Forget the ‘Batmobile,’ Houston contest winner cherishes friendships_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/18/05

Forget the 'Batmobile,' Houston
contest winner cherishes friendships

By Martha Morrow

Houston Baptist University

HOUSTON–When J.J. Worthen's sister first called him about entering Gimme the Mike, Houston, the local NBC affiliate's voice talent contest, he didn't give it much thought.

Auditions were the following day, and Worthen–a student at Houston Baptist University and member of First Baptist Church of Crosby–already had seen on the news hundreds of people lining up to spend the night to audition. But when he got up the next morning, he decided to take his chances.

He arrived at the auditions with just over an hour to spare and didn't think he would get the opportunity to show off his vocal talents. But Worthen got his chance and took full advantage of the moment, winning out over hundreds of Houston-area residents to ultimately become the contest's top winner.

J.J. Wortham, a student at Houston Baptist University, felt God's presence, even when he thought he lost a local talent contest. (Photo by Martha Morrow)

Worthen, a music theory and composition major at HBU, beat out more than 2,000 other singers who auditioned to make the cut to be one of 25 performers who competed on-air. During his first performance, Worthen received perfect scores from all four judges. He began to think he might really have a chance.

Unlike many of the other contestants who were lured to compete by the top prize of a new automobile and a two-song recording contract, Worthen saw the opportunity to spread his witness for Christ and positively represent HBU.

“After all,” he joked, “I had a perfectly good car. OK, maybe my friends complained because you had to roll up the windows by pushing them up with your hands, but it got me where I needed to go.”

With four perfect scores under his belt, Worthen advanced to the final round. His song selection that night wasn't as big a hit with the judges.

“I didn't get a perfect score,” Worthen said. “They all seemed to feel like the song I chose wasn't the best showcase for my voice. So, as the evening progressed, I wasn't expecting to win.”

After all the finalists had performed, three artists ended up with tie scores, and it didn't take the judges but a few seconds to come to a unanimous conclusion that Worthen was the big winner.

“I really didn't see this coming. After I performed, I talked with God about my disappointment but decided to focus on the opportunity I had been given to share my witness. That feeling changed to anticipation when the three-way tie was announced. And even though I was excited to win, my overwhelming feeling was just how humbling it was to win against the quality of performers I had heard that night. They were just awesome.”

As part of his grand prize package, Worthen received a new red Pontiac G6.

“It's like the Batmobile; it's such a cool car!” he said.

Music comes naturally to Worthen, whose mother was his high school choir teacher and whose father once worked as a music minister. The sister who encouraged him to enter the talent contest is also a music teacher.

He sang his first solo at the age of 4, but became more interested in instrumental music as he grew older. He chose music theory and composition as his major because he enjoys writing music and plays four instruments.

“My major helps me understand things that I can apply to every aspect of my music,” Worthen said. “And I can't say enough good things about the music department at HBU. They are like family.

“They don't treat us as students they have to teach. They work to develop us as musicians and teach us to be well-rounded people.”

Worthen was drawn to HBU after hearing the university's music ministry group, Focus, at his home church, First Baptist of Crosby. “I wanted to go to a university that was well-rounded, and after I heard Focus, I knew that HBU was where I belonged,” he explained. Today he is a member of Focus, performing at hundreds of schools and churches across Texas each year.

“I love performing, because it really is about communicating,” he said. “It's about talking to people in your audience. When you realize how simple it really is, you find the secret to performing.”

While Worthen drives around campus in his new car pondering his recording deal, he relishes the true prize he found from the competition.

“After the show, I got so many phone calls and e-mails. When I think about all the people who helped raise me and who have loved me and been my friends for so long, it is just something I will always cherish. I got phone calls from people who to me are giants in my life, and to think that they called just meant so much.”

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



Youth ministry matures during Johnson’s tenure_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/18/05

Youth ministry matures during Johnson's tenure

By George Henson

Staff Writer

RICHARDSON–Randy Johnson insists the key to longevity in youth ministry is developing solid relationships with both youth and adults. He should know, after serving in youth ministry 30 years and recently celebrating his 20th anniversary as minister of youth education at First Baptist Church in Richardson.

Johnson first learned the importance of developing a ministry tuned as much to parents and youth workers as at a youth during a conference led by youth ministry pioneer Bob Taylor.

“That was the first time I had heard anyone talk about the importance of working with parents and youth workers and also of using the existing organizations like Sunday school,” he said.

Randy Johnson once considered himself a "pastor in waiting." But he's committed 30 years of his life to youth ministry. (Photo by George Henson)

“Back then, the mindset was: 'We've hired you as the youth minister. You do the youth ministry.' I don't think we really had the credibility we do today. We were really seen largely as activity directors.”

At that time, a year into his ministry at Monterey Baptist Church in Lubbock, Johnson honestly saw himself as a pastor in waiting.

“Youth ministry wasn't that much of an interest to me, but nobody was looking for a single pastor,” he said. “When I met with the search committee, I told them, 'I'm not going to do this youth ministry thing very long.' And they said, 'Fine.'”

But once he had the job, he poured himself into it.

“I ordered every book the Baptist Sunday School Board published connected to youth ministry. I was smart enough to know I didn't know anything, and so I got these books and read them,” he said.

After five years, he moved to the youth ministry at First Baptist Church in Bryan. At about this time, he began to feel he might stick with youth ministry. However, even to this day, he said his calling is different than many youth ministers.

“God called me to ministry as a vocation. I've never said God called me to youth ministry. Yeah, I'm doing youth ministry now, but next year, who knows,” he explained.

His tenure in Bryan was marked by the influence of a layman nearly 80 years old.

“I learned a lot there about discipleship from Amos Bell,” Johnson said. “He led discipleship at First Baptist in Bryan. He was in his late 70s, but he led the Bible drill and speaker's tournament programs and started student-led Bible studies during the week.

“It didn't take long to notice there was an unusual spiritual maturity to those kids.”

Johnson came to Richardson in 1985, but it wasn't immediately smooth sailing.

“I came to the big city, and it ate me alive,” he said.

It was a time of testing, he recalled.

“This was the first time I had difficulty starting out. When I came here, they had had a pretty strong program, and I had different ideas. Basically, I bit off more than I could chew,” Johnson admitted.

The church stuck with him through the rocky start, however, confirming the reason he wanted to come to Richardson in the first place.

“I came here because I knew the church's reputation as being a good place to serve–a church where staff tended to serve for a while. I had already served five years at Monterey and five years in Bryan, and that was a long time for youth ministers at that time. But I thought if I came here, I had the chance to do something in youth ministry not a lot of people get to do–stay for an extended amount of time. But I never dreamed I'd stay here 20 years,” he explained.

The biggest change over those 20 years has been in the evolution of youth workers as originators of ministry, he asserted.

“Now, youth leadership plan their own fellowship and retreats. That doesn't bother me at all. I love that.

“I want those youth workers to be involved with these kids outside the classroom in ministry projects.

“When youth workers see themselves as youth ministers as much as I am, that's what excites me,” Johnson said.

