successful pastor and popular revivalist. The experience he spoke of was during what Hummel would call the "Rise" phase of Dispensationalism. I'm paraphrasing, but the old preacher, speaking from the platform of that thoroughly Dispensational Bible Institute said something like.</p><blockquote><p>I attended a Bible Conference and saw a man with a bed sheet and fishing pole [Lakin was obviously referring to one of the Dispensational Charts that Dispensational prophecy preachers were famous for. The charts developed by Clarence Larkin are probably the best known]. He told me that this part of scripture applied this time and this other part of the Bible applied to another time [what old dispensationalists often referred to as "rightly dividing the Word"]. I went home and tried to do that for myself but finally gave up in frustration. I simply took of all of the Bible as God's word to me and sought to apply it to my life in my time and place. </p></blockquote><p>To any who may have been present at that Chapel service or who know Lakin better than I do, I emphasize again that I am working from memories of an incident more than fifty years ago. I also know that good preaching is often hyperbolic. I'm confident that Lakin's hermeneutics were more sophisticated than this anecdote implies, but the mule-riding preacher's words have haunted my mind and heart for most of my life.</p><p>I'll leave tracing the impact of Dispensationalism on a national/international scale to better minds, like Hummel's. I'll just say that too many pastors and Bible teachers approach Scripture and ask, "From a Dispensational point of view, what does this passage mean?" I know that there is no such thing as a "view from nowhere," but I do believe that trying to adopt a less prejudicial perspective is important. Approach the text with the necessary agnosticism. After you see what the text means, you may find that it aligns with your overall view of things, be that Dispensational, Covenental, or whatever. Fine. Just be sure you let the text speak. Don't put words in its mouth.</p><p>Apparently, I'm an outlier. The fact that I see nothing in the New Testament that indicates that I should bring a lamb to church tomorrow, indicates to me that there are at least two ways of doing things presented in Scripture. A straight-forward (literal, with a right understanding of the word) indicates that Israel is not the same as the church and the church is not the same as Israel. In fact, the tenses of the New Testament in reference to the formation of the church indicate that it didn't even exist in Old Testament times. I do live in a time in which the residents of the planet, except for those saved by grace, are children of wrath (Ephesians 2:1-3), the world itself is in the power of the wicked one (1 John 5:19), and that this wicked one apparently has a lot of freedom to do his anti-God work (1 Peter 5:8). I could go on, but all that I am saying is that when I take God's word for what it appears to me to say, I see what has come to be called Dispensationalism. On the other hand, some of my go-to commentators would be insulted to have their name associated with Dispensationalism. I go to their books because they deal honestly with the text. I will enjoy telling them if I live until the Rapture, "See I was right." In the meantime, they are a help to me. If we both live to some one-size-fits-all general judgment day I'll say, "Well, what do you know?" </p><p>I'd like to finish this before the Rapture, so I'll stop.</p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-86023289952797100882023-06-02T06:37:00.005-07:002023-06-02T06:37:44.980-07:00Donuts, Chicken, and Our Polarized Culture<p> You may have heard of the controversy about Chick-Fil-A's DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusiveness) policy. It seems to me that some conservative Christians have been too quick on the trigger in reacting to something that they think should generate outrage. Here is an <a href="https://www.denisonforum.org/daily-article/chick-fil-a-boycott-dei-the-chosen-pride-flag/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Why+are+Christians+calling+for+boycotts+of+Chick-fil-A+and+%22The+Chosen%22%3F&utm_campaign=06-02-23+Ryan+Denison+-+Why+are+Christians+calling+for+boycotts+of+Chick-fil-A+and+%22The+Chosen%22%3F" target="_blank">article</a> from a blogger that I like. Dennison, as he often does, says in essence, "Let's cool our jets."</p><p>I had a personal experience that reminds me of the chicken-sandwich-kerfluffle. One of my grandpa things is to do a donut run whenever I'm visiting with my grandkids. Most of my grandchildren are grownup, and the one who isn't thinks she is. Still, they seem to enjoy Grandpa going out before breakfast and bringing home some pastry. I know for sure that Grandpa enjoys it a lot.</p><p>On my last donut run, I went to a local donut shop that I've come to like. Most of the business there is drive-through, but an enjoyable part of the experience for me is going in, smelling the smell of fresh donuts, and, perhaps, interacting with another early-morning pastry fetcher. On this trip I had a pleasant 30-second encounter with a youngish guy who properly "sir"ed me, as his elder. He held the door for me and I for him, as he exited with sweet treats and coffee. Across generational and racial pseudo-boundaries we agreed on the good early morning aroma. </p><p>I was waited on by a very nice young lady. She got my order right, pleasantly helped me get the right mix in my box of a dozen, and handled the credit card transaction flawlessly. She put a wad of napkins in the box and thanked me with a smile. We found no hair stuck to any of the pastries. If I were a donut shop operator I'd want an employee just like this young lady.</p><p>Thus far, I've only described the donut server based on the things that really matter. Everything else about this woman was totally "un-me." It was almost like she was wearing a t-shirt that said, "Please be offended at me." Her outfit included a spiked collar suspending a pair of handcuffs. Her hair was turquoise blue. Her tattoos included facial markings that clearly had a feline look. There is more. In another context, if I knew this woman well enough to engage her in conversation, I'd probably inquire about her appearance and what lay beneath it. Everything about her looked like she is looking for love/acceptance/meaning/satisfaction in all the wrong places. There was a bit of an ache in my heart for her and others like her.</p><p>The fact is, though, my 90-second encounter with the donut server was about donuts. She handled that transaction flawlessly.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Do I want this woman--probably a college student with initiative enough to get up early and go to work--to have a job, or do I want her to be a burden to her neighbors?</li><li>Beneath all of what I regard as her utterly outlandish get-up is this woman a bearer of God's image?</li><li>Is she someone to whom I should show kindness and treat with the same love that Christ showed for her and me--in equal amounts?</li><li>Did she do exactly what she should do for a grandpa out on an excursion to please his grandkids?</li><li>Can I really say that "I have it all together?"</li></ul><div>My questions force me and perhaps push you toward a position that part of me doesn't like. As I answer each question I very much want to add a "yeah but."</div><div><br /></div><div>Some businesses chose to require a strict appearance code for their employees. Others allow rednecks to wear their John Deere caps, retired execs to don a white shirt and tie, and let gray-haired women look aged versions of June Cleaver. The donut shop I visited, obviously, pushes that freedom of choice to the max.</div><div><br /></div><div>The bottom line has to count for something.</div><div><br /></div><div><b>We enjoyed our donuts.</b></div><div> </div><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-54930061519525144582023-05-03T07:52:00.003-07:002023-05-03T07:52:47.381-07:00Looking at the World, The Surgeon General Sees a Truth from the Bible<p> This will be quick and quite inadequate in dealing with a very important topic. My main purpose is to point to something that is undeniably a big deal, a huge problem in our world today--loneliness and disconnectedness. Hopefully, it will whet your interest to do some more study.</p><p>Unless you are on the extreme end of disconnection, in which case you probably aren't reading this, you are aware that isolation, strained social interactions, or even an almost total lack of meaningful social interaction, and the resulting loneliness, and doubts about the meaning of one's life are big problems. The fact is, even though we recognize the problem we likely don't see how wide and deep it is. I didn't.</p><p><a href="https://albertmohler.com/2023/05/03/briefing-5-3-23" target="_blank">Al Mohler's daily "Briefing" for May 3, 2023</a> tipped me off to an advisory by US Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek H. Murthy, <i><b>Our Epidemic </b></i><b style="font-style: italic;">of Loneliness and Isolation. </b>Mohler gives a good summary of the report and points to its implications for those of us who see the world through a Biblical lens. The page that contains the recording of the "Briefing" also includes <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf" target="_blank">a link</a> to the Surgeon General's report.