Knowing that I run the risk of a good ridicule by my equally good buddy Nate, this has been one heck of a day and a half (I can just here Nate saying, “Whaaa!  Cry!).

The good news is that’s it’s almost over.  I was affirmed by the ordination council yesterday after a few hours of grilling.  PABC will now have to vote on ordaining me.  The ordination will take place on the 26^th instead of the 19^th of August. 

Also, I finished my big paper today.  It probably wouldn’t have been a big deal if I didn’t try to over due it with 9 hours of summer school this semester.  Never the less, 16 pages of pure unadulterated pages of brilliance have flown from my fingertips and on to my lap top.  As we speak, it is now in cyberspace heading towards the professor.  I await the verdict.     

This next week’s sermon is on hell.  This time we are going to answer the question, “what about those who haven’t heard of Jesus?”  I plan to post three apologias on this site this week. 

Welp, my wife and I celebrate 19 years tonight…so…see ya!   

It is argued by many that all religions lead to the same god.  The philosophical argument is described by analogy.  The analogy is this: there are four blind men who discover an elephant. Since the men have never encountered an elephant, they grope about, seeking to understand and describe this new phenomenon. One grasps the trunk and concludes it is a snake. Another explores one of the elephant's legs and describes it as a tree. A third finds the elephant's tail and announces that it is a rope. And the fourth blind man, after discovering the elephant's side, concludes that it is, after all, a wall.

Each in his blindness is describing the same thing: an elephant. Yet each describes the same thing in a radically different way.

Islam is describing god as they see it.  Christians are describing the god as they see it.  Mormons are seeing the god as they see it.  If you were to argue with them that it’s the same god, they will never agree (using this analogy, I cant even point out the contradictions found in the different religions, so my major argument is mute). 

The philosophical argument is a good one and, if true, could break down all this hostility towards one another.  If we just accept that each one has a piece of god…then we can all just get along.  As we will see though, this is not a god that one would want nor need to follow.    

All analogies break down at some point or another.  The problem with the analogy is that the blind men, though they cant see, are smarter then the elephant.  They can communicate their ideas to one another, but they can’t communicate with the elephant and the elephant can’t communicate with the blind dudes.  If we were to make the elephant smarter then the blind men, we could assume that the elephant could tell them that one is grabbing its tail and the other is grabbing its trunk.  They could then know the truth.  The elephant in the analogy is an unknowable and impersonal god (not even worth knowing).    

But the analogy breaks down even further.  Let’s assume that the analogy was true and many religions were grasping to know this god.  It stands to reason that at least one religion might have sight and, therefore, could see that the other religions are only grasping at pieces of god (this is the exact claim of the analogy:  After all, the philosopher claims to see the whole god (elephant) where the blind dudes cant.  From their vantage point this god is an impersonal stupid god that cant explain itself, and, therefore, its not even worth knowing).  So, let’s assume that at least one religion has site.  Maybe take this one further and assume that this religion (or this person) is in communication with a personal God.  Then they would be in the best position to inform all others.  I just argue that Jesus was the best person to know God.   

Why does stating that one must do a necessary work in addition to faith in Jesus Christ do the opposite of what the perverters of the gospel claim it will do?  Let’s try to have a general understanding of what they (false teachers) are claiming.

Generally speaking, those that preach works + faith choose focus on a generally good deed, practice, or commandment.  For example, you must worship on a particular day of the week or you must be baptized or you must know God’s first name or you must eat the Lord’s Supper.  These items/practices/commandments are generally found in the scriptures and, yes, one should be about them.  But false teachers will state that these good things are a requirement for salvation. 

The claim looks something like this:  Faith in Jesus + a good work (one normally promoted in the N.T.) = Salvation.