The youth workers at First Baptist spend hours decorating their rooms, giving each department its own special identity.

He said staying 20 years and having had relationships with parents of teenagers gives him credibility with virtually any committee in the church he needs to confer with.

“I've had most of their kids in our youth ministry. They know me; they trust me. I have credibility that if I say I need something, they know I do.”

Also, many of those adults sitting on church committees are products of his youth ministry.

Youth, he said, really haven't changed much in his 30 years of ministry.

“I don't know that kids are that much different. All the technology seems to have made them brighter and more savvy about the world, but they really haven't changed. There were kids in Lubbock with drug problems 30 years ago, so that isn't a new thing.

“If anything, these kids may be more hungry for relationships. They want to be a part of a group, but they don't want to just soak it up–they want to be involved in ministry and give back,” he said.

Relationships, not big, flashy events, have been the bedrock of his ministry, he noted.

“If you look back at my ministry here, you won't see much flashy stuff,” he said.

“I tell my students they have to own their own relationship with God.

“They can't ride on the coattails of their parents or this youth ministry.

“We also stress loving on people when they come here to visit. We talk all the time about welcoming those who come here with the acceptance of God's love.

“Sure, we try to do things with excellence, but it's the relationships that keep people here.

“It's not my teaching or anyone's music. It's that love.”

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



LifeWay Explore the Bible Series for Feb. 20: Jesus paid the debt of our sin out of love_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/15/05

LifeWay Explore the Bible Series for Feb. 20

Jesus paid the debt of our sin out of love

Luke 23:32-47

By Pakon Chan

Chinese Baptist Church, Arlington

The Jewish religious leaders sought any way possible to put Jesus to death. The most deadly accusation was to accuse Jesus of “perverting our nation, and trying to stop men paying taxes to Caesar, and saying he himself is the Anointed One, a king” (Luke 23:2).

But this false accusation did not convince Pilate. Jesus was sent back and forth for trials, and eventually sent back to Pilate again for the final trial. Under the pressure of the Jewish leaders, Pilate released Barabbas for them and crucified Jesus.

The crucifixion

Many people may still have a very fresh memory of the movie “The Passion of the Christ.” The cruelty of crucifixion in reality was even more terrifying. The cross was in a “T” shape, laid flat on the ground before nailing the criminal on it. The victim's arms were stretched out upon the crossbar, and the nails driven through his hands. His feet were not nailed, but loosely bound to the cross. There was a projecting piece of wood placed at the halfway point of the cross to support the weight of the victim. Usually it would take a few days before the victim would die of hunger and thirst.

study3

Matthew told us Jesus refused to drink the drugged wine, which would deaden the terrible pain (Matthew 27:34). Jesus wanted to face death at its worst and with a clear mind. His choice had many important implications. First, it told us that Jesus had paid the biggest price to save us from sin. Second, Jesus showed his great love for us; only he could die in such a terrible way for us. Third, he chose the cross out of his free will, which expressed his total submission to God's plan.

While Jesus was suffering this most painful moment, he did not curse others or regret his own choice. On the contrary, he prayed a forgiving prayer on the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing” (v. 34).

The two criminals

Jesus was placed between two criminals who were crucified on his right and left. But they had two different attitudes toward Jesus. One of the criminals kept hurling insults at Jesus. The other one knew Jesus was not an ordinary person. He was a sinless person but willing to die for his people.

That criminal might have been enlightened by Jesus' prayer of forgiveness and realized he must be the Messiah. He also might have heard of Jesus and his ministry before Jesus was crucified. To this criminal, it was the last chance for him to ask God for forgiveness, and he grasped it. He asked, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom” (v. 42).

Through and in Jesus, God has offered his forgiveness for those who will ask for it. This criminal did not need to do anything to earn God's forgiveness. He was not any better than the other criminal; they both deserved their punishment. All he did was just ask for Jesus' forgiveness. Jesus can save anyone who asks. It doesn't matter how bad they were before, Jesus is ready to forgive, for he has died for us. Jesus replied to that criminal, “This is the truth–I tell you–today you will be with me in paradise” (v. 43).

The veil was rent

An unusual thing happened when Jesus gave up his last breath. The veil of the Temple was rent in the midst (v. 45). The veil of the Temple was the separation between the Holy of Holies and the people. No one can enter into it except the high priest once a year during the Day of Atonement. The significance of Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was to bridge the gap between God and people. Jesus is really the way, which will lead us to the Father (John 14:6). On the cross, as never before and never again, people see the love and forgiveness of God.

The love and forgiveness of God, which are offered to us through and in Jesus, is the greatest mystery in human history. We may not totally understand this mystery, but we still can enjoy it if we accept Jesus as our Savior. Jesus has promised us we will be with him in paradise if we ask for his forgiveness for sin.

Discussion questions

bluebull What do you think is the best way to celebrate Jesus' death and resurrection during the next month?

bluebull How do you interpret the phenomenon of the tearing of the Temple's veil?

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



CBF considering cap on funding to some ministry partners_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

CBF considering cap on
funding to some ministry partners

By Greg Warner

Associated Baptist Press

ATLANTA (ABP) — A plan under consideration by the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship would cap CBF funding of outside organizations, which could reduce CBF support for some traditional ministry partners by as much as 31 percent.

The long-awaited proposal from the Partner Study Committee would limit Fellowship funding to 20 percent of any partner's revenues. Based on recent revenue figures, that would cut CBF funding for Associated Baptist Press from $132,119 to $91,784 (a 31 percent cut) and for the Baptist Center for Ethics from $81,555 to $61,380 (25 percent).

Other partners would be less affected. Funding for the Baptist Joint Committee on Religious Liberty would drop slightly, from $203,888 to $201,680, while the Baptist World Alliance and Baptists Today newsjournal would be eligible to receive more money.

None of the theological schools funded by CBF is close to the planned 20 percent ceiling. The only school that depends on Fellowship funding for more than 10 percent of its budget is Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond.

The Partner Study Committee was initiated last year by the CBF Coordinating Council with the objective of diverting more money from CBF-supported organizations into the Fellowship's own ministries.

Charles Cantrell, chair of the Partner Study Committee, confirmed the proposed cap but emphasized it would be phased in over a couple of years and must yet be approved by the Coordinating Council.

"The report will be presented at the February [17-18] council meeting for discussion and review only, with revisions taking place after the February council meeting as needed in response to council and staff discussions," Cantrell, an attorney from Mountain Home, Mo., told ABP. "The proposed report, including guidelines and implementation dates and processes, would then be discussed with current partners. At the June Coordinating Council meeting, the final report will be presented for a vote by the coordinating council."

The cap would apply to "institutional" funding — or undesignated funding of the partners' core programs — according to Cantrell and others, and would not apply to short-term or scholarship funding, which goes to some partners but not others. Additionally, a "safety valve" is provided to allow institutional funding to exceed 20 percent of a partner's revenues if approved by the Coordinating Council, Cantrell said.

