My Rant of the Week -- Bush Shoe Thrower Goes Free

Welcome to Monday. Time to rant, This week I heard the news that the Bush shoe thrower went free. His lawyer was very pleased and said that his client's actions were a justified end to the Bush invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Perhaps he would like Saddam Hussein back? Did he like the oppression of free speech he enjoyed under that regime where had he thrown a shoe at Saddam he would have been executed without due process of law for political sedition. As it was because of Bush's actions in Iraq he got a lawyer and was released. I don't know, there is obviously no logic in these Bush haters.

The Bush haters have always had a special place of irony. In order to hate Bush on the Iraq issue, you have to basically say the Iraqi people were better of under Saddam Hussein. A regime where rape, murder and real torture were the order of the day. Where free speech, such as throwing shoes at presidents, were illegal. Bush did the world and the Iraqi people a world of good when they both invaded and conquered Iraq. It is a safe country where people are now given due process instead of executed. Terrorists now have little power there (the surge worked) and now were going to continue ot make this issue that things would have been better off had we not gone in. What a laugh?

Ultimately this is what happens when you believe that the best foreign policy is to make every one like you instead of doing the right thing. This policy of making everyone feel good will ultimately destroy us. We need to understand that any treaty is nothing more than a piece of paper without the resolve to enforce it and ultimately this is what we have with Obama -- a man who believes in paper but does not have the resolve to enforce it. This will ultimately lead to two things:

1) Failure -- there will be a WMD attack on someone in the world.

2) A renewed enthusiasm from the terrorists that will lead to another terrorist attack on our own soil.

Rant complete.

Regular Topics on this Blog and Connections to Ministry

One thing I have found interesting as I have been writing on this blog is how the posts on it have often been the topic of discussion in my ministry. Now I don't know if it is simply that I am thinking about them so they come out of my mouth, but it does not seem that way. Lately, many of the things I talk about on blog space simply come up in conversations and it is the other people who start it. Sometimes you just have to chalk things up to the Holy Spirit, huh?

One decision I have made it to have regular topics or areas of coverage with a few open days to vent my spleen now and then:
1. Sunday -- I am not going to talk about my sermons, but I am going to talk about ministry and some of the things I learn over time as I pastor.
2. Mondays and Tuesdays I am going to leave open.
3. Wednesday -- I am going to pick a political or social issue that is a current event and comment.
4. Thursday -- I will continue my look at the Constitution of the United States in relationship to Christianity and the Bible. This probably will extend into the Bill of Rights and Federalist Papers so it will keep me going fora while.
5. Friday -- I ma going to use Friday to consider a book of the Bible and go through it section by section -- right now I am looking at Revelation, but once I am done I want to change books. 66 books and 1189 chapters ought to keep me busy for a while.
6. Saturday -- by 'accident' this has become 'Christians and Sexuality Day' and you know what I think I will keep it that way. The fact is I get a lot of response from young people about this subject and i think someone with thought out answers should talk to them about sex from a Christian perspective. There are a lot of other sources out there that aren't. Just trying to tip the scales a bit.

I may expand on this and have the other two days be regular topics and then just rant as an extra post when I think a rant is in order. Blessings to those in Christ.

Sexuality, the Church and America -- Part 4 -- Friends with Fringe Benefits

I first heard the term 'friends with fringe benefits' back about ten years ago but it seems to have gained steam over the years. The term basically refers to a couple or other situation that people are not considering any long term relationship but are willing to have casual sex. In my ministry, I have encountered several couples who had this sort of relationship. 'Were just friends' but then a long passionate kiss or comment later and it is clear that the friendship is more than platonic. It is a sexual friendship with no expectation that it will be anything other than that.

Casual sex is making a comeback of sorts. The sexual revolution of the 70s was big but the AIDS issue of the 80s slowed things down a bit. Recently though it seems it is getting larger again, probably do to the fact of increasingly open sexual education, a topic of mine for an earlier post, but for now lets deal with the existence of casual sex and who it affects. Well, just about everybody. Since I have turned forty, my e-mail has had no less than three spam type e-mails inviting me to join sites that for all practical purposes are not about relationships but casual sex. Also my advertising that gets place in front of me while I am getting my e-mail has much the same thing in the sidebar from time to time. Don't think this is odd, I hear it happens to everybody because the assumption is that once you hit mid life you want to take chances and do something different and one of the areas this happens most often is sex.

Why is this dangerous? Because it assumes that sex is purely a physical act for fun with no other possible consequences other than pregnancy (which can be avoided through birth control) or a STD (avoided through condom use). These two issues aside, the fact is there is something going on here that goes larger than just the physical.

What exactly happens when a couple has sexual intercourse? The Bible describes this in a couple of ways:
1. 'Knowing' -- Adam knew his wife.... -- more than just sex it is a knowing of the other person in a way you cannot know someone without sex. From personal experience I can tell you there are things I know about my wife's spirit, emotions, mind and body that no one else knows because I have had sex with her and she with me. These things no one else will every know unless we violate our marriage covenant. Which I have no plans on doing, of course, but such a violation causes such knowledge to leak out to others who have no business knowing what we know, should it take place.
2. Becoming one flesh. The union of husband and wife is called this but Paul also uses this term do describe the actions of a man and and a harlot -- 1 Corinthians 6:12-20 (verses 15-16 in particular).

Looking at sexual intercourse theologically this means that something happens every time sexual intercourse takes place that is a knowing of the other person on all levels that binds a person to the other and makes them one flesh. When sin is committed in sex, it usually involves not respecting this union and the spiritual and mental/emotional side of it as well.

This is why the Law of Moses prescribed automatic marriage for couples caught in fornication. 'Dad I'm pregnant and Jake is the father" had automatic consequences -- the man and woman were married immediately and the man lost his option to divorce the girl. (I wonder what would happen if we enforced that one today?). The union was assumed and sex is what caused it to happen.

Paul comments directly on this in relationship to fornication (in his case fornication was the casual sex involved in pagan rites of worship) and makes the following points in 1 Corinthians 6:
1. The body is for the Lord
2. God has raised us up by His power
3. Our bodies are thus members of Christ
4. If we join in fornication with someone we are making the body of Christ joined with that person in fornication -- in his case he says by doing this a person was making the body of Christ a member with a harlot.
5. Regardless if there is a marriage covenant or not, sexual intercourse makes two people one in the spirit as well as flesh.
6. Fornication is a sin against a person's own body for we are joined to Christ
7. Our body is the temple of the holy Spirit we should treat it accordingly.
8. Because we have been bought with a price, including our bodies, we should glorify the Lord in our bodies.

