rejection

Some days I wonder if I should stop listening. Just when I think my status as an eligible and attractive Christian man could possibly return to normal, God throws me another curve. I don’t mean to infer that God teases me, but it’s as if He enjoys speaking through ignored passages of scripture to remind me, “The world accepts [this]; I‘m not going to allow you to do that.” This usually leads to this exchange:

ME: Seriously?

GOD: Yes.

ME: But women are going to think I’m crazy!

GOD: Okay?

ME: Even Christian women are going to think I’m sexist.

GOD: I created male and female. What concern is it of creation how I determine what is glorifying to me?

ME: Please don’t ask me to share this.

GOD: …

ME: I’m never getting married… You know this, right?

GOD: …

At this point I realize that God has said everything He needed to say, isn’t asking for my opinion, and obedience is on me.

Today’s ‘this’ is about hair. That’s right, hair.

“How charmingly insignificant!” you might say.

About a month ago, a female friend and I were discussing all that ails modern pop, which led to a rant about Taylor Swift and her incapacity to write about anything but boys. I gladly offered my two cents (or in this case, three).

“Yeah. Can’t sing. Not really even attractive. She has nice hair.”

Playfully aggravated by my response, my friend asked, “What is it with guys and hair?”

Mind you, I thought I was making a neutral observation. Sure, a guy should be fair game for criticism when he makes comments about a woman’s breasts or butt, but hair? Perhaps I was unaware of a general prohibition on anything pro-T.Swift :)

*************************

I was noting the crazy-awesome nature of a woman’s smile this past week and confessed to my roommate that I’m usually more of an “eyes guy.” He replied, “Yeah, different characteristics jump out at you depending on the woman, but have you ever been physically attracted to a woman that didn’t have nice hair?”

Admittedly, I had not.

“Right. I’ve had this conversation with a lot of guys, and I haven’t met one that didn’t consider a woman’s hair in what he finds most attractive. Nor have I met any that preferred short hair over long hair. Not to say that there aren’t attractive women with short hair, but even those women would probably be more attractive with long hair.”

I couldn’t argue with his superficial reasoning.

*************************

Minding my own spiritual business prior to Bible Study, I skimmed through 1 Corinthians 11, fully prepared to disregard all the archaic ideas about head coverings and hair…

What’s that? Did you say hair? [Run now, Anthony!]

Like a mouse caught in a trap filled with Mini Reese’s Cup, God’s word snapped to my brain.

However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering. (1 Cor. 11:11-15)

I thought about my good female Mennonite friends -- they cover their heads out of honor. Until this past spring, it never occurred to me that this could be accepted outside of proud legalism. By getting to know the hearts of my co-workers, I grew amazed by how humbly they wear their tiny coverings. It’s simply a part of who they are: a symbol of their femininity before a culture that has largely rejected what makes women unique. I think it’s beautiful.

Mind you, I’m not ready to convert. I’m not going to offer the conviction that women should cover their heads and men should uncover theirs -- I’ve been a hat-wearer my entire life! But I’m beginning to understand why one would lend that offering.

It was a different phrase that leaped from the page of my dog-eared companion.

Does not even nature itself…?

Five simple words transformed this passage from a lawful regulation to an eyesight of the Father. Nature itself: spiritually elemental and humanly inexplicable. These are the questions that we do not need to ask the Father, for they have been this way from the beginning. Paul is asking the Corinthians, “Do I really need to convince you that a woman’s hair demonstrates the glory of God and a man’s does not? Look at it! Even the hormones that men and women produce are catalysts for this principle!”

I began peering around the McDonald’s Playplace that hosts our study. Little ones were running about: girls with their lengthened locks danced around as they played, while the boys instinctively pressed the physical limits of the steel and plastic holding the park together. They demonstrated such joy in their play and acceptance of one another. They didn’t mind being exactly who they are.

God created them and He was glorified.

Does not even nature itself…?

We know it when we see it. I’m not talking about superficial beauty, but the kind of expression that undoubtedly points towards Him. As I thought about hair, I realized that my heart naturally gravitates towards purely feminine characteristics. They astound me! I would expect this to be the same for women regarding masculine traits. The soft reassurance of her voice, the proximity in her steps, the sensitivity of her heart… she’s the perfect companion for a grand adventure. Her beauty reminds me of Him.

The modern woman’s shedding of hair is merely a physical rejection among her uniquely feminine attributes. It doesn’t mean much in itself. A woman will often shorten her hair for practical reasons. She might believe it helps her look older, professional, or more sophisticated… less like the unassuming girl dancing around the playground. And while I wouldn’t necessarily disagree, I admit that I don’t care for any of this. Few men do -- it’s not what draws us. We spend our day wrestling with our own acceptance of masculinity and often concede to women claiming our stake. Rejection comes in pairs.

Does not even nature itself…?

Somewhere amidst our wounds we’ve decided that we’re inadequate: that we need to try a little harder and become something better. If only we were taller, thinner, more intelligent, more mature, less moody, less childlike… less us… In rejecting ourselves, we reject what is obvious to the external eye. Femininity, masculinity -- these unique representations of God that manifest themselves through creation -- they demonstrate His glory like nothing else on earth. And that makes us very good.

[Don’t I feel silly for being insecure about my receding hairline?]

suffering

This is the closest I’ll come to revisiting 1 Cor. 7. I planned to ignore it completely, but a multitude of conversations led to some spiritual truth that I felt inclined to share. Whether these words are meaningful for another or I have organized these thoughts for my own benefit, I pray that I’ve found understanding.