<br />I quickly read/skimmed the advisory report this morning. It is full of disturbing statistics and trends. Not only the prose, but the artfully done charts and illustrations point strongly to an issue that is a growing problem in America, and beyond. More and more people are disconnected from meaningful relationships. The result is loneliness and a host of other issues. These problems are not only seen on an individual level. This "epidemic" threatens the fabric of our society. I plan to read the publication more carefully.</p><p>Most of us are aware of COVID's negative impact on social interaction. The advisory points out that the problem did not originate with the pandemic. It did, however, make it worse. The last portion of the Surgeon General's publication wisely points to the future. Unless corrective action is taken (I haven't read the report closely enough to know whether I agree with Dr. Murthy's prescriptions or not) the problem will continue. The problem, and the questions as to what we should do about it, are matters that should be of great interest to Christians.</p><p>Here is one of the charts that illustrates the growing problem:</p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjGQsoOTE2KKfA24pXVT9hG7xBA6Fdo2AMmMMWgb65zPs6Kwamci_uxrO09xzeDjlJDKMyTFfDJ38ePoZVNpPaAdGB8FXdhB07tGMCcJYJmVhREzRghPbzDhhDunq2SR1ws6oURNGBaXiDbZXscV_Y3X7larrWoH2i5VF17wbK5tl8b2W3r7Fa8X6cC" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="521" data-original-width="519" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjGQsoOTE2KKfA24pXVT9hG7xBA6Fdo2AMmMMWgb65zPs6Kwamci_uxrO09xzeDjlJDKMyTFfDJ38ePoZVNpPaAdGB8FXdhB07tGMCcJYJmVhREzRghPbzDhhDunq2SR1ws6oURNGBaXiDbZXscV_Y3X7larrWoH2i5VF17wbK5tl8b2W3r7Fa8X6cC=w637-h640" width="637" /></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">(Page 25)</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;"><br /></div><p></p><p>Often, we see the Bible as standing in opposition to the conclusions of science, and I am not downplaying that tension. However, if we are right in believing that the Creator of the world and the ultimate author of the Bible are the same Person, then we should expect that science, honestly done, and Bible understanding, based on sound hermeneutics, should be aligned, not in conflict. As I read the Surgeon General's words of concern and warning, I was struck again and again with this alignment.</p><p>The Triune God, out of His marvelous existence of sublime relationship between Spirit, Son, and Father, created humans as creatures of relationship, with one another and with Him. In the Old Testament God chose to work through a nation. In the New Testament we meet the transnational body, the Church. An intensely relational entity through which God moves His g<span style="font-family: inherit;">rand plan forward. While there is far more that we don't about Heaven than we do know, it is clear that the eternal abode of God's children is a place of unhindered relationships, "<span style="background-color: #f4f4f4;">now I </span><a class="searchHit1_AbhB3 searchHit_s08LD" href="https://ref.ly/logosres/LLS:1.0.71;pos=res$2FLLS:1.0.71$2F2019-09-20T19:21:55Z$2F5229743" style="cursor: var(--bible-study-theme-button-cursor, default); text-decoration-line: none;">know</a><span style="background-color: #f4f4f4;"> in part, but then I will </span><a class="searchHit1_AbhB3 searchHit_s08LD" href="https://ref.ly/logosres/LLS:1.0.71;pos=res$2FLLS:1.0.71$2F2019-09-20T19:21:55Z$2F5229773" style="cursor: var(--bible-study-theme-button-cursor, default); text-decoration-line: none;">know</a><span style="background-color: #f4f4f4;"> fully" (I Cor. 13:12), </span>we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2).</span></p><p>While God has supremely communicated to us through His word, the Bible. He also communicates through His world, and since we are created in His image, through our hearts. You can see this in Psalm 19, Romans 1-2, and the Book of Ecclesiastes. In taking a look at our world, focusing on human interactions, and the lack thereof, Dr. Murthy and his team have exposed a truth that is clear in Scripture.</p><p><b>It is not good for man to be alone.</b></p>I encourage you to listen to, or read the transcript of Mohler's "Briefing, read or at least look through the Surgeon General's advisory, and--and this is most important--plug into a community of people who take the Word of God seriously, a place where soul-nourishing relationships are encouraged. That would be a good, Bible-believing/teaching/living church. Let me know if I can help.<div><br /></div><div><a href="https://albertmohler.com/2023/05/03/briefing-5-3-23" target="_blank">The Briefing, May 3, 2023</a></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf" target="_blank">Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation, US Surgeon General</a></div><div><br /><p><br /></p><p><br /></p></div>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-187363865530732402023-04-12T06:37:00.003-07:002023-04-12T06:37:58.365-07:00The Lust for a Place at the Table<p> Many of us have memories of the adult table/children's table divide that was necessary for big meals. We didn't want to be relegated to the little kid's table. If tattling was the key, then tattle we did. Even more so, in high school, we wanted to sit with the "cool kids" at lunch. We sometimes paid the admission price of dumping a socially undesirable friend to gain admission.</p><p>An article by Daniel Sillman in Christianity Today, "Carl Henry's Temptation (And Ours)" explores a grown-up version of the syndrome. I have observed the phenomenon often. I have felt the temptation on numerous occasions. I have succumbed more than a few times. I have seen the resulting compromise. </p><p>The article is worth reading. Unfortunately, it is only available to subscribers. If you find out otherwise, please correct me in a comment.</p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-18344427061587152452023-04-10T17:53:00.002-07:002023-04-25T17:52:03.372-07:00A Review of Almost There, by Elwood McQuaidA friend gave me a copy of Elwood McQuaid's recently published little, 164 pages, book, <i>Almost There. </i>Before I share my thoughts about Rev. McQuaid's reminiscences about his first pastorate, I think I should share my perspective--some might call it my prejudice.<div>I hadn't gotten very far into the book, when I realized that Pastor McQuaid was sharing experiences that were very similar to what my wife and I experienced in my first pastorate, twenty years after those of the Mcquaids. I found a kindred spirit in the book's twenty-one chapters. The McQuaids and the Merrells both came from the North to Virginia. Like them, Kathy and I fell in love with the Old Dominion. Elwood tells a tale about possum hunting. My yarn is about blowing my eardrum out on my first deer hunt. You get the idea. I'll stop there.</div><div>Pastor McQuaid writes about the rural 1950s Virginia community of Goodveiw and the Goodview Baptist Church with great fondness and sincere respect. In the epilogue, he sums up something that America is missing but seldom misses. </div><blockquote><div>[A] quality of life and stability of values [that] have all but disappeared. Today we confront a daunting, downward plunge into neopaganism. Is it irreversible? Only God knows. From my perspective, we need to return to the qualities that made us what we once were. Oddly enough, those virtues are best revisited not in America's teeming metropolises, but in the small towns where ordinary folks set the standard." (161)</div></blockquote><div>Through much of the book, Pastor McQuaid tells his story by introducing us to the people of Goodview. People like Jimmy Jones, the leading layman at Goodview Baptist when Elwood and Maxine arrived. Jimmy went on to a highly successful pastorate of his own. A lady in the church where I pastored came to know the Lord under "Pastor Jimmy's" ministry. There was Buck Daniels, who always managed to make himself scarce when Pastor McQuaid came calling. The prayers of Buck's two sisters were finally answered when Buck turned to the Lord years later. The book shines a light on these people whom some would call "unsophisticated." The ability of the church's women to produce feasts on wood stoves, using homegrown and raised ingredients, and the mastery of timber cutting, by the communities men are held up as skills to be valued and respected</div><div>When I was in Bible College, we "preacher boys" took a class that was called "Practical Theology." It was about the nuts and bolts of pastoring a church. In many ways, <i>Almost There </i>is a book of case studies in practical theology. In my humble opinion, the book is full of examples of real pastoral care. While these examples are not couched in formal Theological terminology, the sound Theological underpinnings are there. I'll share one example. </div><div>One of the central realities of sound Biblical Theology is the dignity of all human beings. We do not have value because of our wealth, power, beauty, intelligence, or achievements. We are valuable and worthy of respect because we bear the image of our creator. In the chapter, "Who is that masked man?" Pastor McQuaid makes that known with great sensitivity and tenderness. He also points out that people who should know better, too often don't. In this case, it was a "highly recommended" evangelist who failed the test on how one should treat a fellow child of God--even a child of God who carried a childhood fascination with the Lone Ranger into adulthood.