Your promise to your wife would be like my promise to our Pastor to do next week's sermon!  You probably thought for years that your wife's shopping was just fun. NO, it is hard work and probably double so on a Pastor's salary. In the end she turned out to be the guide you needed. You are not alone in that.

You’re right, Gerrit. I listened to an NPR story about non-Christians (agnostic, atheist, Hindu, Muslim, etc.) celebrating “Christmas.” They had no problem with it, and in fact celebrated the commercialism of the season, because that seemed to be the common denominator – after you remove “Peace on earth to all men on whom his favor rests.” It seems crazy that Christians should rebel against ‘Christmas,’ but it may become more and more necessary as Christ is strained out of the celebration.

Thanks for this post! Testimonies bring praise to our Lord as people get to see a little piece of the work that He is always doing. Our church has a tradition of sharing testimonies during the Sunday School hour during the month of January. People are selected ahead of time so that they can prepare. It's amazing to hear about all the different ways that God is working. Added benefits include getting to know the people we worship with each week on a different and deeper level, gaining understanding about various issues that people face, or realizing that we are not alone in our struggles. May the Lord help all of us to be more open, ready and willing to share testimonies of how the Lord is real to us in our everyday lives, and may it bring him praise.

EXCELLENT point, John! However, I think you're mistaken identifying Deists as being people who just worship who God is as opposed to what He has done. The true definition of a deist (as I understand it) is someone who believes that God set stuff in motion in the beginning, but now allows things to progress on their own without interfering. If I am correct in that, then there are two more problems that arise: 1) A Deist could (theoretically) worship God for "what Has done" just as easily as a person worshipping Yahweh--it just so happens that the "things" that God has done have occurred much further in the past and have ceased occurring. 2) The issue of whether it is difficult to talk about someone without thinking about what they have done is very different from whether it is right to love/worship (in the case of God) that person/being for who they are vs. what they have done. 

I guess I just feel that sometimes we exclude who God is from our consideration when we're thinking about our gratitude and/or our love for Him. God certainly does not love us for what we have done: He loved/loves us "even while we were still enemies." This is the model: God loves us "just as we are" (not "just as we have done"). In a like manner, I think we are called, ultimately, to love Him not for what He has done, but for who He is.

Again, don't get me wrong: what God has done/is doing/will do for us is beyond comprehension, and we should be infinitely thankful for it. But, as Timothy Keller points out in "The Prodigal God"--both sons don't love the father for who he is, but rather only want to get stuff (aka what the father can do for them). We, if we are to fulfill the question left hanging at the end of the parable of the Two Lost Sons, must learn to love the Father simply for who he is.

Lastly, John, some speculative questions for you. I ask myself: would God be worthy of our Love even if we didn't know Him, or what He had done for us? Of course! Silly question: it ultimately doesn't matter (theologically speaking) whether we know about what God has done, or even if we know Him at all--He's still worthy of our praise/worship/love/adoration, etc. Further, then, should those who are condemned eternally love and worship Him? Of course! Even those who are condemned will "bow the knee" and worship Him--and they should love Him too. What about if Jesus had not come to save us? Should we love God still? Of course: all the people of the Old Testament who loved Him, loved Him before they had seen Jesus face-to-face, and many of them seem to have had no idea about Jesus, and they loved Him still. You can go back and back in this question, until (I believe) you are left with the underlying truth that even if God had done nothing for you and I, He would still be worthy of our love simply because of who He is. If that is the case, then shouldn't we embrace that reality a bit more in our worship, devotion, words and deeds?

I don't think we should stop praising God for what He has done! By no means! I just think we need to be a bit more proactive in recognizing that ultimately healthy love between people and other beings is not based on what they have done, but simply on who they are.

I think this too is a really valuable comment, Keith. Though I don't know any millionaires or billionaires myself (that I'm aware of), I've heard the same thing about the loneliness. I wonder, with regards to church-volunteerism and the wealthy, whether there's an assumption that if you're wealthy, you must be extremely busy (else how could you have gotten wealthy, perhaps?). 

While perhaps not an always true assumption, it does point to a mistake that we often make when recruiting staff/volunteers: we either decide for the people whom we might ask that they are too busy before we even ask ("Oh, she's a single-mom. She would be too busy to do this.), OR we recklessly pressure people who may actually be too busy into doing stuff that they really would rather not. 

If we were to engage in the kind of process outlined above, perhaps that would be another pitfall we could avoid (at least to a greater degree). The more we allow the Spirit to speak into these decisions through all of us, the more likely we are to "get it right."

This certainly resonates.  I do get the impression that some people think being reformed means to do what the world does, and then color it christian.   I don't think that's what the reformation was about.

... I need to add something. There is a recurring refrain among the Canadian Christian business community (and they're a broadly ecumenical lot): If you're involved in business, you're involved in ministry.