Now, lets get back to this friends with fringe benefits thing. The fact is that when you and you friend have sex you are joining yourself to at all levels (spiritually, emotionally, mentally and physically). This has an affect on all these areas because once you come apart from each other and go different ways you will never be the same because you know the other person in a way others do not on all levels. That is until you or they have sex with someone else. Regardless of what you think is happening this is what the Bible says is happening. Our society and culture may have changed, but the Word of God has not. This why, no matter what people may say about it, people are unhappy about their casual sexual relationships over time. Because there you are 'knowing' someone intimately but forcing yourself to deny it. It is this denial that something is wrong and our effective treating each other as objects for sexual gratification that cause this -- SIN.

Now I have no problem with the idea that sex is fun and should be fun. What I have a problem with is that you can have fun with sex without commitment in marriage without spiritual and other consequences before yourself and God and your relationship to him will suffer for it. When you first treat the person as a person by committing yourself to them for life in marriage and then explore the fun of sex, then the 'knowing' gained can be shared in complete confidence and trust.

For the Christian there can be no such thing as 'friends with fringe benefits'. The church therefore must take an active stand against such relationships in any way it can without being a bunch of moral judges that condemn people. This sin is pardonable and once true salvation enters, then and only then does the law of God really come in force. My personal stance has always been to tell such couples to forget me marrying them and just head to the justice of the peace, magistrate or whatever and get the piece of paper. You are already married just let the law know it.

IMHO

Next: Polygamy

The Book of Revelation -- Part 2 -- The Blessing of Understanding

Verse three of chapter one contains an often overlooked beatitude that involves people who can understand this book of prophecy. Specifically, those who read it, hears it and heeds it. This brings up several points to consider:

1. The people who read this prophecy could receive a blessing from reading it. It was not designed to cause fear but bring blessing.
2. To read or hear the prophecy brought about the possibility of the blessing of revelation.
3. It is the heeding of the prophecy that brings about the blessing.
4. There is also a final line that speaks volumes -- 'the time is near' which indicates expedience.

The fact is that Revelation had a blessing to it; if you take the time to find it. For me this is a wonderful find because I have always avoided this book other that to read it on occasion. Now there is something to strive to discover. To heed these words leads to a blessings. The real question is how to heed and understand it?

Next: The Message to the Seven Churches

The Rabyd Theologian Looks at the Constitution -- Part 3 -- "In Order to Form a More Perfect Union"

"In order to form a more perfect union..."

Now you have to know a little history to understand this line. The original Constitution of the United States called 'The Articles of Confederation' was not working. The unity that had once existed between the various states during the revolution had basically disintegrated. The Articles gave the central government very little power --effectively none unless their was a war. The idea of forming a more perfect union was large in many peoples' minds. The thought of protecting the rights of states to run their own affairs was on the minds of others.

Biblically, a parallel existed as the tribes of Israel were much the same before the advent of the kingdom of Saul. The problem with this is some people believe that things were too free and wanted a king to protect them. The statement in Judges "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" is not a moral statement; it is a political one. Samuel himself was probably the author of judges and he was not pro-monarchy but quite the opposite. He can't be saying that the monarch got people to stop sinning because that was far from the truth. The statement is about the fact that each man stood in his own sovereignty before God himself. There was no king to answer to but God himself. The issue is that people often look to centralized authority in times of crisis. In the case of the time of judges, the authority was supposed to be God and His Law but judges would handle the crisis points empowered by God. Each man was very free and had massive liberty as long as he, by choice, followed the law of God. It was in short: a theocratic democracy.

In the United States at the time of late 1700's God was in the picture but not a ruler but as bystander and each state handled its own affairs, unfortunately there existed no central government with the power to handle things when to states had a dispute with each other. Union was not on any person's mind but states rights. The Constitution is a result of finding a better way to balance states rights with a need for a centralized power to handle crisis and disputes. The result was a limited central power but with strength within its limits.

The Constitution in and of itself was not powerful enough in many respects for some when regarding in the rights of individuals and states. The individual question was answered by the Bill of Right some years later. But the question of states verses Federal rights has always been heated as this was and still is not quite spelled out in the Constitution. This issue got so heated once we had a Civil War over it.

This line was an attempt to placate both sides -- we want to be united but we know it is an attempt at a more perfect union, not one that does not respect states' rights.

Next: Establish Justice

The Passing of Kennedy

There is an old expression about people dying -- respect the dead and if you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all. So what can be said good about the passing of Teddy Kennedy
1. The man who escaped justice for his role in Mary Jo Kopechne death will now face bar of God for which justice will be perfect.
2. The Senate is now no longer filibuster proof for the rest of the health care debate in addition without Kennedy a lot of things are going to fall apart.
3. He never became President of the United States.

It always saddens me at somebodies death and that sadness is compounded when someone wastes their life without God. Kennedy wasn't even a good Catholic.

Now I know the media will be going gangbusters covering how wonderful he was as the youngest of the Kennedy clan and they will probably give him more time than Ronald Reagan which would be a crying shame, but the truth is when you look at his life it is just sad in the eyes of eternity.

IMHO.

Whose Health is It Anyway?

In the ongoing debate on health care one thing seems very much lost in the shuffle -- Who's health is it anyway? The reason I ask this is because once we establish who owns the health of an individual does that not define who is responsible for that health?

1. My health belongs to me. It is my responsibility to both maintain and provide for.
2. I must take this responsibility, it is not some other person's or organization's responsibility.
3. No one has the right to take charge of my health from me.

Given these things I find two things reprehensible in the debate:
1. How many people think that someone else should be responsible for their health care. This continued passing the buck has been around since Genesis 3 but the fact is its you health quit looking to someone else to take care of it.
2. The government's continued think that they have the right to take control of my health care as if it belongs to them. Once my health is taken into their care what else are they going to take control of? Under Obama and a liberal Congress is their no end to the power they want to take away from the people and give to themselves?
3. The belief that good health care is a right. It is not a right, but a privilege of and advanced society and a person's ability to provide it for themselves through whatever means they can find.

My health is my own and if in the end I don't have the ability to pay for it that is my fault. What we have in this is a bunch of people who think they are going to live forever, so they do not provide for themselves the means to have heath care. Then when they get sick someone other than themselves must pay for it. One incompetence leads to another.

