Posted: 3/21/06

BaptistWay Bible Series for April 2

Every choice carries its own consequence

• 1 Samuel 12

By Joseph Matos

Dallas Baptist University, Dallas

How “narrative” time flies. In the span of only 11 chapters, we have witnessed the promise, birth, call, growth and leadership of Samuel. He has served as priest, prophet and judge. He has anointed and reaffirmed Saul as king. But now, at the beginning of chapter 12, already Samuel is self-described as an old man and gray (v. 2).

Before Samuel fades from the public eye—he will still “advise” Saul and later anoint David in Saul’s stead, but these are done privately—he gives his farewell discourse containing words of correction and exhortation to the people of Israel. Like Moses and Joshua before him, Samuel presents Israel with a choice as they move into the period of the monarchy and outlines the consequences of each choice.

For a printer-friendly version, click on the printer icon at bottom of page.

Samuel vindicated (vv. 1-6)

The chapter opens with Samuel standing before the people as he again presents them the king they have chosen. In the process, Samuel called them to reflect on his own service to them from the time of his youth into his old age, challenging them to find any fault with him as their leader. He offered to make right any wrong he might have committed against them, but they acknowledged he had led them impeccably. At no time did he cheat them, oppress them or take anything from them. Never was his judgment clouded by bribes (vv.3-4). But as the following verses show, their request for a king revealed the nature of their own sin. They had done what prior generations had not.

Israel confronted (vv. 7-13)

Before his own departure, Samuel reminded Israel of the great deeds God performed on their behalf. This recollection, however, was not merely given for information purposes; nor was it given with a view to the people offering praise to God for these great deeds. Rather, Samuel used this brief synopsis to confront Israel with their great sin.

In the past, when threatened by potential destruction by an enemy, their ancestors “cried out to the Lord” for help (vv. 8, 10), resulting in God’s raising up a deliverer. Yet the present generation, with one exception, did not seek the Lord. In a recent battle with the Philistines, Israel had sought assurance by carrying the Ark of the Covenant, only to have it captured (chapter 4). Soon thereafter, as a result of Samuel’s intercession and God’s intervention, their renewed allegiance to the Lord led to their deliverance (chapter 7). Then with mounting threats not only from the Philistines (chapter 8) but also from the Ammonites (ch. 11 and 12:12), instead of seeking the Lord, the people cried out for a human king to rule over them (12:12).

Samuel stood before them to declare that they had received what they had wished for. But it was not God’s best for them, for the Lord was their king.

The concession and challenge (vv. 13-15)

In a striking shift, however, Samuel assured the people that despite their poor decision (in v. 17 he actually says it was an “evil thing” they did), they still could experience God’s blessing and provision if they would offer him first place. Though a human king would rule over them, they must give priority to the Lord.

Notice the conditions and their results given in the passage: “If you fear the Lord and serve and obey him … and if … (you) follow the Lord your God—good” (v. 14).

Conversely, the consequences for disobedience and rebellion would be the same as experienced by their ancestors: “his hand will be against you . . .” (v. 15). They had a king now, but that was no excuse to turn their eyes away from the Lord.

Israel’s confession (vv. 16-19)

As a sign reaffirming God’s displeasure with Israel’s request for a king, Samuel warned thunder and rain would come despite it being the time of wheat harvest (v. 17). Such an occurrence was not only rare given the time of year it was (May-June), but also was potentially disastrous—the crops could be destroyed. As warned, when Samuel called on the Lord, the thunder and rain came. The storm served its purpose, for “all the people stood in awe of the Lord and of Samuel” and they asked for Samuel to intercede on their behalf as they confessed that asking for a king was evil (vv. 18-19).

Samuel’s consolation (vv. 20-23)

Samuel alleviated the people’s fear of the storm and, for the second time, warned them that in order to ensure their standing with the Lord, they must remain true to him and serve him. They should avoid idols, the sin of previous generations, which are of no use in times of trouble anyway (v. 21). Furthermore, Samuel reminded the people that God, for his own sake and for his own pleasure, chose Israel and therefore would not reject them. For his part, Samuel promised he would intercede for them and teach them what is good (v. 23).

Recapitulation (vv. 24-25)

In a final broad stroke, Samuel once more called the people to wholehearted, faithful service to the Lord. Anything short of that would yield dire consequences.

While Israel had committed a sin avoided by previous generations, if they would now remain faithful to God in this new circumstance, they could avoid the consequences experienced by previous generations.

Time would soon tell which choice Israel and their kings made.

Discussion questions

• Was the monarchy God’s best for Israel?

• How often have you sought human means of deliverance from trouble?

• Do you need to return to wholehearted, faithful service to the Lord?

• What stands in the way of your wholehearted, faithful service to the Lord?

