After much speculation and many allegations, former presidential candidate John Edwards admitted to having an extra-marital affair with his campaign’s former videographer. In and of itself, this is sadly no longer newsworthy and hardly even worth discussing on a Christian blog. We have simply come to expect such things and are disappointed but not surprised when they are revealed.

Such events are often accompanied by the prerequisite theatrical contrition and Edwards’ incident was no different. He released a statement saying in part:

I made a serious error in judgment and conducted myself in a way that was disloyal to my family and to my core beliefs,” Edwards said in his statement. “I was and am ashamed of my conduct and choices, and I had hoped that it would never become public.

In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up — feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself,

If left here, this would be nothing special. But Edwards did not leave it there. Elsewhere, speaking of his denials (read: lies), Edwards said:

Although I was honest in every painful detail with my family, I did not tell the public. When a supermarket tabloid told a version of the story, I used the fact that the story contained many falsities to deny it. But being 99% honest is no longer enough.

When has being “99% honest” ever been enough? Since when is honesty ever been judged on the curve? You either tell the truth or you don’t. There is no in-between.I wonder if Edwards’ wife was satisfied with a “mostly honest” confession? Would you drink “mostly pure” water, knowing that there was “only a little” poison in it? Of course not, it’s all tainted!

Edwards’ comments reflect a troubling trend of the human heart: believing that part is a whole. Because Edwards saw that some of the facts in the Enquirer piece were wrong, he denied the whole thing, and probably, in his heart, believed himself. There a scene in an episode of Seinfeld in which Jerry is having to take a lie detector test over whether or not he watches Melrose Place. As he is preparing, he seeks advice from George, known for his lies. George tells Jerry: “Remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it.”

Our society has moved away from any sense of absolutes, especially when it comes to morality. Edwards convinced himself that his statements had more truth than falsehood and patted himself on the back. But God, of course, sees things differently. Through Paul to Timothy, God reminds us that it is for, among others, liars that the Law has been laid down (1 Timothy 1:8-11). Through John, God warns that liars will be among those burning in the lake of fire (Revelation 21:8). Proverbs 12:19 reminds us that: “Truthful lips endure forever,but a lying tongue is but for a moment.” Jesus, of course, describes Himself as The Truth (John 14:6).

How much falsehood is acceptable to you? How much is acceptable to God? If the Truth has set us free (John 8:32), then shouldn’t we be people striving, not to just find truth but tell truth? Edwards’ comments ought to remind us just what a mission field we truly live in. Missions is not just for the people who still worship physical idols, but also for those worshiping idols of the heart. The Gospel is not just for those who try to appease the spirits but for those trying to appease their consciences by clinging to just a little bit of truth. May the Truth really set us free.

• Read God in the Wasteland: The Reality of Truth in a World of Fading Dreams by David Wells
• Read The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World edited by John Piper and Justin Taylor

What’s better that dinner & a movie? Dinner and sharing the the Gospel, of course! This past Friday night, we met at our house for dinner and then several of us (including my oldest son Miles) went to a nearby mall to hand out tracts and share the Gospel.

I had the chance to have several good conversations. The common thread through each of these conversations was that nearly everyone believes themselves to be a good person. Ours is a culture with no sense of holiness or sinfulness. Without a glimpse of God’s holy perfection, why wouldn’t we see ourselves as “good” people? After all, we can always find someone “worse” than we are. With no proper measure, we become the standard. Nearly everyone admitted to lying but denied having ever stolen anything. “Yes, but you’ve already admitted to being a liar,” elicited a chuckle but no conviction.

Even after admitting to breaking many of the Ten Commandments and admitting that, if God were to judge them on the these same commandments they would go to hell, there was no sense of remorse, repentance or conviction. If anyone doubts that “relativism” has indeed permeated our young (none of the people I spoke with that night was over 20 years of age), go to your local mall and talk about right and wrong.

The second observation was just how open to discussing matters of religion these young people were. With the exception of a group of three girls who just turned their backs and walked away, everyone was receptive and willing to talk. Though I did find one smart aleck girl who claimed to be atheist but couldn’t even define atheism, everyone else was willing to talk. This is much different than even a few years ago, when people would try to talk about the disparity between religion and science.

The third observation was just how little young people actually know about Jesus. When asked who Jesus is, one girl responded: “He’s the one who was born in the cow thingy, right?” When I told her that Jesus is God, I received a blank stare you wouldn’t believe! Others couldn’t tell me the basics of why Jesus came to earth at all, that He was killed and more than one didn’t know that He rose from the dead!