I like private insurance because it means I get to shop around and I get to provide for myself. The government always makes things difficult and they never do anything that has any true quality to it other than the military. If we give health care to them the quality will diminish and you can bet it will get very expensive for the already overburdened taxpayers. You know if we continue to tax the rich they will live somewhere else and that will ultimately be bad as they are the ones who dive the prosperity of the economy not the government.

The real solution 1) Kill Medicare altogether and 2) put limits on tort so the cost of health care can stay low.

IMHO

Church Antagonism -- Part 7 -- Recovering from Antagonism -- Church

Churches suffer in antagonism. During and antagonistic bought you will see people leave, rarely will people stay if they visit. Those that get to the end survive and ultimately have to face the future. There is a long list of things the church and individuals should not do after antagonism has been defeated:
1. Don't stop ministry for a rest period. Many people in both my churches who had been under the gun and then suddenly the problem went away did this. Ministry is a lot like prayer and other things that provide spiritual growth and healing, when you stop doing it you lose that avenue for growth and healing.
2. Don't take a break from the vision of the church. The vision God has given the leadership for you church actually can be your saving grace. What it does is allows you focus on something other than the hurt at least for a little while and if done with the Spirit can bring to your church the one thing that is needed above all else -- new people.
3. Don't sweep the thing under the rug and move on. I know that this seems to contradict the two above but to think you can just dump the soul crushing pain of conflict gone bad and move on is not wise. There must be a plan to rebuild relationships and hearts.
4. Become defensive. Many people after surviving antagonism decided to build a bunch of walls and systems to keep it from happening again. The real thing is not to prevent this by defensive measures but offensive. To make sure people are prepared to DO what is right in the face of these things, not just shield themselves.

Some things that do need to be done: (now, these are mine from a long process of thinking on how to get people in a church past antagonism to life)
1. Establish small groups -- not just any small groups, but ones that hold people accountable for their spiritual walk and prayer together. If I could I would make it mandatory for every member to be a part of it. Why? To reestablish relationships and recover from damage. Like it or not people are hurting and they need an outlet to be prayed for and ministered to.
2. Develop a proactive and health approach to dealing with conflict. Conflict is normal and teaching Biblical principles on conflict resolution is very helpful. When you can teach people to focus on the issue at hand rather than the persons involved you have done your church a great service. Leadership needs to model this at all levels.
3. Never let an issue simmer -- deal with it as an issue and get a resolution on it especially if someone gets angry. To many times we let the devil wedge in his agenda through unresolved issues or anger.
4. Be prepared to counsel on all areas -- things happen and like ministers people do a lot of things to cope and often they are sinful and destructive. Be prepared to open your heart to whatever counseling is needed to help these people.

FINIS

Working Overnight and Preaching

Today I had an interesting experience in preaching that I think needs to happen more often.

Working third shift on Saturday I get home on Sunday it is usually around 6am to 7:30am. My service is at 9am so there isn't a a lot of time to prepare, shower get dressed, grab everything and head to the church. My normal pattern is to go right to bed so I usually hit the pulpit slightly fatigued. I hope to go to bed as soon as possible on Sunday. I can definitely see some changes in my preaching

1. I pray a lot during work on Saturday Night/Sunday Night, in fact I am beginning to see the effects that other preachers talk about when they pray all night over a message. There is real Holy Spirit power here.

2. I have a lot of time to think right before preaching about my passage and so I have time to really clarify myself in my head about what I am going to say. It becomes a real gut and heart check on things for myself.

3. When I hit the pulpit at last, I am tired in a good way. I have little resistance to the holy Spirit. Any preacher knows exactly what I am talking about. What God wants you to say seems to be too much so you soften it or edit it. I don't really have the time to explain it here but it happens and a lot of preachers do it. When I am sightly fatigued I don't do this as much, in fact I don't do it hardly at all. The message is much more free flowing and natural. I also don't edit much out.

All in all this had been a good thing. It was a surprise because I thought I would have to fight to get quality up, but the fact is by fighting I may have been interfering with God in the first place.

The issue is always to be a vessel for God use, the more resistance you have to this the more it is work instead of glory to his name.

Sexuality, the Church and America -- Part 3 -- Homosexual Marriage

Isn't it interesting how sometimes things come together that you didn't expect or look for? Like my post for today and the decision yesterday to allow active and practicing homosexuals to be ordained in the Evangelical Lutheran Church (ELC). I really wonder how they can claim to be Evangelical (there is little conservative evangelicalism in this decision) or Lutheran (Can we really see Martin Luther advocating homosexuals in the pulpit), but then again nothing surprises me these days.

There is absolutely no Biblical basis to say homosexuality is justified by God. In fact, quite the opposite is true. God looks at homosexuality as one of the great sins. Right up their with adultery and rape. Homosexuality is listed by multiple Biblical authors as a sin that will destroy you covenant with God both in the Old and New Testaments. Yet here we are not only fighting about homosexual marriage but whether or not to let such people in the pulpit to preach the Word they are violating.

Now, I want something understood, I consider adultery to be just as bad and I have a fit where many denominations have rehab stuff for ministers caught in infidelity but not in homosexuality. Both are equally abhorrent to God. It is only in our minds that we make one above the other. In the Law of Moses both were punishable by death along with rape, murder and sorcery. (Not fornication, couples caught in 'trouble' are simply required to get married with no option for divorce) The reason I say this is I know many churches where homosexuals are forbidden to attend but people in adultery are openly allowed to go. Sorry, double standard. Sexual sin is sexual sin.

Now, in our relationship with the world I think we need to realize not everyone is a Christian and we can't go around legislating morality or in the end homosexual marriage. The battle is not over on this but I believe it will end with some states having homosexual rights. California surprised me. but don't think that is forever. Just means California gays will probably take their case to a higher court which is what they have been looking for in the first place. What we will see is gays immigrating to states that allow them their wishes. Ultimately legislation solves nothing, if people want to engage in sin, they will do so whether it is legal or not. Only the gospel and the changed life through its acceptance stops homosexuality, adultery or any other sin. This gospel is very difficult to preach to someone if they look at you as an enemy political force or trying to take away their rights.

Homosexual marriage has some implications to other things normally seen in this issue.

1. If the homosexuals get their way, what other marriage situations will suddenly petition to have equal rights: polygamy (subject of another post in this series) -- which might include one man with multiple women or *gasp* a woman with multiple men and group marriages of all types (One form is 'line marriage' with men and women sharing each other -- say three men and four women -- the combinations are endless -- for the purpose creating and raising children -- a la Robert A. Heinlein's views in his science fiction) and open marriages. Or is it open if hubby is dating his perspective fourth wife? Yipe, this gets confusing doesn't it
2. Homosexual and other marriage situations listed above in the church. (I think it might be very interesting for some guy to come into my church and introduce me to his wives!)

