A Flood of Opinions About Noah

The movie Noah by Darren Aronofsky debuts today. There are a wide range of opinions among evangelicals. Eric Hovind of Creation Today offers up 7 reasons NOT to go see Noah. If you follow the logic of the first 6 reasons he gives then you will probably stop seeing movies all together. Living Waters which is a ministry I really like and support most of the time has a real dilemma. They have released their own Noah documentary. They clearly want to capitalize on the movie. So they have a conflict of interest because they want you to watch their movie (Which I would encourage you to take the time to watch). But they have taken a strong stance against Aronofsky's Noah as well. In their most recent post about it they cite Glenn Beck. Glenn Beck is a Mormon. That does not mean that he cannot speak truth but there are good solid Christians who hold a radically different view of this movie then Glenn Beck does.

Answers in Genesis has taken a don't go see it position but they have moderated that with information about how to talk to people who have gone to see it. I think that if you are not going to see it that this is a good position to hold. Perhaps go to their site and learn what you can about the movie so you are equipped to engage people in the culture. Another place to go if you want info to share with friends who have watched the movie is MovieBibleStudy.com they have a Bible study posted for Noah. Perhaps you could get some friends to go through it with you. If you really want to boycott the movie I think Movie Guides suggestion of Othercotting is a good idea. After all the reason Hollywood makes movies is to make money. What you spend your money on is what you are voting for. If the thought of Noah offends you go see God's Not Dead or Son of God. You actually have options this time around unless you are boycotting those as well.

Now all of that being said perhaps the other side of this issue should be considered. Grace Hill Media is a Christian Marketing company that has worked really hard to get Hollywood to open its eyes to the Christian Marketplace. Here is a link to an e-mail they sent me today. It is particularly interesting how many Christians have viewed the movie and endorse it as a worthwhile effort. There is an endorsement video link at the bottom of the e-mail. It is worth watching because you will actually hear from people involved in making the movie. They claimed that the Noah story arc is about judgment and grace.

Movie Guide which I almost always consult when it comes to movie content has 9 articles related to this movie. They point out in one of the articles that Paramount has listened to Christian criticism of the movie. They have added a disclaimer stating that some “artistic license” has been taken with regard to the story, but that the movie is “true to the essence, values, and integrity of a story that is a cornerstone of faith for millions of people worldwide.” The disclaimer also adds, “The biblical story of Noah can be found in the book of Genesis.” Here is a pagan company pointing people to the Bible. Of course Hollywood invest in projects like this in order to make money. Their goal is not to offend everyone. If movies based on the Bible do not make money they simply will not make them.

I am personally not sure that I will see this movie. So why write this article? It seems to me that often there is an unrealistic demand placed on the unsaved world to do Bible things or Christian things in a Christian way. Yet how many of you went to see either of the Thor movies or the Avengers which had Thor in it? Christians will go see Thor, which is a pagan god, but they won't go see Noah? It seems odd that we hold such double standards.

Aronofsky is a Jewish atheist. For some that is enough to not see Noah. But in 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 we see God moving in Cyrus the king of Persia. He was a pagan idol worshipping king. God used Cyrus to send the people of Israel back to the land to rebuild the temple. You could say that Cyrus ignited a new conversation with God and about God. I think that there are many people we come into contact with every day who would be interested in having a conversation about God. Noah could be an opportunity to have that conversation. If we turn our backs on a movie like this and only have negative things to say that conversation is never going to happen. Maybe Aronofsky is a type of Cyrus. He could be a man that God is using to open up opportunities for real and important conversations about Jesus our ark of salvation. Perhaps it would be better if we focused less on man and more on our God who moves men - even atheist men - to bring glory to His name in spite of their own plans.

Necessary Church Body Actions Show Pastors are Depending on the Wrong Things

An article on foxnews.com today caught my attention. It is titled, "Churches, other groups do more background checks". They are doing these checks with good reason. A number of pastors and church workers have a criminal history. This becomes especially egregious when the history includes sex abuse. A situation involving sexual indiscretions arose recently in a local denomination. This is the third scandal like this that has arisen in the last ten years. I find this situation to be a sad reflection on where the hearts of church leaders are. I wish that I could give congregations a clear signal that would help them to determine if the man they are evaluating has a heart set upon God. There are however some things that I think congregations can look at that could help them to have a better idea about the heart of the man God has placed before them.