The report also proposes new policies for managing CBF's relationships with partners, including methods of reporting activities and requirements for acknowledging CBF ties, according to council members who have studied the plan. A "covenant agreement" would be developed with each partner, spelling out expectations and mutual benefits. More authority over partner funding would be given to CBF staffers, some observers said.

But the report's key element affecting partners is the 20 percent cap, council members told ABP. Those partners have not seen the report, except for a handful of organizations that have employees serving on the council. The council's conflict-of-interest policy could prevent those council members from voting on the plan, but that policy has not been invoked in the past.

Cantrell declined to provide ABP with a copy of the draft report, saying the Coordinating Council — which received the report this week — should discuss it first. Bob Setzer of Macon, Ga., moderator of CBF and the council, did not respond to a request for an interview.

The Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, created in 1991 as an alternative to the more conservative Southern Baptist Convention, served initially as a conduit for funding moderate-favored ministries, such as CBF's current list of 18 primary partners. Since revamping its mission statement, however, CBF has redirected its funding in recent years to its own ministries and to providing services to churches.

The Fellowship's funding of its primary ministry partners has been declining since 1996, dropping 16 percent during the nine-year period. The most recent cut came in 2002-03.

Meanwhile, overall CBF revenue has grown from $13 million in 1996 to $24 million last year, primarily from designated gifts for missions. Undesignated contributions — the pool of funds that supports partners — grew 19 percent, to $8.9 million in the 2003-04 fiscal year.

During the same nine-year period, the Fellowship's administrative costs — including ministry staff — have more than doubled, from $1.9 million to $4.4 million, and the Atlanta-based staff has grown from 33 people to 59.

The Fellowship has budgeted $2,592,468 for partners in 2004-05, about 30 percent of anticipated undesignated funds. A 2003 task force that created the Partner Study Committee recommended reducing the partner-funding pool to 20 percent of the CBF's undesignated budget. Instead, the committee is proposing a cap based on each partner's revenues.

The CBF's five primary non-educational partners (along with their most-recent available annual revenues, current CBF-reported institutional funding, and CBF's percentage of revenues) are:

Baptist World Alliance, revenue $2,630,277 (unrestricted, not including relief), CBF $40,000, 1.5%; Baptist Joint Committee, revenue $1,008,400, CBF $203,888, 20.2%; Associated Baptist Press, $458,921, CBF $132,119, 28.8%; Baptists Today, approximate revenue $450,000, CBF $40,778, 9.1%; Baptist Center for Ethics, revenue $306,898 (2003), CBF $81,555, 26.6%.

The Fellowship provides institutional and/or scholarship funding to 10 seminaries or divinity schools. Their most-recent available annual revenues, current CBF-reported institutional support, CBF's percentage of institutional support, CBF-reported scholarship funding, and number of students, are:

Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor University, revenue $5,354,027, CBF institutional $142,722 (2.7%), CBF scholarship $66,612, students 363; Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond, revenue $2,191,262, CBF institutional $228,355 (10.4%), CBF scholarship $69,467, students 325; Central Baptist Theological Seminary, Kansas City, Kan., revenue $2,490,000, CBF institutional $163,110 (2.7%), CBF scholarship $25,000 (6.6%), students 120 (est.); Christopher White Divinity School, Gardner-Webb University, revenue $2,626,500, CBF institutional $97,866 (3.7%), CBF scholarship $54,787, students 200; Campbell University Divinity School, revenue $1,200,000, CBF institutional $73,400 (6.1%), CBF scholarship $53,156, students 206; Logsdon School of Theology, Hardin-Simmons University, revenue not disclosed, CBF institutional $16,310 (% not disclosed), CBF scholarship $33,156, students not disclosed; Wake Forest Divinity School, revenue $1,000,000 (est.), CBF institutional none, CBF scholarship $33,156, students 97; McAfee School of Theology, Mercer University, revenue not disclosed, CBF institutional $185,946 (% not disclosed), CBF scholarship $46,630, students not disclosed; International Baptist Theological Seminary, Prague, revenue $1,399,000, CBF institutional $88,080, CBF scholarship none, students 138; and Baptist Seminary of Kentucky, revenue $486,000, CBF institutional none, CBF scholarship $15,000, students 51.

Four of those schools are free-standing, not attached to a university — Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond, Central Baptist Theological Seminary, Baptist Seminary of Kentucky and International Baptist Theological Seminary — a fact supporters say warrants more funding.

The Fellowship also funds Baptist-studies programs, which support Baptist students at three non-Baptist theological schools — Candler School of Theology at Emory University, program revenue $250,080, CBF institutional $24,467, CBF scholarship $21,630, 71 Baptist students out of 610 total; Duke Divinity School, program revenue $115,000, CBF institutional $20,389, CBF scholarship $25,000, 101 Baptist students out of 500 total; and Brite Divinity School at Texas Christian University, revenue not disclosed, CBF institutional none, CBF scholarship $45,389, students not disclosed.

— Greg Warner is executive editor of Associated Baptist Press, which receives funding from the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



BaptistWay Bible Series for Feb. 20: Christians are to be obedient, not religious_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

BaptistWay Bible Series for Feb. 20

Christians are to be obedient, not religious

Matthew 23:1-30

By Todd Still

Truett Seminary, Waco

The fifth and final discourse of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew is typically thought to range from 24:1-25:46. For whatever combination of reasons, our curriculum does not devote much attention to this so-called eschatological (“end times”) discourse.

Rather, this week's lesson examines Jesus' denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees in 23:1-30 (which happens to continue through verse 36), and next week's study focuses exclusively upon Jesus' picturesque description of the final judgment (25:31-46). Since our responsibility is teaching and not designing the lesson, we will treat the texts identified in our curriculum and not so much the fifth discourse itself.

From the place where the last lesson ended (18:35) and this lesson begins (23:1), much transpires in Matthew. Not only does Jesus engage in teaching and in healing en route to Jerusalem (19:1-20:34), he also arrives in Jerusalem, judges the temple and enters into dialogue and dispute with various Jewish religious leaders (21:1-23:39). It is in 23:1-36, however, where Jesus' criticism of the Jewish religious establishment, particularly the scribes and the Pharisees, reaches a crescendo.

At the outset of this study, it may be necessary to remind ourselves who the scribes and Pharisees were. The former were writing bureaucrats and scholars, whereas the latter were one of the three major sects within Judaism in Jesus' day (the other two being the Sadducees and Essenes) which rigorously applied the Jewish law, be it written or oral, to everyday life.

While not all Pharisees were scribes, not a few scribes were Pharisees. Matthew consistently links the two groups together. In fact, in the First Gospel they often are portrayed as Jesus' arch opponents.

While four of the five discourses are directed toward the disciples, Jesus addresses both the crowds and his disciples in 23:1-36 (note verse 1). Jesus commences his excoriation of the scribes and the Pharisees by enjoining his audience to observe what they say but to not do as they do (v. 3).

