Posted: 3/19/04

BWA seeks to put conflict behind,
issues statement affirming doctrine

By Robert Marus

Associated Baptist Press

FALLS CHURCH, Va. (ABP)–Hoping to put controversy behind them, the Baptist World Alliance's Executive Committee issued a statement affirming historic Christian doctrines.

The action came during the committee's first meeting since the Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee voted to recommend the denomination break all ties with the 99-year-old umbrella group for Baptist denominations around the globe.

The SBC is the BWA's largest member body and largest contributor. If messengers to the SBC's annual meeting in June approve the recommendation, the BWA will stand to lose $300,000 in funding next year.

The BWA statement–written by an ad hoc committee BWA President Billy Kim appointed during the executive committee meeting–expressed “great appreciation for the SBC's contribution to kingdom work around the world” but added that committee members “regret the current tensions” that have led to the SBC-BWA split.

Responding to an SBC study committee's reasons for the recommendation to cut ties, the statement also affirmed orthodox Christian doctrines “including, but not limited to” the unique nature of Christ, the “centrality of the Great Commission” to the Christian faith, and BWA's “joyful affirmation of faith in the mediation of Jesus Christ as solely and entirely sufficient for salvation.”

The SBC study committee's report contained undocumented allegations that BWA leaders had been open to “positions contrary to the New Testament and to Baptist doctrines.”

The report also accused BWA meetings and officers of exhibiting a “decided anti-American tone in recent years” and accused the group's international relief arm, Baptist World Aid, of funding “questionable enterprises.”

Prior to issuing the statement, BWA Executive Committee members spent about two hours responding to and discussing the SBC's allegations.

Fausto de Vasconcelos, a Brazilian Baptist leader and the chairman of BWA's evangelism and education division, described his anguish over the situation because of the close relationship Brazilian Baptists have had with the SBC over the years. Noting his 10 years in the United States as a student in Southern Baptist seminaries, he said, “I am a Southern Baptist.”

But de Vasconcelos added that, despite the fact some of the anecdotes cited by the SBC as examples of liberalism stemmed from events his division of BWA sponsored, “I have not seen or heard anything that has to be defended at this point,” he said. “The idea in Brazil is that we're not dealing with a theological matter, but with a political problem.”

Paul Montacute, director of Baptist World Aid, said he repeatedly had asked members of the SBC study panel to provide examples of the “questionable enterprises” they had accused BWAid of funding, but that they refused to cite any.

“We were amazed that such a powerful committee of Southern Baptist leaders could make unsubstantiated charges,” he said. “We're still waiting to hear what it is that we've been up to and what makes it a 'questionable enterprise.'”

Committee members expressed perhaps their greatest indignation at the charges of “anti-Americanism.”

Theo Angelov, secretary of the European Baptist Federation and a survivor of Communist persecution of Christians in Eastern Europe, noted his father was arrested and imprisoned for eight years on charges of being an American spy even though he had never visited the United States.

The government was suspicious of his father, he said, merely because he was a Baptist.

“Now, we are going to be persecuted from the other side in such a way?” Angelov asked. “Let somebody who has suffered more come and accuse us.”

BWA General Secretary Denton Lotz and Kim both urged the committee members to pray for a miraculous reconciliation between BWA leaders and SBC leaders prior to the SBC's vote on the issue in June.

But Lotz also said the purpose of this meeting was to put the matter behind them and move forward in BWA's work.

Citing Philippians 3:13, Lotz said, “After this Executive Committee meeting, we will forget that which is past.”

Posted: 3/19/04

ANOTHER VIEW:
'Under God' invokes multiple issues

By Brent Walker

The United States Supreme Court is being asked to decide whether teacher-led recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools violates the First Amendment's Establishment Clause.

The Court should rule that it does not. Here's why.

The Pledge of Allegiance is not a religious exercise. Clearly, any attempt by the government to demand or even urge participation in prayer or worship would violate the Establishment Clause–particularly in the public schools. But ours is a secular pledge, which is intended to inspire patriotism. It does not have the purpose of advancing religion. At most, it is an acknowledgement of this nation's religious roots and the fact we continue to be a “very religious people,” to use Justice William O. Douglas' phrase.

This reference to America's religious character is non-sectarian. A pledge to “one nation, under Jesus” or “under Buddha” would be difficult to defend. True, “God” implies monotheism, and “under God” is not a perfectly nuanced reflection of religious pluralism. But as my former colleague Buzz Thomas says, this is a pledge, not an essay. It's hard to come up with a more inclusive phrase.

Students cannot be compelled to recite the pledge, with or without the words “under God.” The Supreme Court ruled 11 years before “under God” was added in 1954 that students have the right to forgo pledging allegiance to the flag. Students who object to reciting the pledge cannot be compelled to say it or be disciplined for not participating.

A practical reason. If the court strikes the words “under God” from the pledge, there would be an immediate groundswell to amend the Constitution. Although constitutional amendments are difficult to adopt, this one would most likely pass and, in the process, open the door to more far-reaching Establishment Clause mischief.

Having said all this, what is legal and constitutional is not always helpful or wise. For theological and policy reasons, I would be happier if the words “under God” were not included.

Civil religion in its various forms has long been a pervasive part of American political culture. According to sociologist Robert Bellah, “Civil religion is about those public rituals that express the nexus of the political order to divine reality.”

In its most benign forms, civil religion serves as a unifying, cultural balm that reminds us of our religious roots as a nation. But it can easily and often morph into an idolatry of nationalism, or, at the least, result in the trivialization of religion.

