What is an Evangelical?

The furor around Hillbilly Elegy has largely died away. Much to nearly everyone’s surprise, a populist won the election. Many of his votes came from people who claim the title evangelical.

The exit poll results that indicate 81% of so-called evangelicals voted for Trump have been used as a cudgel against theologically conservative Protestants, many of whom identify as evangelical.

As Robert Wuthnow notes in his recent book, Inventing American Religion, however, there are significant differences between theological belief and political identity. The pollsters have tried to cross that boundary, but there are indications that the political label evangelical may not provide a strong theological indicator.

In J. D. Vance’s book, Hillbilly Elegy, he demonstrates why using the term "evangelical" as if it means deep conviction and meaningful participation in a certain brand of Protestant religion is faulty:

“Despite its reputation, Appalachia—especially northern Alabama and Georgia to southern Ohio—has far lower church attendance than the Midwest, parts of the Mountain West, and much of the space between Michigan and Montana. Oddly enough, we think we attend church more than we actually do. In a recent Gallup poll, Southerners and Midwesterners reported the highest rates of church attendance in the country. Yet actual church attendance is much lower in the South.

This pattern of deception has to do with the cultural pressure. In southwestern Ohio, where I was born, both the Cincinnati and Dayton metropolitan regions have very low rates of church attendance, about the same as ultra-liberal San Francisco. No one I know in San Francisco would feel ashamed to admit that they don’t go to church. (In fact, some of them might feel ashamed to admit that they do.) Ohio is the polar opposite. Even as a kid, I’d lie when people asked if I attended church regularly. According to Gallup, I wasn’t alone in feeling that pressure. (Hillbilly Elegy, J. D. Vance, 93)”

This is one of the reasons Russell Moore, the president of the Southern Baptist’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, penned his February 2016 Washington Post article arguing this election made him hate the term evangelical.

He notes:

“The word “evangelical” has become almost meaningless this year, and in many ways the word itself is at the moment subverting the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Part of the problem is that more secular people have for a long time misunderstood the meaning of “evangelical,” seeing us almost exclusively in terms of election-year voting blocs or our most buffoonish television personalities. That’s especially true when media don’t distinguish in election exit polls between churchgoers and those who merely self-identify as “born again” or “evangelical.”

Many of those who tell pollsters they are “evangelical” may well be drunk right now, and haven’t been into a church since someone invited them to Vacation Bible School sometime back when Seinfeld was in first-run episodes.”

Used by CC license: http://ow.ly/8G0x30aM4e7

Despite the consistently demonstrable unreliability of the label as any serious indicator of religious belief, the word continues to be used without definition and qualification. Careful readers and writers should be aware of this.

Much as when using any term, we must be discerning when we interpret information and express it so that we clearly understand or communicate those who we are speaking to.

Those of who are legitimate Gospel Christians should not stop when someone says they belong to a church or regularly attend. We should seek to know their conversion story and if they don’t have one to help them get one.

It may also be time for us to look for another way to describe ourselves. Since evangelical has become associated with political bloc voting, perhaps we need another term.

At the very least, we need to be careful when we communicate to define our terms. We should also be careful not to allow a bare profession of belief made once upon a time to substitute for authentic, action-inspiring faith.

The Value of Empathy in the Workplace

I’m amazed how many years it took me to become aware of it. Even as a leader, I didn’t recognize the nature and significance of the difficulties in the daily lives of other people at work. Fifteen years into my working career and I think I’m finally starting to figure out what empathy is and why it matters.

I now work for a Christian organization with fewer than a thousand employees. Because we are a distinctively Christian community, our Human Resources department, when requested, shares prayer needs with all the employees through email. I’m amazed because nearly every week we are notified that someone’s family member is seriously ill or dying. These are major life events that sap people’s creative energies, distract from their work, and could even give them a sense of hopelessness.

Even more significantly, I am becoming increasingly aware as I get older of the profound struggles in the lives of many co-workers. When I was younger I assumed everything was alright unless someone told me otherwise. However, as I work in a community of Christians, I find out that apart from the big events that get broadcast through e-mail, there are dozens more “little” crises in people’s lives. For the most part, I was oblivious to these concerns when I worked outside of Christian higher education.

Some people are struggling with anxiety, some with the effects of ongoing cancer treatment, some with children that seem intent on getting into trouble at school. That stress sends ripples through a person’s whole life, including their work. There are a million of needs and struggles. If we’re not careful, we’ll miss them and never take the opportunity to be an encouragement to the people around us.

In organizations with a mission built upon Christian principles, it is easier (sometimes) to stop and pray and to use Scripture to encourage one another. It is also more likely, based on my experience, for people to be willing to discuss their struggles with others at work. However, looking back to the years that I worked in secular environments, I can think of a number of opportunities that I missed to be a better leader and a better friend. In reality, taking a few steps to be more empathetic would have made a big difference in my ability to exemplify the gospel to my coworkers.