Now if one understands “faith in Jesus” to be “belief in Jesus” then there is no problem with their logic:  Belief in Jesus (a work in itself) + another good work = salvation.  Of course the scriptures don’t state that faith is the equivalent of belief.  Nor is belief in Jesus sufficient to save a person (“the demons believe in God and they shudder”).  A faith in Jesus that leads to salvation is more like saying I trust that what God did to save me (Sacrificing His Son) is sufficient in itself to save me.

The equation should look something like this: 

Jesus’ righteous act + my trust in that act = Salvation.  If I dont trust in that act, I must then trust in my own acts to save me.  This is theological (Christian theolgy, that is) impossible (for the law saves no one).  

Now, if I add a good deed that I must do to the salvation equation…whatever that deed is…I change the equation:

Jesus’ righteous act + my own work = salvation.  I can’t say that my faith in what Christ did was sufficient to save me…can I?  No, because I have to add to His act.  That is, I can’t say that I trust His act will save me…can I?  No, because there is something I must do in addition to what He did. 

A huge question is raised:  If God’s payment wasn’t enough to save me….what makes one think their additional finite work could possible save them.  In other words if the infinite does not equal salvation, what makes one think that the infinite + the finite will = salvation.  It doesn’t follow logically.  For if infinite (does not)= Salvation, then infinitie + finite will not = salvation (after all, infinite + finite (always) = infinite.   

So here’s the next logically step for a false teacher:  knock Christ off of His throne (i.e de-deify Him).  Make him an angel (J.W), a spiritual brother (Mormon), a prophet (Muslim {though Muslims believe He didn’t die})…and so on.  Now one is preaching another Jesus.  And as Christ said:  "if you dont say that I AM you will indeed die in your sins."   

I’ve always been an aggressive apologist in regards to atheism, secularism, false religions (Islam), and these pop-up cults (Jehovah Witnesses and Mormons) that demand a person to work their way into heaven (or their version of heaven).  There are very few Baptists that I know that are as aggressive as I am in regards to defending the faith.  I must admit though, I have never set my internal trigger to go off when I hear someone proclaim, “I’m a Catholic.”  Be it laziness, false hope, or what have you, I’ve always hoped that the Catholic masses were part of the “saved” group (even though those that teach within the Catholic Church are, by Biblical definition, false teachers).  With the Pope’s latest reassertion that they are the only way (last I checked Jesus was the only way), the church’s continuing teachings of good works as a means to salvation, communicating with the dead, idolatry, and, if you couple that with the availability of the scriptures today…those who profess Catholic status cant say that they are just being led astray (though it is a rarity to ever meet a Catholic who is well versed in the Scriptures), but choosing their own path.    

I don’t believe that this is just a religious game that we are playing until we die.  We are talking about the salvation of lives.  So, as it stands to reason, those that stand with the papacy are preaching another gospel and they, according to Galatians 1: 6—10, got some “splaining” to do to our God.  Those that listen to the papacy and believe what the papacy says are naively going down the wide road when they do have access to the correct, but smaller, path.  (I feel as if I must now write to why adding any works to what Jesus has done makes adding to it a false religion…maybe later this week)

Now it’s easy to just point fingers and claim that we have access to the truth (notice I say “we have access” to the truth not “we are the truth”), it’s another to back it up.  As far as my walk goes, I have now set my internal trigger to include Catholics.  As with all the other false ways, I will approach them with one main goal:  To lead them away from the wrong path and set them in the right direction.     

I must apologize for not staying current with my blog.  This last spring and summer semester was just a killer.  The good news is that I’ve really killed some hours.  Add that to a relatively easy upcoming fall semester…I should pick up my bachelors this December. 

I suppose the good news is that I should have time to keep up with my blog (currently I’m lagging considerably behind in comparisons to my good friend J).

Just to give you a little update:  I will be standing in front of the ordination council this coming up Sunday.  Ordination council is set up for the 19^th of August.  We (the church) have just started a new sermon series.  Get to my web site and check it out.  It’s entitled, “Questions about Christianity.”      