Simply stated, civil religion is not the same as heartfelt, vital religion. Ceremonial religion is not life-altering, world-changing religion. “Ceremonial deism,” as it is sometimes called, is a pale substitute for authentic faith in a personal God whom we call “Abba Father.”

Indeed, one of the traditional arguments in favor of the constitutionality of this and other forms of ceremonial deism (such as “In God We Trust” on coins) is that, through long use and rote repetition, the words have lost any religious import they might have had. In short, what is commonplace becomes mundane.

As my friend Derek Davis of Baylor University's J.M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies has written: “The God of American civil religion is a God stripped of his real essence and instead becomes a God used to advance national interests, be it anti-communism in the 1950s when the phrase 'under God' was added to the pledge, or in the 2000s, as the God of the bumper sticker 'God Bless America,' whom America calls upon to fight the war on terrorism. God becomes a watered-down deity, a supreme power called upon only to bolster patriotic sentiment and advance national goals.”

The vitality of religion in America is thus diminished–not enhanced–when we conflate our penultimate allegiance to Caesar with our ultimate allegiance to God.

This explains why the Baptist Joint Committee–along with many other religious organizations–declined to file a friend-of-the-court brief in this case. The court can only rule on the legal issue, and our concerns are more theological, political and practical. However, we will continue to speak out publicly about how this issue is something of a tempest in a teapot and about the dangers that attend a pervasive civil religion.

Brent Walker is executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs.

Posted: 3/19/04

California court denies Catholic charity religious exemption

By Robert Marus

ABP Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON (ABP)–The California Supreme Court has ruled a Catholic social-service agency must provide contraceptives as part of its prescription-drug benefit for employees, raising alarms among some religious-liberty watchers.

By a 6-1 vote, the court ruled the Sacramento branch of Catholic Charities must comply with a state law requiring employers to include contraceptive benefits if they provide prescription drug coverage.

The justices ruled Catholic Charities does not qualify for a religious exemption to the law because, essentially, the organization is not religious enough.

The Roman Catholic Church–with which Catholic Charities groups across the country are affiliated–officially opposes all forms of artificial contraception.

At issue in the case was a provision the state's legislature included when the law passed in 1999. It exempts churches and other religious groups from the law if contraception violates the organization's religious beliefs.

However, the exemption is narrowly crafted. It allows exceptions only if a group:

Has as its main purpose “the inculcation of religious values.”

“Primarily employs persons who share the religious tenets of “the organization.”

“Serves primarily persons who share the religious tenets of the entity.”

Is classified like a congregation or denomination under tax codes.

Catholic Charities meets none of those requirements. The court noted the group both hires and provides services to people of many faiths other than Catholicism, and it does not include overt religious instruction or evangelism as part of its service programs.

Attorneys for the charity argued the state exemption discriminated against the Catholic Church–even though the church originally supported its inclusion in the bill–because it defined what sorts of groups qualified as “religious” too narrowly. Catholic social teaching, they contended, requires that Catholics provide food, clothing and other benefits to the needy with no religious strings attached.

But the court's majority appealed to previous federal court decisions–including a controversial U.S. Supreme Court decision from 1990–in saying that the state was within its rights to force Catholic Charities to comply because the law treated it equally with secular entities.

“The law treats some Catholic organizations more favorably than all other employers by exempting them; non-exempt Catholic organizations are treated the same as all other employers,” said Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, writing for the majority.

Werdegar also quoted a state legislator's comments from debate on the law's passage: “The intention of the religious exemption in both these bills is an intention to provide for exemption for what is religious activity. The more secular the activity gets, the less religiously based it is, and the more we believe that they should be required to cover prescription drug benefits for contraception.”

However, the justices did say the third requirement for an organization to qualify for the religious exemption–that it must serve primarily those of its own religion–is “problematic.”

“To imagine a legitimate purpose for such a requirement is difficult,” Werdegar wrote. “Reading the provision literally, a hypothetical soup kitchen run entirely by the ministers of a church, which inculcates religious values to those who come to eat … would lose its claim to an exemption from the (requirement) if it chose to serve the hungry without discrimination instead of serving co-religionists only. The legislature may wish to address this problem.”

In a separate opinion concurring with the majority, Justice Joyce Kennard raised a concern about another of the state's criteria for qualifying as a religious organization.

“I have serious doubts that the First Amendment, as construed by the United States Supreme Court, allows California to limit its religious-employer exemption to religious entities that have as their purpose the inculcation of religious values,” Kennard wrote, noting some religious organizations “like Catholic Charities … are organized for the purpose of feeding the hungry, caring for the sick and providing shelter to the homeless.”

The lone objector to the court's judgment in the case was Justice Janice Rogers Brown. In a lengthy dissenting opinion, she said the state was overstepping its bounds with regard to religion in the case.

Brown said the majority's opinion begs this question: “May the government determine what parts of bona fide religious organizations are religious and what parts are secular? And, in particular, may the government make such distinctions in order to infringe the religious freedom of that portion of the organization the government characterizes as secular?”

Rogers continued, “A substantial amount of federal case law supports Catholic Charities' claim that the legislature's attempt to draw distinctions between the religious and secular activities of a single religious entity is an impermissible government entanglement in religion. I am inclined to agree.”