The church's response will be interesting because as you can see in some churches like the ELC they accept such things and it makes no difference to many of them if your homosexual or polygamist (See the Mormons in certain places). But what about those good ole boy conservative Evangelicals?
1. We will take the morally superior position and blast people for their lack of moral fortitude that we obviously possess and they don't.
2. We will enter the halls of government as moral crusaders trying to fix every body's bad morality and make things right.
3. When we fail, (and we will fail -- we have been failing with this tactic for over fifty years) we will advocate isolation and casting out with no hope of reconciliation. Creating our own Christian enclaves shut off from the world Jesus loves but is lost in sin.

Not good, but then again it is what we do, even if it hasn't ever ultimately worked. What might work is never done, because we are always looking for someone to blame for the fall of morality in the United States and the real answer is not them, but us. We stopped making change about the gospel and instead left it to the courts and legislatures. We really don't believe in the power of the Holy Spirit or the gospel anymore, if we did we would use them more for this and other situations.

Next: Friends with Fringe Benefits

The Rabyd Theologian Looks at the Constitution -- Part 2 -- "We the People"

For step on of this long running series I would like to look at the preamble of the Constitution. By far it is one of the best written things by man that is not Scripture. Here is the whole thing:

'We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.'

The thing that starts this off is the "We the People of the United States..." Not a statement by a king or dictator to his subjects but an establishment of sovereignty by the people by the country. The Constitution lets us know who is ordering itself with this Constitution -- the People of the United States. This does have a few implications:

1. The government, whatever is established, is under authority of the people. In short, the people of this country sit as sovereign not the President or Congress or the Supreme Court. The people as a whole are the rulers.

2. There is a Biblical ramification in this for final judgment and relationship with God as a nation. As the people go, so does the relationship. If the people elect ungodly men to run themselves then it is the people that will be held responsible. Also, even if a godly men are placed in office, the sovereignty of the people means that this may not save them from God's judgment as God will hold the people responsible for their actions. There were times that Judah had good kings but because of the wickedness of the people they were still judged.

3. With the people as the sovereign entity, any government established would have to be a limited on so as not to upset this sovereignty. The order of government must be such that "We the People' is never violated.

Next: In Order to Form a More Perfect Union

The Book of Revelation -- Part 1 -- The First Line May Tell All.

"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him to show His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; ..."

There is something about the actual written title of a book that usually tells something about its contents. There is something too this in this book called Revelation

1. This book is ultimately, first and foremost, designed to reveal Jesus Christ. The future is a secondary and simply the place in which Jesus will reveal himself, but it is the revelation of Christ itself that the book says is central to its contents.

2. This book was given to anyone who calls himself a bond-servant of Christ. This makes it have a universal application to anyone who wants Christ revealed to them in the now.

3. Jesus promises to reveal himself in the future and it is in this revelation that Christ will show more of himself.

What is not stated here is that the contents of the book are a revealing of seven year time period called by evangelicals the Tribulation or the Millennium that follows. What it does say is about what 'things which must soon take place'. 'Soon' is a very relative word. 'Soon' to who? The book already looks at time in a relative way right out the gate. What's to make us think the whole time frame of the book is not also relative. Some thing taking place quickly and then huge gaps of time between other events. It also opens up the possibility that some of the contents may be very symbolic with nothing to do with time at all. They may just reveal a greater understanding about Jesus Christ.

Next: The Blessing of Understanding

Happy Birthday Justin!!!

Today is one day that I will pause to say Happy Birthday to my son Justin. Today he turns 18 and this Fall will be off to college.

Eighteen years ago (Wow! Has it been that long?) I was sitting at my table in the early morning thinking another day was going to go by in a long summer in Ellendale, ND. I was going to start my Junior Year in Bible College in the Fall and my friends were gone home for a break so I was left to entertain myself for another day. Justin wasn't due for another two weeks so when my wife came in saying that she was in labor, well it was a surprise. By the end of the day Justin Thomas Raby was born. At the time the whole Justice Clarence Thomas vs. Anita Hill thing was going on. I didn't like the name Clarence, but I thought Justice Thomas has a nice ring to it. Justice turns to Justin and you have a cool name. With the Thomas, I also gave one of my children a Biblical name, he is the only one.

Justin is my middle child and a great athlete as well as my most imaginative child. Some would say reckless but I say that Justin's push the edge attitude may serve him well in his life once he learns to harness it. He is also funny and friendly.

Justin moved out of the house soon after graduation and I miss him. 1) Besides the dog, I now am left as the only male in a house dominated by three females. 2) He is the only one of my children that shares a common interest with me in sci-fi and fantasy fiction. 3) He is also the only one in the house I can talk video games with. 4) I have loved watching him grow up and now I feel like I am missing part of something important to me -- his life.

Happy Birthday Justin -- God Bless You and Keep You All of Your Days!!!

Jesus Was Not A Pacifist

Every time some conservative group protests something and talks about guns and Jesus with a sign or words or anything else there will always be some ignorant liberal who will espouse their ignorance of Jesus by saying Christians should be bringing guns to protests because it insights violence and Jesus was non-violent.

I wouldn't mind so much if these people didn't have some politically correct axe to grind with an edited politically correct Jesus but I think they are missing a few points from Jesus life itself.

1. John the Baptist when addressing soldiers tells them to be content with their wages but never tells them to give up soldiering -- Jesus never refutes this. (Luke 3:14)
2. Jesus, not once but twice, drives out the money changers and their garbage from the temple and on both occasions created a weapon to do so. (John 2:13-25; Mark 11:15-18; Matthew 21:12-17)
3. Jesus himself said that he had not come to ring peace but a sword. (Matthew 10:34-39)
4. The reason two swords were at the garden in the end was at his request (Luke 22:36-38) -- I don't think Jesus had trouble with carrying weapons.
5. One ultimate thing -- if Jesus is a pacifist and would never hurt a fly, who then is represented in Revelation 19 where the king of kings slaughters his enemies and leaves blood standing that is bridle deep?

One other point, Jesus is the same God (If you beleive the Trinity) that in the Old Testament ordered the Israelites to war and genocide. Odd thing for a pacifist.

There is nothing in Jesus teaching that indicates pacifism. Great restraint and self control maybe in the face of personal insult is taught, but in matters of life and death Jesus is actually quite silent. Maybe he expects the rest of the Word that he inspired to speak for him.