“The Retrial of Jesus Christ” was a major success for FBFC!  I will download the photos in the next day or so.  This congregation should be very proud of the work that they did for our God.  We took Psalms 51 and presented the gospel in a very unique way.  Lives were truly touched!    

Missions project:  We will now change focus and begin our missions project.  We should break ground on the garden in the next couple of weeks.  Again, everything that we grow will be handed over to the local food pantry.

I got a little reminder of what resource is the most tapped and needed:  time.

In my adult development and aging psychology class, I have to read a (huge) chapter each week, answer four questions (which require a rereading and searching for other material), and then post an answer to a weekly question by midnight (every Wednesday).  Not paying a lick of attention to the calendar, I missed the fact that our extra-credit assignment was due this week (I decided I didn’t have time or the need to do this one) and not the reading and questions for chapter 10.  I did read the chapter, but realized that the questions weren’t due for a week.  

This was better then finding a fifty dollar bill in one of my coat pockets that had been forgotten!  To get 5 extra hours to concentrate on the next deadline…Wow!  

You can find these “leaders” in every organization (including our churches): men/women that enjoy the title that they are given; first to bask in any success (even the successes of those they lead); never one to take responsibility for any failures (this is where they start remembering those that grudgingly follow); and even fail to rise up new leaders.  They lead out of trepidation…that is, they force a person to move out of fear of personal loss; be it loss of friendship, job, money, security, or advancement. 

By the way, if you got one of these leaders in front of you and you do desire to lead, you might want to know that advancement may be out of the question (that is, if they have all the say).  The last thing an insecure leader wants is to share “power.”  Out of stupidity or job security they believe that their success means everybody must remain powerless.  I believe it was Maxwell’s 13^th leadership trait that says good leaders duplicate themselves.  Bad leaders choke possible contenders.

Ask yourself this question:  Is your desire to lead based on a deep need to be personally recognized.  If so, I wouldn’t serve with you even at gun point.  Your motivation is based on your own egotism and you are destined for failure.  Now, if you have a deep desire to see the mission accomplished at all costs…then, even if you don’t claim to be a leader, I would follow or lead with you (that is, if your mission and my mission are compatible).     

            Trees are budding.  Grass is changing back to its brilliant green color.  Flowers are popping up.  Smoke can no longer be seen pouring out of the chimneys.  Doors and windows are now being opened to let the fresh spring air come in and cleanse the putrid artificial atmosphere that has collected within our homes over this long winter.  Are you not excited?

            There is also a lot of fresh activity happening at the church!  By the time you receive this letter, First Baptist will have already ministered at the annual Farmer City’s Easter Egg festival.  We are diligently preparing for the Good Friday services.  On top of all this, we are measuring out the land that we are going to use to grow fruit and vegetables that we can give away to the needy.  Ministry in action!  Are you not excited?

            In both the change of season and the growth in ministry, we see one common denominator:  God.  It is God that makes the grass grow green, the trees come alive, and the warm spring air pump into our lands.  It is also God that makes our church grow in depth and in width.  The apostle Paul writes in regards to the Church, “God makes it grow.”  (1^st Corinthians 3: 6b)

The one true difference between the change in season and the growth of the church…is you.  See, with or without us, spring would come.  However, without our work in the church, God won’t let it grow.  Growth comes from our faith in Him!  Paul also writes in that 1^st Corinthians 3 passage: “The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor.  For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.” (6: 8—9)

Though God could choose to make the church blossom without us as he chooses to do so in nature…He doesn’t.  He chooses to involve us in His outreach to His people.  Our faithful actions contribute to His will, plan, and design.  I must ask you:  Are you not excited?

God Bless!

Pastor Mike

Easter Egg Hunt:

  First Baptist will set up a booth at this year’s Easter Egg hunt event (March 31).  We will be giving away eggs, necklaces, and a gift certificate to Toys R Us.  We will also be promoting our Good Friday Services.