Posted: 3/19/04

Call to ministry may be in a
variety of vocations, hospital CEO insists

By Marv Knox

Editor

DALLAS–God calls people into all kinds of professions; the challenge is to seek God's will and follow it, Joel Allison told a convocation audience at Dallas Baptist University.

Allison, president of Baylor Health Care System in Dallas, illustrated his point with his own life story: As a young man, he seemed headed for the pastorate or a mission field. But God led him into health care administration, which has been his ministry for three decades.

Allison, the first member of his family to attend college, addressed the campus community on the morning he received an honorary doctor of humanities degree from DBU.

He enrolled in Baylor University in Waco during the mid-1960s on academic and athletic scholarships, majoring in religion and journalism.

“I had dedicated my life in high school to some type of Christian ministry, and I was trying to understand what particular area of Christian ministry God would want me to serve him in,” he said. “I tried daily to understand God's will for my life.”

But that understanding took an unexpected turn during his senior year, Allison reported.

Nearing the end of their collegiate careers, he and his wife, Diane, scheduled a visit to Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, the next logical step toward becoming a pastor or a missionary.

But God used that trip to “raise more questions and doubts than affirmations,” he recalled, noting seminary administrators told him he “might” be admitted, they “might” get into seminary housing and she “might” be able to get a teaching job.

“We understand you have to have faith … and with prayer, you can overcome barriers,” he said. Still, the tentative nature of every aspect of the trip caused them to pray for God's guidance and clarification.

They got it through a series of events.

First, he got close-up exposure to hospital life. His brother-in-law was participating in a family medical residency at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth. On weekend visits, Allison got to put on scrubs and make rounds.

“It was a wonderful experience for me,” he remembered. “It was such an unusual, different place. Hospitals are so alive from the busyness–24 hours a day, seven days a week.”

The next semester at Baylor, Allison took a photojournalism course and was required to shoot a photo essay. He chose “a day in the life of a medical resident” and immersed himself in the life of a hospital.

Not long after that, the Allisons traveled to Uvalde with her brother, who was completing his residency and thinking about joining a medical practice in South Texas.

During a tour of the hospital, Allison learned the incoming administrator had intended to minister in a church but felt God's leadership to minister by leading a hospital.

“At that moment–one of those defining moments–it really hit me: Maybe this is what I'm supposed to do,” he said.

The next Monday morning, he called Hillcrest Hospital, a Baptist facility in Waco, and both top administrators confirmed that they saw themselves engaged in a “ministry of healing.”

So, Allison took a fork in the road to ministry, following a direction that led him to Hendrick Medical Center, a Baptist hospital in Abilene, as well as to hospitals in Amarillo, Corpus Christi and St. Joseph, Mo.

He joined Baylor Health Care System as senior executive vice president and chief operating officer in 1993 and became president and CEO in 2000.

“This is a truly wonderful Christian organization that is governed by a tremendous board of trustees–Christian men and women who are committed to the mission and vision of Baylor, its commitment to patient care, community service, research and education, to be a healing ministry.”

Allison urged young people to consider ministering through health care, describing the doctors, nurses, technicians and administrators with whom he works:

“So many of them are there out of a sense of calling. They want to serve. They have chosen their life's work in a way of serving others to minister to those who come with specific needs.”

That sense of purpose and commitment can be reflected in many fields, as long as God leads, he added.

“Wherever you're serving, if it's God's plan, it's a calling,” he explained. “What we have is a challenge to be sure we are in God's will, that we are looking for that calling, that we are truly following his will for us.

“He has a plan for each of us. Our challenge is to be sure we find that plan.”

DBU President Gary Cook affirmed Allison as a role model for professional ministry.

“There are all sorts of ways to minister,” Cook told the convocation audience.

“God may call you to be a Christian lawyer, a Christian doctor, a Christian schoolteacher, a Christian business person. He called Joel Allison to be a Christian health care administrator.”

Posted: 3/19/04

DOWN HOME:
Coveting leaves sinner 'flushed'

If confession is, as they say, good for the soul, I'm about to get better.

Here goes: I have broken the Tenth Commandment. Smashed it to bits. Obliterated it.

You say, after all the controversy of late, you don't have the Ten Commandments memorized, and you can't quite put your finger on No. 10. I have coveted.

Covetousness is a sneaky sin. At first, you don't realize you're coveting You just “want” something. Well, maybe you don't, but I did.

And it seems so insignificant, too. You ask yourself–or at least I asked myself: “What's so wrong with wanting, even craving, that? I sure wish it were mine.”

When I first realized I might be coveting, I did what any kid brought up on Scripture memorization and Sword Drills would do. I went to the Bible. Looking for loopholes.

The first part of Exodus 20:17 looks OK: “You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or his maidservant, his ox or donkey.”

My “neighbor”–who lives in another subdivision–has a nice house, but I like mine better. His wife's a wonderful person, but I'm madly in love with Joanna and couldn't imagine a more fantastic wife. And he doesn't even have a manservant, maidservant, ox or donkey.

But the last part of the verse snagged me: “… or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

See, I covet his toilets. No, it's true. And if you've bought a new house, or even a new toilet, in the last decade or so, you know what I mean. They're created to conserve water.

And while they may or may not succeed in achieving that purpose, they definitely can drive their owners crazy, especially owners with children. To use biblical terms, these ecological toilets strain at a gnat, and they certainly couldn't swallow a camel.

So, that's how, one lovely evening when we were over at our friends' home for dinner, I came to covet.