Be Aware of the Hurting

The most significant step in becoming a better coworker is to simply be aware of the struggles in people’s lives. This starts by recognizing the humanity of the people that we work with.

Even theologians with a solid understanding of the doctrine of humanity need to be intentional to see the uniqueness of each person at work. My coworker isn’t just a line item on my budget with a productivity quota, she is a human with a family, medical needs, and hopes for the future. If I focus on whether she’s accomplished the proper number of tasks on the to-do list instead of whether she’s flourishing as a human, I’ve missed the mark as a leader.

There were many instances I can recall when I was very critical of peers who didn’t make deadlines or weren’t as successful at their work. I had a critical spirit that exalted myself because I stayed at work late or achieved a better result. Looking back, based on conversations I had at the time, many of those people were struggling with concerns at home with their families. It wasn’t that they didn’t want to do well at their work, it was simply that their work wasn’t as important as the other issues they were wrestling with.

I would have been more Christ-like had I been consistently concerned for their wellbeing as a person. Being effective at work is important, but it isn’t the only thing. It also may have helped people to be more productive had they known that others at work cared and were concerned about more than just the bottom line.

Be Compassionate Toward the Hurting

Simply recognizing that the world around is hurting is insufficient. It’s roughly the equivalent of telling the hungry, poorly clothed person and telling them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled.” (James 2:16).

US Government work used by CC License: http://ow.ly/bJWK309wYOv

In the workplace, most often the problem will not be a lack of food or clothing. The contemporary equivalent of brushing off physical needs is to address someone’s medical condition or concerns for their family by saying, “I’m sorry about that. Do you think you can get this report done on time?”

Obviously, sometimes there is work that just needs to get done. However, it may be that sharing another person’s assignment or covering a shift for them is exactly the sort of relief they need. Going beyond acknowledgment that someone has a problem and seeking to relieve it is a step in the right direction. Even if they don’t accept the offer, the willingness to help means more than simply offering your “thoughts and prayers” and “oohing” at the right moments in conversation.

Be Concerned with the Flourishing of Others

There are many people more aware and compassionate that I am. Many of them are not Christians. This is something that I’ve come to expect because common grace is real and, frankly, I’m naturally a selfish person.

However, as a Christian, I bring a vision of holistic flourishing to my workplace that others will lack. If I can beat down my introversion and task-oriented, deadline-focused nature, I can actually apply the knowledge of the good news about a savior who came to redeem and restore all of creation for the good of humankind and for his own glory. There’s a deeper message of hope and wellbeing in the gospel that only Christians can share.

We know the end of the story. We know that creation is groaning with birth pangs in anticipation of being set free from the bondage of sin and decay. (cf. Rom 8:18-23) We have a hope that should enliven us and cause us to desire to meet the needs of those we work in their daily struggles, pointing them toward redemption in Christ.

Conclusion

 Our workplaces are awash with a flood of private distress. As we do our work, we can serve others by doing our jobs excellently. We can also serve those we work with by demonstrating empathy for their concerns. Christians ought to pursue the good of people, not simply the metric that bolsters the bottom line.

As we move from simply recognizing the needs of others to offering to provide help, we open up opportunities for demonstrating what redemption looks like. Many people are carrying the weight of heavy burdens today. They need to know what redemption looks like more than they need a lesson in productivity. Christians can provide that, which is a key part of how we live out our faith through our work.

We Need the Substitutionary Atonement

Not too long ago someone told me in an off-hand manner that the Conservative Resurgence of the Southern Baptist Convention should have never happened.

The Cross by Michael Craven. Used by CC License. http://ow.ly/RDIe30aJ2tm

I tend to agree, but for different reasons. I’ve heard the Conservative Resurgence objected to based on it being divisive. Inasmuch as it was divisive (and for some it certainly was just a power play), it is a shame that the split happened.

However, most of the people I’ve heard object to the Conservative Resurgence do so because they don’t think that the doctrines in question were worth dividing over. Typically, these are individuals who are sympathetic with revising gender roles in the church and who want to undermine belief in the reliability of Scripture.

Those two issues were certainly the most discussed issues during the controversy in the SBC, which has become known as the Conservative Resurgence. In reality, though, they were simply the tip of the iceberg for a deeper theological debate. There were legitimate heresies that were being tolerated in the seminaries and churches of the SBC and the denomination needed to be called back to doctrinal faithfulness.

One of the major outcomes of the Conservative Resurgence was the formation of another association of Baptist churches. The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (CBF) formed to support those churches who disagreed with the SBC on key doctrinal disputes. The CBF became a home for theological liberals and moderates.

The moderates were those who were willing to tolerate the erosion of traditional Christian doctrines, as long as they didn’t go too far. At least, that was the general idea. In truth, many moderates ended up tolerating outright theological liberalism, which eats at orthodoxy and the essentials of Christianity like a canker.