Posted: 3/21/06

Family Bible Series for April 2

Honor Christ’s suffering with persistent service

• Luke 22:14-20, 24-27, 31-34

By Greg Ammons

First Baptist Church, Garland

Karen Bolla, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University, conducted a study on forgetfulness. She discovered that everyone forgets certain things. A person’s name is most commonly forgotten. Eighty-three percent of Americans forget people’s names. Have you ever forgotten whether you have done something or not? Well, don’t feel alone—38 percent of Americans have the same feeling.

Just before his crucifixion, Jesus warned his disciples about forgetfulness. As they gathered in the Upper Room to observe Passover, Jesus gave the meal a special significance. He used it as a visual aid to encourage his disciples to remember his atoning death for them.

For a printer-friendly version, click on the printer icon at bottom of page.

The Lord’s Supper is more than ritual (Luke 22:14-20)

Jesus and his disciples reclined at the table to celebrate the Passover meal. Jesus said, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer” (v. 15). He wanted them to know this meal would take on special significance. He took the cup and bread, gave thanks for them and gave them to the disciples.

Our Lord was instituting an observance for the disciples which would become an ordinance of the church. The Lord’s Supper meal is to be a time of reflection, not ritual.

There have been many interpretations by various groups through the years as to the meaning of the Lord’s Supper. Some view the meal as containing the actual body and blood of Jesus. Others feel Christ’s presence is represented in a special way at the observance.

However, Jesus was establishing a symbol of remembrance. His body was broken and his blood was shed for our salvation. His followers are to remember this wonderful event and celebrate it in his church.

Some people approach the Lord’s Supper in a ritualistic manner. They feel simply observing the ordinance saves them. However, Scripture makes it clear we are saved through faith alone and not of works (Ephesians 2:8-9).

On the opposite extreme, others observe the Lord’s Supper in a nonchalant manner. The supper is not to be observed in this manner either. Observance of communion is a wonderful way of remembering the cost of our salvation through symbol.

Greatness comes through serving (Luke 22:24-27)

After the Lord’s Supper, a dispute arose among Jesus’ disciples over greatness in the kingdom of God (v. 24). Jesus responded to their selfish desires by stating his followers do not gauge greatness like a pagan world measures it. Greatness in God’s kingdom is not gained by ruling, but by serving (vv. 25-27).

Our society today views greatness in different ways. Power, position, prestige and accomplishment all are worldly measurements of greatness. Service to God and humanity does not rank at the top of the list. Yet God still reminds us that he measures greatness through service.

General William Booth, founder of the Salvation Army, was a devout follower of Jesus. He loved serving God through meeting human needs and serving his fellowman. Near the end of his life, General Booth lost his eyesight. When his son broke the news to him that doctors believed his vision loss was permanent, there was a long pause from the general. Finally, he said, “I have served God to the best of my ability these many years with my vision, and now I shall serve him to the best of my ability without my vision.” Booth understood his primary purpose, through both prosperity and adversity, was to serve God. Greatness comes through such devoted service.

Satan wants you to fail (Luke 22:31-34)

After the disciples’ dispute over greatness, Jesus turned to Peter and made an interesting statement. “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. When you have turned back, strengthen your brothers” (vv. 31-32). Satan was the one who desired that Peter fail. Jesus made this fact clear.

Peter did not believe Jesus’ prophetic statement. “Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death” (v. 33). But Jesus responded, “I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me” (v. 34). We know the outcome. Peter denied his Lord.

The evil one still desires that believers in Christ fail. He tries to convince us our failures are final. Yet Jesus wants us to know, like Peter, that there is still purpose and a mission for us.

One of the great hitters in Major League Baseball history was Babe Ruth. During his 22 seasons, he hit 714 home runs. Yet, some are surprised to know that Babe Ruth holds strikeout records as well. He struck out 1,316 times and still holds the record for five consecutive strikeouts in a single World Series game. Greatness still can be achieved even in the context of failure.

Discussion questions

• Do you remember Jesus’ death in meaningful ways?

• In what ways can you serve God better?

• In what ways have you seen Satan hinder the service of Christians?

Posted: 3/21/06

Explore the Bible Series for April 2

Put trust only in God

• Isaiah 24:1-31:9

By James Adair

Baptist University of the Americas, San Antonio

Isaiah 24-27 is a collection of oracles, probably from different periods of time, dealing primarily with judgment of Israel’s enemies, though some prophecies of salvation for Israel also appear.

Because many of the oracles refer to eschatological (end-time) motifs, such as God’s final banquet or the final triumph of God’s people, this section is sometimes referred to as the Isaiah Apocalypse.

For a printer-friendly version, click on the printer icon at bottom of page.

We will also look at selected passages from chapters 28-31, which reprise the earlier theme of God’s judgment on Israel and Judah, interspersed with oracles of salvation. (Rather than following the canonical order, I will group the passages thematically.) Many of the oracles in these sections are difficult to date with any precision, since the historical references they contain frequently are absent or ambiguous.