Good Friday Services

  The Retrial of Jesus Christ

Join us for the Retrial of Jesus on April 6^th, 7 pm.  A dramatic presentation that guarantees to pull you in like no other….In the end, we assure you, even those that love Him will shout:     CRUCIFY HIM!!!

Missions Project:

We will be beginning one of several missions projects within the next few weeks and we need your help.  We have committed to planting a huge garden.  All produce will be donated to the local food pantry.

  Block Party

As planned, First Baptist will have a block party like no other.  First or second week of June is our tentative date.  Contact Pastor Mike to see how you can help.

Is the abundant life that Christ spoke about in John 10 really possible?  The immediate answer, knowing who Christ is, is yes!  He wouldn’t of said it if He didn’t mean it!  Fair enough.  So let me ask you, are you living your life to the fullest?  Are you claiming this promise for your life? 

Would your friends say that you are living your life to the fullest?  Would an acquaintance claim that you are “freakishly happy” regardless of life’s circumstances?  Examine all the evidence; take a good look.  After all, you don’t want to miss out on this!    

Jesus said, “I have come that they (you) may have life, and have it to the full.” 

Brothers and sisters, we are a dependant creature.  We need food, water, air, and we need each other.  But more then all of this, we need our God.  That big hole in the middle of our souls that the great philosophers speak about, that Solomon lamented about in Ecclesiastes (3:11), can be filled by our Lord Jesus Christ!

Don’t have that full life?  Go to Him!  Stay with Him!  Abide in Him! 

In Christ,

Pastor Mike

Estabrook's comments link:  http://www.news-gazette.com/news/opinions/letters/2007/03/05/obamas_war_stance_a_cynical_pretense

As I watch our wonderful fighting men and women kill terrorist who had just attempted to shoot down another Blackhawk in Iraq and the word is coming down that a major offensive is occurring in Afghanistan, I am simultaneously reading C.G. Estabrook’s March 5^th letter to the editor attacking the character of this country for the way they have “misrepresented” the Middle East, 9/11, and the war in Iraq.  The dichotomy is shocking to say the least. 

On one hand, I am watching brave Americans risk their very lives to protect this country, watching this great country do what they have to do to protect us from further destruction on our home front; on the other, I am reading the ravings of a lunatic.    

It’s one thing to fight for a new direction, it’s quite another to accuse this country of being worse then the terrorist and equivalent with the Nazis.  Her conclusion that this country must retreat from Iraq and Afghanistan, pay reparations, and hand over our leaders to be prosecuted as war criminals was just as appalling.  I do think we should adopt these demands though.  For us to leave, the Islamic fundamentalist must retreat from the Middle East, pay reparations, and hand over their leaders. 

Estabrook, this is not Vietnam.  I don’t know if you’re reliving the glory days of the 60’s or just some crazed fanatic, but understand this:  If we don’t have victory over there; we will never know peace here. 

Jesus’ Tomb critique

I have to admit, it was a pretty good show:  One of the best examples of a slight of hand that I have seen in a long time.  Had it been a Pro-Jesus production, one “proving” the resurrection, I believe it would have been rejected on its merits…and the director would have been accused of using faulty premises to come up with their predetermined conclusion.

The film-maker does start out by using the Bible as his source (I do find the scriptures reliable).  Interesting that they would even use this in the first place.  Let’s face it, if what they say was true (i.e. Jesus did not rise from the dead; he was married; had a kid, ect.), the Bible has to be based on lies and must be discounted as an unreliable source.  Using it destroys their credibility.  Let me illustrate:  if I know that my calculator is broken; but because its calculations support my a-priori conclusion and I decide to use it anyway, my argument is weakened.

The names on the ossuaries that match biblical records were Jesus, son of Joseph, Mary, and Jofa (Joseph, Jesus' brother).  We hear those names and our mouths drop…after all, we know them all to be in one family.  Keep in mind that those who first found these boxes, almost thirty years ago, didn’t set up a press conference.  The names were very common during the first century in Palestine and, though an interesting find, there was no need to stop the presses. 