A Recent Example

A case in point is a recent opinion article by a Kentucky-based CBF pastor, who is a regular contributor to Baptist News Global, a partner organization to the CBF. The author, Chuck Queen, argues against the substitutionary atonement:

“Popular Baptist preachers and evangelists over the years have emphasized trust in Jesus’ substitutionary death as essential for salvation. It is such a staple in many Baptist churches that pastors, even though they don’t believe it themselves, refuse to touch it.”

He goes on:

“Many Christians believe this to be the gospel truth. To deny this truth is to deny Christ. But this theory of the redemptive significance of Jesus’ death is seriously flawed. The major problem with substitutionary atonement is the way it imagines God. This interpretation of Jesus’ death makes God the source of redemptive violence. God required/demanded a violent death for atonement to be made. God required the death of an innocent victim in order to satisfy God’s offended sense of honor or pay off a penalty that God imposed. What kind of justice or God is this? Would a loving parent make forgiveness for the child conditioned upon a violent act?”

His argument against the substitutionary atonement is actually a portion of a known heresy called Socinianism. It has huge theological and Christological problems. Sam Storms has helpfully posted a summary of this doctrine previously, in which he notes that the Socinian rejection of the substitutionary atonement requires a rejection of the essential justice of God. That is, Socinians must reject the idea that God must be just; instead he can simply ignore sin. Here is Socinus in his own words:

““If we could but get rid of this justice, even if we had no other proof, that fiction of Christ’s satisfaction would be thoroughly exposed, and would vanish” (De Servatore, III, i).”

““There is no such justice in God as requires absolutely and inexorably that sin be punished, and such as God himself cannot repudiate. There is, indeed, a perpetual and constant justice in God; but this is nothing but his moral equity and rectitude, by virtue of which there is no depravity or iniquity in any of his works. . . . Hence, they greatly err who, deceived by the popular use of the word justice, suppose that justice in this sense is a perpetual quality in God, and affirm that it is infinite. . . . Hence it might with much greater truth be affirmed that that compassion which stands opposed to justice is the appropriate characteristic of God” (Praelectiones Theologicae, Caput xvi; Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum, I, 566).”

The Problem of Justice

The CBF pastor contends that God does not have to be consistent in his justice in order to be just. He argues,

“If God is sovereign, as advocates of substitutionary atonement contend, then God is the source of all justice. God is not subject to some sort of cosmic principle of justice outside of God’s own nature. If God chooses to simply forgive sin the way a loving parent would forgive sin, without requiring some sort of pay off or sacrifice, there is no one to tell God that God is violating the demands of justice. God sets the standards of justice.”

This sounds good to some, but what Queen has essentially done is simply picked one of the two wrong choices in the Euthyphro Dilemma. He is right to note that moral justice is not an absolute imposed on God, but he is 100% wrong to assert that God simply makes up what is just. This is a huge theological problem.

If God can simply change the rules at any point, then your sin today could be tomorrow’s self-sacrifice. There are many within the ranks of the sexual revolution that hope this is true: they hope that earlier condemnations of sexual immorality have been revised by God to say that more sex is good as long as it is “loving.” Or, they might hope that despite the clear prohibition of killing innocents as a private individual in the Ten Commandments, it is now a good thing to commit an abortion. This would be convenient.

The proper answer to the Euthyphro Dilemma is “none of the above.” God isn’t bound by a moral law that existed prior to him. Neither can the moral law—and the just application of that law—change. Instead, the moral law is a reflection of God’s character. There is a reason that many times during the giving of the law, God commands the Israelites, “Be holy as I am holy.” (e.g., Leviticus 11:44) Since God does not change (cf. James 1:17), the moral law that reflects his character does not change.

But apart from the logical problems that Queen faces in trying to create a God that changes, he has many scriptural problems. The most obvious is Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5:

“For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.”

In contrast, let us compare Queen’s comments:

“Jesus didn’t have to die in order to make atonement to God for sin.”

And,

“Jesus didn’t die because God needed a sacrifice. Jesus died because the powers that be had him killed.”

Paul claims that the atonement is of first importance. Queen claims that the real issues is that “the sacrificial images employed by Paul and other New Testament writers carry a lot of baggage.”

This should not be overlooked. Queen is arguing that Paul got the core of Christianity wrong and that he has misled the vast majority of Christians since his time. 

In other words, what Queen is saying is that Scripture is wrong. He is also saying that orthodox Christianity for millennia have been wrong.  And they are wrong not about something that resides on the edge of Christian conviction, but the very heart of the message of Christianity.

Queen is arguing that the definition of the gospel—that Christ died for our sins—is wrong.

This is why I am thankful for the Conservative Resurgence. We may spend time fighting about politics, but at least we can all agree on the gospel. As for Queen, we should pray that he repents and places his faith in Christ for the propitiation of his sins. I'm not sure what he places his hope in otherwise.