Nevertheless, they continue to speak to us today: They warn God’s people about the dangers of injustice, idolatry and putting one’s trust in anything other than God, and they encourage God’s people with the promise that God will never abandon them.

Isaiah 24:14-16

Some Christians equate personal financial security with God’s blessings, and they also see national wealth and military might as indicative of God’s approval on a larger scale.

This oracle, however, warns against such assumptions. In the midst of widespread rejoicing over God’s apparent blessings, the prophet has deep concerns.

The main word in the phrase translated, “I waste away,” in 24:16 occurs only here in the Hebrew Bible. As this translation indicates, some scholars think the phrase means the prophet is expressing his mortification at the treachery of some of his fellow citizens. Other scholars suggest the translation, “I have a secret,” perhaps indicating the prophet has received a revelation from God of which his compatriots are unaware, a message that will put a halt to the celebrating. What does the prophet know that others don’t?

Isaiah 28:1-13

This oracle similarly sets the prophet in opposition to the mass of the people, but in this passage, his message is more direct, and the people’s opposition to that message is equally blunt. In response to his contemporaries’ lampooning of his style of delivery (“do and do … rule on rule … a little here …” in Hebrew sounds like a baby’s babbling), the prophet promises God indeed will deliver a simple, straightforward message to the people—through the strange language of the Assyrians.

Isaiah 30:8-17

One of the commentaries on Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls includes an interpretation of portions of Isaiah 30. It takes the phrase “tell us pleasant things” (literally, “speak to us smooth things”) as a reference to the end times, when people will demand their prophets tell them messages pleasant to hear.

Another document from the caves near the Dead Sea, the Damascus Document, uses the phrase “seekers of smooth things” pejoratively to identify their political/religious rivals.

The passage in Isaiah says the people do not want to hear a true word of God from the prophet, because it might be a message of judgment. Instead, they prefer to hear only positive, affirming messages.

Many preachers today similarly are tempted not to oppose certain types of sin or certain groups of sinners. Nevertheless, the prophetic books, as well as the example of Jesus himself, teach us the importance of speaking the whole counsel of God, even when it is unpopular.

Isaiah 25:6-10

Many fairly recent movies have used food and meals as a metaphor for life as a whole, or at least certain aspects of it. The Danish film Babette’s Feast portrays an exiled French woman preparing a special meal for her entire adopted community on the Danish coast. As a result of the feast she prepares, old friendships are renewed, longstanding grudges are settled and suspicions about outsiders are laid to rest.

The Bible often uses meals to portray fellowship among believers and communion with God. For example, the 23rd Psalm, Jesus’ parable of the wise and foolish virgins and especially the Last Supper all picture meals that are much more than just the consumption of food.

In this passage from Isaiah, the meal envisioned will be rich and sumptuous. The Lord is the host, and the guests are all those who have waited patiently for God’s deliverance. The feast celebrates not only victory over Israel’s enemies, but victory over death itself.

Isaiah 28:14-22

I’m always a little leery of clothing advertised as “one size fits all.” Since human beings come in many different shapes and sizes, I find it a little hard to believe a pair of socks, for example, that fits my wife’s size 7 foot also will fit my size 14 foot.

In Greek mythology, an innkeeper named Procrustes claimed he had a “one size fits all” magical bed. No matter how tall or short his guest, he claimed, the bed would magically adjust to fit his size. What he didn’t tell those who ventured to take advantage of his hospitality was that it wasn’t the bed that changed size, it was the person sleeping in the bed. If the man was too short, Procrustes stretched him on the rack until his feet reached the end of the bed. If the man was too tall, that portion of his legs that overhung the bed were cut off. He was eventually done in on his own bed by the hero Theseus.

In this oracle, the prophet speaks of Judah’s current situation: “The bed is too short to stretch oneself on it, and the covering too narrow to wrap oneself on it” (28:20). In other words, the solution that the nation of Judah had chosen for itself, reliance on Egypt for protection against the Assyrians, did not fit the needs of the situation. God was ready to do something “strange” and “alien” (28:21)—fight alongside Judah’s enemies.

The only hope for survival lay in a kernel of wisdom sufficient to form the foundation for a renewed society after exile. “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation: ‘the one who trusts will never be dismayed’” (28:16). The nation would fall to its enemies, but God promised to preserve a remnant of people whose righteousness reflected their trust in the Lord.

Discussion questions

• How often do we hear words in sermons or lessons that challenge views and attitudes we have maintained without question for years? How willing are we to evaluate whether these words of challenge really come from God? Do we prefer to hear, and teach, lessons that stir up no controversy and are pleasant to hear?

• Churches often have banquets or potluck dinners. In what ways do these meals foreshadow the future, eschatological banquet of all believers with God? In what ways do these meals fall short of the ideal, eschatological banquet?

• How do we deal with setbacks, even catastrophes, in our own personal lives? How is our trust in God strengthened or weakened by circumstances?