Parents sometimes encourage their children to do as they say but not as they do. All too often, however, they fail to offer an explanation for such an admonition. The reason Jesus gives his listeners for following the instruction of the scribes and the Pharisees is that they “sit on Moses' seat”; that is, they stand in his authoritative train of teaching (v. 2). He tells his listeners not to act like them, however, because “they do not practice what they teach” (v. 3). In a word, Jesus calls them “hypocrites” (vv. 13, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29).

Specifically, Jesus levels three charges against the scribes and Pharisees in verses 4-7. First, Jesus declares they place the burden of the Jewish law upon the people and do not even lift a finger to lighten their load (v. 4). Additionally, he accuses them of being spiritual “grandstanders.” Their Scripture boxes strapped to their foreheads and left arms overflow while the tassels on their long, flowing robes hang down low (v. 5). Jesus also criticizes them for loving special seating and for enjoying reverential greeting (vv. 6-7).

This prompts Jesus to inform his followers that they are not to call one another “rabbi” or “father” or “instructor,” for they have one Father in heaven and the Messiah as their instructor (vv. 8-10). Rather, they are to call one another “brothers” and “sisters” and are to outstrip one another in service, not status. In the kingdom economy, humility is the leading economic indicator (vv. 11-12).

With these three incriminations still ringing in their ears, Jesus adds no less than seven woes of prophetic condemnation. Talk about adding insult to injury!

It seems more than coincidental that there are three examples of hypocrisy set forth in verses 4-7 and seven woes recorded in verses 13-36. In Scripture, the numbers “three,” “seven,” and “10” all signal completion. Indeed, it appears one purpose of this chapter is to question the spiritual credibility of those who condoned Jesus' death.

Woes one and two may be taken together (vv. 13-15). Calamity is pronounced upon the scribes and Pharisees for opposing Jesus and his message on the one hand (v. 13) while going to great extremes to promulgate their commitments on the other (v. 15).

The third woe centers upon these so-called “blind guides'” proclivity to set up for themselves legal loopholes with respect to making various oaths (vv. 16-22). Jesus points out the intellectual and spiritual folly of thinking lesser oaths are binding while greater oaths are non-binding.

It reminds one of children who make up the rules of a game on the fly and for their own advantage. Although wise in their own eyes, Jesus regards these spiritual directors as “blind.”

The fourth woe is in regard to tithing (vv. 23-24). While Jesus does not oppose their giving a tenth of their agricultural produce, including the small herbs mint, dill and cummin, to the temple and its priests, he maintains they have strained out a gnat, a small unclean insect, only to swallow a camel, a large unclean land animal, by neglecting the godly virtues of justice, mercy and faith.

Woes five and six have to do with putting on airs (vv. 25-28). With respect to the proper washing of the cup and plate, Jesus' misgiving is that external actions have eclipsed internal attitudes. First things must be kept first (vv. 25-26). Similarly, Jesus' unflattering depiction of the scribes and Pharisees as white-washed tombs revolves around his belief that there should always be a congruity between what appears to be and what actually is. The old adage “pretty is as pretty does” is appropriate here.

Last, Jesus points out the inconsistency between the scribes and Pharisees memorializing former prophets while rejecting the prophets, sages and scribes now in their midst. This reality, which Jesus came to know all too well, prompts him to denounce them as a “brood of vipers” and to question how they can escape being consigned to eternal damnation (vv. 29-36).

I, for one, do not need the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus' day to alert me to the deleterious spiritual tendencies and patterns that exist in my own life. May God have mercy on us all for our feigned piety and superficial spirituality. We can only hope and pray that Jesus laments over the messes we are and that we make, even as he did over Jerusalem (vv. 37-39).

Discussion question

bluebull What similarities can be found between the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus' day and Christians of today?

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



LifeWay Family Bible Series for Feb. 20: God is just in condemning sin, but also forgives_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

LifeWay Family Bible Series for Feb. 20

God is just in condemning sin, but also forgives

Hosea 11:1-11

By Leroy Fenton

Baptist Standard, Dallas

Christian love often can seem no deeper than the skin of personal convenience, far from the deeper sacrificial love of God. Ninety-five percent of those who call themselves Christian never lead a soul to Christ and for the most part hardly try. The church is like a crowd at a football game where 100,000 in the stands are spectators watching 22 players at work in the arena. Evangelism classes are avoided like the plague because of laziness, fear and pride.

We hide in the cloister of our Sunday school rooms and sanctuaries teaching lessons on love and listening to sermons on compassion like the phantom of the opera hiding behind a mask. We always are grateful someone else does the work of love while we enjoy the glory.

Most Christians do not care enough to tithe and provide the means to send out those who are willing to go witness and make disciples. “We don't have the gift of evangelism” is often the glib disclaimer. Love becomes a word that does not penetrate our person and subsequently cannot penetrate into the world.

We have had 2,000 years to win the world to our God of love, but the Muslims have out-preached us with their Allah of sternness and legalism. To nation after nation, the American church has said, “Go to hell; we don't care enough to come. There is no place for you in our church.”

study3

This fault of the church hardly represents the character of the God we worship and love. God wants all his creation to worship him and walk with him. He holds out his hands in a gesture of warmth to welcome and reclaim those who will repent and come home, regardless of their past rebellion.

Gomer is an Old Testament prodigal. Hosea is like the loving father of Luke 15. Gomer must have thought a thousand times in her moments of anguish, “I wonder if my husband will have me back?”

Very few people have experienced Hosea's answer to a family dilemma by going to the streets, dark and dangerous, and finding the wasted wreckage of womanhood, taking money he could not afford to pay as her ransom and offering her another chance to stand at his side.

God already has paid the ransom price for every person enslaved by sin and lifts his hands to welcome home all the prodigals who will come to themselves. Rising from the ashes of brokenness and sickness of heart, Hosea walked with tears in the light of the love of God lavished upon destitute humanity.

God's grace is difficult to comprehend. God loves us and desires the broken relationship restored. Past failures make us fail again, haunt our psyche with doubt and self-deprecation. How could God love me after what I have done? How do I overcome the past and set the course for the future? Will God forgive me and welcome me back into his family?

Drifting away (Hosea 11:1-2)

Chapter 11 is a powerful expression of God's great heart of compassion for a people who will not let him love them or lead them. This emotional, tender, poetic yearning for a restored relationship from the very heart of God was expressed as a father's love for his wayward child.

Historical points of reference are used as examples of a father's reminiscing of parental love from the early years of childhood to the youthful rebellious years of Egyptian bondage (v. 1). This appeal to history is effective in illustrating past providence and great grace in Israel's behalf. Israel, the chosen people of God, had drifted away as God continued to call out to her, not unlike a fleeing child running for the dangerous street while ignoring the pleading parent. One can feel the hunger to grasp the hand, the sadness in the words and the emptiness of the spirit of God who calls but finds no one listening.

Israel was so self-absorbed in her own passions and lusts satisfying her carnal nature that she was incapable of hearing the loving call of God. She had drifted so far away, she was not in touch with her own immorality or her uniqueness as the chosen people of God. Israel had adulterated herself and gone after other lovers and other gods.