No Legitimate Support is Offered

The strongest part of Queen’s defense is that he has struck first and anticipated the logical response of orthodox Christians. He anticipates that those of us foolish enough to accept Scripture and traditional Christian doctrines will argue that the atonement that is at the center of the gospel is at the center of the gospel. By anticipating the argument, he is inoculating some of his readers against the response. But careful readers won’t fall for his trap.

Queen never explains why his capricious, ever changing god is consistent with the God of the Bible. Instead, he simply asserts that “the God of Jesus, however, does not need to be propitiated.”

He also inserts an ahistorical fact with no evidence that the so-called Constantinian shift pushed substitutionary language to the forefront of the Church’s discussions of God. This is a theory in search of support, which Queen can’t provide because it doesn’t exist.

The reason the Eucharist has been a part of the Church’s liturgy since the beginning is because it remembers the significance of Christ’s death on the cross. It isn’t just a nice way to remember a nice guy that died because of injustice. If that were the case, there are a lot of Christian martyrs we should remember with meals.

Similarly, baptism, when properly performed, recalls the significance of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.

It’s almost as if Jesus Christ himself and the authors of the New Testament anticipated the false gospel Queen and others like him present. In fact, they did.

Instead of making an argument, Queen makes some assertions based on a twisted, anemic idea of a false god that provides no justice. He makes no effort to deal with significant texts of Scripture, like the letter to the Hebrews, which makes it clear that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” and that Christ is the sacrifice that enabled our sins to be forgiven. (Heb 9:15-28)

Conclusion

The cross is absolutely necessary for the forgiveness of our sins. If you lose the substitutionary atonement, you lose the gospel. There are certainly other aspects and significances of the atonement, but if we miss Christ’s sacrifice on our behalf, then we’ve missed a central truth of Christianity. I'm thankful for the SBC where, despite our warts, we aren't arguing about gospel basics.

As we celebrate Christ’s death on the cross, his burial, and his resurrection, ponder the truth of the substitutionary atonement. It is bloody and horrid. It’s meant to be. He took our place. We deserved that fate. However, it’s also joyful, because God used Christ’s sacrifice to make a way for our redemption.

Hallelujah, what a savior.

Low Culture with a Purpose

Evangelicalism takes a lot of flack for being hokey. I know this because I’ve dished out a lot of the criticism.

Tim LeHaye’s Left Behind series is the perpetual butt of jokes among conservative and revisionist scholars. It has inspired numerous book titles that play off the franchise’s moniker; those books are almost always critical not only of the theological interpretation of LeHaye, but also the cultural cheesiness.

At one level, the criticism is justified. There are too many conservative Christians the see kitsch culture with a Christian overtone as the high watermark of art. Prairie fiction is a blight on the Christian imagination. Much of the Contemporary Christian Music scene is a sectarian revision of pop hits from a couple of decades ago. Evangelical culture makers need to improve their cultural tastes and stop mimicking popular trends a few years after they were vogue.

However, those who are critical of Evangelical subculture need to ensure we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. This, I fear, is an even more significant danger for us. We can become so critical of the style of some cultural creations that we ignore the value of the content.

The Embarrassment of Christian Cheesiness

When I was in college, one of my fellow English majors revealed how cheesy her homeschool life was. She shared with the class at our secular institution that her mother used to read her C.S. Lewis and point out how Aslan is like Jesus.

The class groaned as she described her mother’s attempts to disciple her using children’s literature. It was so simplistic and moralistic. It was so cheesy.

I now believe that it was perfectly practical and appropriate.

Photo used by CC License. Photo credit: http://ow.ly/MPTj3090a87

I’m glad to see conservative Christians work toward becoming culture makers again. We need people like Andrew Peterson, Phil Keaggy, and others to keep making excellent books, movies, and music.

At the same time, we need to keep making popular level material that puts the cookies on the bottom shelf, as the saying goes.

This hit me as we were listening to a Seeds Family Worship playlist in the van on the way to church. The music is pretty basic. The lyrics recast Scripture to fit the tunes and are often repetitive and simplistic. I went through an inner turmoil one day while the songs rolled on because I wondered if I was somehow cheating my children by exposing them to this kitschy music.

A Better Calculus is Warranted

Then I realized that I was missing the point and my analysis needed to be revised.

I certainly do not want my children to live in a cultural desert. I want them to be exposed to art and music that reflects the unique ability of humans to create, whether the artists are Christian or not. I want them to be familiar with high quality cultural artifacts and conversant with the good, the true, and the beautiful.

More importantly, though, I want my children to grow up being surrounded by some of the great truths of the Christian faith. Sometimes this will come through watching performances of Handel or listening to Tallis. Sometimes this will come by singing doctrinal truths along with a catchy tune that will never win an award for musical excellence.