Posted: 3/20/06

Satellite photos fuel
controversy about Noah's ark

By Hannah Elliott

Associated Baptist Press

DALLAS (ABP)—Recently released satellite images of an unknown formation or object on Mt. Ararat in Turkey have added fuel to archeologists’ ongoing quest to find Noah’s ark.

The “new and significant development,” an image from a QuickBird satellite, is relevant because the high-resolution view shows clearer detail of a “ship-like object … 1,015 feet in length,” Porcher Taylor, a professor of national security law, told Space.com.

Taylor has spent 13 years investigating the mysterious item.

“I’ve got newfound optimism … as far as my continuing push to have the intelligence community declassify some of the more definitive-type imagery,” Taylor told the online science news forum.

Taken over the northwest corner of Mt. Ararat, the picture shows a long, dark object—or rock formation, some say—resting sideways in glacial ice at an elevation of 15,300 feet.

Taylor, a national security analyst for more than 30 years, works in the paralegal studies department at the University of Richmond. Associated Press reported he calls this work his “satellite archeology project” and has devoted himself to getting to the bottom of the Ararat mystery.

While Taylor says he has no agenda for his investigation, he aims to expose the irregularity in the mountain’s geography for whatever it is. And then he wants to make it visibly accessible for public, scientific and scholarly critique.

To that end, Taylor has lobbied to use previously classified satellite imagery and systems like QuickBird, GeoEye’s Ikonos spacecraft, and Radarsat 1 in order to prove or disprove the ark rumors.

“We’ve got three new birds (satellites) that are going up,” Taylor said in the online article. “I’m using all my clout, rapport and lobbying to, hopefully, have them at least fly calibration runs over Mt. Ararat.”

Despite some enthusiasts’ conviction about the object’s history, others hesitate to declare it the biblical ark—or any kind of manmade object.

“My gut instinct is that it’s natural phenomena,” said Bill Crouse, president of Christian Information Ministries, who twice has led archeological expeditions to the mountains of southern Turkey.

“What I find when I analyze these photos is that this is naturally occurring,” he said, but then added, “of course, you never say never.”

Christian Information Ministries is an organization that gathers information for Christians. Headquartered in Richardson, Texas, it specializes in Noah’s ark research, cults, the occult and other non-Christian worldviews. Crouse recently contributed to The Explorers of Ararat.

Founder and former editor of The Ararat Report, a newsletter recording progress in the search for Noah’s ark, Crouse said the geology of the region could create something resembling a ship.

“What we have here is a natural caldera,” Crouse said. “The caldera gathers ice and rock. When it breaks off, given the right conditions with ice and shadows, it can resemble a box-like shape.”

Not only does Crouse doubt the biblical correlation of the oblong shape that has perplexed explorers since the 19th century, he thinks current investigators have got the wrong mountain entirely. He said the mountain known as Ararat today “didn’t become the traditional landing spot of the ark until about 1200 A.D.”

Instead, Crouse said, someone made a “geological mistake” and labeled a single mountain as Ararat, instead of a region.

“The Bible says the ark landed in the Ararat mountains, plural,” Crouse said. “In short, my conclusion is that the ancient authorities are pretty much uniform that the ark landed on a mountain about 200 miles south of Ararat.”

Called Chudi Dagh, that mountain overlooks the entire Mesopotamian plain and the borders of Iraq and Syria. While Crouse believes several historical references to the ark—most notably from ancient historians like Josephus—help prove that it did exist in modern record, he said modern satellites and the Turkish army, which tramps through the area often, have found nothing to irrefutably prove the ark theory.

Plus, Crouse said, the economic incentives to keep travelers searching the Turkish highlands continue to prompt dubious eyewitness reports of the ark.

Still, the new intelligence and satellite imagery are sure to lend Taylor a hand with the object’s verification. And that keeps him motivated, he told Space.com.

“I maintain that if it is the remains of something manmade and potentially nautical, then it’s potentially something of biblical proportions,” he said.

Posted: 3/17/06

Network hopes to avert clergy shortage

By Hannah Elliott

Associated Baptist Press

DURHAM, N.C., (ABP)—In a demonstration of their commitment to develop young ministers, about 40 churches have signed a covenant to coordinate their efforts and—they hope—avert a clergy shortage.

Founding members of the Shiloh Network signed their agreement recently at the close of Baptist Heritage Week at Duke Divinity School in Durham, N.C. Church representatives also discussed mentoring methods like retreats, fellowships, seminary scholarships and financial loan programs.

Though aided by Duke and other institutions, the network was founded as an initiative of local congregations. The name Shiloh comes from the Old Testament account of Samuel hearing his call to ministry at a temple at Shiloh.

“The whole idea of creating call in a small church is relevant for us in terms of raising up leaders,” said Gregg Hemmen, pastor at Cane Creek Baptist in Hillsborough, N.C. “Raising leaders from among us who are skilled and helping them to feel that ‘Yeah, I am equipped to do this’ is a great thing,” said Hemmen.