My daddy's a pastor, and he's always said you're coveting if you want to take away what belongs to others, even if you wish they could have something better. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately, depending upon how you look at it), I couldn't rationalize my way out of this one, because I spend more than my share of time in our local hardware mega-store, and I know nothing new in the plumbing world can compete with the pre-regulated ceramic hardware.

Some theologians would say this is a matter of temptation, not sin, and I won't really break No. 10 until I go over to my friend's house with a wrench in my pocket and larceny in my heart.

They can quote Martin Luther, who said something like, “Just because a crow flies over your head doesn't mean you have to let him build a nest in your hair.”

If only flushing covetous desires were so easy.

Posted: 3/19/04

EDITORIAL:
Christians must insist state support quality education

Very soon, Gov. Rick Perry will convene a special session of the Texas Legislature to consider public school finance reform. The consequences of legislators' actions will impact Texas for at least six decades–until next fall's kindergarteners retire.

Why should Christians concern themselves with something as secular as public education? Here are several reasons:

Following Jesus' teachings, Christians should care about basic human needs.

An adequate education is vital. Students who do not achieve basic competency are doomed to eke out an existence in jobs that pay little more than minimum wage. That translates into a lifetime of poverty, which often means substandard housing, almost non-existent health care and poor nutrition. Ignorance and hopelessness often are accompanied by substance abuse, teen pregnancy and violence, absentee parenting and a behavioral pattern that produces another generation dominated by despair.

Of course, educating the next generation of Texans is expensive. The cost of teaching 4.2 million students in 1,041 school districts is an estimated $27 billion. And it's getting more expensive. Our school rolls are growing by 70,000 students per year, at an additional cost of $1.1 billion annually.

Worse, we're falling behind. Texas ranks 34th in average expenditure per student. Last year, we spent $745 less than the national average on each student. In districts across the economic spectrum, we've had to cut teachers and academic programs and increase class size. Yes, we have some excellent schools and well-educated students, but many of our children are falling behind.

We should be concerned about justice.

The Robin Hood school-finance system sought to close the gap between the richest and poorest school systems. And while it did narrow that gap, it created problems at both ends. The poorest districts still are under-funded and inadequate. Meanwhile, the wealthier districts are over-taxed, hamstrung by regulations and frustrated.

Texas schools must provide equity, defined as “substantially equal access to similar revenues per student at similar levels of tax effort” and an “adequate education” for all students.

The new finance system must spread the burden for education more fairly. And it must afford students everywhere the opportunity to receive excellent training. Whether they live in a booming suburb, a declining farm community or the teeming Rio Grande Valley, students deserve an education that will prepare them to become productive adults.

Texans must own up to racial diversity to meet this challenge. In America, we tend to think of black-white relationships. In Texas, demography drives the issue. In 2000, Hispanics comprised 39.5 percent of the student population; that figure will be 46.1 percent in 2010 and 66.3 percent in 2040. No matter where they were born and what language they speak at home, our children must be well-educated.

Christians must care about fairness.

The good news is Texas is a low-tax state; we rank 48th in total taxes as a percentage of personal income. The bad news is our taxes are regressive; they place an unfair burden on certain segments of the population. For example, 80 percent of Texas' 2003 tax revenue derived from property or sales taxes. Such a narrow range of taxation places an unfair burden on segments of the population. Property owners pull more than their weight, as do poor people, who spend a disproportionate share of their income on sales taxes.

This imbalance could be rectified by a state income tax, accompanied by decreases in property and sales taxes. Texas is one of only nine states that does not tax income. Such a tax shift makes sense in terms of fairness and effectiveness. But since the state uses its no-income-tax posture to lure ultra-wealthy CEOs to move their companies here, we're more likely to ice skate on the Brazos in July than pay state income tax.

So, to achieve fairness as well as solve Robin Hood and achieve equity, the Legislature needs to look at picking up more of the cost of public education so local property taxes can be decreased and so the tax burden can be distributed more evenly.

We should strengthen, not harm, our state.

We must not allow “solutions” that only make matters worse across our state. Such solutions are irresponsible.

That's why we must oppose the two quick fixes likely to come from well-financed lobbyists–gambling revenue and vouchers.

Even if casinos and video lottery terminals were to produce the revenue their advocates propose–a claim that is highly suspect–that money would be offset by the costs to Texas communities. Gambling is regressive. It takes a toll on gamblers and their families. And it pumps money out of communities (as opposed to spending in local legitimate businesses) while it escalates related costs, due to crime, bankruptcy and other social problems.

Beyond that, vouchers would leech money out of school districts even as they provide their beneficiaries with training that is inferior to what they could receive in most public schools.

We must provide for the future.

More than any other endeavor, education is an investment in the future. Some people believe their responsibility for education ends after their children graduate. Others feel they have no responsibility for educating children outside their communities. As Steve Murdoch, the state demographer, correctly notes, life just isn't that simple. We're all connected, and what happens to one affects all.

From a merely pragmatic perspective, we must educate students well, or Texas will become an economic backwater with an under-educated workforce, diminishing natural resources and cramped cities. We must demand an education system built on quality standards, not minimum standards.

From a spiritual standpoint, Jesus cared for all people–their physical as well as spiritual well-being. We should follow Jesus' example.