We live in different days. The sexual revolution has turned “whoring” into “hooking-up.” The majority of our youth, including Christians, have experienced sex before graduating from high school. Sexual licentiousness is like a carnival of college coed dorms, hotel rooms, the backseat of cars or the bedroom of absent parents, encouraged by blatant movies and bold television. Our attitudes about sex are deformed.

Sexual innocence has been decapitated, and parental supervision has been bombed. With numerous opportunities for sexual experimentation with several partners, there is little resemblance to the days when sex usually was meant for marriage and those who were more inclined to a sensual nature were shamed.

Our age has drifted away from God and the biblical values and morals of the past generation, and it has come so quickly. Our dreams and hopes for the future of our nation and the church are in the hands of those who separate reason and values from feeling and pleasure. There is an emptiness of loss, a void of virtue that grip the aching heart of God.

In Hosea's Israel, the drift away was no more pronounced or sinful than that of our own. God says, “The more I called them, the more they went from me; they kept sacrificing to the Baals, and burning incense to idols” (11:2). The drifting of America into adultery and godless unfaithfulness is reminiscent of Israel's dilemma.

Persistent love (Hosea 11:3-4)

Hosea garnered his gospel out of his grief over Gomer's whorish life and her spurning of his love. The deep loving heart of God became the mirror of his own redeeming forgiveness that pushed him to the slave block to buy back his bride.

Understanding the love of God, he captured the nature of true biblical faith and prophetically foretold the coming history of Israel. This ungrateful nation had turned its back upon the God who had reached out to her. Four analogies are used for God's fatherly love: God taught them “to walk,” “healed them,” “lifted the yoke from their neck” and “bent down to feed them” (vv. 3-4).

Israel gave Baal credit for her past and vision for her future in spite of God's persistence “with cords of human kindness, and ties of love” (v. 3). Ephraim, the younger son of Joseph, was the name of one of the 12 tribes of Israel. Following the Syro-Ephraimite War, 734-732 B.C., part of the outer land was taken by Assyria, leaving the more central area where Ephraim was located. Ephraim, being the more prominent, became a designated name for Israel.

Determined rebellion (Hosea 11:5-7)

Rebellion, stubbornness and disobedience inevitably would bring doom to Israel through the judgment of God. Disintegration of character and flagrant worship of pagan idols left Israel in a terrible condition of determined depravity. Their conflict with God and ignoring of his law would lead to another captivity at the hands of the Assyrians, not unlike what had been experienced in Egypt (v. 5).

The force of this play on words should have been intimidating but went unheeded “because they refuse to repent” (v. 5). If undiscerning Israel wanted bondage, they would have it at the hands of the Assyrians whose “swords will flash in their cities, will destroy the bars of their gates and put an end to their plans” (v. 6). God would give them up, would not hold them back and would grant their determined desire.

The bondage of sin would bring its just reward and results. God will go as far as he dares, but there comes a time when he turns his back upon rebelliousness and incorporates the harsh judgment of love so that “even if they call to the Most High, he will by no means exalt them” (v. 7).

Amazing grace (Hosea 11:8-11)

God recoiled at the thought that Israel would be like Admah and Zebolim (v. 8), two cities obliterated along with Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 10:19, 14:2-8). The very thought brought God to have “warm and tender” compassion upon Israel. Their consequences brought his compassion. God did not want to do what he had to do.

That is tough love–doing what is necessary to bring about repentance and reconciliation. However, God would not execute his “fierce anger” or take his judgment to its ultimate possibilities. His judgment would be restrained in that God would “not again destroy” Israel.

There is a softness even in God's justice that reveals his compassion and character. Were it not for this reprieve, he could have abandoned Israel forever rather than continue his part of the covenant. Only because of the balance of anger and grace, wrath and love is redemption possible. Because “I am God, and not man,” God would come not in wrath only but in love so that when his “children come trembling” from the “roar” of his wrath “like doves from Assyria,” God would “settle them in their homes”(vv. 9-11).

Tough love acts with restraint. Rather than continuing to guide, control and enable, it turns loose and allows the consequences of poor choices to take their natural course. Never giving up, love waits for the judgment and penalty that comes with those poor choices to create painful losses that open up the insubordinate heart to hear and the defiant mind to understand so the will of rebellion can be broken. Sometimes this comes quickly; for many, it takes years. And for some, it never happens.

This last possibility makes it very difficult to turn loose, for there is always the possibility the prodigal will not come to himself and come home again. Hosea, out of his own experience of grace, shows that God is hesitant to turn Israel loose with “How can I give you up” and “How can I hand you over” (v. 8).

Just as Hosea struggled to both hang on or give up on his estranged wife, so God struggled with Israel. God, with this anguish over Israel, will forever be praised for his willingness, likewise, to hand over his only Son to be crucified for the sins of the world.

At some point, it becomes obvious that turning loose is the only way for both to win. That is the amazing grace of God–loving someone enough to turn loose and wait for the opportunity to redeem from bondage, regardless of the cost. God will give a person up but never give up on a person. God, in keeping with his creation, will never make a robot out of a person but never quits trying to woo a person's will to a voluntary and spontaneous relationship of love and respect. Such a dynamic makes our humanity filled with the splendor of living in his image.

Discussion question

bluebull What signs are there that Christians may be drifting from their responsibilities as children of God?

bluebull How have you experienced the persistence of God's love?

bluebull What task has God called you to that you have given up on, but he still waits for your obedience?

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



Faith groups question whether Bush Budget ‘compassionate’_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

Faith groups question whether
Bush budget 'compassionate'

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (ABP)—President Bush is proposing a $2.57 trillion federal budget for fiscal year 2006 that would substantially cut or eliminate many domestic social programs while creating or boosting funding for a handful of others that would be open to religious groups.

As presidents are required by law to do on the first Monday in February, Bush presented his proposal to Congress Feb. 7. It includes the elimination of, or significant cuts in, about 150 different domestic programs that Bush said either are not working or are redundant.

He referred to the budget proposal as “a disciplined budget” in remarks to the Detroit Economic Club. He noted that the budget increases spending on defense and homeland security while cutting spending on other domestic agencies and programs aside from entitlements such as Social Security.

“My budget reduces spending … on non-security discretionary programs by one percent, the most disciplined proposal since Ronald Reagan was in office,” he said.

The budget includes significant reductions in the budgets of the Department of Education as well as the Department of Housing and Urban Development. A major HUD program—the Community Development Block Grants—would be removed from that agency and folded into a new program in the Department of Commerce. However, funding for that program would be more than $1 billion lower than the previous year’s funding level for the block grants.

Bush’s proposal also includes significant increases in funding for some programs that are open to religious social-service providers, including programs that encourage sexual abstinence among teenagers and programs for mentoring the children of prisoners.

“When I look at the overall budget, and look at it in the context of previous submissions, I think it’s a compassionate budget, in light of tight budgetary times,” said Jim Towey, director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, in a conference call with reporters shortly after the budget was released.

“All budgets reflect priorities, as well as prioritizing programs that are effective,” he added. “And (we need) to look at ways in which we can meet the needs of the American people, especially those in need.”