One message to the gun control people -- make your argument but would you please stop using Jesus. The Jesus you believe in has been edited and watered down to fit your beliefs -- He is not the Jesus of Scripture because you are leaving a few things out.

Church Antagonism -- Part 6 -- Recovering From Antagonism -- The Minister and His Family

I wouldn't be writing this article if people did a better job of following Matthew 18:15-18 in the first place because then a lot of antagonistic situations would be dealt with with good solid confrontation and redemption. But as it is we do things in a more political correct model of non-offensive action that solves nothing or the minister and or others think the Christian thing to do is nothing and the result is sinful situations that hurts people. Because of these things antagonism goes the wrong way and victims are left in its wake. Most notably, the minister and his family get hit hard in most cases.


Now, if a minister is caught in an affair or some other sin, there are at least one hundred resources to draw on to rehab the minister and his family. Counsel, financial resources, job support and other things are available to such a minister. The fact is that there are very few resources available to ministers who are victims of antagonistic churches and situations. If I had the money I would work to change it, but being antagonism has almost ruined me financially twice, I appeal to others to change this. The few resources that are available are expensive (something most minsters cannot afford in these situations) or limited to dealing with the recovery phase of counseling not the crisis phase itself.


When a minister is under the gun the most important thing he needs is constructive counsel. The 'be warmed and filled, we will pray for you' counsel I received from the leadership of my denomination was not helpful. It did very little to help the situation and to be blunt, it violated Scripture in several instances. The fact is one of the most helpful things denominations could provide to ministers -- counseling centers -- is often not there. Denominations in many cases do not think of keeping and developing ministers through problems - -they just try to get things to be good and spend money on the gospel and others things. Let's get real though, antagonism happens and the victims deserve better than what they get. Just because denominations want to think happy thoughts does not mean it always happens.


If a pastor is forced out of a church. There are many needs. Chiefly, how is a minister going to support his family. For myself, I spent almost two years unemployed because in both cases jobs were scarce. This is why in the second case I asked for 90 days severance. I got an argument instead about whether or not they should charge me rent. Here they were kicking me out of my home (the parsonage), my job (being a minister) and my church, and they were complaining about having to give me some money to get by for a while, as I looked for a job and on top of it all wanted to charge me rent. I have been a strong advocate now for years because of this, that if a minister should receive 90 days severance if removed for any reason. Sin is one thing, but personal conflict should not be the cause a man to loose his ability to take care of his family. If you really want to say 'this is for the best' then pay for it. If it really isn't personal, then pay for it. It may cause some people to think twice if getting rid of the pastor is going to cost their church something. The irony of the situation at my second church was they wanted me out of town, but because they choked off my financial resources I didn't have the means to leave.


Losing a church HURTS. I can't describe how angry it makes you feel. Pastoring is a large risk on an emotional, mental and spiritual level. Congregations that understand this are a blessing to a pastor. There is usually nothing physically demanding about pastoring (work days and painting the church aside) but the emotions get very much involved. You care about people and love them, and then when they basically kick you to the curb -- it hurts. During my two years recovery I have had only the counsel of friends and family to get me through, but many of those simply do not understand. Recovery would take less time if there was a good counselor at your side who understands but more often than not -- no such counselor exists for pastors and families that go through antagonistic church situations. Need counseling is necessary in a lot of areas:
1. Career -- What do I do now?
2. Marriage -- Sorry stress produces stress and often marriages are the thing that suffers.
3. Children -- Do not think the pastor's kids are immune to hurt? I have one some who wants nothing to do with conventional church and another who seems to have no faith at all. They have made their own decisions about this but part of the thing that drove them away was how people treated them as pastor's kids --as if being a pastor's kid puts a special halo around your head or something.
4. Financial -- As detailed above.
5. Addiction -- Some things pastors and family members do to 'feel' better when under the gun are addictive and destructive.

If you are a victim of antagonism find what you can but one thing is for sure you might have trouble. If you ever need someone to e-mail contact me.

Next -- Recovering from Antagonism -- Church Recovery.

The Prosperity Gospel Considered by Solomon

I haven't really be giving a pulpit report from my preaching because I have been writing a book on the subject of Ecclesiastes but one thought that struck me about today's sermon on chapter 5:10-20 was how it stood in stark contrast to the prosperity gospel. It was actually a thought that came to me after I had finished speaking but there are several points I think Solomon would make to the prosperity preachers that would make their view look foolish:

1. That those who love abundance and the increase of wealth are engaged in vanity
2. When goods increase, those who consume them increase
3. That a good night's sleep is better than riches.
4. Riches can be horded to a person's hurt.
5. In the end we come into this world naked and we will return the same so the accumulation of anything is chasing after the wind.
6. The good and fitting thing is to be joyful over what God has given you regardless of economic status and to enjoy it in peace.

I guess I would believe the prosperity gospel more, if there were not so many warnings about becoming rich and setting your heart on riches IN SCRIPTURE. In this case Solomon warns that setting one's heart of riches robs you of the ultimate prosperity -- love, joy and peace. You can be rich and have these things but if riches steal them, then better not to be rich.

As a minister I find the prosperity gospel to be more the product of the current materialism of the Western World than an honest consideration of Scripture. The prosperity gospel gives Christians a justification to acquire and hoard goods in the name of Christ. Some of the fruit I have seen is old ladies giving up their social security checks to these preachers (the majority of funding for these guys and gals comes from this source), people buying things on credit believing God will supply the funds to pay for them and stinginess to the local church because the minister wouldn't preach this false gospel (no lie, I had one couple tell me that if I didn't start preaching it they would stop tithing). These false teaches seem to be doing well these days but I think many of their followers put themselves in a position of real poverty to support them. I find the whole lot of these preachers a little distasteful.

Solomon at least recognized, despite his great riches (think Bill Gates on steroids), that that was not what gave life meaning or significance. It was the ability to enjoy God's gifts in peace of heart and mind. That is something you can take with you through death to Christ's side.