–Marv Knox
E-mail the editor at marvknox@baptiststandard.com

Posted: 3/19/04

LifeWay Explore the Bible Series for March 28

Respect for all people marks a healthy church

1 Timothy 5:1-6:2

By David Morgan

Trinity Baptist Church, Harker Heights

Treat others as family (5:1-2)

One important image of the church in the New Testament is the family of God. Those who receive Christ are called the children of God (John 1:12). Jesus regarded those who do his will as his family (Mark 3:33-34). Christians are adopted as sons and call God “Abba, Father” (Romans 8:14-16). Churches are the family of God.

Churches strive to become families where each person is committed to others. Members assume responsibility for each other and in turn make themselves accountable to each other. The Apostle Paul used family relationships to show the virtue in treating others in God's family with respect.

Paul insisted that Timothy treat elders in the congregation with dignity. Should he need to admonish them, he should appeal to them with gentleness and consideration. He should not be harsh or sharply reprimand them.

Church leaders can become overbearing and harsh, consumed with their task as leaders. Remembering to treat all people kindly will help overcome this temptation.

Honor widows (5:3-16)

Paul also said Timothy should treat older women as he would honor his mother. Both younger men and women also deserved his respect. He should treat male peers as brothers and women as sisters. Paul included a special note concerning the relationship with these women: treat them “with absolute purity.” Timothy's behavior should provide no grounds for suspicion.

Paul addressed women's behavior several times in his letter (2:9-15; 3:11; 5:3-16). The presence of a temple of Artemis in Ephesus may have prompted Paul's interest regarding treatment of women. Such temples often were staffed by female priests, and worship may have included sexual activity with these women. If this was the case in Ephesus, Paul sought to distance the church's worship as much as possible from the pagan temple's rituals.

Paul's counsel for the church to care for widows reflected the unrestricted acceptance found in poet Robert Frost's words: “Home is the place where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in. I should have called it something you somehow haven't to deserve.”

When Paul urged the church to give proper recognition to widows, he meant both respect and financial support. A husband's death in Paul's day left widows vulnerable. Society left them few alternatives for supporting themselves. The most frequent options were begging and prostitution.

Paul expected widows with children to receive support from their children and grandchildren. Caring for their widowed mothers was one way by which Christian children demonstrated their godliness. Such help would show their faith. It also would be a way for children to honor their mothers for the sacrifices made for them.

Paul further refined his understanding of the widows whom the church should support. They had no family to care for them. They were utterly dependent upon God. They had an established history of godly behavior and Christian service. Good deeds characterized their lives. They had looked after their own families and may have helped raise children who were not their own. The women had shown their willingness to help others in the congregation.

Life throws curve balls to many people, including those in the church. One powerful witness of the transforming power of God's love is when churches provide financial support and encouragement to people facing adversity.

Help ministers (5:17-21)

Another group that deserved honorable treatment was the “elders whose work was preaching and teaching.” “Work” suggests the task of leading the church.

The “double honor” included both esteem and financial support. Paul supported his statement by referring to an Old Testament prohibition of muzzling an ox that is threshing grain (Deuteronomy 25:4). The farmer should not prevent the animal from eating as it worked. A second reason to care for the minister was that the worker deserves to be paid. Jesus had told the 70 as he sent them out, “the worker deserves his wages” (Luke 10:7).

Financial support is encouraged but so is emotional and spiritual support. Accusations and complaints may be leveled against any minister. Paul instructed Timothy to disregard these unless brought by more than one person.

Paul also protected the church. Should the elder deserve to be corrected because he continued in sin, it should be done publicly as an example for all. Believers can learn from the correction offered to others. We need to remember that the correction here falls under the instructions that an elder should not be harshly rebuked. Any correction should be redemptive in nature. Note, too, that the rebuke is for persistent sin and not for lesser issues.

Pastors are highly visible persons in their church and community and face intense scrutiny. They face sin like all Christians. They also are subject to criticism by others more than many. Paul reminds churches to treat them fairly, honor them and support them financially.

Question for discussion

What follows disrespect?

Posted: 3/19/04

LifeWay Explore the Bible Series for April 4

Money matters, but keep it in perspective

1 Timothy 6:3-21

By David Morgan

Trinity Baptist Church, Harker Heights

Know good teaching (6:3-5)

Money matters. Our attitude toward material possessions reveals much about us and our level of Christian maturity. The Apostle Paul taught we should use our possessions to serve God.

A wrong attitude toward wealth was one of many problems with false teachers. Paul had already addressed the danger of false teachers (1 Timothy 1:3:11). Here he focuses more on their actions than their teachings. In addition to their desire for material things, he pointed out pride, conceit and their bent toward pointless controversies leading to dissension. Paul's words can help us to identify and reject false teachings when they appear.

These teachers were guiding people to live in ways contrary to what others were teaching about Jesus. “Agree” suggests they were attaching themselves to false doctrine instead of Jesus. The “instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ” likely refers to teachings about Jesus, although it could refer to those things Jesus taught.

The church needs to keep the teachings of Jesus foremost in its life and in the mind of its people. Sound instruction draws people together, whereas false teaching creates controversy.

Pride blinded the false teachers. They could neither see what God was doing, nor could they see themselves as they really were. “Conceited” means “wrapped up in smoke.” Their own sense of self-importance was like a fog that prevented an honest self-evaluation.

Paul considered an interest in false teaching as unwholesome. “Arguments” means “word-battles.” Out of arguments and controversies springs envy, which feeds quarreling and friction among Christians. Without adequate spiritual knowledge, hard feelings and animosity increase in the church.