But many supporters of government-funded social services disagreed.

“The president said this is a budget that sets priorities, and we just don’t agree with any of the priorities in there,” said Yonce Shelton, policy director for the Christian anti-poverty group Call to Renewal. “You know, what kind of values and priorities are ones that present a rosy picture of additional support and funding and ask faith-based groups to do more of that, but then at the same time they really are cutting support mechanisms that help support working families?”

Shelton pointed out Call to Renewal has long been a supporter of Bush’s faith-based plan to expand government’s ability to fund social services through religious groups, but the group has become increasingly critical of Bush for offering little new money for such programs.

“I think when you talk about cutting community programs, which on the other hand the administration is saying we’re trying to support with community and faith-based initiatives, you’ve got to question the integrity and honesty of that approach,” he said.

Shelton also noted that the budget proposal includes further cuts in Medicaid funding, which means cash-strapped states will have to absorb the expenses or cut some benefits of the program, which mainly helps poor and elderly people.

“Practically speaking, if you’re not helping low-income people with their healthcare, … in the long run, that’s just going to present more of a burden to society,” he said.

But Bush said many of the cuts were in programs that were ineffective or redundant.

“The important question that needs to be asked for all constituencies is whether or not the programs achieve a certain result,” Bush told reporters. “Have you set goals, and are those goals being met? And the poor and disadvantaged absolutely ought to be asking that question too. In other words, what is the goal of a particular program? And if that goal isn’t being met, the question ought to be asked, ‘Why isn’t the goal being met?’”

Bush’s budget is likely to face major hurdles in Congress, where many of the domestic programs scheduled for cuts enjoy strong support.

Several congressional Democrats lambasted the budget , including House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who labeled it “immoral.” Meanwhile, key Republicans offered only tepid support, with at least three members of Congress’ Republican leadership issuing statements calling Bush’s proposal a “starting point” for the 2006 budget.

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



Bill would allow charities receiving federal funds to discriminate on basis of religion_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

Bill would allow charities receiving federal
funds to discriminate on basis of religion

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (ABP)—For the second time in as many years, a House panel has approved a bill that would allow some government-funded charities to discriminate in hiring on the basis of religion.

On a party-line vote, a subpanel of the House Education and Workforce Committee approved the “Job Training Improvement Act.” The act reauthorizes a federal program that funds local organizations helping provide unemployed people with marketable job skills.

The committee’s 15 Democrats voted against the bill, while its 18 Republicans supported the legislation.

The proposal would remove protections for employees seeking jobs from religious social-service providers funded under the program. The 1964 Civil Rights Act already allows churches and synagogues to discriminate in hiring for most positions on the basis of religious principles. However, the courts have not definitively settled the issue of whether religious groups retain that right when hiring for a position wholly or partly funded by tax dollars.

The 1982 Workforce Investment Act, which set up the program, originally prohibited organizations receiving grants under it from discriminating on the basis of religion, race, gender and other categories. The new bill would remove those protections only for religious providers, and only on the basis of religion.

“If this bill passes… we will be repealing civil-rights protections that have been in effect for decades,” said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), who offered an amendment to the bill that would restore the 1982 language on religious discrimination. It failed.

But freshman Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) said Scott’s amendment “in itself would discriminate against faith-based organizations.” She said religious groups “can’t be expected to sustain their religious mission without the ability to employ people who share the tenets of their faith.”

But several Democrats on the panel said Republican supporters of the proposal were trying to have their cake and eat it, too. Because the courts do not allow direct government funding of religious activity, they argued, religious charities should be able to hire qualified people of any faith for government-funded job-training services without compromising their religious mission.

“The question is whether, once they’ve received federal dollars, they should be able to discriminate in employment based on religion in the providing of non-religious services,” said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).

“We all agree it is not lawful for these organizations to use federal dollars to promote particular religions,” he continued. “And therefore, at the same time, to argue that it is more effective for them to be able to discriminate on the basis of religion is nonsensical.”

But Rep. Vernon Ehlers (R-Mich.) noted his downtown church in Grand Rapids offers many ministries to the community that, while delivering services that have no explicitly religious components, nonetheless are done with a religious mission in mind.

“We want staff in total agreement with the mission of the church as we know it,” Ehlers said. “We would want (the program) to operate according to the philosophy of faith of the church.”

The issue has come to a head in the past few years, as President Bush has pushed for more federal funding of social services through churches and other religious charities. Though he failed to pass his “faith-based initiative” in its entirety through Congress, he has slowly implemented many parts of it via executive orders and other administrative actions.

Meanwhile, the House has done its part to aid piecemeal implementation of Bush’s plan, including adding similar employment-discrimination provisions to a number of bills funding social-service providers. But most of those attempts have been thwarted in the Senate.

In 2003, the House passed a bill similar to the Job Training Investment Act that included an identical provision on religious discrimination. However, it never passed the Senate.

The current bill is H.R. 27. It will likely be considered by the full House before the end of February.

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



New York judge allows same-sex marriage, says prohibition unconstitutional_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

New York judge allows same-sex
marriage, says prohibition unconstitutional

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

NEW YORK (ABP)—A state judge has ordered New York City officials to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples on an equal basis with heterosexual couples.

New York Supreme Court Justice Doris Ling-Cohan said a law the state attorney general has interpreted as prohibiting same-sex marriage violates the state’s constitution.

“Similar to opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples are entitled to the same fundamental right to follow their hearts and publicly commit to a lifetime partnership with the person of their choosing,” Ling-Cohan wrote in her 62-page opinion. “The recognition that this fundamental right applies equally to same-sex couples cannot legitimately be said to harm anyone.”

The judge ordered the city clerk in New York to stop his office’s practice of denying marriage licenses to gay couples. She also said gender-specific language in the state’s Domestic Relations Law, which officials had interpreted to ban gay couples from marrying each other, should be read as gender-neutral.

However, Ling-Cohan delayed implementation of her ruling for 30 days in case city officials choose to appeal it. And New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (R), who personally supports gay marriage, nonetheless said the city will appeal.

City attorneys said they also will ask the state’s highest court, the New York Court of Appeals, to hear the case immediately, skipping an intermediate court. The city’s head attorney, Michael Cardozo, said officials are seeking the expedited ruling “so that a decision on this important issue can be reached as quickly as possible.”

Unlike in many states, the New York Supreme Court is a low-level trial court. There are two levels of appellate courts above it.

Although the judge’s decision interprets the state constitution, at this point the ruling affects only marriage licenses issued in New York City.

Attorneys for Lambda Legal, a gay-rights group, filed suit last year on behalf of five same-sex couples who were denied marriage licenses by New York City officials. They contended the equal-protection and privacy provisions of the New York Constitution requires that marriage rights and responsibilities apply equally to homosexual and heterosexual people.

In her ruling, Ling-Cohan noted that one of the plaintiffs, Curtis Woolbright, is the son of an interracial heterosexual couple who moved to California in 1966 in order to marry legally. Many states had laws banning interracial marriage until a 1967 United States Supreme Court ruling declared them unconstitutional.