</div><blockquote><div>A man who should have known better had entertained himself at the expense of someone who didn't know he was being mocked. And he did it in front of the man's wife and children, who knew exactly what was happening. Cletus Norman was a hard-working husband, father, and good citizen. Sure, he held fast to a harmless fantasy that others had long since abandoned. But exploiting Cletus's weakness and humiliating him for a few moments of personal amusement seemed to me to be a heartless thing to do. (96)</div></blockquote><p>From God moving in mysterious ways to provide a new parsonage, to the amazing examples of grace that led folk to become women and men of God, this little book is filled with examples of the power of a Gospel-based ministry. We need that.</p><p>I recommend that any pastor who leads a small congregation get a copy of <i>Almost There. </i>Even those who don't share the commonalities that I share with Pastor McQuaid will be encouraged and challenged to be faithful. If I were teaching that "Practical Theology" class, I'd make this book required reading. Most young pastors, even in today's world, will find their first flock in places more like McQuaid's Goodview than Keller's Manhattan. And while I can't say for sure, I suspect that those who do land in one of the urban centers will find folks there who, below the surface, look a lot like the tomato-growing, chicken-frying, front porch-sitting, possum-hunting residents of the Goodview of seventy years ago.</p><p><i>Almost There </i>is published by Westbow Press, a division of Thomas Nelson and Zondervan.<br />The Book is authored by Elwood McQuaid with Lorna Simcox.</p><p>Howard Merrell, the writer of this review, began a forty-two-year ministry at a little church about a hundred miles from Goodview in a mill town in the Alleghany Highlands of Virginia. Like Elwood and Maxine McQuaid, Howard and Kathy Merrell were educated by their first church. Unlike the McQuaids, the Merrells stayed put. I think Pastor Mcquade would agree that God leads His servants in different ways for His own purposes.</p><p>In one chapter, Pastor Macquaid mentions a good friend of his, Morrie Brodsky, founder of Scripture Truth Book Company. Morrie's son, Phil, is my friend. He gave me the book. Phil and his staff at Scripture Truth are distributing the book. Perhaps you can obtain it elsewhere, but I encourage you to contact the folks at S.T. <a href="https://scripturetruth.com/">https://scripturetruth.com/</a></p><div><br /></div>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-40798711813978457732023-03-03T07:12:00.006-08:002023-03-03T07:12:52.928-08:00A Rare Defusing of a Common Syndrome: Something We Need More Of<p> On the surface, Joshua 22 is a totally odd chapter of Scripture. It is knee-deep in and totally wrapped with the Old Testament Jewish Culture and a system of worship that is totally alien to me. As I have read through the Pentateuch and now am nearly through Joshua, I find myself saying again and again, "Thank you, Lord, that I live in this time after the coming of Christ!" I am confident that there is <i>a rhyme and a reason </i>to the way God chose to be worshipped in this era, and to the elaborate ways He established the special relationship between Himself and the people He had just delivered from bondage in Egypt, but I don't understand many of the fine details, and I am glad that I don't have to deal with all the rules, restrictions, and boundaries.</p><p>Yet, in the midst of this totally "Other" system of worship and Theocratic rule, I find a bunch of people who are just like me and my neighbors. It is on that level that I am able to apply the truth of 1 Corinthians 10:11, a verse that is talking about the experiences of the Jewish nation of this era:</p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><blockquote><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come.</span> (<span lang="en-US">1 Corinthians 10:11</span>, NASB95) </blockquote><p>These folk had the same blood type as me--totally human.</p><p>As I say, understanding and applying Joshua 22 is totally dependent on grasping the context, so for those of you who haven't been following the <i>formation and establishment of the Jewish Nation, </i>I offer the following summary: </p><p><b>(If you are up on your Old Testament Jewish History, feel free to skip to the "Meanwhile Back at the Ranch" heading.)</b></p><p style="text-align: left;"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>God, for purposes that run through all of Scripture, chose to establish a nation that is set apart from the rest of humanity, yet with a mission to be a blessing to all the people of the world. This nation would be the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. God changed Jacob's name to <i>Israel, </i>the name that was passed on to the nation that sprang from his descendants. (This begins in Genesis 12)</li><li>It represents no failing on God's part, in fact, it is part of the formation process that the infant nation became slaves of the great Egyptian Empire. (The early chapters of Exodus)</li><li>Under the leadership of Moses, accompanied by an impressive array of miracles--all of which left the Egyptian gods, so-called, lying shattered in the desert sand--God delivered the nation of Israel from its 400-year captivity. (the rest of Exodus and Numbers)</li><li>On the way out of Egypt to the Promised Land, God gave the people a set of laws, a system of worship, and a calendar that would set the rhythms of Jewish life. Many of these patterns can still be seen in the practices of Rabbinic Judaism today. Miraculously, the Lord cared for His people. (The latter part of Exodus, Leviticus, and the first half of Numbers record the history of this time and process.)</li><li>Building a nation that will serve God made up of people who, like all of us, are prone to rebel against God, is a messy process. That messiness brings the refugee nation to a crisis in Numbers 13. As a result of their refusal to by faith obey the Lord, the nation was delayed in reaching their new home. The forty-year tour of the wilderness meant that by the time Jacob's descendants were finally ready to enter Canaan/the Promised Land/Israel, it was a new generation that would enter. (These 40 years are covered in the latter half of Numbers) Before the people moved into their new home a review of the Law was necessary. (That's the Book of Deuteronomy)</li><li>Following a change of leadership from Moses to Joshua (You know, the guy who "fit the Battle of Jericho") the Nation of Israel crossed the Jordan River into their new home. Before they could settle down, however, the current residents needed to be conquered. The "Why?" of that is a bigger, much bigger, matter than this post, not to mention my mind, can contain. (The Book of Joshua, up to chapter 22)</li></ul>Just one more detail needs to be added to this historical overview. As the Jewish nation was on its way into the region west of the Jordan River that would become their home, a couple of minor kings and kingdoms were defeated. Some of the Israelites, the Tribes of Gad, Rueben, and half the Tribe of Manasseh looked around at the rich pasture land and said, "We'd like to settle down here." After promising to help the rest of the nation conquer the land across the river this plan was approved by Moses. The two-and-a-half tribes were as good as their word. As Joshua 22 opens, these soldiers are going back to civilian life on the farms that were already occupied by their wives and children.<p></p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Meanwhile Back at the Ranch:</b></p><p style="text-align: left;">As soon as they cross the Jordan the Eastside contingent of the Nation of Israel does something that looks to me, and more importantly to the rest of the Jews, to be a total violation of all that they had learned in the last fifty years--<b>do it God's way or suffer the consequences.</b></p><p></p><blockquote><i>When they came to the region of the Jordan which is in the land of Canaan, the sons of Reuben and the sons of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh built an altar there by the Jordan, a large altar in appearance. </i>(Joshua 22:10)</blockquote><p>When the family on the other side of the river got news of this, they in unison cried out, "Here we go again!" Quoting the great prophet Barney Fife, they vowed to "Nip this thing in bud." No, really they said, "What is this unfaithful act which you have committed against the God of Israel, turning away from following the LORD this day, by building yourselves an altar, to rebel against the LORD this day? (Joshua 22:16). (1995)</p><p>They didn't just talk about what their transJordan cousins had done, they mustered an army and were fully prepared to deal with what their relatives had done. And, they were prepared to act before the transgression had nationwide consequences.