But there were also other ossuaries in the tomb.  A box with Matthew on it.  This is where we begin the red herring trick and we start on a new path.  Matthew, of course, is found in the Bible; but he wasn’t a family member, he was a disciple and shouldn’t be found in a family tomb.  The film-maker shows how there were many Matthews in Mary’s line that had this (very common) name, so it fits, according to their line of argument.  I believe it raises many questions myself:  Why was some great, great, great grandfather (or some uncle) here and not her other sons?  Where is Joseph (the father)?  Where are Jesus’ sisters?  In the end, we have the first ossuary that is not directly tied to a family in which we (believe we) know all of the names.  The film-director finds a way to justify this box…but he’s fishing for evidence to support his argument now.

Then he makes his big move:  There is another box that doesn’t fit the gospel records.  This next box supposedly belongs to Mary (Magdalene).  Wait a minute…She’s in the gospels.  Yes, but not this spelling.  The name doesn’t match…period.  What does the film-maker do?  He now goes to a 4^th century document to make the connection and shows how the spelling on the ossuary matches this other document.  Talk about fishing!  The gospel of Philip is a 4^th century fairytale!  It’s a good filler to make Mr. Brown’s book “The Da Vinci Code” more shocking…but it’s a fairytale.  

Why is Mary Magdalene in the family tomb?  Well it’s Jesus’ wife.  Don’t remember reading that in the gospel.  Hold up…there is another box…a child’s ossuary.  Jesus and Mary’s son no doubt…as the film-maker asserts.  Guys, ladies, the film-maker is taking these two other ossuaries that have no known connection what-so-ever to the Jesus of the gospels and appeals to modern day folklore and uses a rejected work of fiction to support his argument…like I said, if a Christian would have done this to support the resurrection, they would have been rejected. 

Furthermore, because the DNA of the “Magdalene” ossuary doesn’t match the bones in Jesus’ ossuary…it must be his wife and the child must be Jesus’ son.  Come on.  These remains could be related, by marriage, to any of the other remains in the tomb.  But that wouldn’t match Brown’s assertion.

I will leave the connection to the James’ ossuary alone for the moment…after all, the James’ ossuary is believed to be a fraud and the connection they (film-makers) made was directly challenged afterwards. 

Please submit any comments directly to me at fbcpastor@mchsi.com   

            On an infomercial for the Discovery Channel’s upcoming documentary, “The lost Jesus tomb,” an interesting question was posed:  “Would the discovery of Jesus’ remains destroy Christianity?”  The honest answer is yes…it would.  Oh, there would be your die hard flat-earthers who deny anything remotely “scientific” that will continue on with their faith; but other then that, the true discovery of Jesus’ bones would shut the doors of millions of churches across the planet and John Lennon’s dream of “a world that would be as one” would be one step closer (Of course, a dead Jesus doesn’t destroy the Muslim faith, so some religion stays…sorry John).

            Even the Apostle Paul concedes that a Jesus that stayed dead makes the Christian faith nothing more then a meaningless philosophy and even a sad state of affairs for those who call themselves Christian.  He wrote, “…if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.  More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead….if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.” (1 Corinthians 15: 14—17)         

            That he and the other apostles would be “found to be false witnesses…” is an understatement to say the least if Jesus was dead:  He would be an out and out liar writing to a very naïve audience.  We know that Paul wrote this letter some time around 60 A.D; that is, probably less then thirty years after Christ had been crucified and raised from the dead!  Why would the early church even save this letter?  If Jesus had not been raised from the dead, but lived a regular life, taught some cool things, had some kids (according to the supposed burial find), and died…why would the early church have kept this record?  After all, they would have known. 