My heart was broken afresh for our culture. I am convinced all the more that “missions” is not just “over there,” but begins at our doorsteps. When we send a missionary to a foreign country, we take great pains to understand to understand the culture, the customs and the way of thinking. In other words, we “enculturate” the Gospel. We do not modify its contents, but we take great pains to communicate it accurately and effectively to that particular culture. Should we not the same pains in our own neighborhoods?

Please pray that we will be faithful stewards of the Gospel entrusted to us in and about Christ in the culture to which He has called us.

• Read the article “What Is A Missional Church” by Scott Thomas for Acts 29
• Read Planting Missional Churches by Ed Stetzer
• Read Simple Church: Returning to God’s Process For Making Disciples by Thom S. Rainer and Eric Geiger
• Read Planting Growing Churches for the 21st Century by Aubrey Malphurs
• Read 44 Questions for Church Planters by Lyle E. Schaller

In light of yesterday’s post about personal preference in worship style, doctrine and choosing a church, Gunny posted this video the other day that I just couldn’t help but pass along. I have not been this appalled in a LONG time:

Planting churches forces us to consider some issues we might not otherwise dwell on. For example, how much of what we look for in a church is truly biblical and how much is just personal preference, and how much personal preference is acceptable? After all, every church isn’t for everyone, so isn’t it fine for us to just admit that, on some level, we make these choices based on preference?

If you’ve been involved in “church life” for any extended period of time, you surely know that people are not casual about their preferences. We’ve all heard the horror stories of churches splitting over the color of carpet. Some of you may have actually lived through that. Yet most of us are willing to overlook matters like the color of the carpet, but don’t you dare sing too many “contemporary” songs, or “traditional hymns,” depending on which side of the argument you come from.

One of the things that breaks my heart in this discussion is that, for a good many people, the more theologically informed we become, the more picky we become, when I’ve come to believe it should be exactly the opposite. For many people, the more theology they understand and become convicted of, and as they begin to formulate positions, many of those positions become boundary markers of what their idea of church should be when in reality, there are godly men and women on the other side of that theological conviction who just as strongly believe otherwise. In other words, many of our theological convictions are simply strongly held personal preferences, just (hopefully), with Scriptural backing.

And yet, shouldn’t it be the case that as we become more theologically secure in our own positions that we understand that, for most of them, it truly is believers that we disagree with? As we become convinced of certain positions, should be picture of The Church become bigger instead of smaller. Yes, there are doctrines worth excluding over. If you don’t believe in the Trinity, you are not a Christian. If you believe baptism saves you, etc. But let’s be honest, for most of us, these are not the kinds of issues we are leaving or joining churches over.

Don’t get me wrong. I love to study theology as much as the next guy, but I worry that we are all so convinced that we are right that, soon, everyone else is wrong. All of the sudden, I’m no longer free to worship with brothers and sisters with differing opinions because its my duty to show them the error of their theological ways. Many of our theological convictions, as important as they are (and we should all have them), become dividing walls rather than tapestry threads. What I mean is that we take many theological convictions which are not essential, either to the faith or the church, and we use them to exclude people who are most likely believers while we could be coming together over the essentials, weaving together these various positions. The result is that the church often resembles a maze more than it does a beautifully woven tapestry.

I’m not saying we should be B’hai or Unitarian and that every believe is fine and dandy and that they’re all equal or part of the same belief. But should our view of the end-times really be used to exclude others (please note, I view the “Dispensationalism vs. Covenantal” discussion as being about much more than just the end-times and even then I worry we divide more than necessary)? Can we really not worship if a song was written after a particular year? Am I naïve to think that we truly can have unity in what is essential, liberty in what is non-essential and in all things charity? When is being “picky” no longer just being theologically careful but prideful? If the Gospel is faithfully and accurately being preached, if there is biblical polity (church structure; i.e., elders, deacons) and practice (of the sacraments, membership, discipline, etc.), is music style really a deciding factor? I thought we were supposed to consider others better than ourselves (Philippians 2:3-4), not as potential converts for our preferences.

Just in case anyone starts to wonder who I’m writing about, I’m primarily targeting myself and the initial group at Church of the Cross. It’s only natural that a brand new church will take on some of the “preferences” of the planter and the initial members. And its also only natural that some people will visit, wanting to push their own preferences on to a new work. As a planter, I must prayerfully find that place of balance between standing firm for implementing the vision of this local church that God has given me and not pushing my own personal preferences too strongly. I must be comfortable, and even joyful when this new work takes on shades and hues that I had perhaps not initially intentioned, because, after all, it’s not my church but God’s. I am called to be a faithful under-shepherd to the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:1-4). After all, it’s Christ that I’ll have to answer to, especially for pursuing my own preferences. May I be found faithful.