</p><p>In many ways, you have to admire the response of the nine-and-a-half tribes. They had finally learned that God, and God alone, must be worshiped and He must be worshiped as He prescribes. That is a fact that is as applicable today as ever. I was about to say, though, that the Canaan-dwelling Jews went off "half-cocked"--not fully prepared--but maybe they were nine-tenths cocked--"almost, but not quite." Whether the missing element in their action was 50% or 10%, it was crucial.</p><p>Two words describe the missing, or faulty, part of their reasoning, <i><b>"to rebel." </b></i>Though the Jews living on both sides of the Jordan were Jews, descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, miraculously delivered from Egypt and preserved in the wilderness, <b>now there was a river between them. </b>Already, there was reason to <i>other </i>them. They aren't like us. They live on the other side.</p><p>Here is where it really gets ugly. <b>We know why they did this. They built this altar "to rebel."</b></p>Automobiles have "Idiot Lights" for a reason. It is because so many of us are _____s when it comes to making sure that our cars and trucks have enough oil and coolant in them. In this day in which "othering" has been raised to an international pastime, I propose that we all install "Motive-Alert" warning lights (digital or analog is up to you) on our personal dashboards. Any idiot can look across the river and see that those <i>other </i>people are building an altar. It takes a smart idiot--one with a working Motive-Alert warning system--to realize, "Yeah, but I don't know why."<p></p><p>To their credit, the "Nine-and-a-halfers" didn't immediately go all ben Rambo on them. They sent Phineas, Henry Kissinger, and some other guys over to the other side to talk--and more importantly, listen--first.</p><p>Newsflash: </p><blockquote><p>The diplomatic mission from the nine-and-a-half tribes sent to the other side report: "We are glad that our brothers and sisters on the other side of the Jordan remain true to the core values of what it means to be a part of the nation delivered by God. In an official statement representitives of the two-and-a-half tribes say: ““The Mighty One, God, the LORD, the Mighty One, God, the LORD! He knows, and may Israel itself know. If it was in rebellion, or if in an unfaithful act against the LORD do not save us this day</p></blockquote><p></p><blockquote><p>Further: </p></blockquote><blockquote><p> "[W]e have done this [built this altar] out of concern, for a reason, saying, ‘In time to come your sons may say to our sons, “What have you to do with the LORD, the God of Israel?</p><p> “Therefore we said, ‘Let us build an altar, not for burnt offering or for sacrifice; rather it shall be a witness between us and you and between our generations after us, that we are to perform the service of the LORD before Him with our burnt offerings, and with our sacrifices and with our peace offerings, so that your sons will not say to our sons in time to come, “You have no portion in the LORD.” </p></blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;">In conclusion: </p></blockquote><blockquote><p><b> “Far be it from us that we should rebel against the LORD and turn away from following the LORD this day, by building an altar for burnt offering, for grain offering or for sacrifice, besides the altar of the LORD our God which is before His tabernacle.”</b></p></blockquote>I encourage you to read Joshua 22 on your own. Join me in applying the 1 Corinthians 10:11 principle to this passage. "What can I, on a personal level, learn from this passage?" and "As I pray for my leaders, how does the experience recorded in Joshua 22 inform what I ask on their behalf?"<div><br /></div><div>Though it wasn't <i>forever after, </i>Joshua 22 ends with the people living happily together. The river was a reality. The "othering" division that almost took place didn't need to be. </div><div><br /></div><div>We need more Phineases.<p class="MsoNormal"></p><p> </p><p></p></div>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-43023043947506564022023-02-24T06:34:00.000-08:002023-02-24T06:34:00.845-08:00If I Could Understand Everything About God . . . <p> One of the catchphrases (in this case it's actually a sentence) I frequently use is: "If I could understand everything about God, he wouldn't be much of a god would he?" Others address the same idea by talking of attempting to "put God in a box." Obviously, if the earth is God's footstool (Isaiah 66:1)--and that's a metaphor--then there is no box big enough.</p><p>Especially, though, for those of us who approach our faith in a cognitive way--"What does the Bible text say, and what does it mean?"--and who have seen the excesses of late Twentieth and early Twenty-first Century so-called Spirit-led ministry, there is a measure of cynicism that has to be overcome. We've seen too many "Spirit-filled" evangelists weeping before the camera, looking at a different camera wide-eyed and disheveled when they are caught in Spirit-forbidden sin. If I'm not careful I allow all the gold-plated bathroom fixtures, Leer Jets, and mansions with guards to convince me that anything beyond what happens with me just isn't right. It must be fake. Somebody has an agenda.</p><p>Lord, when my skepticism becomes seeing you as living in a box, forgive me. Heal my heart.</p><p>I read <a href="https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2023/february/asbury-revival-outpouring-protect-work-admin-volunteers.html">this account</a> from <i>Christianity Today</i> magazine of what is going on at Asbury University, </p><p>My first impression was: I was impressed, but, likely, not in the way you expect.</p><p>I was impressed by the way the administration at the school reacted to what was going on. I can tell you by experience that making good decisions, as a group, in a new situation, with others looking over your shoulder is hard, <i>really hard. </i>It looks to me like these folk are working hard to maintain balance. On the one hand, there is the unknown. On the other hand, there is a desire to do what is right. </p><p><i>Lord, guide the administration at Asbury. Protect them and help them protect the students in their care.</i></p><p>The article I mentioned above, and other reports tell of gatherings similar to what is going on at Asbury breaking out at other schools. </p><p><i>Lord, I admit my ignorance, but I confess that my ignorance of your greatness is vast. It is so vast that I have no idea of what I don't know. Surely, in the vast reaches of who you are, that stretch infinitely beyond what I know, there is much that I don't understand. I do know that you, God, are loving and righteous. So, Lord, from my tiny store of understanding I reach out to you. Lord, I pray that not just college students, but old and young, rich and poor, people of all colors and economic conditions will know your love and will turn from the sin that not only destroys individuals but is consuming our society. I pray that folk will turn to you. </i></p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><blockquote> <span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Our Father who is in heaven,</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Hallowed be Your name.</span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Your kingdom come.</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Your will be done,</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">On earth as it is in heaven.</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Give us this day our daily bread.</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.</span><span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. </span> (<span lang="en-US">Matthew 6:9–13</span>, NASB95) </blockquote><p>AMEN </p><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-64934901515651442962023-01-06T08:08:00.002-08:002023-01-06T08:10:45.974-08:00Epiphany--for me not quite, but . . .<p> Some of my friends, who have gone to the trouble of reading some of my Facebook posts over the past couple of weeks, may have wondered about my wandering. "Howard's not a liturgical guy, yet here he is going on about some Anglican guy's thoughts on the days from Christmas Eve to the Feast of Epiphany."</p><p>Guilty.</p><p>I have been interested in Walter Russel Mead's thoughts recorded in his "<a href="https://providencemag.com/category/the-yule-blog/">Yule Blog.</a>" For some years, Mead has taken time annually to write his "Yule Blog" corresponding to the Yule Season, which at least some followers of the Christian liturgical calendar will recognize as the time beginning with Christmas Eve and ending with the Feast of Epiphany, January 6, today.