The network will help curb clergy shortages and put vigor into congregational cultivation of pastors, said Curtis Freeman, director of Duke’s Baptist House of Studies. Otherwise, he said, churches could be left with a short supply of leadership.

While seminary enrollment is up nationwide, only a third of seminary students intend to work in a church, a study by Auburn Theological Seminary revealed. Further complicating the problem, today’s seminary student typically is older than in years past and pursuing a second or third career, which means they will be in the clergy pool less time.

In the Baptist State Convention of North Carolina, 33 percent of pastors were more than 55 years old in 2001, while only 7 percent were younger than 35, Freeman noted. That means in the next 10 years, almost five times as many leaders will retire as the young clergy who take their place.

Wilshire Baptist Church in Dallas is ahead of most congregations in stemming that clergy drain. Wilshire’s Pathways to Ministry program includes training for high school, college and seminary students.

The church receives funding from the Lilly Endowment to maintain a pastoral resident program.

“If churches really love what God is up to in their church, they will want another generation to follow in that vein,” Pastor George Mason said. Wilshire’s congregational “self-esteem” is higher than ever, he said, thanks in part to the way members feel involved in the program.

“They see themselves as an incubator for the ministry,” Mason said. “We have been growing greatly in our understanding in this regard. The congregation has a sense that they have something to offer.”

Leaders at Wilshire Baptist envision a three-year revolving emphasis for the Shiloh Network at their church, he noted.

Organizers of the Shiloh Network plan to involve some of the same elements recounted in the biblical account of Samuel’s call. They hope to integrate each phase of the covenant—calling, qualifying and connecting—as Shiloh candidates and initiatives develop.

Calling involves naming specific people who have the skills and aptitude to become ministers.

Qualifying means fostering those individuals through education, whether it be internships, seminary or other learning opportunities. Connecting means advocating, grooming and placing pastoral candidates with selected bodies of worship.

Frank Granger of First Baptist Church of Athens, Ga., came to the same conclusion that others had regarding the “clergy crisis” among churches nationwide. As the church’s minister of education, Granger saw the network as a way to support local seminaries and leaders.

“I see that it is significant for a church to invest in theological education, because whether they realize it or not, that’s where their future leadership will come from,” Granger said. “We need to support these schools, and I see the network as a way to do that.”

For its recent 175th anniversary, the Athens church invited people whom the church has ordained. For Granger, that told a lot about the state of things when it comes to young leaders.

“Through our whole history, we’ve ordained 18 people,” Granger said. “We’ve ordained six since 1972 and three in the last five years.”

The difference in ordination will come from lay involvement, he insisted. The key for his church, he said, is “getting more focused in the congregation as a whole. I’m convinced we’ve got to get this to the lay leadership.”

Part of that congregational involvement involves money. As members of the network, each church must contribute $500 annually—or 0.1 percent of its annual budget, whichever is smaller—to support of the network. While some churches may have limited budgets, Granger said, one thing he appreciates about the network is that it allows each entity to creatively find a way to participate.

“Our missions ministry has a certain amount of money available for this type of thing,” Granger said. “I see this as a part of missions, and this was a one-time gift that fit that description.”

Mason agreed.

“Churches that have very little resources can still do this with not a lot of money,” he said. He plans eventually to create a website detailing the network so interested churches nationwide—no matter the size, location or budget—can glean information and resources for their own participation. Some of that information may detail ways churches can tailor logistics of their involvement to fit their congregation.

Posted: 3/17/06

2nd Opinion:
Partisan churches will feel IRS heat

By Melissa Rogers

Consider yourself warned. That’s a key message the Internal Revenue Service sent to churches and charities with the materials it recently released on impermissible electioneering. While the IRS has merely slapped the wrists of most noncomplying organizations in the past, the new materials put churches and charities on notice that it will react more vigorously to violations in future election cycles.

Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code provides an exemption from tax for organizations with charitable, religious or educational purposes. The code also flatly prohibits these organizations from directly or indirectly participating or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for elective public office. In short, this tax benefit is intended to flow to charitable, religious or education work, not partisan political activity.

Nevertheless, the IRS report saw “increasing political intervention in the 2004 (election) cycle” by 501(c)(3) organizations. In response, the IRS is stepping up its educational and enforcement efforts.

The materials include new information about IRS investigative procedures and additional guidelines regarding what these organizations can and cannot do during election season. The IRS describes these materials as “the ambitious beginning of additional guidance in this area.” One of the overarching points is the IRS will not tolerate bias for or against candidates by 501(c)(3) organizations, even when it has a coat of whitewash on it.