Christian movies are another example. If you’ve seen the films produced by Sherwood Pictures, you have seen some feel good, moralistic, happy ending on your screen. The gospel is always a key element as someone goes through a crisis of faith.

I’ve dismissed these movies before and heard others mock them mercilessly. Now that I’m a few years later on in life with kids that are a little older, I’m reconsidering.

In no way do I think that Fireproof or Courageous are worthy of an Oscar. The overall production is not polished enough to put it into the same league as most major films. But I’ve reached the point that I’m glad the movies have been made. They are telling simple stories and pointing to an over-optimistically good world, which is more like the world that we want to live in than most of the dystopian films produced by Hollywood.

But aren’t cheesy Christian films and pop music Scripture songs just cheesy knockoffs of culture?

Knockoffs vs. Creative Packaging

As I’ve considered the difference between “Christian” Prairie Fiction and Fireproof, I think a basic principle that separates worthwhile Christian pop culture from the junk.

Many of the Contemporary Christian Music songs (though not all) and most of the Amish Romance/Prairie Fiction genre are simply knockoffs of popular culture with the offensive ideas taken out. These are the “God is my girlfriend” songs, which only gain any Christian content when played in a context that assumes the deep emotional love being expressed is for God and not romantic idol. Your average Amish Romance is just a Harlequin novel with the sex pushed off screen.

In contrast, C. S. Lewis is trying to present a particularly Christian perspective on the world in compelling terms through a well-written story that is symbolically accessible to children. My family’s peppy Scripture songs are trying to disciple by getting simple lyrics stuck in their head. Sherwood Pictures is trying to entertain an audience and get the gospel out there through a story with a happy ending.

There is a difference between making a cheap knockoff and creating healthy, purposeful entertainment. Sometimes simplicity and morality presented through story is the best way to get the medicine down.

Those of us who are critical should step back and remember that using popular culture to disseminate the gospel is not a recent invention. As Karen Swallow Prior notes, Hannah More wrote plays for sophisticated audiences and entertaining tracts with stories that landed on pleas for gospel conversion, which were distributed to the masses. We ought not criticize methods that were effective in reaching the lost. For example, Hudson Taylor was converted to Christianity through a novel that led to a moralistic gospel presentation. The author of that kitschy book will doubtless receive treasure in heaven for his or her efforts.

There is a place for using popular cultural forms in Christian subcultures, but it should be simplicity for the sake of the gospel, not mimicry for the sake of the dollar. That is the real criterion by which we should be judging our art.

An Account of Meeting C. S. Lewis

Early on in my time at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, I had the opportunity to attend one of the best academic conferences I've ever been to. It was a conference on the life and work of C. S. Lewis.

The breakout sessions were ok, but this hour-long lecture by Walter Hooper, Lewis' editor and curator of his literary remains, was worth the trip. Hooper is known for carefully guarding Lewis' image (which one might expect, given his job), so there might be a bit of hagiography here. However, I still find the lecture very enjoyable.

I pass this resource on to you, for your enjoyment.

Books Aren't Dead Yet

Sometimes it seems we are being constantly bombarded by news of the death of the book.

In some cases, the concern is the rise of the internet, which has cultivated a reliance upon shorter and shorter articles. Some folks seem to expect 140 characters to sufficiently capture the complexities of an argument.

In other cases, people (like myself) lament the rise of the e-book, which tends to reinforce the addiction to screens, undermine the reliance upon actual physical books. There is good evidence that e-books are both not as likely to replace real books as some fear and that they actually have the negative effects that traditional reading advocates ascribe to them.

Despite the worries of real book fans, a recent Gallup study indicates that the future of reading in general and real books in particular continues to look positive. This is encouraging and matches the findings of a study published by Pew Research in the Fall of 2016.

On one hand, the number of people who claim to not have read a book in the past year has doubled since 1978, from 8% to 16%, but it hasn’t changed much since 1990, which is well before the internet was widely available.

The study actually shows a fairly steady percentage of readers, with some slippage in some of the higher consumption categories. Still, the overall number of people actively engaged in reading books is quite high and far from the dire warnings that some technophobes issue. At the same time, it is worth noting the question for “reading” of a book includes listening to audiobooks. This inclusion may mask a phenomenon that still reflects a lower consumption of printed words for the same ideas being read on a commute, a run, or family vacation.

Screen grab from http://ow.ly/BHDz308l8Bg

At the same time, the study also showed that 73% of people pick up a printed book more often than other formats. Only 6% of people rely on audio books as their primary means of engaging books. The news is not all that bad for those that value reading. Books appear to be holding their own against the flood of other entertainment options.

One caution, though, in this study—as in all of the studies I’ve seen on this topic—the nature of the books is never considered. In other words, people may be reading as much, but if they are reading prairie fiction instead of literature, that makes a difference. If book sales skew toward popular punditry and away from well considered arguments about policy, then reading is of much less value. It would be interesting to see a study that reflected on both the quality and the frequency of reading.