</p><p>Until a couple of weeks ago I had no acquaintance with Mead. He is an Anglican. From what I have</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://i.etsystatic.com/16166726/r/il/d32fa0/4262749123/il_1588xN.4262749123_ri7a.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="647" data-original-width="800" height="259" src="https://i.etsystatic.com/16166726/r/il/d32fa0/4262749123/il_1588xN.4262749123_ri7a.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /> read in the 2022-23 edition of his Yule Blog I conclude that he is the kind of Anglican I wish there were more of. He reminds me of C. S. Lewis in one regard, that is, he is not a member of the clergy or a professional Theologian, yet he says profound and relevant things about Theology and what it means to follow Christ. His professional resume makes clear that he is an intellectual. Like Solomon, he has concluded that one's intellect is not fully developed unless it includes training and thought on Theology, which was once considered the "queen of the sciences.<p></p><p>Mead's Lewis-like view of what it means to be well-educated is one reason I was interested enough to read his winter musings. Even though the "Yule Season" ends today, I encourage you to read his <a href="https://providencemag.com/category/the-yule-blog/">Yule Blog</a>.</p><p>Here is a sample from the final post on the 22-23 Yule Blog:</p><p><span face="acumin-pro, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; font-size: 17.6px;"></span></p><blockquote><span face="acumin-pro, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; font-size: 17.6px;">[T]he Baby Jesus is the meaning of Christmas, and the meaning of Christmas is the meaning of life. That meaning is the source of our life, the goal of our lives, and the light of all life and of all human beings. It has existed forever and somehow both lives with and is God on high, but It came into our world and </span><a href="https://providencemag.com/2019/12/day-2-rolling-credits-christmas-gospel-jesus/" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #912525; font-family: acumin-pro, sans-serif; font-size: 17.6px;">into a Jewish family </a><span face="acumin-pro, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; font-size: 17.6px;">on a special day when Augustus Caesar ruled in Rome and Herod was king in Jerusalem. We had somehow lost touch with the Meaning of it all, but the Meaning hadn’t lost touch with us. It was intent on finding us anyway—and It did. That is what Christians have been celebrating since December 25 and what in many ways we go on celebrating all year.</span></blockquote><span face="acumin-pro, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; font-size: 17.6px;"></span><p></p><p>The second reason I have taken the time to read and comment on the Yule Blog is because I need to explore this whole thing of the liturgical calendar some more. </p><p>In most of my pastoral career, with a few exceptions, Christmas, Palm Sunday, Good Friday, Easter (I'd add in the somewhat cultural late additions of Thanksgiving and Mother's and Father's Day), I have paid no attention to the liturgical calendar. I say "most of" because during my few years living on Guam, I periodically filled the pulpit for the lovely congregation of the Lutheran Church of Guam, which does follow their liturgical calendar. When I would preach there I would choose one of the texts for that Sunday, as my text from which to preach. I was a guest. I thought it best to follow their practice. </p><p>As near as I can tell, the liturgical calendar is the result of collective wisdom and input that stretches over the centuries, that came to a consensus: "These are events and/or truths that are worth celebrating, understanding, and remembering we'll put them on the calendar." Major divisions within the Christan community--the great schism between East and West, the Reformation, etc. have resulted in variations, so not everyone agrees on exactly what should be on the liturgical calendar nor exactly when those events should be remembered. For instance, many remember today as Epiphany, a day associated with the visit of the Wisemen to the Holy Family, and others, celebrate today as Christmas, the birthday of our Savior. So there are a lot of churches that really don't follow a liturgical calendar, then there are churches that do, but they don't all follow the same calendar.</p><p>So, other than the fact that this is a matter of division in Christendom is there any lesson here?</p><p>Here is one, or maybe two: Though I enjoyed my time with my Lutheran friends, and appreciated Mead's Christmas-related thoughts, I'm not recommending that we Evangelicals adopt one of the Liturgical Calendars as our guide for answering the greatest of Homiletical questions, "What do I preach next Sunday. While I respect the wisdom of the ancients, I don't think that they are necessarily the best authority on what the people in Covington Virginia need to hear next Sunday. I think in general, expository preaching through books of the Bible and/or themes that run through the Bible is the way to go. But, and here is my point. I need to realize that these ancients weren't dummies, at least all of them weren't. I need to listen to them more.</p><p>To use the word in its non-Theological sense, that's a pretty dull <i>epiphany, </i>but it's the best I can do right now.</p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-32908571173945892182022-12-30T06:43:00.007-08:002022-12-30T06:44:36.700-08:00In Which I Channel Scrooge for Some Commentary on New Year's Resolutions:<p> I guess I'm a New Year's Scrooge. Since I spent a few years in academe, I suppose I should come up with a seventy-five cent word (inflation) to describe my lack of excitement about changing the calendar on the wall. How about <i>annodisapprobationism</i>?</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: right;"><a href="https://static01.nyt.com/images/2009/11/06/arts/06disney_span/articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp&disable=upscale" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="293" data-original-width="600" height="156" src="https://static01.nyt.com/images/2009/11/06/arts/06disney_span/articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&auto=webp&disable=upscale" width="320" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>Here are some reasons for my ADS (AnnoDisapprobation Syndrome):</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>I don't drink & can't dance, so that eliminates a lot of the celebration associated with New Year festivities.</li><li>On those occasions when I have stayed up to watch the ball drop, my main thought has been about how much money it cost the City of New York to clean up all that confetti, gum wrappers, and who-knows-what. Why doesn't the Big Apple just announce a shutdown of Times Square, and use the money they save to hire some extra police, build a school, or a homeless shelter, or something worthwhile? Hardly Dick Clark like thoughts. (To those of you who object, that New York makes money on tourism, I say, "Bahh This-is-my-blog Humbug.")</li><li>Having lived for a time where "America's Day Begins," on Guam where it is already fifteen hours in the future, I cynically ask, "Who told New York that they get to be the one who takes the old calendar down? Aren't they the home of the Yankees?" Don't get me started.</li><li>To all the gushy people on TV who wax eloquent about all the opportunities the New Year will bring, I say, "Bahh Chronological Humbug." If they really want a new start in the New Year wouldn't they be better off getting a good night's sleep.</li><li>Who or what is "Auld Lang Syne" anyhow? </li></ul><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://cdn3.vectorstock.com/i/1000x1000/10/37/a-new-years-day-calendar-turns-page-to-change-th-vector-631037.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="690" data-original-width="800" height="276" src="https://cdn3.vectorstock.com/i/1000x1000/10/37/a-new-years-day-calendar-turns-page-to-change-th-vector-631037.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />As the noneventful passing of 1999 to 2000 demonstrated, the passage from one year to another is really no different than any other passage from 11:59:59 to 12:00, or 00:00. (To those who want to argue about the precise time a new day, and in this case, the New Year, begins, I say, "Bahh Overly-Persnickety Humbug." The fact remains, there is nothing magical about this new day. In reality, significant days, be their significance good or bad, are spread throughout the calendar. </div><div><br /></div><div><b>Warning! I'm reeling in my curmudgeonly attempt at humor and getting serious now.</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div>When people ask me if I have made my New Year's Resolutions yet, I generally try to brush the question aside. OK, I'm not completely done with being a curmudgeon. The fact is, I sort of don't like the question. My reaction is not unlike what a "Merry Christmas" produced in the heart of the unreformed Scrooge. Let me explain.