The false teachers were so corrupt they could not distinguish between true and false, right and wrong. They even believed godliness would generate material gain. We can understand the words “who think that godliness is a means to financial gain” in two ways: (1) False teachers took advantage of the godliness and trust of those for whom the teachers were responsible; (2) religious leaders acted as committed Christians to increase their wealth.

Recognize the place of wealth (6:6-10)

Godliness will enhance the believer's life if accompanied by contentment. “Contentment” suggests an independence of external circumstances. It suggests not resignation to one's station but a confidence in Christ that all needs will be met (Philippians 4:12-13). Godliness benefits the believer but not necessarily with a larger bank account.

We enter this world with nothing and take nothing out. Physical necessities are represented by “food and clothing.” Anything beyond this is luxury to most of the world's population where some fail to have even adequate food and clothing. Paul's words recall that Jesus taught that God is concerned about plants and birds (Matthew 6:25-34; Luke 12:22-31). God's concern for “small” things reminds us God will provide for us.

The desire for riches tempts many people. The word “trap” is described elsewhere as the devil's snare (1 Timothy 3:7; 2 Timothy 2:26). Being consumed by the desire to gain wealth ensnares us.

A person enamored by wealth is “plunged into” (“drowned by”) ruin and destruction. Paul used two words with similar meaning to stress the completeness of the action.

Paul appears to have quoted a proverb to drive home his point. The craving for wealth and not material possessions themselves are the root of the problem. While all evil cannot be traced to the love for money, the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil.

Focus on what is important (6:11-12)

Paul inserted a personal word to Timothy to warn him to resist the temptations that had ensnared the false teachers. He instructed Timothy to strive for qualities of being right with God, acting with obedience and godly manner, and being gentle toward others.

Paul called Timothy a “man of God,” to liken him to other heroes of the faith such as Moses, David and Elijah. The qualities Paul mentioned would equip Timothy for the effective service God had called him for.

Timothy may have had a timid streak (2 Timothy 1:7), and Paul urged him to keep struggling to the best of his ability. Living the Christian life is difficult. God had called Timothy to discipleship and service at his baptism. Timothy's baptism also demonstrated his acceptance of God's call. Paul encouraged Timothy to take and keep hold of the life that was his in Christ.

Use wealth unselfishly (6:17-19)

Wealth has appropriate uses, although it may lead to arrogance and become the source of one's hope. We cannot trust wealth–it can be as quickly lost as gained. Since wealth can so quickly dissolve, the wealthy should generously share with others. One's generosity both reveals and builds a person's godly character, forming a foundation for the coming eternal life. Enduring hope comes from God who provides all we need.

Money cannot buy happiness, but proper use of money can enhance Christian maturity–something that will benefit us both in this age and the age to come.

Question for discussion

How can wealth be a problem?

Posted: 3/19/04

LifeWay Family Bible Series for March 28

Act boldly when following God's direction

Esther 2:7, 17; 3:5-6; 4:13-17; 7:1-3; 8:11-13, 16

By Rodney McGlothlin

First Baptist Church, College Station

Congratulations. You get to study a whole Old Testament book in one lesson. The book of Esther has 10 chapters, so if you are planning to read the entire text, you will need to start early and stay late.

Or you can do what the Jews have done for centuries. You can celebrate the story. The book of Esther is commemorated in a Jewish festival called Purim (Esther 9:18-32). It is not a solemn festival like Passover. It is a happy and noisy feast. According to the Talmud, it was to be celebrated in the most un-Baptist of ways by drinking until you could no linger distinguish between the phrases “Cursed be Haman” and “Blessed be Mordecai.” It was more of a Mardi Gras celebration than a fast during Lent.

In studying the lesson this week, it may be best to just tell the story. It goes like this: Mordecai and Esther were cousins by birth, but father and daughter by experience. He raised the orphaned girl as his own child after the death of her parents.

She came to the city of Susa to be a member of the royal harem of King Xerxes after the untimely dismissal of Queen Vashti. It seems Vashti was a liberated woman for her time and esteemed her independence rather highly. Xerxes called her to a party already in its 180th day to show off her beauty, along with the other accoutrements of his royalty. She didn't cotton to the idea of being a trophy queen, so she stayed put.

Xerxes asked his advisors what he should do about a queen who refused a simple command from her husband. They assured him it would be bad for the kingdom if all the royal women took to refusing their royal husbands' requests. Vashti vanished. They had a contest of sorts to find a new queen.

Esther, the cousin/daughter of Mordecai was encouraged to try out for the new reality series called, “So You Want to be a Queen!” She was the last to be voted out of the engagement party. She became Xerxes' new favorite wife.

Meanwhile, back in the castle, a seedy sort of fellow named Haman was percolating a plan to destroy his hated enemy, the Jews. He hated them all because of his disdain for Mordecai. Xerxes had tagged Haman as his chief of staff and given him kingly powers. All subjects of the king had to bow down to the king's hit man, Haman. All did but Mordecai the Jew. He stood proud, unbent and unimpressed. If the king could cause Vashti to vanish, surely Haman could hang an unbending old Jew named Mordecai. He built a scaffold 75 feet high, which was at least 68 1/2 feet more than really was necessary.

Mordecai told Esther it was time to let King Xerxes know his favorite wife was a Jew. This situation was complicated by the fact it had been 30 days since Esther had been the favorite wife of the king. She would have to go see the king. It seems the only thing King Xerxes hated more than a wife who would not show up on command was one who showed up on her own. The queen could be executed for pushing her royal luck on his majesty.