In the meanwhile, rest assured the reports of the death of the book have been greatly exaggerated. That should be cause for a cautious celebration.

A Plea for Reading the Bible

One of the greatest tragedies in the Christian life would be to believe that the Bible is God’s word and not take steps to read and understand it.

In contrast to the many years prior to the Protestant Reformation when the Roman Church worked to keep reading the Bible in the vernacular language illegal, we now have more access to the Bible for less money than ever. The problem is that we simply are not reading it.

Consider this video from the United Bible Society, which shows a people group in Indonesia getting the New Testament in their language for the first time. Compare their excitement over access to God's Word with our apathy despite the overflowing availability of it.

Choosing a Translation

There are so many versions of the Bible available right now that it can becomes confusing to figure out what you need. Here are some tips for choosing a version:

1.         Find out which translation your local church uses in its regular worship services and Bible studies. If they are consistent, it may help to have the same translation as you worship.

2.         Consider your reading ability. One of gifts of having multiple translations is that you can find a version of the Bible that is easiest for you to comprehend. This guide from the publisher, Cokesbury, may be helpful for your decision. Even if you aren’t sure what your reading level is, the guide will give you a relative understanding of the differences in difficulty.

3.         Before you buy a Bible, go to www.Biblegateway.com and read the same passage in several versions. If you are familiar with a particular passage, you can compare between translations and get a feel for the language in it.

4.         Ask one of the leaders in your local church for a recommendation if you aren’t sure. A good Bible can cost a significant amount of money, so ask your pastor or a trusted ministry leader what they recommend.

After you’ve picked a Bible, or if you’ve already got one, then the most important thing you can do with it is read it and begin to learn it. If you’ve read this far in this post, I’ll assume that you have a desire to read your Bible and are looking for ways to break down this monumental task into smaller chunks.

An Argument for Bible Reading Plans

Many contemporary Christians set annual goals of reading through the Bible each year. This can be a great practice for a number of reasons.

a.          It exposes you to the whole counsel of God. It may take a year and you won’t remember all the details, but making it through Scripture will help shape your understanding of God if you work at it.

b.         The practice of reading all of Scripture in a year ensures that, if completed, most days you will have spent time in God’s Word.

c.          You will begin to see patterns, recurring themes, and connections in Scripture that you were not aware of. Reading the Bible helps you become a better Christian.

At the same time, simply going through the motions to move your bookmark 3 chapters each day or check of the day's box can become a form of legalism. It is important to find a reading plan that meets your commitment level, your ability, and the time resources you have available.

For example, a mother with several young children is going to find setting aside even 20 minutes a day for Bible reading exceedingly difficult on a consistent basis. Therefore, choose a Bible reading plan that keeps you moving, but doesn’t kill you.

It is also possible to skim through the Bible each day in a year and never latch on to anything. It is possible to read the Bible without getting anything from it. This is a danger with some of the 1 year plans. Find a reading plan that matches your reading ability and time commitment. 

But by all means, please read the Bible.

Some Basic Reading Plans

Here are a few different Bible reading plans that are available for free online. I’m linking to a few of them here:

1.         The simplest option is to read the Bible from cover to cover. In order to do this, you will need to read about three chapters each day every day.

2.         Another option is to read through the Bible in chronological order. Our Bible doesn’t necessarily flow in a straight timeline from the first page to the last, so someone has put together a reading plan that puts the minor prophets (for example) in order and shifted Paul’s letters to the order that we believe he wrote them. If you are trying to understand the flow of the Old Testament history (for example), doing this reading plan may help.

3.         For those looking some flexibility in their schedule, but who still want to get through the Bible in a year, a five day a week reading plan like this one will give you two catch up days in the week. This is an option that might appeal to busy professionals or parents.

4.         Some may want or need to use a slower pace. For those who read a bit slower, there are plans that will walk you through the Bible in two years.

If you have never read through the Bible, I recommend that you start with one of these plans and get a broad sense of Scripture. Do this for a couple of years, then consider a more in depth study method or selective reading plan.

One example of a focused study method is the plan suggested by Joe Carter, writing for The Gospel Coalition. He suggests reading each book of the Bible twenty times straight through. This, he argues, will begin to change your worldview through Scripture saturation. His method is pretty simple:

1.         Choose a book of the Bible.

2.         Read it in its entirety. 

3.         Repeat step #2 twenty times. 

4.         Repeat this process for all books of the Bible.

I have not tried Joe's method myself, but it stands to reason it would be beneficial if simply because it would help the reader be very comfortable with the content of the Bible. Moving through all sixty-six books of Scripture would take some time, but at the end, I imagine the reader would have developed a depth of familiarity that would serve well for the remainder of life.

