Pass the buck on poverty

Wow, I received the Barna Update this week on the topic of Helping the Poor, here http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdateNarrow&BarnaUpdateID=273. Let me note a few items from that article.

• 72% consider poverty to be one of the most serious social problems facing the United States today, yet...
• 64% consider it to be the government's responsibility, and...
• only 18% consider it to be an individual responsibility, and...
• only 4% consider it to be the church's responsibility.

A few comments or observations:

Why do many 'pass the buck' to the government?

It appears that the government has taken away a responsibility which was largely the church's before. With factors like this, is there any wonder why churches have less and less influence?

Synod Removes 'Male' as Requirement for Office and Allows Women as Delegates

The Synod 2007 of the CRC met recently and reported their major decisions at http://www.crcna.org/news.cfm?newsid=192. One of the decisions includes removing the word 'male' as a requirement for office, allowing women to serve in church 'office' and as delegates to Synod. In their report they also note that they make the provision for those who disagree. While they may think they are providing for others who disagree, the provision is a simple kick in the teeth.

The provision, as reported, allows "delegates to classis or synod who believe that including women delegates is in violation of the Word of God may record their protest on the appropriate credentials." Let me make a comparison to illustrate the absurdity of this provision.

Let's say that you are a Christian doctor who believes that the Word of God rejects abortion as the killing of a human. However, at a Christian hospital, the recent decision was made to allow abortions to be performed. Also, all doctors must attend the 'surgery' of an abortion, but may register their protest when signing in to attend.

Any doctor who truly believes that abortion is the killing of a human life, would not be able to attend the 'surgery', but would/should do everything in their power to stop the murder. They could not merely stand by in protest while they watched the brutal murder.

If this report accurately reflects the full decision of Synod 2007, you should see an exodus of many churches and Christians from the CRC, at least those who hold to their convictions.

Genesis 1 says nothing about time?

I heard a sermon by a pastor last year on Genesis 1. He stated in the sermon that Genesis 1 says nothing about time. At that statement a member of the church yelled out 'Amen!'

Whether you believe in a young earth or an old earth, this statement is ludicrous and an outright lie. For humor's sake, I repeat the text of Genesis 1 (NIV) [copied from http://www.biblegateway.com/] and have underlined things which I think say something about time, and italicized those that indicate time in the form of past tense. You read it, and be the judge.


Genesis 1

The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.
11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.



If the rest of Genesis says nothing about time, why have many scholars through time engaged in 'biblical chronology'? Why do archaeologists try to make links with their digs and artifacts with the events of Genesis (whether to 'prove' or 'disprove')?

Regardless of your beliefs, the Bible is rooted in history and real events. History is time and we either take God at his word both spiritually, and historically (i.e. time/space) or we don't. If you are a Bible believer, you cannot deny the time elements in Genesis.

Myth: Jesus lay down his life and took it up again?

This is a common belief and phrase among Christians. In some sense, it is true, consider John 10:18. John 10 indicates that Jesus had the authority, but did Jesus raise himself? If you consider the God (as the Trinity) then it is true, otherwise it appears to be a myth.

Actually, every reference in the New Testament to Jesus resurrection is either neutral, or states that the Father raised him (not that Jesus raised himself). So really this means that Jesus had the power to lay down his life, but God the Father raised him.

Read these scripture verses and decide for yourself: Act 2:24, 32; Acts 3:15, 26; Acts 4:10; Acts 5:30; Acts 10:40; Acts 13:30; Romans 6:4; Romans 10:9; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 1 Corinthians 15:15; 2 Corinthians 4:14; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:15-23; Colossians 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 1 Peter 1:21

This actually reinforces a better understanding of salvation and the gospel message. Let me explain: If the wages of sin are death and we’ve all sinned, we all deserve death. (that’s the bad news) The good news is that Jesus loved us and died for our sins. In order for him to die for us, he had to live a sinless life, otherwise he would also deserve death. Because he didn’t sin, he didn’t deserve death, thus it was an overt action that he lay down his life and paid for our sin. He took on a punishment that he didn’t deserve.