• Read J.L. Dagg’s Manual of Church Order online
• Read Nine Marks of a Healthy Church by Mark Dever
• Read Brothers, We Are Not Professionals by John Piper
• Read The Church by Edmund Clowney

Though you might think he’s overstating his case a bit, Albert Hsu says in his book The Suburban Christian that: “The suburban life is a spiritual quest.” He goes on to clarify:

We’re all here looking for something. People live in suburbia for any number of reasons. We may have come here because of a job change for for a relationship. We come in search of affordable housing, good schools or safe communities.

Hsu argues that suburbia embodies the quest for an “ideal life” and that:

Whenever people describe suburbia, invariably they use phrases like ‘a good place to raise kids’ or ‘where people settle down and start a family.’ Inherent in these comments is an aspiration of hope for their future and a dream of a good life for their children. In other words, suburbia is the context and the settign for the fulfillment of people’s hopes and dreams.

The suburbs are the embodiment of much of the “American dream.” Single family homes surrounded by parks, schools and endless choices for consumerism (even if these choices are actually quite sterile because they are nothing more than chain stores and restaurants therefore nearly every suburb, no matter where you are, feels a bit the same).

The ideal accompaniment to suburban living seems to be the shopping mall. A collection of consumerism under one giant air-conditioned roof surrounded by fast food. So you can exercise walking around the mall, pick up the newest Tommy Hilfiger duds and wash it down with an Orange Julius, all within a comfortable driving distance from your McMansion. And yet, what, on the surface seems to be a myriad of choices is really not all that wide. After all, nearly every suburb and nearly every mall is populated by the same products. So the “dream” of the fulfilled life in the suburbs often amounts to little more than being made a clone in the consumer army.

The ideal accompaniment to the suburban shopping mall seems to be the (typical) megachurch. A collection of “family friendly” programs under one giant air-conditioned roof surrounded by fast-food preaching. Granted, I am painted with very b r o a d strokes here, but stereotypes often have at least a kernel of truth and many, if not most large churches are large because they tickle people’s ears while appealing to the inborn (or is that inbred) “American” consumer in each of us.

It is not far too common to find churches with their own bowling alleys, roller-skating rinks (it’s retro now, you know), soccer teams and program after program to attract people, all the while, giving them the illusion of choice and even fulfillment. But we all know from experience that consumerism is quite shallow. We thrive on the desire for the next big purchase (or program) and when we have it, we want the next one, and on it goes.

How then, does one effectively glorify God and create disciples of Jesus Christ in the suburbs? By their very nature, these areas which often pride themselves on being “family friendly,” create an overwhelming amount of isolation. There are no longer city centers, homes no longer have front porches, closed garages are now the most prominent feature of most homes, nestled nicely next to (closed) designer blinds. All the while, we have a myriad of choices, as long as it fits with the prescribed HOA guidelines and color schemes and we become slaves to our commute because our mortgage just went up. In other words, the dream of “fulfillment” is quite shallow. The dream of the suburban dream is a mirage.

I wonder how many suburban churches actually preach and live the liberating power of the Gospel?! Suburbs are indeed a mission-field. More Americans now live in suburbs than in urban and rural areas combined, but I wonder if it might also be said that American suburbs contain some of the largest and yet weakest churches anywhere in the world? How can this be? Because we have come to import and practice consumerism into every area of life and churches have been all too willing to capitulate.

What if a church bucked this trend? Not just to be contrarian but Gospel-saturated, Christ-glorifying? What if a church did not offer tennis courts but the Word preached and opportunities for discipleship and growth? What if people marinated in such an environment until they understood that the water cooler is the new version of the town well and God prepares divine appointments, even there? What if people saw their “work” as ministry and their possessions as tools?

Please join me in praying that Church of the Cross might have just such an impact. Please pray that we would have the wisdom and discernment, humility and boldness to preach the Gospel in the midst of a consumer-centered suburban environment.

• Read The Suburban Christian: Finding Spiritual Vitality In The Land of Plenty by Albert Hsu
• Read Death By Suburb: How To Keep The Suburbs From Killing Your Soul by Dave L. Goetz
• Read Simple Church: Returning to God’s Process for Making Disciples by Thom S. Rainer and Eric Geiger

As we continue to look towards the beginning of a new church, there’s a central concept that I keep returning to: make disciples. Of course this is not a new concept: this, of course, is at the heart of the “Great Commission” (Matthew 28:18-20). This is a thought that I’ve wrestled with many times over the years, especially since seminary.