A Call for Gracious Persistence

Photo Credit: Bible Reading by Cristeen Quezon. Used by CC License. http://ow.ly/CZMj307AJ0y

Whichever method you choose to increase your Bible intake is not nearly as important as simply reading the Bible more deeply. You will benefit more from reading a third of the Bible this year than in reading none. You will benefit from picking up after you have missed a few days and continuing on, even if it puts you “off schedule.” Falling short of your goal is no sin. Failing to take time to engage with God’s word can lead to sin, as you enter life's battle unarmed by the sword of the Spirit.

Therefore, don’t wait until the New Year to start a plan. If you decide to start in February, that is fine; there is nothing magical about the first of January.

If you miss a month, don’t sweat it. Just pick up where you left off and keep going.

If you don’t get it all, keep moving. Ask questions of your pastor or ministry leaders. Just keep moving.

Christmas - It's Going to Be Alright

It’s going to be alright.

That’s the message of Christmas.

It isn’t toys, tinsel, and turkey.

It’s going to be alright.

Whether it happened in December or not, God came down to earth and took on human flesh. He was born in poverty, worked with his hands, and lived a perfect life. He did this to repeal the curse laid on all creation due to Adam’s sin. He did this to reconcile all things to himself and restore all things on our behalf and for his own glory.

Used by CC License. Photo Credit: http://ow.ly/Docz307pVri

It’s going to be alright.

We take this celebration and make it about stuff. We ratchet up the anxiety by trying to make it perfect and make sure our house becomes paradise for our kids and our families for a day. We get together with people we rarely see and who we may not like. We make it about so much that isn’t the point.

It’s going to be alright.

God knew. He knew what Pontius Pilate would do to his son. He knew what would happen to Christians in Rome. He knew what we would do to one another, sometimes in his name. He knew what we would do even though we know it dishonors him. But he sent his son anyway.

It’s going to be alright.

Jesus knew that for a moment it would feel as if he were separated from the the Father and the Spirit. He knew that as the righteous wrath of God was poured out on him on our behalf that the earth would tremble and the sun would go dark. He knew that the world would stand on a knife’s edge of existence as he who knew no sin became sin so that we could become the righteousness of God.

It’s going to be alright.

Jesus knew that though he had paved the path for sinners to be redeemed, many would hear the gospel and ignore it. He knew that many would find the pearl of great price and yet not tell anyone about their joy. He knew that he was giving a mission to unworthy servants bound to fail him. He came. He died. He did it anyway.

It’s going to be alright.

He knew you. He knew me. Even in our mother’s wombs, he knit us together. It was for our sake that he was slain before the foundation of the world. He knew exactly what you need. His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness. He prepared good works in advance that we should walk in them.

It’s going to be alright.

He gave us this ministry of reconciliation. He gave us the gospel. He gave us testimony of his humanity. He lived a human life just like ours, tempted in every way we are but without sin. He gave us faith, hope, and love. He called us to be holy as he is holy.

It’s going to be alright.

It’s Christmas. It’s a day to celebrate the alrightness from God. It’s a day to rejoice in his goodness and mercy. It’s a day to celebrate the future hope we have in our redemption, the redemption that all creation eagerly longs for. It’s a day to celebrate the majesty of undeserved, unconditional, irresistible, hallelujah inspiring grace.

It’s going to be alright.

For the Cause - A Tribute to Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary

I started seminary in the fall of 2005. I’ve been a student at Southeastern since the Spring of 2007. I graduated with my PhD in December, 2016. It’s been a long road.

Despite that long road, however, I look back and am grateful for the opportunity to have studied at Southeastern. As a graduate of the United States Naval Academy, I know something about loyalty to an alma mater. (By the way: Beat Army!) Everything at USNA is geared toward imbuing the ethos of a professional naval officer. It’s in the facts that are memorized, the habits that are inculcated, and the courses that are studied.

I enjoyed (most of) my time at USNA, but was always somewhat surprised at the number of people that didn’t really believe in the mission. The thing is, you could be a good Company Officer or a good midshipman and not really believe in the mission. After all, people would say, it doesn’t really matter if your shoes are shined, it’s whether you can get the job done. There was often a subversive disbelief under the veneer of compliant excellence.

That contrasts distinctly with ethos of Southeastern. I have both worked there and been a student there. There are few shined shoes, but the school as a whole is one that has bought into its mission. That makes a huge difference.

Southeastern’s mission is pretty simple: “We seek to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by equipping students to serve the church and fulfill the Great Commission.”

I had that mission memorized long before we moved to Wake Forest because every chapel sermon includes an introduction with Danny Akin’s voice announcing it. No one can get away from it because it hangs on many of the light poles throughout the campus and adorns the syllabus of each course offered through the institution.

More significantly, Southeastern’s mission animates the institution.