<p></p><p>I'm not opposed to resolutions. But, I do find it unhelpful to think that resolving is a once a year exercise.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>I doubt that Abram waited until whatever the last day of the Ur-ite calendar was to resolve to obey and go "out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance . . . not knowing where he was going" (Heb 11:8). <b>When I become aware that God has spoken it is always time for resolute obedience.</b></li><li>I don't think Daniel "Purposed in heart" (I love that KJV-ism) because it was a special day in the calendar, either Jewish or Babylonian, rather it was because the demand of circumstance happened to meet the barrier of conviction on that day. To quote the Apostles who followed in Daniel's civil-disobedient train, <b>"We must obey God rather than men"</b> (Ac 5:29). </li><li>It wasn't at a "Watchnight Service" that Paul said, "I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (<span lang="en-US">Phil 3:14</span>). If he were at a church's gathering called to "pray in the New Year" (a worthy thing to do, by the way) he might very well have preached that sermon, but the tense of the verb he used indicated that there never was a time in which Paul did not <b>press on with resolve.</b> </li></ul><div>You can supply many more Biblical and Historical examples. <b>The fact is, a deliberate, determined, unsatisfied-with-the-status-quo, disciplined, obedient-to-God, resolute mindset is how we should always live.</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div><div><b>If December 31/January 1 serves as a reminder for you then feel free to ignore everything the old curmudgeon who started this post said. Go ahead, RESOLVE!</b></div><div><b><br /></b></div>I'll make a broad suggestion, you fill in the measurable, achievable, appropriate particulars.<p></p><div><b>LIVE FOR JESUS.</b></div>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-36300167327698471052022-12-04T11:19:00.000-08:002022-12-04T11:19:04.489-08:00A Friend Who Was Wrong, But Not Wrong About Everything<p> As a preacher I've made and not kept this promise many times; I'll be brief.</p><p>Over the past few years, I have appreciated David French's commentaries on culture and American life. Recently, he came down in support of the Respect for Marriage Act. Fellow Evangelical Al Mohler criticised him sharply for this. (You can look up the exchange if you want.) I've kind of mulled this over for several days. While I admire French's desire to respect pluralism in American life, I think he crossed a line on this one. I agree with Mohler. Marriage is a definable thing. It can't be remade into whatever we, or the zeitgeist of our time desires. It's a line we shouldn't cross.</p><p>Let me explain that while I have appreciated French's thoughtful approach to big questions, I haven't appreciated him enough to pay for his stuff. My interaction with him has been largely limited to a free article that comes my way once a week, or so. This morning, I saw the freebie in my inbox. "Should I read it?" I thought. "I mean, he was wrong about the marriage thing."</p><p>Well, I'm glad I did open his piece. Actually, his piece did, sort of, have something to do with what I'm saying, but that wasn't the point he was making. If you read his piece, you may say he is actually saying the opposite. We can discuss that in the comments. For now, I'd encourage you read what he says, <a href="https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/frenchpress/remembering-what-repentance-looks-like/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Remembering+What+Repentance+Looks+Like&utm_campaign=Remembering+What+Repentance+Looks+Like" target="_blank">"Remembering What Repentance Looks Like."</a></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-4094603151474810192022-11-23T07:07:00.000-08:002022-11-23T07:07:01.530-08:00A Word from One of Israel's Kings that is Relevant for Thanksgiving 2022<p> Lord willing, I'll be preaching on Jehoshaphat's utterly weird battle strategy in 2 Chronicles 20. The plan, which led to the complete rout of an overwhelming enemy, sounds more like the script for a praise<br /> concert than a plan for a battle. </p><p>You can read the Chronicler's account <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Chronicles+20%3A1-30&version=ESV" target="_blank">here</a>.</p><p>You can hear the story put to music <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psfMp46GDs8" target="_blank">here</a>.</p><p><br /></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://assetsnffrgf-a.akamaihd.net/assets/m/1102016060/univ/art/1102016060_univ_lsr_xl.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="800" height="400" src="https://assetsnffrgf-a.akamaihd.net/assets/m/1102016060/univ/art/1102016060_univ_lsr_xl.jpg" width="800" /></a></div><p></p><p>As I was reading through the passage, I was fascinated with the word, "stand."</p><p>The Hebrew word is very common in the Old Testament and, not unlike our English word "stand," it takes on a number of nuances.</p><p>In 2 Chronicles 20:5 the word describes Jehoshaphat's stance, he "stood in the assembly." As he prayed, he made a declaration on behalf of the people of Judah, perhaps a challenge or appeal more than a statement of settled fact. "We will stand before this house [the temple] and before You [God]." The response was what the king had hoped it would be. Verse 13 finds all of Judah "standing before the Lord." "We do not know what to do, but we will look to you" (v. 12). It was a stance of attitude--a conviction, an act of the will. That comes across even more clearly in verse 17, "hold your position." We might say "stand firm." In verse 21, Jehoshaphat "appointed" singers (this is where the strangeness of the battle plans comes in). The appointment was telling them where they stood in this operation,</p><p class="MsoNormal"> “<span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">And when he had taken counsel with the people, he appointed those who were to sing to the </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal;">Lord</span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;"> and praise him in holy attire, as they went before the army, and say, “Give thanks to the </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal;">Lord</span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">, for his steadfast love endures forever.” And when they began to sing and praise, the </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal;">Lord</span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;"> set an ambush against the men of Ammon, Moab, and Mount Seir, who had come against Judah, so that they were routed. For the men of Ammon and Moab rose [stood] against the inhabitants of Mount Seir, devoting them to destruction, and when they had made an end of the inhabitants of Seir, they all helped to destroy one another.</span>” (<span lang="en-US">2 Chronicles 20:21–23</span>, ESV) </p><p class="MsoNormal">In brief, the enemies of Judah took a stand against Jehoshaphat and his people. Their clear intention was to utterly defeat them in battle and take all of their possessions as their own. Instead, they ended up standing against one another. The internal struggle between the enemies of Judah was so complete that by the time the singers had finished their concert, God had given Judah complete victory. </p><p class="MsoNormal">I can imagine two of the singers surveying battle field. "It had to be that high-note I sang at the end of the first phrase," said a tenor. "No," objected a bass, "it was that booming rhythm I kept up all during the song." in reality:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> “<span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">You will not need to fight in this battle. Stand firm, hold your position, and see the salvation of the </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal;">Lord</span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;"> on your behalf, O Judah and Jerusalem.’ Do not be afraid and do not be dismayed. Tomorrow go out against them, and the </span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal;">Lord</span><span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;"> will be with you.”</span>” (<span lang="en-US">2 Chronicles 20:17</span>, ESV) </p><p class="MsoNormal"></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><b>Know what the Lord says. In our day, that means knowing--really knowing--the Bible.</b></li><li><b>Believe it.</b></li><li><b>Do it.</b></li></ul><div>Where do you stand this Thanksgiving?</div><p></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-90968842775630301122022-11-18T06:37:00.002-08:002022-11-18T06:37:14.202-08:002 Articles & a Statement on the "Respect for Marriage" Act:<p><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">The two articles, one from a respected Evangelical magazine and the other from a widely read online, Evangelical commentator, agree on the basic facts of what the act does--mainly codifying recent SCOTUS decisions, particularly Obergefell. The CT article puts a positive spin on it, while Dennison takes a darker view.