For example, the IRS indicates that it’s serious about its prohibition against implicit candidate endorsements. The IRS has found that churches often incorrectly believe the campaign intervention ban is limited to explicit candidate endorsements. For this and other reasons, the IRS has provided some specific guidance, including some “key” factors it considers when determining whether communications cross the line from permissible issue advocacy into impermissible candidate endorsement.

Of these factors, the IRS notes that “(a) communication is particularly at risk of political campaign intervention when it makes reference to candidates or voting in a specific upcoming election.”

This suggests ministers who wish to preach about public issues may avoid IRS scrutiny by ensuring that they do not mention candidates in these discussions or otherwise connect the discussions with elections. That strikes a fair balance between a congregation’s important interest in addressing the issues of the day and the duties accompanying this tax-exempt status.

The IRS also emphasizes that voter registration drives must be unbiased both in theory and in fact, and it encourages 501(c)(3) organizations to monitor their websites to ensure they aren’t favoring certain candidates through the use of links.

Further, the guidance underscores the rule prohibiting churches and charities from selectively giving their directories or anything else to campaigns. “Allowing a candidate to use an organization’s assets or facilities will also violate the prohibition if other candidates are not given an equivalent opportunity,” the IRS says.

In this same vein, it seems significant that the service chose to release these materials in Ohio. Several Ohio churches and other religious organizations recently have been accused of intervening in the 2006 gubernatorial race in favor of Republican candidate Ken Blackwell by repeatedly featuring Blackwell at their events, among other things.

The IRS report concludes by recommending increased use of tax-exempt status revocation in appropriate future cases, believing an adequate foundation for such action is being laid.

Given the current climate, the IRS is right to increase its educational and enforcement efforts. Moreover, Congress made the right call when it instituted the electioneering ban. It’s a sensible quid pro quo for this tax-exempt status, and it has the salutary effect of helping to ensure that churches and charities aren’t converted into campaign precincts.

Religious organizations and individuals should do the right thing, too, both for legal and nonlegal reasons. People of faith should resist every attempt to drag houses of worship into partisan politics, whether those attempts come from outside or inside the congregation. Contrary to recent suggestions by the North Carolina Republican National Committee, which has asked individuals to forward their church directories, churches aren’t part of any political “base.” They are houses of prayer for all peoples.

Heaven help us if we forget that.

Melissa Rogers is visiting professor of religion and public policy at Wake Forest University Divinity School. Her column was distributed by Religion News Service.

Posted: 3/17/06

EDITORIAL:
Forget holy smoke, what about people?

Does God expect you to be holy?

Do you know what “holy” means?

If you answered yes to either question, welcome to the minority. Not just the minority of Americans, but Christians.

A new survey by The Barna Group reveals only one-third of Americans (35 percent) agreed “God expects you to become holy.” More surprisingly, less than half (46 percent) of born-again Christians believe God calls them to holiness.

Maybe the majority’s excuse is they don’t know what being “holy” means. When the Barna pollsters asked Americans for a definition, the No. 1 answer was “I don’t know” (21 percent). Other answers included “being Christ-like” (19 percent), making faith your top priority in life (18 percent), living a pure or sinless lifestyle (12 percent), having a good attitude about people and life (10 percent), focusing completely on God (9 percent), being guided by the Holy Spirit (9 percent), being born again (8 percent), reflecting the character of God (7 percent), exhibiting a moral lifestyle (5 percent), and accepting and practicing biblical truth (5 percent). Answers provided by Christians and the public at large were “virtually identical.”

Regardless of their definition, about three-quarters of Americans (73 percent) believe “it is possible for someone to become holy, regardless of their past.” Just half (50 percent), believe they know someone who is holy. And only one in five (21 percent) consider themselves holy.

So, what does “holy” mean? “The Hebrew word for ‘holy’ means ‘marked off’ or … ‘to cut off’ or ‘to separate,’” explains Millard Erickson, former theology professor at Baylor University’s Truett Seminary. He cites two characteristics of holy people. They are “specially set apart or sanctified to the Lord.” They also “live lives of purity and goodness.”

That seems like a pretty high standard. Does God expect people to be holy? Both the Old and New Testaments say yes. God told the ancient Hebrews: “I am the Lord your God; consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am holy” (Leviticus 11:44). Echoing that commandment, the Apostle Peter instructed the Christian church: “As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; for it is written, ‘Be holy, because I am holy’” (1 Peter 1:14-16).

Admittedly, holiness isn’t a hot topic among most Christians. A couple of reasons probably explain this fact: First, many Christians who talk up holiness aren’t good role models. Some are so overly pious and full of themselves they project an angry, judgmental image of Christianity, which we instinctively reject. And some fail to live up to the standards they set for others, so when they say “holy,” we think “hypocrite.” Like the so-called Christian leaders of morally bankrupt businesses or preachers who prey on women. Second, holiness seems too hard. We can relate to the Apostle Paul, who called himself a “slave to sin” and basically said: I can’t do what I know I should do, and I can’t stop doing what I know I shouldn’t (Romans 7:15). Hardly holy, huh?