It seems that many churches have adopted a business model when it comes to gauging success or failure in the church. What I mean is that, when attendance is up, we must be doing something right. If attendance is down, we must be doing something wrong. The question is not whether or not we are making disciples or how well we are making disciples.

Though there are certainly other factors, it seems that this business mindset has actually helped make much of the American church impotent. Our only question when it comes to the success or failure of churches seems to be how many people were there? And yet it shouldn’t take long to realize that this is at best an artificial question. In search of numbers we have pandered to the lowest common denominator, removed the offensive portions of Scripture, removed discipline from Body life, taught the Bible as a self-help book and develop myriads of programs to draw people.

Don’t get me wrong, “programs” are not necessarily bad in and of themselves. There’s nothing wrong with the concept, it’s just that it’s been so over- and misused that many of us “Reformed” type have had a knee-jerk reaction and avoided the word altogether. But let’s be honest, we still implement programs. But the problem (well, at least one of the problems), is that many of our “programs” not only don’t compliment one another, they compete.

We often hire “program” ministers with quite different philosophies of ministry. Thought these ministers may, at least on the surface, play for the same team, under the radar, there is often competition if not outright resentment. Or, churches have a bundle of programs, but there is no process. They react to felt needs, which may certainly be real and pressing, but the goal of making disciples is not at the center of what the church does, or what the programs are designed for. The result, oftentimes, is a church full of people who expect to have their needs met without being expected to grow and mature in the faith.

As we have begun to pray about Church of the Cross, we have not only developed a purpose, but, I pray, that purpose is also a process. In other words, we want people to know, not only what we’re about, but how we hope to get there. Our purpose statement is that

Church of the Cross exists to: Worship God • Strengthen Believers • Evangelize the Lost

If you’ll notice, this is also a sort of circular process. If we begin at the end, with evangelism, we are actively seeking opportunities to build relationships outside of the church, to serve our community, to share the Gospel, to see people come to Christ. As this happens, we seek to come alongside them through deeper, fellowship/accountability relationships. Believers become strengthened through these activities along with introductory and deeper studies of the Bible and its truths. The result is lives of full-blown worship (which, of course, results in obedience and service). Worship then propels us back into the world to share the Gospel (evangelize the lost). Our purpose statement is also our process.

Though it might be naïve of me, as I look at this end of a church plant, the more I’m becoming convinced that churches need to cut through the clutter and be willing to let go of programs that do not further a specific goal as a unified whole. This is certainly not an easy goal but I wonder if you think I’m off-base here?

• Read Simple Church by Eric Geiger and Thom S. Rainer

I was leaving the doctor’s office yesterday from getting my allergy shot when I saw a bumper sticker I initially couldn’t believe. In fact, I backed my car up TWICE to make sure I had read the sticker correctly. And it is a small parking lot and there was another car behind me trying to exit whom I sure was not pleased! What, you may be wondering, could have caused me such consternation? I’m glad you asked. The sticker read:

When Clinton Lied
Nobody died

Now, I’ll be honest and say that I hesitated writing about this at all because I really am not interested in whether or not you think George W. Bush lied and in posting this, someone is likely to make that a personal agenda. But I have been thinking this over and over and I do think it’s worth discussing. The point of the bumper sticker, it seems to me, is something like: “Well, yes, of course Bill Clinton lied, but it wasn’t as bad as when George W. Bush lied.” This just flabbergasts me (I’ve always wanted to use that word in a blog post. It’s fun to type. Try it.).

The not-so-subtle implication is that, not only is it acceptable that our politicians will lie, it is expected. The issue is not that we should expect our politicians to tell the truth, that’s out of the question. The issue is how much and what type of damage results from the lie. Apparently, gone are the days of expecting our public servants to display virtue and all of our “best” qualities. Now, pragmatism rules the day and truth is not even a consideration.

As one might expect, the Bible has some things to say about this kind of approach to public policy. For example, consider Proverbs 29:12: “If a ruler listens to falsehood, all his officials will be wicked.” But in our case, not only is the assumption that the ruler will listen to falsehood but will himself spew lies. I wonder how many people would be as comfortable with a bumper sticker reading, “Clinton was wicked, but not as wicked.” After all, isn’t this essentially what the other sticker was communicating?

Proverbs 13:5 reminds us that the “righteous hates falsehood.” Of course, this bumper sticker does not speak for an entire nation, but it’s astonishing just how much we take lying rather than truth-telling for granted. We tell “little white lies” not to hurt people’s feelings, we make up stories to get out of jury duty. The list could be endless. But God reminds us that liars have a special reservation in “the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death” (Revelation 21:8).