“The challenges to laws banning whites and non-whites from marriage demonstrate that the fundamental right to marry the person of one’s choice may not be denied based on longstanding and deeply held traditional beliefs about appropriate marital partners,” Ling-Cohan wrote.

Quoting an 1871 Indiana ruling upholding such a law, she added, “Although anti-miscegenation (mixed-race marriage) laws were first enacted in colonial days, such laws were still common into the 1960s and upheld in case after case based on tradition rooted in perceived ‘natural’ law. For example, the Indiana Supreme Court relied on the ‘undeniable fact’ that the ‘distribution of men by race and color is as visible in the providential arrangement of the earth as that of heat and cold.’”

Ling-Cohan was elected to her position in 2002, after having earned nominations from both Democrats and Republicans. Her district covers an area of lower Manhattan. The case is Hernandez et al. vs. Robles.

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



Cybercolumn by Jeanie Miley: Giving honor … where honor is due_22105

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/11/05

CYBERCOLUMN:
Giving honor … where honor is due

By Jeanie Miley

Sometimes, a movie expresses things I have been thinking but haven’t had the courage to say. Such was the case for me as I was watching In Good Company on a cold February afternoon.

The movie made me think about the contrast between cultures that respect and value the wisdom gained over a lifetime and those that don’t. And every time I start down this line of thought, my mind takes me back to the story of the boy Jesus astounding the learned in the synagogue when he was only 12.

We who love the stories of Jesus enjoy the story of the precocious young Jesus, discussing Important Things with the rabbis and scholars. And we who are parents take comfort in the anxiety of his earthly parents, who, for a time, didn’t know where he was.

Jeanie Miley

I find it increasingly fascinating that instead of taking the boy Jesus back to Jerusalem and installing him in a position of power, he was, instead, taken home for long years of training and tempering, of preparation and waiting until he was mature enough for his ministry. While I have fretted and longed to know what went on in Jesus’ life in those years between his impressive show of knowledge in Jerusalem and his launching of his ministry, I think that the silence about those years does, perhaps, speak volumes.

The truth is that sometimes, wisdom does, indeed, come out of the mouths of babes, and anyone who has been around at least one block knows that it is a foolish thing to ignore the input and influence of the young. Sometimes, a child can see and say what an adult cannot, and there are times and places that yearn for the fresh winds of the Spirit that only the young can bring. More than once, I’ve been brought to a place of breathless awe by the words of an innocent child.

However, my culture worships youth and youthfulness, and the truth is that while we may give lip service to the dangers of having “too much, too soon,” we keep on giving responsibility to people who have not earned it, expensive toys to children who may or may not have the maturity to handle them and positions of power to those who have not learned the hard and necessary lessons in the trenches of life.

In our culture, untrained and inexperienced adolescents challenge and question leaders and teachers with decades of training and experience behind them. We throw out traditions that have had meaning and purpose for generations, we are so desperate to placate and pacify the young. We are so scared of “losing” the next generation that we are often afraid to speak up and speak out to them about their choices. Parents are often so scared of “losing” a child that they avoid setting boundaries and limits, thereby failing to protect the young from themselves. We work so hard to identify with the young that we often stoop to their level of maturity, rather than insisting that they rise to ours.

Jesus’ heavenly father must have known that he needed the long years of preparation before he was given his gigantic mission, and I like to imagine what his earthly parents must have had to say to him in those years to help him mature into the adult Jesus who turned the world upside down.

“Why are the parents allowing their children to decide where they go to church?” my daughter demanded of me, back when she was 15. “Don’t they know that is too much pressure for a kid?”

Like I said: Out of the mouths of babes.

Jeanie Miley is an author and columnist and a retreat and workshop leader. She is married to Martus Miley, pastor of River Oaks Baptist Church in Houston, and they have three adult daughters. Got feedback? Write her at Writer2530@aol.com.

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



BaptistWay Bible Series for Feb. 13: Church discipline, forgiveness flow together_20705

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/08/05

BaptistWay Bible Series for Feb. 13

Church discipline, forgiveness flow together

Matthew 18:15-35

By Todd Still

Truett Seminary, Waco

Last week, we commenced our study of Jesus' fourth discourse in Matthew's Gospel by considering the Master's instruction on who is greatest in the kingdom of heaven, namely, children (18:1-5). Additionally, we reflected upon the fact that Jesus holds his disciples responsible for the spiritual well-being of the so-called “little ones,” likely recent converts and/or immature believers. Even as the heavenly Father is extremely concerned that no “little ones” are lost, so also Jesus' followers should take extreme measures, if necessary, to ensure the spiritual maturation of such persons (vv. 6-14).

This week's lesson covers the remainder of the fourth discourse. We will overview Jesus' teaching on the restitution of a believer overtaken by a transgression (vv. 15-20). Furthermore, we will examine Jesus' parabolic response to Peter's question regarding the limits of forgiveness (vv. 21-34). These passages offer practical and radical counsel regarding Christian relationships.

Although verse 15 begins hypothetically (“if”), sin amongst and against believers is a sad and sobering reality. More frequently than we Christians would care to admit, we transgress against God and one another. When a believer sins (against another church member and by extension the entire congregation), what course of action should be taken?

Verses 15-17 set forth a pattern for reconciliation between fellow Christians. Should a brother or sister sin (against you), the onus of responsibility falls upon the aggrieved party. Earlier in Matthew, believers are admonished to seek reconciliation with the brother or sister who has something against them before giving their offering (5:23-24). Elsewhere, Paul enjoins the Romans “If it is possible, so far as it depends upon you, live peaceably with all” (12:18).

In the first instance, the offended is to seek out the offender in private and to point out to him or to her the error of his or of her way. If this person should listen to the admonition of a fellow Christian, then restitution will result (18:15). In the event that reconciliatory efforts on a one-to-one basis fail, then the person seeking to affect restored relations is instructed to take another believer or two along.

This enables individuals not directly involved to serve as witnesses (v. 16). Deuteronomy 19:15 states: “A single person shall not suffice to convict a person of any crime or wrongdoing in connection with any offense that may be committed. Only on the evidence of two or three witnesses shall a charge be sustained.”

If the erring member should refuse to listen to a small band of believers, then the entire church is to get involved. Should even the admonition of the congregation be rebuffed, then the insider is to be treated as an outsider, that is, as a Gentile and a tax collector (v. 17). The disciplinary action of the congregation against a wayward member is to be viewed as authoritative (vv. 18-19) and in keeping with the presence of Jesus in their midst (v. 20).

Most contemporary Christian assemblies are wary of church discipline. This is understandable, for the practice is notoriously susceptible to abuse. This fact notwithstanding, Christian communities should take sin, as qualified as such in the Scriptures, seriously and act restoratively toward those caught in sin's ugly snare (Galatians 6:1).

Contrary to popular opinion, in some instances the most compassionate step a Christian or a church can take is to help a believer remove the speck from his or her eye, acknowledging all the while the log they have just removed from their own (Matthew 7:1-5). However, any and all action taken against another believer by a congregation should be done in a spirit of gentleness, remembering all the while that the very people with whom Jesus mixed and mingled during his earthly ministry were tax collectors and sinners (9:10-12; 11:19).