Whatever our reasons for downplaying holiness, Barna’s results are alarming. This is not an esoteric theology debate. This is a probe into the central core of our faith-life:

• Our passion for holiness measures our passion for God. Holiness—uniquely otherness—is a defining factor of divinity. If we believe we are created in God’s image, we theoretically aspire to reflect that image. The more we are set apart for God’s service and the more our character aligns with God’s moral purity, the closer we are to being who God created us to be.

• This isn’t about a long list of “don’ts.” While the overly pious seem to have captured the definition of holiness, they’re missing the point. If we’re set apart for God, that means we see God’s plan in all phases of our lives, not just church on Sunday morning. It’s complete integration of faith and life; it means who we are and Whose we are define how we live at home and work and in the community. And rather than behavior by omission—“We don’t smoke and we don’t chew and we don’t go with girls who do”—holiness manifests itself in commission—warmly, winsomely embodying the loving presence of Christ for all the people we touch in our lives.

• Rather than a skewed version of holiness building yet another barrier between Christians and the world, true holiness resurrects a ramp between the world and God. What could be more attractive in a weary, contentious world than the fruits of the Spirit—love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control—that characterize holy people?

Posted: 3/17/06

Faith-based funding figures disputed

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (ABP)—In response to growing criticism of his “faith-based initiative,” President Bush touted White House figures showing growth in federal funding of religious charities last year.

The figures give a different picture than a recent study by a non-partisan group that monitors Bush’s initiative. And the discrepancy between the two sets of statistics underscores the difficulty in measuring the effects of the policy precisely.

Bush, speaking to a White House-sponsored conference for leaders of religious and community charitable groups, said the federal government had given nearly $2.1 billion in grants to religious charities in fiscal 2005. That amount reflected an increase of 7 percent over last year’s figure.

But, in recent months, several religious leaders Bush initially recruited to push his faith-based initiative have turned on it. They have criticized the president for talking about funding social services through religious groups publicly but reducing the overall pool of funds available to charitable groups by cutting discretionary spending on social services.

A study, released in February by the Roundtable on Religion and Social Welfare Policy, seemed to confirm that view. It tracked 99 federal grant-making programs between 2002 and 2004 to gauge how much they gave to groups the study considered religiously affiliated. It found that, while the share of the funds given to faith-based providers versus secular providers remained steady, the total amount of funding had decreased over the period, from $670 million in fiscal 2002 to $626 million in fiscal 2004.

The White House immediately attacked that study. Jim Towey, head of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, accused its authors of “cherry-picking” because they did not take into account new federal programs that had appeared during the period covered—nor did it include grantees the White House considers “faith-based,” but that were simply renewing government grants they had received since before the faith-based initiative even existed.

Lisa Montiel, the Roundtable’s research scientist and a professor at the affiliated Rockefeller Institute of the State University of New York at Albany, said her study was interested in tracking growth of new funding for faith-based groups.

The Roundtable study also showed only a small percentage of the federal grant money it studied went to congregations or other small local organizations—the very types of groups Bush has said the faith-based push was designed to help. According to that study, congregation-based groups got less than 10 percent of the federal funding over the three years studied, their share decreasing every year.

Meanwhile, large regional, national or international faith-based groups got the lion’s share of the funding—with nearly 54 percent going to such groups in fiscal 2004. Many of those are groups, like Catholic Charities or Lutheran Social Services, that provide services essentially secular in content and that would have been eligible for federal funds before Bush’s initiative.

Posted: 3/17/06

Church: Help families cope

Many people bring their family to church with one question in mind, said Bo Prosser of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship—“Can your Jesus help us cope?”

“Our job as ministers is to help people be connected enough that God can work in their lives,” Prosser said at Family Ministry 101, a recent training event at Wilshire Baptist Church in Dallas.

Prosser, CBF coordinator of congregational life, and Diana Garland, dean of Baylor University’s School of Social Work, led the one-day workshop. Family Ministry 101 is one of three workshops being offered in the newly launched Family Ministry Academy, a continuing education opportunity provided by the School of Social Work’s Center for Family and Community Ministries.

Churches may need to examine their schedules to ensure they are drawing families together instead of pulling them apart, Garland said.

Age-graded Sunday school classes and class names that label members as single adults or place them in other categories may need to be revisited, she added.

Garland, author of Family Ministry and Sacred Stories of Ordinary Families, described family as a set of relationships that endures over a lifetime despite life’s separations. Through families, people attempt to meet their needs for belonging and attachment, meet those needs in others and share life purposes, help and resources.

Belonging is a sense of entitlement—“your right to come into my home and get the cereal without asking,” she explained. Attachment is “the people we want with us when life is awful, even if they can’t do anything, can’t fix it,” she said.