• Try to determine without asking outright if the person being considered would do the work of ministry whether they are paid or not. In other words is this a calling on their life that they cannot escape.
• Look at the persons conversations. Are they naturally drawn to talk about their Lord Jesus. Is there a natural ease to their conversations about God.
• Do these conversations come from their heart or their head? Are they heartfelt or are they cerebral?
• Do you see evidence of discipleship reflected in his family? Is he leading his family toward God.

There are also some things that churches depend on that could give them a false sense of security. I would recommend John Pipers book, "Brothers, We Are Not Professionals: A Plea to Pastors for Radical Ministry". It will help churches to look for men who are living in dependence on God. But since pastors have often stopped depending on God then it is no surprise when the churches stop as well. When the church has moved from depending on prayer and the direction of the Holy Spirit to depending on professional pastoral placement agencies there is something wrong. Pastors are under shepherds. They are tasked with helping to point the people to God. To help them to grow in relationship with Jesus. Seminary training can only go so far in helping a man to accomplish this. Pastoral placement agencies can only look to external evidences. Ultimately it is a pastor's heart and their dependence or lack thereof upon the God that will make or break them (Psalm 127:1). Churches need to look for men who cannot do what they do without God (Psalm 20:7). Men that need him desperately. Men that don't trust in the flesh.

This is the single biggest reason that background checks are necessary. Pastors are not living in dependence upon God. They trust too much in their own ability. The flesh is weak and unfit for the task. We desperately need the Lord's help. If the church is to regain her vitality and strength (which can only come from God) then her under shepherds need to be needy. If we cannot show people that we need the Lord then how can the people ever learn how important it is to need Him. In a success oriented society like ours, the servant leader must learn that true success is when Christ increases and we decrease. If this were the focus of the hearts of pastors then background checks would become unnecessary because He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion (Philippians 1:6).

The Cohabitation Conundrum

Marriage is declining and cohabitation is on the rise. How has this come to be? A God focused perspective can point to only one thing. "There is no fear of God before their eyes."(Romans 3:18) It was God who created marriage. It was God who made it between one man and one woman for one's lifetime. It was God who in His law said we should not commit adultery. It was God who created this marriage union to symbolize His Son's relationship to His bride (the redeemed) (Ephesians 5:31-32). As the world drifts from believing in the God of the Bible they drift from what He has said and why its important. This does not mean that we just give up and go against God. What this means is that we must be more burdened for the lost people of this world than ever before. They glibly store up God's wrath against themselves with reckless abandon. They encourage one another in public by publishing articles like the one that sparked this blog (Going Cohab? 8 survival tips for staying together). Jonathan Edwards said once in a sermon, "When someone has suffered in the fires of God's wrath in hell for 10,000 years they will not be one day closer to the end than the day that they entered." This is a terrible fate. People are choosing it without a thought by simply following their hearts, which are in natural rebellion against God. Be heart broken for them. Pray for them. Seek to reach them with the gospel of Jesus Christ. Keep the fires of compassion for them alive by living with your eyes firmly fixed on Jesus. Never forget that Jesus can save them because we know He has saved us from the same fate.

Presumed Guilty

That very phrase rubs us the wrong way—especially since our legal system assumes that a person is “presumed innocent until proven guilty.” That assumption is appropriate in man’s court of law. No doubt most people you meet on the street wouldn’t happy with the assumption of guilt. After all, isn’t it wrong to “judge” another person? I would have to agree, and I take my cue from the apostle Paul who stated, “. . . it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself.” (I Corinthians 4:3) So there you have it: judging another human being is wrong. In fact, God is a God of love and sent Jesus to express His love to us. The most famous verse in all of the Bible confirms God’s love for the world and is followed by a verse with Jesus telling Nicodemus that he didn’t come to condemn the world. What a comforting thought. It just confirms how wrong so many Christians are for being so judgmental and almost makes me want to go watch a Joel Osteen sermon to be reminded again that I really am a special person and was created to live a victorious life.

But alas, there’s bad news in all of this—really bad. Jesus continued talking. The bad news surfaces when He explains why He didn’t come to condemn the world. It’s because—ready for this?—we’re already condemned. Uh oh. Now I’m offended. You see, I have the same problem every other human being has. I like making my own rules (e.g., I want to be my own god) and therefore, I’m not going to allow anyone else to “condemn” or “judge” me. After all, aren’t I a good person by nature? The last thing I need is to be sent on a guilt trip.

Herein lies the problem. Despite our determination to play by our own rules, we all have different rules. Don Richardson explains in his book, Peace Child, that the cannibalistic Sawi people of Irian Jaya esteemed deception to be virtuous. It goes without saying that our western economy wouldn’t work real well under that kind of system. Like it or not, someone has to be the final authority and make the rules, and according to God’s rules, we’re condemned if we don’t believe in the name of the only Son of God.