The spirit of forgiveness and mercy that marked Jesus' ministry and should characterize those who seek to follow in his steps is poignantly illustrated by Jesus in his memorable parable of the unforgiving servant (vv. 23-35). In response to Peter's question if he should forgive another believer who has sinned against him up to seven times (a number in Scripture that signals completeness), Jesus answers, “Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times (or, as some manuscripts read, seventy times seven)” (vv. 21-22). In essence, Jesus is saying to Peter (and to us) that believers who tally up the wrongs done to them by others are barking up the wrong spiritual tree.

To illustrate this point, Jesus tells a story of a slave, easily likened to a Christ-follower, who owed a king, a thinly veiled allusion to God, an insurmountable, indeed an unimaginable, debt (some 150,000 years of labor). In response to the slave's desperate plea for leniency and his foolish promise he would pay the debt entirely if the king would but have patience with him, the king is moved with pity and forgives the debt entirely.

Subsequently, this slave moves to extract a comparatively paltry sum (one hundred days' wages) from a fellow slave. When the king gets wind of such, he summons the “wicked slave” and asks him if he should not have been merciful since he himself had been shown mercy (5:7). Having previously been spared from a grisly judgment, this slave was now to be subjected to the same.

In driving home the primary point of this parable, Jesus warns his disciples, “So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister from your heart” (18:35).

When we pray collectively, “Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us,” we should mean it. It would be the height of spiritual hypocrisy and tragedy if we who have been forgiven much did not also forgive much. In the final analysis, none of us want to experience God's judgment. We would be wise to relate to others in a merciful manner, mindful of the fact that we, too, are sinners.

Discussion question

Why has church discipline fallen out of use?

Is it still practical to employ? If not, what system would work better?

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.



LifeWay Explore the Bible Series for Feb. 13: Jesus demonstrated submission to the Father_20705

February 18, 2005

Posted: 2/08/05

LifeWay Explore the Bible Series for Feb. 13

Jesus demonstrated submission to the Father

Luke 22:14-22, 41-44, 66-71

By Pakon Chan

Chinese Baptist Church, Arlington

This chapter of Luke brings us to the last days of Jesus' earthly ministry. Jesus went to Jerusalem to observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread and prepared to die as its Passover Lamb.

Once again, Jesus had demonstrated his control over his destiny and ministry even in a situation of betrayal. Satan uses people's weaknesses and confusion to interrupt God's plans and ministry. In this situation, it seems Satan, the chief priests and the Scribes had control of Jesus' fate. Judas was their means to execute the evil plan. Unexpectedly during the meal, Jesus exposed the plan of the betrayal and warned the traitor with a curse (22:21-22).

What a comfort and encouragement a minister can have in these verses that God will overcome all evil and turn it into the fulfillment of his divine plan. Jesus confirmed that “truly the Son of Man goes as it has been determined” (v. 22).

study3

Paul has assured us that “all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28). Jesus went on his journey to die for all sinners, and that was his ministry.

The last supper (vv. 14-20)

Jesus knew this was the last Passover meal he would eat with his disciples. This Passover meal was not just any Passover meal to Jesus, for he knew he was the Passover Lamb and was about to be sacrificed for his people.

From this passage, we can easily identify at least three new meanings Jesus added to the Passover meal. First, it is about the kingdom of God. Jesus said he would not eat another Passover meal after this one, but was anticipating eating with them again some day in God's kingdom. The Apostle John had a vision of the feast of the Lamb in God's kingdom in heaven in his book of Revelation (Revelation 19:7). This Passover meal has transformed into the Lord's Supper since then, and becomes the preparation for all the disciples of Jesus Christ for the future feast of the Lamb in God's kingdom in heaven.

Second, the unleavened bread of the meal has a new symbolism to the disciples for it represents the body of Christ. By sharing it, we remember the body of Christ was broken for us. This body was a sinless body, but it was sacrificed for all the sinners. This rite of remembrance also is an act of commitment. By eating the bread, we commit to the body of Christ through loving each other with the love of Christ.

Third, the cup after the meal is the second cup of the Passover meal. It symbolizes the blood of Christ shed for us. Because of shedding his blood, a new relationship between God and human beings is established. Covenant in the Bible refers to the special relationship between God and his people. Through a covenant, Israelites became the people of God. This new covenant was created by the blood of Jesus. His blood cleanses the sins of his disciples, therefore, a new relationship between God and human beings becomes possible. The disciples of Jesus Christ are the children of God. It also symbolizes a covenant of Christians bound in love to one another.

Human beings are very forgetful, and we easily forget why and how we were saved. Jesus has installed the Lord's Supper for his disciples to remind them of his sacrifice and their ministry and identity as God's new people.

There is a tradition for almost all Chinese churches that they observe the Lord's Supper on the first Sunday of every month. The Lord's Supper reminds them they were saved by the broken body of the Lord and his shed blood. It also reminds us to love one another just as Jesus loves us. In the remembrance of the Lord, they can rededicate themselves to kingdom ministry and wait for the second coming of Christ.

Thy will be done (vv. 39-46)

After the meal, Jesus knew the time of his death was drawing near. This death was the most horrible and unbearable suffering a human being ever experienced. This moment was so very terrifying and painful to him, he needed to have a close and intimate confirmation from the Father. He prayed so hard and intensely that Luke told us “his sweat was as drops of blood falling upon the ground” (2:44). He could have gotten himself out of this terrifying situation by just denying his identity as the Son of God (22:70). But Jesus could not do this because he was the very Son of God.

What was Jesus praying for if his only option was to fulfill his mission? He had to fulfill his mission as the Messiah, but could there be another more easy way to do it? This bitter cup even the Son of God did not want to take. Once again, Jesus demonstrated his submission to God–to take whatever God had for him. From a human perspective, there might be a lot of ways to accomplish the task and fulfill the mission. But God had set the path for him and this was the cup Jesus had to take.

This may be the most difficult part for many Christians. We want to use our ways to accomplish God's work. We all tend to find the easiest way to do things, and a way that requires less sacrifice. We, as Christians, want to do God's will, but do we also want to do it according to his way? Jesus taught his disciples to pray for God's will be done as it is in heaven. Now he demonstrated the meaning of his teaching by taking this most bitter cup because it was the will of God.

This is the example of Jesus: he would not stop and draw back from his mission even if it was not the way that he wanted to take. He might struggle, but he was willing to yield and to submit to God's will.

Discussion questions

Next time you observe the Lord's Supper, meditate deeper on the meaning of the actions you take in this ritual.

If God's mission for us is clearly written in the Bible (like the one in Matthew 28:19-20), why do so many Christians still struggle so hard to do it?

How did Jesus set the example of submission in his prayer?

News of religion, faith, missions, Bible study and Christian ministry among Texas Baptist churches, in the BGCT, the Southern Baptist Convention ( SBC ) and around the world.