Sexuality, the Church and America -- Part 2 -- Pornography

I originally was going to talk about the issue of homosexual marriage as part two but the issue of pornography and public nudity have a link that needs to be considered. The issue involves the definition of pornography and what changes would be made to that definition if women are allowed to show their breasts in public. Suppose in ten years ladies of the 'topfree' movement have won a national decision that allows them to be 'topfree' in any public places a man can. What then happen to all the pictures involving women with exposed breasts? Are they still considered porn? Probably not. What that means is that certain covers of magazines would change. For example (once again I am not trying to freak anyone out with this picture but I need a real life illustration to make my point), here is a cover from Maxim magazine:

This cover is indicative of a lot of men's magazines that do not necessarily contain naked pictures but if 'topfreedom' is achieved this lady would be allowed to drop her arm and hand without fear of prosecution for the magizine. Now, I pass the magazine racks everyday at my job and when I shop as well and so do a lot of other people. If women can be 'topfree' in public, then the covers of magazines would then be allowed to do the same. The issue I have is suddenly being forced to explain to children what is going on and why that women can show her breasts now and what are they? If I was a parent of small children and did not want my child to be exposed to this kind of thing, I would be out of luck. The store could say: "no shirt, no shoes no service" but I still have to go by the magazine rack where breasts would be visible.

Another issue would be Internet porn. What I mean is suppose you are using a filter of a secular nature and the filter does not allow you to filter out exposed female breasts because of the changes in the law. Your kid could be doing a report on some famous female celebrity and wham there is a picture of that celeb with herself exposed. Happens a lot these days.

That then brings up the question of then what does constitute pornography -- pictures of sexual genitalia and sexual acts only? This leaves a lot of wiggle room for a lot of other things because you dealing with the fine line of when exactly does an image become sexually explicit. That line would be even finer and more difficult to see.

The Church has never dealt with this issue well to begin with and this would make it even worse. Gentlemen we are going to have to live in a world when the sexually suggestive poses are going to be less suggestive and more overt and this going to mean a necessary change in the way we deal with this temptation. Ladies understand that your competition level for your husband's or boyfriend's attention will become more difficult. The 'topfreedom' movement may have a few good points, but I don't know if they see all the ramifications of their actions should they succeed. Pornography would be one issue that will certainly be affected.

Christians need to be ready for this change and not get overly bent out of shape about it, but take action that shields ourselves from the temptations that will be associated with these possible changes. I don't think we can stop this from happening in the very near future and the plan need to be one not of protest but one of reaching people (despite their ethical differences with us) for Christ with the life changing gospel.

IMHO

Next: Homosexual Marriage ( I mean it this time)

The Rabyd Theologian Looks at the Constitution -- Part 1 -- Introduction

The will be a long running series like so many others I am working on at the present time. I like to talk politics from time to time but as a conservative, my reactions are pretty straightforward and you can probably get those opinions from many other blogs and they would be the same as mine. Just think Reagan conservative with Rush Limbaugh thrown in and long running Christian faith and that's me. But one thing I want to look at for myself that is long in coming is the Constitution of the United States. One thing I have always wanted to do is apply interpretation techniques to other documents of importance that I would normally reserve for the Bible. If we let the document stand for what it says, it is what do we get?

I really don't know how long this will take, but as I have decided to engage things long term now, I will make sure I take my time and keep going. Over the next weeks I want to look at the document as a whole. and then break apart the Preamble. Along with this I want to consider what the Bible says along side this great document to see how much the Founders were sticking to Biblical principles. Christians often say so, but has there really been an analysis of this or is this just something we say to be political?

I make no bones about it, I believe that we should as much as possible understand both the Constitution and the Bible in the way they were ORIGINALLY to be understood and apply them the same way as much as possible. This notion of both being flexible documents is a lot of hogwash. But that does not mean that in both cases there might not be some room for interpretation. That said I would have to say that I have a full plate.

Next: Reading the Constitution

100 Posts in 101 Days

Just a celebration for reaching objective two of my blogging world. The first was to blog for 30 straight days. I wanted to reach 100 posts as the second objective and today is the day. If I hadn't missed a day on vacation at the beginning of August, it would have been yesterday.

Going with yesterday's post -- if you want to blog, keep going and don't quit. Believe in what you are doing and set some goals and you will reach them.

Blessings

Blogging 101 -- Keep Going.

I have learned a first lesson about blogging which is keep going. If you doing this because you want fame -- good luck those days are largely over. If you are doing this because you think your ideas and thoughts are good ones and need to be heard, then you got it. Blogging is very much about the belief in the value of your ideas. If you don't believe in them you will not keep going you will give up and move to something else. For over three months I have found this to be true and I keep going. It works and I keep writing.

Blessings to all those who keep blogging.

The Book of Revelation -- Is it really what we think it is?

My thoughts on the book of Revelation have always been cloudy and the only thing I think John Calvin did that was truly smart was he never wrote a commentary on it. Perhaps a lesson to the rest of us, but here I go making a series of posts on the subject of Revelation. I remember sitting in Sunday School as a teen when they taught about the end times (eschatology is the technical term) and asking the question of -- what if everyone is wrong? It is not an inconceivable option and as I went through my education I realized a few things:

1. The doctrine of the Rapture as most evangelicals have come to know it has only been around since the 19th century.

2. The doctrine of the Great Tribulation hinges on a single passage in Daniel that could be interpreted as fulfilled already in the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. See Daniel 9:24-27 for details.

3. The seven year tribulation timeline that is superimposed on the book of Revelation has its origins in both western thoughts of time and is only a recent phenom as it also has its origins in the 19th century.

4. "Seven" is put against many things in Revelation -- horns, trumpets, vials, seals, etc. One thing it is not put against is 'years'. Yep, for all the talk about a seven year tribulation, there is never a time in the Bible where the concept of a seven year time period and a great tribulation are linked.

5. Now, I also have different ideas on how the God of the Bible relates to time (aka as open theism) and I am wondering how that might affect my interpretation of the book of Revelation? I also wonder if all I had was the book of Revelation, how would I interpret it without referencing other books of the Bible?

So discarding the one wise thing John Calvin did (hey, I have already discarded everything else he did, so I might as well throw the last thing out), here I go into the wonderful world of Revelation and the great effort in this series, which may take a quite a while, is to let the book speak for itself. Onward and Upward.

Church Antagonism -- Part 5 -- Dealing with Antagonism

There are a few prelims to deal with in antagonistic situations. The biggest thing to remember is to make sure your dealing with an antagonistic situation. Conflict is normal in a church and if handled in a healthy manner can be constructive. Antagonism has two factors to look for. 1) A Person or persons who no matter what compromise is reached it is never enough. 2) Intense feelings that result only in anger and frustration.

One final thought -- remember some antagonists really, really believe they are doing the right thing, so communications may be very difficult. Antagonists do not want to reason or debate a point, they want to dominate and force their will on everyone else.