This notion of condemnation (or, as Charles Spurgeon explained, damnation is a more accurate term) doesn’t jive with the popular view of God as a loving God. Or does it? When you read the Bible, you come to find out just how great God’s love is for us, and the price He chose to pay to remove our condemnation was the condemnation of His own Son. Chris Tomlin correctly wrote,


I’m forgiven because you were forsaken
I’m accepted; you were condemned

As it turns out, the bad news that I’m condemned turns out to be good news if I believe in the Son of God, because God not only placed my condemnation on Him; He gives me His righteousness. “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (II Corinthians 5:21)

So, the next time someone tells you not to judge, simply agree with them. After all, they’re already condemned and don’t need you to pile it on. Just make sure to follow it up with the good news that they can stand justified from all condemnation if they play by the right rules.

Do you know legalism when you see it? (Part 1)

I have been accused of legalism often. Why? Because I seek to drive the speed limit. As far as I can tell there are three reasons that you could drive the speed limit.

1. You could drive the speed limit because you feel it is your duty as a Christian to do this. This would not make you any different then any other religion that places man made restraints on its followers. Obedience out of duty is ultimately cold and does not engage the heart.
2. You could drive the speed limit because you feel more spiritual if you do. In order to do this you are judging yourself as better than those that are passing you on the freeway. This would make you no better than the Pharisees of Jesus day. Are you more spiritual because you followed the speed limit? You might be but not if you think that you are. Because if you are doing it to be more spiritual you have just adopted legalistic righteousness as your guide.
3. You could drive the speed limit for the sake of bringing your heart into submission to the authority over you recognizing that Jesus is the ultimate authority. It is Jesus that has given the state its authority and as long as there is no conflict with my calling in scripture then I should submit to them. This only works if we recognize our fallen sinful state and are using this as a means of practicing bringing our flesh under the authority of Christ. In this case the action does not make us more spiritual. The action points out in practice the ultimate authority that we are seeking to know better, namely Jesus. This only remains free of legalism as long as I don't start judging others for not doing what I do. Why? Because this is clearly not stated explicitly in the Bible.

This is similar to Paul confronting Peter about refusing to eat with gentiles (Galatians 2:12-14). This was an issue of hypocrisy. Peter and Paul were wrestling with the issue of true Biblical righteousness and Peter was becoming legalistic. Making judgments based on his actions.

It seems in this case that legalism there and even now can be when we see ourselves as more pleasing to God because of something we do or don't do. Anytime our eyes are focused horizontally (i.e. man) instead of vertically (i.e. Jesus) we run the risk of becoming legalistic. I have an acquaintance out here that heard me speak on tithing and afterward confronted me about legalism. He said that there is no requirement to tithe. While I agree that there is no verbatim (and said as much in my talk) the bigger issue for me is that, if the people under the old covenant which had not seen the completed pouring out of God's grace could tithe then why would I who has witnessed the full impact of God's amazing grace not want to tithe (See my blog post on tithing from 8-9-10). This particular acquaintance has gone on to say that not only do we not need to tithe because of grace but that to tithe (even out of a joyful and grateful heart) is sin. He also told me that asking God to forgive our sins after our initial salvation is a lack of faith in God's completeness of forgiveness granted on the cross and thus to ask for forgiveness of sins is sin. So this acquaintance has separated himself from other believers like myself that simply want a vibrant relationship with God. We want it so much, that we take our sins before His throne and seek His forgiveness and help in eradicating them from our lives so that we might know Him better. This kind of demand where grace is used as a club to condemn the actions of fellow Christians is a form of legalism. In this case he sees himself as more right in God's eyes then me and so he condemns me and separates himself from me (and from a whole host of other Christians I might add). Can tithing become legalistic? Absolutely! Almost anything can. Helping the poor, wearing certain clothes, even evangelism can all become legalistic if the focus of our heart is not right. If we are doing it for appearance sake (i.e. being a man pleaser) then it is probably legalistic. There is only one person that we should care about ultimately pleasing and that is Jesus. The reason for doing things to please Him is simple. We do what we do for the sake of the love that He has placed in our hearts. It is the relationship with God that drives us to live a life that reflects a love for the things that He loves.