I know hundreds of men and women who feel 'called' to their ministry in business, and who refer to that same sense of calling when they hire CEOs, managers or sales people.

Here's a digression: I recently spoke to a group of Christian multi-millionaires and billionaires. They told me two things: they're lonely (their friends want their money) and they have left the organized church (the church just sees them as walking ATM machines or, at best, a potential chair of a capital campaign).

They don't seem to be valued for their leadership skills or their spiritual needs.  When's the last time you appointed a very wealthy member to the Diaconate or used his/her gifts as Sunday school teacher?

This approach seems to make obvious sense when hiring in a Christian context. But does it also have application in a "secular" context? For example, if a Christian manager in a secular organization is hiring, which of these steps still apply? If we believe that "there is not one square inch" over which God doesn't rule, then we see His sovereignty in every hiring decision. We also see the Christian worker or manager as being at God's disposal for His Kingdom purposes. The interesting question is how this plays into a hiring decision when non-Christians are applying, or when questions about faith are not permitted by company policy. Clearly God uses people who are not part of His elect to carry out His plans (for good or ill - think of Cyrus and Pharoah!) 

Food for thought - and good preparatory dialogue for tomorrow's CRC Webinar "Every Square Inch" at Work - sorry for the shameless plug!

hmmm... maybe the Church could try that with elder and deacon selection?   it's done to some extent, but this probably takes it beyond the level most churches select their council members?  or not?

One of the workshops at a Safe Church conference was entitled: Bullying, it's not just for children. That's so true, as this helpful article points out. Thanks. Church leaders, who by their position are granted tremendous power (more than most realize), must constantly resist the urge to misuse that power for their own ends. We must prayerfully uphold our church leaders in this regard. And all of us need the constant reminder to follow in the way of our Lord, who in humble submission did not demand his own way, but rather gave himself in love. May the Lord's Spirit guide us, revealing what is needed, aiding us to honor him, as we honor others.

Rob I think you have done your best to provide a good insiteful balanced approach to a discussion of who Adam is/was.  However, within your "many" words, there seems to be a tendency in a few cases to look for problems where none exist.  For example, when you mention Nod, you assume there was a community there.  But Nod (which means wandering), is simply an identifier, like the name of a river, of an area.  There is no indication that there was a community there already.   

Also you mention that it is unlikely that Cain would have married his sister due to levitical laws.   But you know that these laws were not given until later, and that even Abraham married his half sister.  To suggest that this is a reason for proving other communities existed is simply not logical.  Rather, it would be much more logical to assume that Adam and Eve had many other children, and that brothers married sisters at that time.  I just saw a family on "America has Talent" which had 12 children in 18 years, and no twins.   Isn't this also scientific evidence of such a likelihood for Adam and Eve that they also had many children even before Seth was born? 

I think your synopsis of the meaning of "Adam", which is related to red, to earth, and is sometimes plural was well done, but it is certainly no indication that Adam was not a real singular living created being, created by God from dust in his own image.  In fact, it would suggest that he was created from the earth itself, wouldn't it.  

An explanation would be valuable, of why Genesis 4:26 would say that at the time of Enosh, Seth's son, men began to call on the name of the Lord, when obviously Abel and Cain were already sacrificing to God much earlier.  At least this should highlight the value of context in understanding the meaning of a phrase or verse.  

Love it, Janet. Amen back at you!

Anton, It is not appropriate to for Network users to be snarky to one another. I am sorry if you have expeirenced that on The Nettwork. One of our comment guidelines states that comments should be "friendly and polite in tone and language, even when you strongly disagree."   If you find a comment that you think is in violation of our comment policy please click the "flag for review" link below the comment. This will notifiy us of the comment and we will make ajudgement if the comment should be removed. Thank you Anton for participating on The Network and I do hope you find it useful towards your ministry needs. Jonathan WilsonNetwork Community and Content Manager

In the latest issue of The Banner, there was an insert  called," Ministry report 2013".

when you come to Canadian Ministry, you would be led to believe we are only about Aboriginal Ministry north of the 49th parallel . It seems our interim Ministry Director has not made much headway in the year since his appointment. Another item that points to the broken bi-national structure of the crcna. Let's fix it or forget it. The congregations already are becoming dis-engaged to the denomination

     C.S. Lewis explofes  these topics in his (fictional) trilogy, OUT OF THE SILENT PLANET, PERELANDRA, and THAT HIDEUS STRENGTH.  You might find a lot of provocative and stimulating stuff there.

Wow, you guys have awakend me this morning. What if?  What if all those other planets in all those other galaxies (upon which we so far  have discovered almost nil) had at one time sentient creatures that had come under judgment and we are the last viable planet in the universe? And we are apparently losing ground every day.