Paul and the other disciples would be the worst kind of liars indeed.  For all but one went to the grave, by force (Paul had his head cut off; Peter crucified upside down), claiming that Jesus was crucified and rose from the dead.  The believers during the reign of Nero (forty years after the cross) would have been some of the saddest people to ever live.  Believing a man that owned a family grave, buried with his kids, was a living God.  The church itself, even most die hard atheistic historians would agree, came into existence and flourished because of this belief…all during the time that many would have known it to be false…if Christ had a grave.

No sir.  Jesus’ grave doesn’t exist.  The historical evidence is already available and from 2000 years ago to today…there is no grave.  The church is your proof.  To the Christians, your relationship with Him is more then proof.  The claims of this document are not new…remember the first lie post resurrection:  Christ’s body was what?  Stolen by the disciples?  Without even seeing the document…I’m positive…my faith in Him stands on solid ground.              

January and February are finished and I couldn’t be happier.  They are such a down time for me.  Out of pure exhaustion from the previous year’s leg of the run, I take January “off.”  It’s more like checking out mentally then actually getting those few weeks off.  I go through the motions…but my heart isn’t in it. 

From the gray expression on the majority’s faces, it looks like I’m not the only one.  That’s o.k. though.  When it comes to the congregation here at First Baptist, it’s o.k. to take a break.  They deserve some time off.  We ran hard last year!      

As cabin fever reaches its peak, for me, February is a time of planning and regrouping.  I ask myself a few questions:  “How am I going to run my race this year” and, “What does God want to accomplish through me?”  I write down my thoughts.  Pray.  Put on my running shorts.  Do a few stretching exercises….and when the calendar strikes March 1^st:  Bam.  Its time to rock.

I pray for the congregation that God has led me to pastor.  I pray that He gives them strength and endurance….because if they think last year’s run was hard...oh, what’s the song?  “You aint seen nothing yet.”  I believe that He is going to push us to the point that we literally dry heave—now that’s the way to run!    

May we endure and may God be glorified.    

I took a class on death last semester and there were an unbelievable amount of people who were in favor of people committing suicide….Now, it wasn’t that they thought it was a good idea to go back to the days of Socrates, when the social norm was for the unproductive elderly to just walk away and die; but they were in favor of “assisted suicide” or “euthanasia.”

I remember thinking at the time, “what a strange thing to be promoting.”  In our debates, I uncovered that, for the most part, no one wanted to define when a person’s life was no longer valuable (much to dangerous to define a life that’s worthy to live, thank you very much Mr. Hitler), but, as they argued, we shouldn’t force a person to live a life that was without hope, full of pain, and of little value. 

Taking the atheistic perspective that humans are animals, I would have to agree.  “You wouldn’t let a dog suffer, now would you?” they (my fellow students) would shout.  Of course I wouldn’t let a dog wriggle in pain and if that’s all we are, I’m all for letting the hurting and hopeless die.  For that matter, I would have to support taking out the lame and worthless (worthless from an evolutionary standpoint of course).   

That doesn’t even sound right—does it?  Why?  Because of our altruistic nature?  Come on!  It would benefit humanity to remove certain humans from the gene pool.  Again, speaking in evolutionary terms, natural selection has served our ancestors well by being the amoral selective agent that has moved us from the swamp to the cave to the three story, two bath, town house.  Ironically, the “amoral” selective agent has created (sorry, gotta use the term) a creature that is moral.   

When you add our moral inner core with our rather large brains, you now have a creature that becomes natural selections worst enemy.  If there was ever a creature that could direct their evolutionary paths…it’s us!  But morals can’t make the necessary and hard decisions needed for our very own future survival.  Altruistically speaking, we must be willing to prevent some reproduction from occurring…or even euthanize those whose life is of no evolutionary value.  

But that doesn’t sound right!  It doesn’t sound right because our inner being, the moral agent is screaming that this is wrong:  We can’t just go around destroying life.  A question arises then, how is it even possible that we could have developed a moral core????  It seems illogical that an amoral selective agent could have even produced a moral byproduct that is bent on the self-destructing behavior of perverting its own gene pool.  This, my friends, we will have to continue another day….