While it’s certainly easy to point the finger, Christians must first deal with our own sin (Matthew 7:3, etc.). Before we try to change our nation of liars into “truth tellers,” we’d better be sure we stay clear of falsehood first. How many lies do we tolerate and even commit without even thinking about it?

More than anything, that bumper sticker pained me because it was just one more reminder of how far from Truth we have gladly strayed. May it be Christians who follow the lamp unto our feet (Psalm 119:105) back into truth before we expect our politicians to do any differently.

• Read Respectable Sins: Confronting the Sins We Tolerate by Jerry Bridges
• Read Culture Shift: Engaging Current Issues With Timeless Truth by Al Mohler
• Read The Discipline of Spiritual Discernment by Tim Challies

There is a lot of talk these days about “buying responsibly.” We are expected to research whether our goods are produced in sweat shops, our coffee should be “fair trade,” we shouldn’t buy products with a large “carbon footprint,” and on and on and on. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m all for buying responsibly. I am a strong proponent of remembering that none of our decisions are isolated ones and purchasing (or not purchasing) can often be a political statement as much as anything else.

Christians have often flirted with some of these ideas, most notably in the form of (often failed) boycotts. There was the famous (or is that infamous) SBC Disney boycott that was quietly pulled. And don’t forget the chain e-mail, maybe you received it, saying that Proctor and Gamble was actually a satanic company and to not buy any of their goods. More recently though, we find many Christians sounding exactly like the rest of the culture when it comes to our purchasing decisions. Sometimes there will be a biblical nod, sometimes not.

But what pains me is just how little many Christians actually do think about their purchasing. Why should we care about sweat shops, the environment and fair trade? We as Christians should be the first to speak up on these issues and how our dollars (or whatever your currency might be) further or hinder God’s purposes for creation and humanity. But far too often, we simply follow. Far too rarely do we lead with any clarity, much less authority on these issues.

And if it’s true that we don’t often think deeply about how or where we spend our money “outside,” out there in the world, certainly its true within our own cultural borders (the fact that we have borders at all should be a bit of a problem, but that’s for another day) and should be taken all the more seriously.

I have written before (here) about how, for many Christians, the question of whether or not to purchase something (think particularly here music or books) is where it is purchased rather than the actual content. In other words, if it was purchased at a “Christian” store, it must be safe, right? Wrong. Walk into just about any “Christian” bookstore and you’re likely to be greeted by the warm, happy sappy smiling face of Joel Osteen or T.D. Jakes while being serenaded by Phillips Craig and Dean, all of whom are heretics.

I want to appeal to anyone who will read this: STOP PURCHASING AT “CHRISTIAN” STORES THAT DO NOT PRACTICE DOCTRINAL DISCERNMENT. Yes, all-caps and bold! When is the last time you thought that your dollars might be going to make it easier for the wolves? That is exactly what we’re doing when we fund these stores. We are boldly saying: Biblical fidelity does not matter to me, or, I don’t know any better. Neither is acceptable. There are at least a couple of things I want us to think through:

1) Buying at “Christian” stores decreases discernment: Instead of knowing their Bible and its teachings, many well-intentioned believers know their retailers. The question of discernment, for many, becomes a point-of-purchase decision rather than one of actual content and biblical fidelity. As long as we continue to promote the idea of “Christian” bookstores, far too many will continue to rely on retailers who are simply out to make money to determine what should be purchased. As much as this should not have to be said, “Christian” retailers are not always out for the best interest of your soul.

2) Buying at “Christian” stores continues isolationist trends: Christians in America have rarely achieved the “in the world but not of the world” balance we so often speak of. Recognizing this, many well-intentioned Christians have simply created their own subcultures, replacing all of the content of the outside world with sanitized, “family-friendly” versions. Funding “Christian” stores simply continues this trend. When you need a plumber, you don’t hire someone just because their a Christian, you hire the best plumber.

Though more could certainly be said, it pains me to think that we often think more about the plight of South American coffee farmers than we do the purity of the Gospel. We are often more concerned with anything other than the Gospel when it comes to purchasing decisions. We are willing to turn the microscope everywhere but inward.

• Read Following Christ in a Consumer Society: The Spirituality of Cultural Resistance by John Kavanaugh
• Read Christians in a Consumer Culture by John Benton
• Read Consuming Religion: Christian Faith and Practice In A Consumer Culture by Vincent J. Miller
• Read Consuming Faith: Integrating Who We Are and What We Buy by Tom Beaudoin