Islam, Grace and Southpark

Comedy central apparently aired an episode of Southpark in which they depicted the prophet Mohamed dressed up in a bear costume. I am not endorsing or recommending you see this episode or any episode. The issue here is that a group called revolution muslim opposed the episode. They were adamant that depictions of Mohammed not be shown. They posted on their website graphic pictures of the death of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who was murdered in 2004 by Muslim extremists for making a movie about Muslim women. The caption under the images read: “Have Matt Stone and Trey Parker Forgotten This?” The threat was seen as very real and comedy central censored the episode. What strikes me about this is the lake of grace that exists in the religion of Islam. While I am sure that Revolution Muslim does not represent all muslims, Islam is rigid and there are reasons that countries controlled by Muslim leadership are so repressive. The main thing that stands out to me is the appalling lack of grace. I have witnessed to Muslims in this country and it always strikes me how they are working to balance the scales. They talk about repenting and seeking to do good. Lets take a step back and think about the seriousness of sin and its offense to God. If I lied to my children I will not get in a great deal of trouble. If I lie to my wife I will certainly face consequences. If I lie to a police officer or a judge I could go to jail. If I lie to the federal government I could lose my life for treason. The difference in each of these situations is the stature of the person or entity I lied to affected the consequences of telling a lie. God is greater than any government and He is holy. How much of an offense is one lie to God? Could anyone ever do enough good to offset just one lie? The tragedy for my muslim neighbors is that they live under a religious experience that offers no grace and so they offer no grace. I count myself privileged that God called my in grace to Himself. He paid the penalty for my sin and made me His child. I repented and now seek to follow Him as my Lord. Repentance for me was recognizing that I have sinned against God and cannot hope to pay the penalty on my own. I called on God in my brokenness to save me and Jesus took my penalty and paid my price. I am counting on grace and this gives me the ability through the Holy Spirit to offer more grace to others. May God grant my Muslim neighbors the grace they need to meet Jesus repent and receive His grace so that they too can come to live God focused lives in Jesus my God.

Is there a reason to agree with Sam Harris? Why?

Today I will conclude my dealing with Sam Harris's talk on why we should ditch religion at the TEDs conference. I have addressed some of the issues raised by Sam Harris and qouted by John D. Sutter in an article on CNN.com called, "Philosopher: Why we should ditch religion." These comments in the article are recaps from his 20+ minute video presentation on the TED web site. (There is a link to it in the link above if you want to see it.) Sam's case is an emotionally charged one. He makes the statement that, "Religion has convinced us that there's something else entirely other than concerns about suffering. There's concerns about what God wants, there's concerns about what's going to happen in the afterlife." This statement is a legitimate statement if there is no God. But as I have talked about in earlier blogs Sam has not made His case that there is no God. Rather Sam has made the case for suffering and the insufficiency of religion using appeals to human dignity and man's knowledge as ultimate determinate factors without explaining the basis for either. Sam depends on God's image in man without acknowledging that dependence. However I would agree that the Christian church is often too caught up in trying to force unsaved pagan people to live a life that is moral by God's standards. The pagan man hates God (Romans 1:30). We are not called by Jesus to change the actions of people. Changing peoples actions makes us Pharisees (Matthew 9:11, 12:2). God said to Samuel in 1 Samuel 16:7 But the Lord said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.” Since we cannot change the heart of men our job is not to change pagan men and women but to introduce them to the one who can change their hearts. 
Sam also talked about how there is no reconciling Islam and Christianity and indeed he is correct. The problem is that Sam sees all religions as the same and here is the fatal error. Jesus made it clear in John 14:6 that He is the way the truth and the life and that no man comes to the Father except through Him. This then explains the problem with all religion outside of the Christian faith. It is the need of Jesus to be the central figure in the lives of those that would be reconciled to God that drives Christianity. We do not kill or force our belief on others because it is God that changes their hearts. What do we do? We kindly and compassionately share the gospel with those that God places in our lives. Our heart for them is to save them from God's wrath. If they reject that then they are rejecting God. At that point our focus should be to live God focused lives before them. The only way the society will be changed is if Jesus Christ first changes us.

Is Sam Harris religion better than others?