If he could simply take up his life again this weakens the gospel. It would be like a lizard saying go ahead cut off my tail, I can just grow another one; it’s meaningless. But if Jesus didn’t have the power to take up his life, it is a meaningful action. Why is it important that God the Father raised Jesus? When God the Father (the judge of all) raised Jesus, he showed that he accepted Jesus payment for our sins. --Romans 4:25, “He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.” He also "declared [Him] to be the Son of God...by the resurrection from the dead." --Romans 1:4

He accepts Jesus sacrifice and penalty, and turns over all authority as judge to him. --Ephesians 1:15-23

Deep-in-the-bones Belonging

I read in The Banner recently a short article encouraging us to consider participation in the Lord's Supper by all baptized members. The article can be found here.

In the article they suggest a simple approach for every congregation to discuss and consider the issue:

1. Host a congregational discussion
2. Address the topic in a Church Ed class
3. Distribute a devotional booklet
4. Re-examine the role of Profession of Faith
5. Practice charity and patience

In expanding on each suggestion the author makes points that support the expanded practice, so it doesn't really suggest an unbiased consideration of the question (not that this was the goal, as was stated early in the article).

I think there are two major problems with this suggested approach, both have to do with authority.


#1 In the CRC, who has the authority to make these decisions?

Reformed church polity for the CRCNA "is presbyterian: that is, system of leadership by elders (presbyters) who represent Christ in his church." Therefore, it is the elders who make these kind of decisions, not the congregation as this proposed method of examination appears to indicate. This proposed approach, puts the discussion in the hands of the congregation, including "3-year-olds to the adults". While the author may still assert and agree that the elders make the decisions, this is not indicated in the article at all. The phrase, "Perception is reality" comes to mind, even if this was not his intent, that is how it is perceived.


#2 Where is the Biblical authority?

Again, we must ask about this article, "where is the authority?" Is it in the congregation and their interpretation, or is it in the Bible, our revelation of God and His will? While the author suggests looking at some passages, and he does not suggest a major step of examining scripture as a whole on what it says about the Lord's Supper. He just suggests we examine "the meaning of baptism, the Passover, and how Jesus transformed the Passover into a communion meal" He doesn't suggest looking at the meaning of communion, or 1 Corinthian 11 quoted in the formulary for the Lord's Supper.

In either case this article suggests (intentional or not) that the congregation guide the decision on this matter, an approach that simply puts 'man' in charge, rather than God. If we hold congregational discussions to guide our decisions, we are making 'man' the authority and we can continue to make any decision, based on any 'interpretation' we want, based on the most persuasive argument at the time. This is basic secular humanism and denies the Reformed church polity that states that Jesus Christ is the only head and ruler of the church.

I suggest a key step before any of these other steps are considered. Step 0: Examine the scriptures regarding the topic. Pull together the elders and/or those gifted in Biblical study to first examine God's revelation to us about the practice of communion, with an eye specifically related to children participating.

If I get time, I may make a stab at this in a later post. What scriptures do you see pertaining to this topic? I'd be interested to hear from you.

My time has not come

As I was reading the Bible this morning I ran across John 7 and was reminded of a friend who talked to me a few months ago about this passage. He had a discussion with someone else who couldn't trust the bible because one Bible had verse 8 with the word 'yet' and one without it. But, is that a reason not to trust the Bible?

Here is verse 8, with the word in question highlighted: "You go to the Feast. I am not yet going upto this Feast, because for me the right time has not yet come."

Just on the surface, including or not including the 'yet' does not change the meaning. 'Yet' is a word indicating time, (not whether or not Jesus was going, but when), and the later part of the sentence clarifies that in stating the "right time" has not yet come.

The footnotes on this verse do indicate that some earlier manuscripts do include 'yet' and some don't, so it's no surpise that we have different Bible translations that include or don't include the word.

If you wanted to spend a little more time evaluating this you could look at the context of this verse, the surrounding verses are completely consistent with this. You can look at John 7.

In verse 6, he again states "the right time for me has not yet come". Verse 9 says, "Having said this, he stayed in Galilee." indicating that he meant what he said, it wasn't his time. Verse 10 reinforces the time issue by saying "after his brothers left", (captain obvious says 'after' is a word indicating time). It also tells that "he went also" and his purpose in delaying his time was to go "in secret."

Introduction

Hi, welcome to the Nufey blog. I plan on posting a variet of topics and random thoughts. Many will be tentative thoughts that I'd like to explore, but not definite statements, posting them and getting your response will help me refine or change my ideas. Either way, we'll give it a try and see how it shapes up over time.