With great courage and determination, she told Mordecai she would do it. She asked Mordecai to hold a three-day prayer meeting in preparation for the event. They prayed. Esther went. The king welcomed her into his presence. In gratitude, she invited Xerxes and his right hand man, Haman, to a royal feast the next day.

That night the king couldn't sleep, so he called for the “record of chronicles,” an early, less exciting version of the modern Congressional Record. In the royal history, the king learned of a Jew named Mordecai who had uncovered a plot to kill the king. Mordecai reported it, saved the king and was quickly forgotten … until that wakeful evening now known as “Sleepless in Susa.”

Xerxes called for Haman and asked him what should be done for the most loyal man in the kingdom to the king. Haman thought the king meant him, so he suggested the man be put on a royal steed in a royal robe and have one of the king's servants parade him around the capital shouting: “This is the king's most loyal subject. His favorite of favorites.”

The king told Haman it was a fine idea and he should immediately carry out this command himself. Haman wanted to eat his words when he found out the king's hero was Mordecai the Jew. That is how Haman wound up leading a parade to honor his enemy.

The next day, Xerxes and Haman showed up at Esther's place for the banquet. That girl could cook! Xerxes offered her anything. She told him of Haman's hatred of the Jews and his plot to kill them. She told him she was a Jew, too. Haman tried to crawl through a crack in the floor, but he would not fit. He did, however, fit just fine on the 75-foot gallows he had constructed for Mordecai.

Imagine that story being told hundreds of years later by German Jews in one of Hitler's death camps, or by Russian Jews in Stalin's Gulag or in a modern shopping center in the middle of Jerusalem where a suicide bomber has stolen any hope of peace and security.

Why take a stand for God? Because God still remembers his people and stands up for them. He still turns the tables on his enemies and brings laughter where there have been tears. We share the joy, hope and confidence that come from trusting God against all odds. Happy studying and faithful serving.

Question for discussion

When is it hard to trust God?

Posted: 3/19/04

LifeWay Family Bible Series for April 4

Christ's suffering was born out of his great love

Matthew 27:27-31, 35-37, 50-51; 1 John 4:7-10

By Rodney McGlothlin

First Baptist Church, College Station

Mel Gibson has everyone talking about his movie “The Passion of the Christ.” I have seen the movie. The book was better! Gibson showed us well the “how” of the crucifixion. The church must tell “the rest of the story.” The Bible lesson for today tells the story of the suffering of the Savior in Matthew 27:27-51. It gives us the meaning of his suffering in 1 John 4:7-10.

“This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 John 4:9-10).

The word study for this lesson is “propitiation.” It is the King James Version word that the New American Standard text above translates as “atoning sacrifice.”

Have you used the word “propitiation” lately? I didn't think so. The reason you have not used it is because it is a word heavy with Greek baggage from the first century. None of us is a first century Greek. Neither was John. He was a first century Jew who wrote in Greek so he might be understood by his larger culture. He may have gotten the word from the Greek language, but he took its meaning from his Jewish roots in the Old Testament. What does this word mean?

The word does not mean God was mad and had to be satisfied by someone or something so he could love humanity. The ancient Greeks believed their gods were capricious and had to be bought off at times by their human subjects. They were not much different than the folks among whom Abraham first lived in the land of promise–people who often practiced child sacrifice to appease their gods. Abraham would learn that his God would not require the death of Isaac to prove his devotion. God would himself provide a sacrifice. Ultimately, Jesus is the “Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29). God loved us before he sent his Son into the world.

Propitiation then originates with God. He makes the first move to bring his straying creation back to himself. He sends Jesus to “show his love among us” (1 John 4:9) and to be the “atoning sacrifice (propitiation) for our sins” (1 John 4:10). This means he not only forgives us, he removes the offense that stands between us and God so we might have a relationship with him. When we focus only on forgiveness as the effect of the cross, we become selfish. God takes away our guilt and gives us eternal life.

But the idea is more than that. He does not just forgive so that we can be debt-free. He forgives so that we can be his. It is relationship he desires. His forgiveness removes the offense that is between us. We are not just forgiven. We are restored. It is not just a privilege, it also is a responsibility to live and act as God's restored people.

In January 1935, Mayor Fiorello La Guardia appeared in a night court that served the poorest ward of New York City. He dismissed the judge for the evening and took the bench himself. An old woman in ragged clothes came before the bench, charged with stealing a loaf of bread. She had done so to feed her grandchildren after they had been deserted by their father. Her daughter was too sick to work.

The shopkeeper refused to drop the charges. The prosecutor said: “It's a bad neighborhood, your honor. She's got to be punished to teach other people around here a lesson.” La Guardia agreed. “I've got to punish you. The law makes no exceptions–$10 or 10 days in jail.”

Even while pronouncing the sentence, his honor the mayor was reaching into his own pocket for a $10 bill. He said: “Here is the $10 fine which I now remit; and furthermore, I am going to fine everyone in the courtroom 50 cents for living in a town where a person has to steal bread so that grandchildren can eat. Mr. Bailiff, collect the fines and give them to the defendant.”

The following day, the papers reported that $47.50 was turned over to a bewildered old lady who had stolen a loaf of bread. One dollar had been contributed by the shop keeper and the prosecuting attorney. All in the courtroom gave the mayor/judge a standing ovation. (Adapted from “The Ragamuffin Gospel,” by Brennan Manning.)