The school is certainly not a perfect organization. However, even its failings tend to lead to it falling in roughly the right direction. Having a clear mission and broad buy-in for that mission keeps the institution on track and calls it back even when it strays.

In this case the mission is easy to get behind. It’s an institution of higher learning, but one distinctly organized around theological education. The students, staff, and faculty that are drawn to the institution are those who have a strong desire to do something (they may not know what) for the glory of Christ and in service of his church.

Recently, the institution adopted a new school hymn. That was good, because the previous one was a dirge that did little to inspire. Southeastern’s school hymn is now a song by the modern hymn-writers, Keith and Kristyn Getty, called “For the Cause.”

As I listened to the song the first time, and the hundred times after, I could not help but recognize that it reflects exactly the ethos of the institution. It’s not just a slogan, it’s actually the driving idea behind the institution.

At graduation rehearsal, Danny Akin addressed the prospective graduates. In his simple address, it became apparent that his mission is the same as Southeastern’s mission. That’s part of why everyone else’s mission tends to blend in with it and become just like it.

If I were to do a study on the impact that a unified mission and vision could have on an organizational structure, I might choose to use Southeastern as an example. It’s an institution of higher learning dedicated to a simple, but important ministry: equipping men and women for service for kingdom of Christ.

I’m thankful for Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. Being surrounded by such a cloud of witness as the students, staff, and faculty pulling in the same direction was a terrific experience. It shaped me in ways I probably do not understand.

Southeastern is a going seminary, so I have friends in places of service around the globe. They were all equipped by Southeastern. More importantly, however, they were shaped and focused by the culture at the institution.

We sang “For the Cause” at the conclusion of the ceremony on Friday. It was a powerful moment, standing in the front row of a crowded chapel, hearing hundreds of voices heartily singing out in unison:

Let it be my life’s refrain
To live is Christ, to die is gain.
Deny myself
Take up my cross and follow the Son.

I'm confident the students and faculty meant it deeply, too. That makes a huge difference. In fact, it’s what makes Southeastern as special place. I’m now employed at Oklahoma Baptist University, but I will always appreciate my time at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

A Fun Activity for your Family

Some extended family time is upon us. Once you’ve exhausted the possibilities for polite discussion, you may be wondering what you should do or talk about.

 In some families, this may be the time that the traditional family game of Twister is launched. However, for those of more sedate minds, other games may be in order. Some games are entertaining, some humorous, some dauntingly boring, and some just plain fun.

 I’m here to suggest a fun game that can fill your afternoon even if you didn’t plan ahead. In fact, all you need for this game is a timer (like the one on your cell phone), some paper, and writing utensils.

 This is a version of Madlibs, but without the prefabricated story.

Photo used by CC License. For credit: http://ow.ly/zcxK306twQu

 The gist of the game is that everyone will answer a series of questions by writing down a clause of a sentence. At the end, the resultant sentences will be read aloud. Typically much hilarity results, especially if you have an odd assortment of ages, interests, and personalities.

 You’ll want to set a timer for 15-30 seconds (otherwise someone will think too hard), announce one of the questions, have people write on their papers, then fold their answer back and pass the paper along.

 The game can be played with any number of players, however, I would recommend having five or more. We recently played with a group of college students, ourselves, and our kids.

 There are five questions that participants will need to write a clause in response to:

1.  Who did it?
2.  What did they do?
3. Where did they do it?
4. When did they do it?
5. Why did they do it? 

Since we just played this game, I’ll produce some of the results below: 

My stinky dad
Searched for the formula to turn iron into gold
At the North Pole
After mother said to
To get back home. 

[Two Participants]
Ate a stack of pancakes
On the moon
As the sun rose and the choir sang Old MacDonald in falsetto voices
Because she forgot bubble gum.

 16 yellow monkeys with names that start with ‘z’
watching TV
in Fred’s stomach
while Ronald Reagan was President
to win one million dollars. 

Everyone in this house
Stacked some coins
On Hoth
As the snow fell on a quiet July evening and the banjo music lilted on by
Because no unicorn had come 

Princess Leah
Landed terribly
In a ramshackle house on the edge of a cliff in Texas
In the 1600s
To feed mom carrots. 

George Washington
Flew upside down deliberately
In New York
On November 18, 2016
To be able to retire early and learn to play shuffleboard. 

 

Doctors in the Soviet Union
Got soaking wet in the rain
In Greece
In 1812
Because no one had ever asked her to the prom. 

Dr. Wierdo
Advertised on the internet
At McDonalds
Before dinner
To destroy the dark side forever. 

A co-op of ladies making and selling jewelry
Did the hokey-pokey
Down by the river side
In the second century of the new republic
Since her mother hadn’t ever seen her left toe uncovered.

Obviously, all of these are a load of nonsense, which is exactly why they were so much fun. If you are bored, or in need of some cooperative levity, I recommend playing this simple game.