Both Garland and Prosser stressed the importance of sharing stories and memories as the way to help nurture belonging and attachment. In the research that led to her book, Sacred Stories, Garland interviewed 110 families across the nation and across denominations.

“It was in the stories that I heard the real faith, not Sunday school-answer faith,” she said.

Garland urged church leaders to focus on families’ strengths, to “see families less as ‘problems to be fixed’ and more as mysteries rooted in God’s image and through whom God works,” she said.

For more information about the Family Ministry Academy and future workshops, contact the Center for Family and Community Ministries at (254) 710-4417 or visit www.family-ministry.org.

Posted: 3/17/06

IMB chair urges committee to reconsider

By Steve DeVane

North Carolina Biblical Recorder

RICHMOND, Va. (ABP)—The chairman of the Southern Baptist International Mission Board is asking the board’s personnel committee to take another look at two controversial measures the board passed in November.

Chair Tom Hatley, pastor of Immanuel Baptist Church in Rogers, Ark., announced the decision in a letter to Southern Baptist pastors. The IMB released the letter, as well as an “open letter” to all Southern Baptists, two documents supporting the decisions and other materials.

The information focuses on the trustees’ votes on speaking in tongues, the use of a private prayer language by missionary candidates and candidates’ mode of baptism. In his letter, Hatley told pastors they can comment on the matters through an e-mail address for trustees, imbtrustees@imb.org.

“As chairman, I am asking our personnel committee to take a fresh look at these documents with the intention of providing further clarification,” he said. “Your suggestions will be passed along to this committee as they are received.”

During a November meeting in Huntsville, Ala., the IMB trustees approved a policy stating that a missionary candidate will be disqualified if he or she practices tongues or a “private prayer language.”

They also adopted a baptism guideline stating that future missionary candidates must have been baptized in a church that practices believer’s baptism by immersion alone, does not view baptism as sacramental or regenerative, and embraces the doctrine of the security of the believer.

Exception clauses were included in both for special situations. Neither the guideline nor the policy is retroactive, and neither will be applied to anyone already in the missionary appointment process.

Critics of the policy and guideline warn the IMB and Southern Baptist Convention are becoming too exclusive and narrow.

The controversy surrounding the IMB changes was a factor in a dispute between IMB trustees and Oklahoma trustee Wade Burleson. In an unprecedented move, trustees tried in January to remove Burleson from the board for discussing board deliberations on his weblog. Hatley has since said he will ask trustees in March to drop the challenge against Burleson, pastor of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Enid, Okla.

Some critics of the policy on the private prayer language also have suggested it might have been approved as a way to embarrass IMB President Jerry Rankin—who has acknowledged he uses the practice—or pressure him to resign.

Hatley responded to that suggestion in his letter to pastors. “Trustees have been blamed for having the motive of trying to hurt our president,” Hatley wrote. “The force that pushed the issue to this higher level, however, included the president and a few others on staff and on the board.”

Rankin said last month he insisted the full board deal with the issue because of its importance.

“I did insist it come before the full board because I think you have to be very circumspect in your processes,” he said in a question-and-answer session with Baptist editors. “It was at my insistence that the full board act on it, rather than it just being a committee that puts this in place.”

Rankin said in February he didn’t think the issue was dead. “I think there’s a lot of reaction … that’s been generated across the convention to revisit it,” he said. But Rankin said he wasn’t confident the policy would be reversed.

“As much as there’s been reaction against it, there’s been a lot of support for it as well,” he told the editors. “I think even controversy strengthens the resolve of our board to kind of justify or defend what they’ve done.”

Rankin said March 7 he appreciates Hatley’s explanation to Southern Baptists. “Much of the confusion and misperceptions regarding these actions came from the lack of clearly defined explanations for the policies,” Rankin said. “While some will not be in agreement with the rationale, these documents will help others understand the deep convictions of those on our board for moving in this direction.

“There is no question that those on each side of these issues are committed to the effectiveness of the International Mission Board and are conscientious in their desire to be accountable to the Southern Baptist Convention. … We want Southern Baptists to be assured of the doctrinal integrity and practices of our missionaries and move forward to win a lost world to Jesus Christ.”

Hatley said he edited position papers on speaking in tongues, private prayer languages and baptism.

“Most pastors and theologians among Southern Baptists of recent decades and of today regard the charismatic movement as divisive, encouraging spiritual pride and stressing minor gifts out of proportion to biblical evidence,” the paper says.

“Although there remain some charismatic churches excluded by associations that consider themselves as still belonging to state conventions and the Southern Baptist Convention, their number has declined over the years since the mid-’70s.”

The paper on baptism notes that the 1925, 1963 and 2000 versions of the Baptist Faith & Message doctrinal statement all demonstrate that Southern Baptists have interpreted Scripture to teach that baptism is an ordinance administered by the local church.

“A church’s beliefs, therefore, matter,” it says.

Greg Warner of Associated Baptist Press also contributed to this story.