“Propitiation” is not a word we use every day. It is not something we can do to get God to notice us or love us. It is what God did out of his love so that we can be his children. His grace forgives us, restores us and empowers us to love others. For John in this epistle, we can love one another because he loved us first (1 John 4:7-8).

We can't explain it. Grace always is beyond explanation. All we can do is bow in his presence and offer our praise and gratitude. It's the ovation he deserves.

Questions for discussion

How would you begin to tell the rest of the story of “The Passion of the Christ”?

The story is told of how Fiorello La Guardia stood up for a poor woman–how has Christ done the same in your life?

Posted: 3/19/04

Gay marriage makes headlines,
but it won't sway elections, poll reveals

By Amanda Mantone

Religion News Service

WASHINGTON (RNS)–Gay marriage is not a decisive issue for American voters in the 2004 presidential election, despite national debate over gay rights, according to recent polls.

A CBS News poll found that more than half (52 percent) of all voters would support a candidate who doesn't share their views on gay marriage.

Only 4 percent of voters said gay marriage is the main issue they want to hear about in the election.

Sen. John Kerry, the apparent Democratic presidential candidate, has said he does not support legalization of same-sex marriage, but he opposes the constitutional amendment proposed by President Bush banning gay marriage completely.

Voters in a poll sponsored by the Alliance to End Hunger said candidates' positions on issues such as poverty and hunger are more important than positions on gay marriage.

In the survey, a majority of voters–78 percent–said a candidate's plan for fighting poverty would affect their voting decision, while only 15 percent said a candidate's position on gay marriage would matter.

A Pew Research Center study found that a national ban on gay marriage, despite recent debate, is not an issue of importance for voters.

Gay marriage did, however, rank as a more important issue than abortion or gun control.

The Pew poll, which surveyed 1,500 U.S. adults, found that American voters oppose gay marriage by more than two-to-one.

Gay marriage remains a “make-or-break” voting issue for two-thirds of gay marriage opponents but only 6 percent of gay marriage supporters.

Some voters are more strongly opposed than others, according to the Pew report.

Six in 10 Republican voters strongly oppose gay marriage, as dotwo-thirds of evangelical Protestant voters. Of voters 65 and older, 60 percent oppose gay marriage. Catholics and mainline Protestants are less likely to count gay marriage as an important factor in their voting decision.

According to CBS, opposition to gay marriage is growing. Nearly 60 percent of Americans said they favor an amendment limiting marriage to a man and a woman, up from 55 percent last December.

The number of voters who favored allowing homosexual couples to legally marry in a July poll was 40 percent; it has dropped steadily since then to a current low of 30 percent.

Posted: 3/19/04

Missionary narrowly misses Madrid bombing

By John Hall

Texas Baptist Communications

MADRID, Spain–Had it happened another weekday, David Dixon might no longer be dean of a Spanish seminary or pastor of an international church. And his three sons could have been left without a father.

Dixon normally rides the train that followed one of four that exploded March 11 in Madrid. He might have been waiting in the station when the train was bombed.

But that particular morning, Dixon's classes were pushed back to allow a visiting professor to teach. Dixon and his wife, Susie, heard about the explosions on television prior to 8 a.m.

The Dixons, former missionaries with the Southern Baptist International Mission Board who now are partially supported by several Texas Baptist churches, immediately recognized one of the trains. It was one many of their high school-age son's classmates took.

Spanish forensic experts inspect the bodies of victims of an explosion on a train outside Madrid's Atocha station. Texas Baptist missionary David Dixon narrowly missed being in the train station at the time of the tragic blast. (REUTERS/Kai Pfaffenbach Photo)

They thought about friends. They thought about church members. They thought about family.

The couple hit the phones and the computer. They tried to locate friends and neighbors. And they sent e-mail to overseas friends and family to let them know they were unharmed.

“Our phone rang all day long,” David Dixon said. “We got over 40 calls that day.”

Of more than 200 people who died, one directly affected those around the Dixons. A Filipino church member lost a cousin.

All the missionary children who go to school with their children survived unscathed.

While Susie Dixon continued answering the home phone, her husband went to the seminary. Classes were cancelled; schools around the nation closed to observe three days of mourning.

Seminary students held a prayer service where they asked for comfort and spiritual revival before going to a demonstration of solidarity against the acts, which have been linked to a terrorist group.

The nation began gathering in large groups to take a symbolic stand against the attacks.

One of the assemblies consisted of 2.5 million people. Flags with single black stripes were draped over balconies, displayed in cars and flown outside buildings.

Hotels offered free lodging to victims' families, and taxis provided them free transportation.

“Spain as a country was traumatized as the United States was as it watched Sept. 11,” David Dixon said.

Churches held prayer services where tears flowed. Spanish Baptists gathered March 16 at First Baptist Church in Madrid, near one of the damaged trains. A memorial of “M-11” was held March 20.

“This is a culture and society that shows a lot of solidarity,” Susie Dixon said. “That's shown brightly in this time of crisis.”

These terror events provide a unique chance for the 8,500 Spanish Baptists to share their faith in a nation where one-quarter of residents are spiritually involved, according to the Dixons.

Citizens are searching for hope. Believers can help them find it in Christ, the Dixons stressed.

“I hope people will consider the fleeting nature of life and realize their need for a savior,” Susie Dixon said.

By spreading the hope and love of Christ, Baptists are giving meaning to people's lives and leading them to have a relationship with God, David Dixon said.

Faithful living changes the purpose of lives and turns hatred to love, he said.

“It's the heart where terrorism arises,” he said.