Until such a time as we meet another extra-terrestial being to ask them these kinds of questions, isn't this a lot like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Just to add to this... in case you're tempted to think: What's the possible relevance of this!? Scientists have recently calculated that there may be about 8.8 BILLION stars in the Milky Way galaxy alone that have earth-sized (and possibly habitable) planets around them. Considering how many galaxys there are... well you do the math....

Jim, we got the designation through an unscientific survey, a web-based poll. So Grand Rapidians (including me) voted themselves in as Beer City. But all is not lost. Besides Christian publishing, we gain a certain fame--and notoriety--from Art Prize, but the Christian world also sees us, though the work of Calvin Institute for Christian Worship, as a major stimulant and resource center for worship renewal. Through industrious work, we have also managed to become a metropolitan region of more than one million people -- by census counting. Still, your main point is right, that our prominence as a theological center has declined significantly.

Keith, the issue with homosexuality is not the numbers but how the church as an organization deals with the subject. If the media would deal with the subject  based on your percentages (which I agree with) there would rarely be an article on it.  Maybe the church might be wise to treat the subject as 1% of its issues?

Your comments on pornography are well taken.

I don't know what Churck Missler means. To begin with, Alpha and Omega are Greek letters, not Hebrew. Maybe he's referring to the Greek Septuigent of the Old Testament. Could you help me out, do you have a specific point to make about the blog I wrote? I want to apologize, I didn't listen to the three hours of Chuck Missler's sermon or teaching. I'll listen when I get some extra time. 

I want to thank you for your thoughts here. First off, there’s nothing that you wrote that I wouldn’t agree with. I agree with it all. Also, like you, I feel the Genesis story is also based on real events and not a fable or some kind of parabolic poetry. The problem with English speakers is they don’t appreciate the depth of meaning found in the original Hebrew words of Genesis. There is so much more written in these texts than I have found in any English translation that I have ever read. All translations fall short of the original language.  My advice to reading Genesis is to get a good Hebrew-English concordance of the Old Testament and with a little effort you can see what it is I’m talking about. And, as for all those articles pointing to a single woman’s Mitochondrial DNA as the origin of all of humanity I’ve also have read and agree, would seem to be evidence for the existence of a Hava or Eve, or Noah’s wife at the least. Also I’m not at all opposed to the idea that Eve may have been born miraculously from Adam. The problem is the text itself says there were other people at the time of Adam and Eve. Genesis chapters 4 and 6 speak to this. For example, in chapter 6 you have several curious texts that say the daughters of Adam were either married or taken by the Sons of Eloyim (which can mean a whole variety of things) and were also taken by the Nephalim or the fallen/ tyrannical ones. These two sets of people are not identified as sons of Adam, in fact both texts seem to imply it wasn’t a good thing that the daughters of Adam were married or taken by these people. There is such a wonderful bountiful depth here in Hebrew Bible that I wish more people could come to appreciate.

Hi Keith,

Thanks for your post.  The headline sure grabs attention!  : )

I agree with you that pornography is probably a big problem, deserves more attention than we give it, and has the potential to seriously harm of Christ's Church.

However, I feel that homosexuality has a much, much bigger impact than the way it's outlined in your post.  It may be the case that only 1% of the population has same-sex attraction (though I think the matter is more complicated than this), but I believe that many more people are affected by the matter than just those who experience same-sex attraction.  At the very least, others would include family members and friends of sexual minorities.  Then there's the matter that quite a few people feel that same-sex relationships are not prohibited by God's Word.  Then there's the matter of same-sex marriage, which affects us as citizens of our countries.  Then there's the matter that, as I've heard it at least, the *main* impression many people in North America have of the church is "group of gay-haters."  Wow, that's pretty sad.  And on it goes. 

In fact, I think the 2nd paragraph of Brett Turner's earlier post gets at these realities.

And Aaron Vriesman's (hi, Aaron!) post assumes that there isn't a biblical argument for approving same-sex relationships - which, agree with it or not - there is such an argument.  Many Christians (yes, not all) who accept same-sex relationships feel they are doing so not by ignoring the Bible but are doing so for *biblical* reasons. 

A few of these items I'm raising are *not* issues that pertain to pornography.  Each issue has its own challenges, to be sure.  I think, though, that homosexuality is a much bigger issue than what is argued for in this forum.

That's all. : )

God bless,

Dave

Hello Keith. I reckon you are right. Pornography is the silent poison of our modern society. I even once saw an episode, dont watch it these days, of the Simpsons and in this episode there was reference to pornography as if it were normal and ok. If I recall it correctly Homers wife Marge either offered to get him some or actually did. It was bizzare! A cartoon on in prime time when children watch it!

The homosexual issue is odd though as its pushed at us all the time. Here in Australia it is. Often we hear our polititions talk about supporting it and same sex marriage etc... I even went to a local comunity centre once and saw in the childrens area a large poster promoting same sex couples, telling the children that if a boy likes a boy and a girl likes a girl its ok because its the same as a boy liking a girl or visa versa. Strange times indeed i reckon.