</span></p><div style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;">I think the CT article is only available to subscribers. You may find it elsewhere. It is by Carl Esbeck.</div><div style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></div><div><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2022/november-web-only/same-sex-marriage-religious-liberty-respect-marriage-act.html">https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2022/november-web-only/same-sex-marriage-religious-liberty-respect-marriage-act.html</a></span></div><div><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></span></div><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.denisonforum.org/daily-article/does-the-so-called-respect-for-marriage-act-threaten-our-religious-liberty/">https://www.denisonforum.org/daily-article/does-the-so-called-respect-for-marriage-act-threaten-our-religious-liberty/</a></span><div style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><br /></div><div style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: small;"><div><br /></div><div><div>In the Theological sense, I am an Evangelical, the LDS church is not. They have, however, been co-belligerents with us in many of the social battles of our time. The first line of their statement indicates that they still profess to be on our side in regard to a proper definition of marriage. </div><div><a href="https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/respect-for-marriage-act-statement">https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/respect-for-marriage-act-statement</a><br />I wonder, though, in our age of freedom to worship (in private), but not necessarily freedom to proclaim truth lest it offend, is the Mormon statement a retreat into a sort of modified Benedict Option (HM's brief definition: withdraw, hole up, and hope, wait, and pray for better days).</div><div><br /></div><div>Not all slopes are slippery, but, clearly, some are. </div><div>Christian leaders need to be wise. All of us need to pray for clear courageous thinking.</div></div></div>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-88106860618523939292022-09-22T11:54:00.000-07:002022-09-22T11:54:08.581-07:00Knowing too little...part 2<p> </p><div class="mail-message expanded" id="m#msg-f:1744696911022564228" style="font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><div class="mail-message-header spacer" style="height: 88px;"></div><div class="mail-message-content collapsible zoom-normal mail-show-images " style="margin: 16px 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; user-select: auto; width: 380px;"><div class="clear"><br />Without getting too technical--I don't know enough to be very technical--& staying brief (I'm not good at poking a cell phone) here is an update & some further thoughts, maybe lessons.<br />Life has parallels with a journey. It is a frequent trope in writing & cinema. The journey Kathy & I are presently on is epic in proportion, at least for us. We are incorporating family along the way. I’m starting this at my brother's home and finishing it at my son’s. The fact that our trip is taken in recognition of our 50th Anniversary, makes it especially symbolic.<br />I'm not the dumbest guy around when it comes to cars & trucks, but I couldn't hire myself out as a mechanic, either. My knowledge about auto mechanics & my adequate, but limited, financial situation have struck a pretty good balance over the years. Partly by using my limited knowledge, & a willingness to get my hands greasy, I've saved thousands of dollars over the years. But on this occasion, I was 2,000 + miles away from home. I wasn't sure what was wrong & I had no way to fix it.<br /><br />All I was sure of was that something was wrong--VERY WRONG. I had worn out both rear tires on the car in about 3,500 miles—new tires, on freshly aligned wheels. In case you don't know, that's bad.<br /><br />Ok. I realize that there are very bad problems in life and in the world. I also know this isn't one of them. Nobody died, and no countries were invaded. Still, my problem was at least a nuisance.<br /><br />As I intimated in the previous post, relationships were key in reaching a solution.<br /><br />1) Even though I was far away from my safety net, I still knew it was there. Kathy and I have family and friends for whom the, "If you need anything . . ." statement is much more than idle, polite-talk. These folk have our back even when our back is far away. You need to have that kind of people in your network. The best way to have the kind of person who will show up for you, as part of your team, is to be willing to show up for them. Don't take such folk for granted. Cherish them. In mine & Kathy's lives, you know who you are. Thank you.<br /><br />2) Know which friend to call on for which purpose. When I noticed the rubber that meets the road was being rubbed off by the road that meets rubber at least 10-times faster than it should be, I was pretty panicky. "What am I going to do?" A friend I contacted didn't immediately solve my problem. In fact his first stab at it was wrong (Keep in mind he was 2,000-miles away & was trying to figure something out bàsed on my lame description.) Wrong though he may have been, the direction in which he pushed me was exactly right. "Howard, this, isn't unsolvable. It's not caused by some kind of a vulcanized demon. Calm down! We'll figure it out." That's not anywhere close to what my friend actually said, but it is a reasonable summary of what I heard. It was exactly what I needed to hear, even though some of his message wasn't what I wanted hear.<br />Boy, do we need friends who know the truth & will tell us the truth. I ask myself, "Am I a person who is receptive to truth? Do I communicate to others that I am someone who is committed to living by the truth, so they can be confident that shooting straight with me isn't a waste of time?"<br /><br />3) The third part of wrestling my problem to the ground involved 2 people I had never met & will probably never meet again. Yet, some relational skills that I, by God's grace, have learned over the years helped me a lot.<br /><br />All of us want to be good at what we do, and we appreciate it when our expertise is recognized. This syndrome can easily become pride, but, at it's best, it's just simple honesty. "I know what I'm doing, and if you will recognize that I can probably help you."<br /><br />It was Friday. The manager of the tire shop, Armando, deftly handled a steady stream of demands, from customers, inquirers, shop personnel, suppliers, folk in a hurry, others who had been waiting a while. I saw him make a promise, get interrupted, quickly move to field the interruption, only to be interrupted again. I watched as he triaged it all. I tested him in my mind. "Will he get back to that promise?"<br /><br />He did.<br /><br />I saw him cycle through this scenario several times. Not only did he pass my quiz, he, from time to time, would insert some responsibility, outside the scope of my observation, into the flow. Kind of like a guy juggling chainsaws and giving directions to the nearest McDonalds, all the while keeping the saws buzzing and flying. Not only was he good, he was good in 2 languages, and humorous in both.<br /><br />"Armando, I know it's not your job to solve my problem, but I sure could use the benefit of your expertise."<br /><br />In about 90 seconds Armando kindly told me what I didn’t want to hear, what I needed to hear, and then went on to suggest a solution. A friend of mine, who is with the Lord, now, used to say, “It is hard to beat a man at his own trade.” By appealing to this man whom I had never met—at the time I didn’t even know his name—on the level of his competence, and asking him to help me out of kindness rather than demanding that he stop everything and adopt my problem as his own, a micro friendship began.<br /><br />Armando is about the age of my sons. The first step in his solution led to an encounter with Benito. Hanging around a tire shop all day gets pretty boring. I went outside to stretch my legs and let the New Mexico sun bake some of the AC-induced chill out of my bones. It didn’t take long. From my vantage point outside the alignment bay, I could see Benito using his flashlight, searching under my car for something. Not a good sign. Seeing me outside, Benito invited me to join him under the car. He showed me the critical part, then he took me to his computer screen. Two things were apparent, even to a non-expert like me.<br /><br />1) The big red box on the screen fairly screamed, “Something’s not right!”<br />2) The “thing-a-majig” (sorry for the technical language) that the computer said was supposed to be on my car, the thing that needed to be adjusted to make the red box go away, wasn’t there. Further searching in the computer and consultation with a manual offered no help. Further examination of the part revealed “FOMOCO” (Ford Motor Company) stamped on the part. Whatever the problem was, or wasn’t, came from the factory. It wasn’t some after-market add on.