Steps in dealing with an antagonistic situation or person:

1. Pray -- you are engaging in spiritual warfare here. If you do not pray, you will be sucked up in the emotions of the situation instead of deal with it effectively. Pray and keep praying.

2. Confront them with the truth of the Word. Confrontation is difficult enough when it is opinion verses opinion, so make sure the Biblical question is addressed. If the antagonist has used gossip -- give evidence of it and point out verses that deal with that, etc.. Deal with everything and lay it on the line with the Bible.

3. If they refuse to listen, then take it to the board of the church. If it is the board that is the problem, then you might want to talk to the pastor and let him know he is not alone. Make a plan to talk to people and bring some people that agree with you to confront the person again with the problem.

4. If they fail to listen take it to the next meeting of the congregation. If it is only once a year, then call for one. If you are the pastor, do this. Don't be afraid but deal with it. If you are a member, find out how to call a church meeting and do so. Bring the matter up in the same way as before before the church. If the people still don't listen, move for their removal from the church. Even if you are not successful, a message will be sent. If you are successful, you will be surprise how much burden will lift off everyone in the church and the antagonists involved will get a wake up call.

If you are in leadership, stand your ground
If you are not in leadership, keep the support up and do something constructive. The biggest thing people can do is not gossip about the thing and confront gossip when you hear it.

Antagonists in power will of course fight this and may succeed in defeating you, but if that is the case then you will know one thing for sure -- the situation has been dealt with with one final step.

5. Contact denominational leadership, if you have any. If they do not help ( a situation that happens more and more these days-- I will deal with this in a later post) then you need to make some gut level decisions on your place in the church and whether to stay and continue to fight or leave.

One way or another, the situation will be dealt with and you will have some sense of resolution of the future. Hopefully the antagonists are gone (yes, this is a good thing), although you may have to deal with the gossip they spread after they leave. Don't hold out any illusions they will change until after they leave. If they haven't left, well you have decisions to make. Round Two or the Door. One note, if you are supporting the pastor and he has decided to stay -- stick with him. If he has decided to leave, stay with him to the last day.

Next: Recovering from Antagonism -- The Minister and His Family

Preaching and Reliance on the Holy Spirit

Every once and a while circumstances beyond some of your control teach you a lesson. Today taught me a new chapter on reliance on the Holy Spirit. As I stepped to the pulpit today. I had been awake for over 16 hours between work and the day before. Because I actually worked as opposed to having the night off and my job is very physical, I was very fatigued. Check that, I was tired and almost exhausted.

I let up a simple prayer -- 'God I am relying on you today.' God came through and as I preached I felt His Spirit and power. The message was right on and affected me (the most important part). I went home and went to bed and here I am writing.

Just another lesson that God's strength is there when maybe you have none.

Sexuality, the Church and America -- Part 1 -- Public Nudity

This is a new series based on some observations I made a week ago about the future of sexual morality in America. In this post, I want to look more fully at the issue of public nudity. The backdrop of this is my series Nudity, Modesty and Culture (If you haven't read it, do so and then come back) where I deal with the following related topics on this issue:

1. That nudity from a Biblical point of view consists of what the apron area of a persons body.
2. The idea of nakedness and women's breasts is never connected in Scripture.
3. Modesty Biblically is supposed to be a matter heart and spirit but the church often makes it a matter of dress and covering up.
4. In the end, modesty is culturally defined.

Which leads us to the culture war between Christians and the secular world of the USA about public nudity. There are significant things to consider here as I look at the news and issues coming up very soon.

1. Several women's groups, lead by the Topfree Equal Rights Association (TERA) are advocating equal rights for women to go topless (topfree) in the same places men can -- You can go to their web site but understand they have many pictures of 'topfree' women so if this bothers you don't go. A good chunk of the main supporters are women who breastfeed which have increased TERA's membership in number since the whole Facebook breastfeeding fiasco. There are also a growing number of women who simply see this as a constitutional issue. The argument leveled is that if a man can appear in public without a shirt a women should also be allowed to do so as well. They see this as a question of equal rights under law. The inequality being that a man is only considered naked if he exposes his genitals but a women is also considered indecent if she shows her nipples (by the way this is why a woman can show every part of her breast on those magizine covers as long as she covers her nipples). They further argue that in reality women's breasts do not constitute actual nudity as they really don't have a sexual function but a nurturing one.
2. There of course are many nudist organizations which I will not chronicle but suffice it to say they do not see nudity as a problem but maintain that a person should be allowed to dress or undress as they see fit.
3. Currently there are six states that allow some form of topfree rights for women and two others engaged in legal battles over the issue -- in every case the women have won and I predict they will continue to do so. It also should be noted that in many local areas there are topfree rights already in place by local ordinance and these are changing in favor of the women as well. Bourbon Street in New Orleans has been this way for many years but now they are definitely not alone. Ladies you may already have 'topfree rights' where you live and not know it.

How the Christian culture responds to these things is typical. There is a cry of outrage followed by a blaming society for the moral slippery slope. The self righteous judgment game follows where we all feel better about ourselves and our righteousness by looking down on those that engage in these practices. I would have to say this is not effective. A few observations:

1. Lust as a problem does not exist in these women or nudists -- it is a problem of each individual human heart. If the whole world dressed like the Amish, lust would still exist.
2. Self righteousness never wins a culture war.
3. If people are forced to live a certain way they will resent it, but righteousness that is engaged freely as Christianity is designed to do is a powerful thing.
4. In making a Biblical argument against these things we are going to be hamstrung by a couple things -- One, there is no way to make an argument that Women's breasts constitute nudity and so to get on the Bible here is difficult (shocking but true). Two, this IS a constitutional issue in this country and not a Biblical one and the fact is equality would dictate that either women should be allowed to go topfree, or men are going to have to be covered up (No more shirts and skins basketball guys)
5. Full nudity is something that people still have trouble with that are not Christians so the fight is going to be long here anyway because both sexes are required to cover up the angle of equal rights cannot be used.

My prediction is that the women who are advocating Topfree Rights will eventually win them on a nationwide scale and probably before the next ten years are out. Like when women began to show more leg and the public had a fit along with the moral majority the reaction will be same and then familiarity will come to a point that people will not notice anymore. In fact there may be a time when a women walks into a church with a bare chest and nobody will think anything of it. Sorry, it may happen because women walk in with short skirts now and nobody notices, well accept those people with lust in their hearts or self-righteousness.

This of course assumes we continue to go on the same path we have been going and when it comes to sexual morality and right now there does not seem to be a cultural reason to change course.