CNN has an article by John D. Sutter called, "Philosopher: Why we should ditch religion." In the article he draws comments from Sam Harris trying to make the case on why we should ditch religion. I will be examining some of the comments by Harris over the next couple of days. Tonight I want to look at the opening comment in the article. Sam Harris says, "For the world to tackle truly important problems, people have to stop looking to religion to guide their moral compasses." This is a fascinating statement. Essentially, Sam wants us to get rid of the only foundation for morality that man can reference that is unwavering. And he wants us to ditch this moral compass for what??? Sam Harris is one of the outspoken athiest of our day. So we know that his ditching of spiritual forms of religion is to be replaced by a dependence on science and evolutionary thought. It fascinates me because I grew up being taught that the goal of good science is that it is testable, observable and repeatable. Most scientist would call this a good definition of science. Evolution one of the main things Sam wants us to rely on by this definition is a total failure. The macro evolution that Sam is talking about happens over millions of years. It is not observable. We take our best guess based on what we see. Now your preconceived notion will have a great deal of influence on how you interpret the data you discover. This is where Sam and many other scientist begin to rely on faith in their opinions about the data. But macro evolution fails the testable part of good science as well. Once again we look at the data and based on what our notion is about the outcome we come up with what must have happened. For committed evolutionist like Sam it is a forgone conclusion what the data must mean. Finally evolution fails on the repeatable side as well. But that really does not matter to the evolutionist because it all adds up based on what their assumptions are about the data we find. So you see what Sam has is a lot of faith in man's ability to peer into the past with absolute accuracy and determine that there is no God. Sam's faith ultimately is not in hard empirical data. His faith is in man's understanding of the data. Very highly educated Christian scientist looking at the same data will come away affirming that the data points to God and disproves evolution. Once again the person's predicate notions influence the way they see the data. What strikes me here about the statement is that Sam wants to replace the Christian religion with a religion that roots its faith in man. Romans 1:20-23 tells us how men who reject God even though they perceive the invisible things of God, like morality, become futile in their thinking and their foolish hearts are darkened. Where will morality come from without Christian religion? Who will be the arbiter of what is right and wrong? Will there even be such a thing as right and wrong in a world like that? The answer is yes there will be right and wrong. The right and wrong will be determined by God's law which is written on the hearts of men. Sam Harris will borrow the capital of morality from the Christian religion and use it with impunity while at the same time decrying that religion. Sam there is no moral compass for anyone without a righteous and Holy God to whom we can look for that direction. Sam can have his religion of man, I will continue to pursue a God focused life.

Happiness: SELF focused vs. God focused - Part 4

This is a continuation of a post I started 4 days ago. The other day Lucy Danziger published an article called, "4 Simple Secrets to Feeling Happier Every Day." Lucy is the Editor-in-Chief of SELF magazine. This is the final point she made about happiness from a secular perspective. It is titled, "Conflict can be OK!" WOW! She deals with conflict management in a very simplistic manner in 3 very short paragraphs. There are many passages in the Bible that treat this subject in detail. A brief list would include Matthew 18:15-17, Luke 17:3-4, 1 Corinthians 6:1-8, 1 Corinthians 9:19-21. These passages cover a variety of different situations. They deal with everything from confronting a brother to forgiveness and not being able to forgive and seeking to identify with others. The scriptural perspective on conflict and managing it is dramatically different from Lucy's point of view. Lucy's conclusion is that, "Connecting, especially with friends is important to your happiness." The Holy Spirit declares to us through the word that conflict management is not about us but is for the glory of the kingdom of God. 
Let's take for example a brother or sister in our fellowship who is in sin. If we ignore the sin or gloss over it in order to be reconciled we are embracing a worldly answer. Do we condemn them? Not readily and not immediately. Our goal is their reconciliation to God. First we go to them privately and express concern as a fellow believer. We need to make sure they understand that we are coming because we too are sinners and have experienced things that separate us from God (Matthew 7:3-5). It should be our earnest desire to help them understand that what they are doing is building a wall of sin between us that we cannot overlook because we care about their relationship with God. Matthew 18 above gives additional steps to follow but the point is that conflict resolution is focused on bringing them back into fellowship and relationship with God. In the Christians case this will not always be comfortable. Sometimes we will have to forgive people that we do not feel like forgiving. We may have to separate from someone that we really like for the sake of helping them to understand the seriousness of sin. We have to remember that it is vital to stay open to embracing them and bringing them back into fellowship should they desire that. But at the end of the day the most important thing for anyone is that there is nothing standing between them and God. Remember if someone hangs onto a sin when confronted then that sin is potentially a god to them. If it is something they are holding onto and yet claiming to be a Christian then we must for their sake show them that sin separates. That is the point of separating from an unrepentant brother or sister. We are pointing out to them that if they persist in this that they may indeed be separating themselves from God. Some would say that this is judgmentalism. Unfortunately people who say this fail to understand that if this is done correctly and in love that we may truly be winning someone to true repentance. If we succeed in bringing them back into fellowship we would have literally saved them from hell with the working of the Holy Spirit bringing them to repentance. What do I want to do? Shall I accept someone, have personal peace now and watch them slip into a Christless eternity? Certainly not! We must risk all for surpassing greatness of knowing and having others know Jesus Christ our Lord.