<br /><br />Benito is a guy closer to my age than his boss’s. I sensed by the way he searched for an answer and the way he listened to my suggestions that he is the automotive equivalent of the orthopedic surgeon to whom I owe my mobility. I remember Dr. Shuler saying to the resident with whom he was working, “We hate to meet a break we can’t fix.” I figure Benito had been doing wheel alignments back when computers were only things one read about. He didn’t want this thing to beat him. My problem became Benito’s problem to solve.<br /><br />In our world we find many things that about which we disagree. We get a lot more done on common ground, though.<br /><br />Benito and Armando got their heads together. They called an unknown ally at the local Ford garage. He put them in touch with an even more unknown Ford alignment guru who shared the secret that got me back on the road.<br /><br />Suffice to say, unknown to the computer, my car has a funky and hidden means of adjustment. Later when Benito brought the print-out from the computer (sans red-boxes) showing me the tire-eating problem was solved, I could see the satisfaction on his face. We live in a world full of problems. The image of God within us compels us to fix them when we can. When we are able to restore a measure of shalom to this messed up world—even if it is just a properly turned bolt on he belly of a Ford—we feel the “ahh-ness” that sin and the fall stole from the world. Though it is fleeting, it feels good.<br /><br />But, the fallen-ness of the world was not finished with its peace thievery that day. Shortly after the unseen alignment guru pointed Benito to the hidden adjustment that would correct the pigeon-toed condition of my Ford, word came that the truck that was delivering the replacements for my two worn-to-the-belt rear tires was broken down. Another truck had been dispatched.<br /><br />At this point, I’ll cut to the chase. As the staff was closing up the store for the weekend Kathy and I got back on the road.<br /><br />Perhaps you are amused with my tale. I hope so. But, is there more? Again, I’m hopeful.<br /><br />To use the words that Cornelius Plantinga used as the title for his great book, clearly this world is “Not The Way It’s Supposed To Be.” Shalom, in big and little ways, is snatched away at every turn. Yet what Kathy and I have seen on this trip confirms that in spite of that we can still see God’s creative hand. Beauty still abounds. We saw that in the luxurious fields of grain, the magnificent sunrises and sunsets, the rising moon that looked like we would drive right into it in just few miles, the magnificent mountains and the incredible canyons. We felt an Edenic “ahh” as we stared up at the Ponderosa Pines, watched the Aspens shimmer in the breeze, or heard and saw the ocean waves lap onto the shore. We were reminded, though, that the greatest repository of God’s good things shines from the hearts of people when they do what is right. Let’s thank the Lord when we see that. Let’s live that way. And, let’s share the Shalom-restoring Good News of Jesus, which will one day restore this world to the way it should be, and, because of the common grace of God, poured out like rain on all people, gives us moments of peace down here where the rubber meets the road.</div><div><br /></div></div><div class="mail-message-footer spacer collapsible" style="height: 0px;"></div></div>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-84228033120333613372022-09-09T10:20:00.001-07:002022-09-28T06:13:00.222-07:00Knowing too little, but needing to know more:<p> I’ll be a bit vague in order not to incriminate the innocent, Kathy, or the guilty, me.</p><p>The fact is, sooner or later we find ourselves in a place where we need to make a decision, or decisions, with not nearly enough information, and little if any opportunity to get more. It is frustrating. </p><p>I find myself berating myself. Why didn’t I study this more—more web searches, more conversations with experts—I could have taken a class.😧</p><p>The fact is, though, except for a few remarkable folks—and I’m not one—information doesn’t have all that long of a shelf life. I heard an interview with John McEnroe the other day (to prove my point, I don’t remember how to spell his name, if I got it, it was a guess) Mc quoted a basketball player, “The older I get, the better I used to be.” These days I find myself remembering that I used to know something, but I don’t remember what it is that I used to know.</p><p>I have to make a gut decision. Problem is my gut isn’t like the junk drawer in my shop. If I put a 3/8 x2” bolt in that drawer, it’ll be there. I’ll have to rummage, but it’s there. Often, what I need to know just isn’t there. Rummaging morphs into worry, as in, “Be anxious for nothing.” I am to often anxious for nothing. The nothing I find in the junk drawer off my mind, sets me to worrying.</p><p>Don’t get me wrong. I’m not promoting blissful ignorance. Blissful ignorance is overrated. It is also expensive, to the ignorant one and to others in the neighborhood. I’m still working to add some stuff to my junk drawer. I’m even sorting it to make retrieval easier. But experience has taught me that a whole chest of junk drawers is not enough to meet life’s needs. I need more.</p><p>Maybe I’ll share more later, but let me say here, what I find most useful is not to know <i>something</i> more, but to know <i>someone</i> better.</p><p>My relationship with the Lord and with His people is what really gets me through.</p><p>It’s trite, but not really. It’s not what I know, but <b>Who</b>!</p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-10564483486933361632022-08-15T13:37:00.000-07:002022-08-15T13:37:06.024-07:00At the campground. <p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmA0CGkjizNAPMc6638WRR5jCoG1hW8jBz7y4cEepvVNa0K-ccOrYesUrzyuA9Jr_tI_wNWiFlhOcpYle2tZP2vDvqtDNTQvisiYIefOxickaeVbExocoTEy630QDG5vzuuztk3GvvxxFMOMVkkZVIjA8h2nJhDQd33XQuDYI5YcpCOJIS0j33z3Ys/s960/IMG_0066.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="720" data-original-width="960" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmA0CGkjizNAPMc6638WRR5jCoG1hW8jBz7y4cEepvVNa0K-ccOrYesUrzyuA9Jr_tI_wNWiFlhOcpYle2tZP2vDvqtDNTQvisiYIefOxickaeVbExocoTEy630QDG5vzuuztk3GvvxxFMOMVkkZVIjA8h2nJhDQd33XQuDYI5YcpCOJIS0j33z3Ys/w640-h480/IMG_0066.JPG" width="640" /></a></div><br /> Our little Frolic among the behemoths.<p></p><p>Most folks’ comments include the word “cute.”</p><p><br /></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6275183824497732536.post-53831871917584433652022-07-29T08:38:00.004-07:002022-07-29T20:21:32.742-07:00Treating Others Right, Even Those Who Don't Deserve It<p> I read Amos in my devotions this morning. To be honest, it is a pretty dismal book, full of words of condemnation. Here is one example.</p><p> Thus says the LORD: </p><p> "For three transgressions of Moab, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because he burned to lime the bones of the king of Edom. So I will send a fire on Moab, and it shall devour the strongholds of Kerioth, and Moab shall die . . .." (Am 2:1–2)</p><p>When I read that, I asked myself, "Hadn't I already heard about Edom from the Prophet Amos?"</p><p>Yes, I had.</p><p> "Thus says the LORD: For three transgressions of Edom, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment; because he pursued his brother with the sword and cast off all pity; he maintained his anger perpetually, and kept his wrath forever. So I will send a fire on Teman, and it shall devour the strongholds of Bozrah [2 cities in Edom]." (Am 1:11-12)</p><p>So the Lord pronounces judgment on one nation and then pronounces judgment on another nation for basically doing what the Lord said He would do to that same nation?</p><p>Yes, pretty much. Why? </p><p>Certainly, it is above my paygrade to explain the ways of the Lord, but let me surmise for a moment. I think I have something instructive and useful in mind. Could it be that the Lord is like a human parent who challenges the right of an unrelated adult to discipline the parent's child and then proceeds to discipline their child for precisely the offense that motivated the outsider's intervention? "This is my child, I'll take care of this." Romans 12:19 lends some credence to this theory.</p><p class="MsoNormal"> “<span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”</span>” (<span lang="en-US">Romans 12:19</span>, ESV)</p><p class="MsoNormal">I see, however, behind this apparent conflict of judgment a principle that we need to remember in our contentious age. Even our enemies deserve to be treated with respect. The principle reaches as far as animals:</p><p class="MsoNormal"> “<span lang="en-US" style="font-style: italic;">If you see the donkey <b>of one who hates you</b> lying down under its burden, you shall refrain from leaving him with it; you shall rescue it with him.</span>” (<span lang="en-US">Exodus 23:5</span>, ESV, emp. added) </p><p>Let's keep in mind that even bad people are people. We should treat them as such.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Howard Merrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09803269554170053972noreply@blogger.com1