IMHO

Next: Pornography

Church Antagonism -- Part 4 -- What Allows Antagonists to Thrive

Church antagonists would never get away with anything if they did not act in a atmosphere that allows them to thrive. There are basically two factors involved:

1. Apathetic Bystanders: This can be anyone who would have the influence or could act at least in some way to confront the antagonism or stand up against it. The truth is that antagonists only survive because people do not stand up to it. They feel they are not in a position to stop it or are not sure what they should do. In my own ministry, my greatest problem was not the antagonists but the people who supported me that said and did nothing to stop it. Most are acting on the misguided notion that to be loving Christians they should get involved but real love sacrifices and stands up to evil. Remember it is often the pastor who is getting pummeled here and it is not loving to him or his family to just let him get pummeled. When good people do nothing, evil prospers. In my case it felt like it was me against half of the church with the other half watching the action -- not good.

2. Ineffective Denominational Officials: Boy do I know this one well. The fact is most denominational officials who could come in help the pastor and/or congregational leaders in trouble but they have a few things that make them ineffective: a) no plan -- and they follow it to the end. When you don't have a plan or procedure of how to handle these things you cause the 'bad' guys to have the advantage. b) lack of information on the situation -- ignorance of what is going on and being to lazy to find out what is really going on. If you are going into a bad situation get all the facts before you act. c) Lack of pastoral support: Pastors need support in this and they often don't get it. To tell someone under the gun to just pray about it or buck up smacks of -- 'be warmed and filled' but not doing anything needful.

If you get people fighting for their church and denominational officials who actually can help the situation looks a lot brighter.

Next: How to Act in the Face of Antagonism

Why Do I Lift?

My friend Pastor Sean posted about why he runs and so I thought I would ask the question for my fitness approach. -- I lift weights and have off and on now for almost 11 years.

My father had originally lifted when I was younger and the day he died his doctor told me that it probably added some time to his life. When I turned 29 I came to realize I needed to lose weight -- I was somewhere in the neighborhood of 320 lbs. I needed something.

I hate running -- no offense to my friend Sean and every other runner out there but it bores me to tears and because of my ankles and knees it is very painful for me to run. Walking alone would not do much. I decided then and there to break out my Dad's old weight set. In a single month I lost twenty pounds and three months later I was down to 275. After a year --245. I think it was this that inspired my oldest son to look at being an athlete but you would have to ask him.

I have upgraded from my Dad's old concrete filled plastic to a full Olympic set but the principles I follow have remained the same. I have adopted a very Body Builder style to my lifting and for three months last summer a diet to go with it. In three months 295 to 265.

My largest problem over the years has been sticking to it. I often wonder if this has a more spiritual issue to it. That is there have been times in my life I have needed it. Lifting is very meditative for me. There is something about it that allows me to clear my mind and focus, but there are times when I am focused already and don't need it. It can cause me to give it up and enjoy the results for a while and then the results vanish.

I am ready to go at it again and this time my wife wants to join me. I am not sure how I feel about that -- lifting has always been a solo act for me but I know my wife could use the confidence boost and I would certainly like the results on her if she stays with it. This time it is going to be an attempt at a complete change of lifestyle, not just a temporary action so keep us both in prayer. I am hoping that by doing this together I will have a deeper reason to continue. I also hope our marriage will grow as it would be something we do together.

Back from Vacation

It is good to get away, but it is last good to be back home. My brief vacation was punctuated by several events:
1. Visits to the Mackinac Bridge and Mackinac City. This is my home state and the fact is that it is the most beautiful one on the Union as far as I am concerned (yes, I have been to others -- at least half of them). To top it all off the weather was a little cold in the Upper Peninsula it was clear and bright most of the time.
2. Visits with our good friends in ministry -- The Lester's (The Hotel Lester has two chief advantages -- the company is good and the price is cheap)
3. Time to think in an environment so quiet that I could actually hear myself think.
4. Such conditions inspire a closer walk with God -- I have had a lot of time to make decisions involving my call and place in God's kingdom.

Now I am glad just to be home with my family and in an environment familiar.

Vacation Post 08/03/09

Hey -- just a quick post to say I did so on vacation. Having a great time and relaxing. The Hotel Lester is good and no Big Foots have been encountered here in the Upper Peninsula despite Sean Lester's insistence they are here. If we see one we will send pictures.

Blessings to everyone.

Going on Vacation

I have now, including today, posted for 90 straight days. That is now possibly about to come to an end as I head off to vacation with my wife to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. If I gain access to a computer I will post if I can but if not do not be alarmed I will be back on August 5 for sure.

I am not saying I won't post while on vacation but I am saying I might be too busy with my friends and wife to have time to so or simple no way to do so.

Blessings and see you when I get back for sure if not sooner.

Christians and Sexuality: Where is the USA Headed Morally?

As I look at the United States moral issues involving a sexual nature have always been forefront in the secular and Christian culture wars, I see some interesting things on the immediate horizon:

1. Public Nudity: Particularly the fight by women to have equal rights as men to be bare chested in public. The whole breastfeeding thing on Facebook and the current court cases in the last few years indicate that things are changing quickly. Currently there are six states which have 'topfree' laws of a various nature: California, Hawaii, Maine, New York (where a woman can now go topfree in any place a man can), Ohio and Texas. Other states are currently embroiled in battle about this: Pennsylvania and New Jersey come to mind. In many cases local communities define the laws here but in many cases these local laws are changing. It's like I said in my series on Nudity, Morality and Culture, it is something we as Christians are going to have to get used to seeing more and more. Literally.

2. Homosexual Marriage: I do not think this is going to leave the issue of States rights for a while but who will control it is debatable. I hat e to says this we are going to lose in the end and my own issue on this is that I retain as a minister to both not perform or acknowledge homosexual marriage. Just like I feel about common law marriage, neither the church or any minister should have to be forced perform or acknowledge such marriages if they choose not to.

3. Friends with Fringe Benefits: How common is this now and the one thing no Christian is saying is an intelligent response to casual sex. We decry it and we speak against it but this is not a response that people are going to accept. This is largely a continued failure to deal with the results of the sexual revolution.

4. Pornography: Has anyone else notice how common porn has become and it is not the world who has the problem that concerns me, but it is the number of church people caught in it. In fact we seem to have more problems with addiction to porn than anyone else -- I think in large part it is the poor way we sexually educate youth in the church that is the problem.

There are many others but these are the one that seem in front right now. What do you think?