A number of friends have broached the church’s divorce epidemic as of late, and I wonder if our “attitude pendulum” has not swung too far. It wasn’t long ago that a Christian getting a divorce was taboo; neither was it uncommon for those who had been divorced to feel unwelcome within a church body. I’m not encouraging a return to the latter. Clearly, it is our responsibility to exercise grace upon lives bent towards redemption and reconciliation with Christ.

While it is not in our best interest to administer law upon a believer redeemed and set free from an unsavory past, we overstep the precision of truth when we make martyrs of divorcees for their decision to leave difficult marriages. I’ve recently seen this occur at an alarming rate. When a loved one leaves an unloving marriage, it has become natural for believers to support the decision based on the relief of suffering. We acknowledge that the divorcee may be better positioned to serve God outside of the struggling marriage than within the burden of irreconcilable differences, selfishness, adultery (whether physical or emotional) or outright abuse. We praise the “strength” exhibited when the better party has found the determination to move on with his or her life.

Understand that I’m not advocating the acceptance of abuse. It is perfectly reasonable for a woman married to an abusive man to grab the children, leave the household, and never return. Likewise, stories of other believers’ adultery make me sick enough to my stomach that I can hardly fathom the thought of reconciling with my wife were this committed against me. I recognize this in my flesh, at least in regards to the worst-case scenario. However, a physical separation made in good judgment does not justify a position to break spiritual covenant with a spouse or with God Himself. Even a separation due to drastic circumstance is not an allowance for remarriage, or as scripture refers to it: adultery.

Jesus doesn’t contend with this being a difficult teaching. In the narrative found in Matthew 19 and Mark 10, Christ explains that divorce was never instituted by God, but was permitted because the people were hard-hearted. He distinguishes what is physically lawful from what is spiritually binding. I love the black and white response:

The disciples said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” (Matthew 19:10)

Yes! Make no bones about it: this relationship is not a light commitment!

[I’ve often wondered how the disciples thought the relationship was designed to operate. Perhaps they had never given it much thought because divorce had become an accepted practice. Oh, dear.]

When Christians file for divorce, most would conclude that the other party broke the marriage covenant first, justifying their “release“ from their marriage. After all, this is how legal matters operate. When a binding agreement is made between two business partners, that contract becomes null and void should one participant break his end of the arrangement. Due process is considered before this occurs, so that each individual knows the ramifications of terminating the contract.

What divorcees fail to recognize is that the marriage covenant was never theirs to break. Yes, husband and wife are bound together, but they are bound together by God! Guess who’s not breaking His end of the covenant…

We cannot forget what is most honoring to Him. Knowing that God hates divorce (Mal. 2:16) -- an attitude only attributed to our Father regarding idolatry, injustice to the poor, and deceiving one another -- would He prefer a man or woman to willingly commit this sin so that He might be served more effectively? Or would He be more honored by the spouse that endures a lifetime of suffering to the detriment of a “greater” ministry? What I know of God is that the ends never justify the means. The only justifiable action is obedience.

I don’t express it often enough, but my mom is an amazing woman. Understand that due to his own painful experiences, there are times in which my dad is incredibly difficult to love. Between the unforgiveness, the continual perception of being slighted, and the jealousy he harbors for my mother’s time, loving him is a full-time job. When he pulled out of the church, my mom held the burden of keeping my brother and I spiritually fed. During this season, she couldn’t involve herself in functions that contributed to her own spiritual health or develop deep friendships. If she spent too much time away from the house (or too much time on the phone), my dad would get upset or accusatory. Looking back, nearly every unjust argument in our household could be attributed to his desire to keep us together and maintain my mom’s position as the only steady thing in his life.

To her credit, marriage has always been a choice. I’m sure it’s been frustrating following Christ by herself. I’m certain that every prayer pleading for my dad’s salvation has come at the cost of denying another ministry. Had she left my father years ago, she could have easily married a man that loved God and made her feel appreciated. She’d have been unified with a body of believers that encouraged her gifts and offered emotional support. By most physical standards, her life may have been better.

But this much I know: in spite of my dad’s spiritual bondage, he loves my mom and there’s not a chance that he would leave her. And she loves him… she loves him enough to forego everything else to keep their marriage healthy. Would God be more honored by my mother bringing 100 people to Christ as a divorced woman? For me, the answer is rhetorical; we have a sorry habit of measuring the wrong criteria. It’s irrelevant what God may have had in store had my mom never married my dad. Her greatest act of obedience is fulfilling the covenant made between the two of them and God.

Here’s where this chapter comes full circle with me. In light of what I wrote about idolatry, there’s always been the opportunity for a more physically gratifying life. Thousands of Christians fall into temptation every day -- should I justify breaking one commandment to end years of sexual frustration, I would be in good company. Better men than I have fallen and recovered to lead successful ministries. The hour of condemnation would pass, and I wouldn’t have the standard of purity hanging over my head any longer.

During my previous study, I was frustrated by the lack of modern context within Paul’s teaching. An American man in the 21st century does not have the luxury of marrying to satisfy his desire because he wants it. There are a million free will decisions that Paul’s contemporaries never had to consider. What if a woman never reciprocates my love? What if I’ve aged to the point that the majority of my female peers have already given themselves to another man? What if my innocence becomes despised or a catalyst for a woman’s shame, even when I do not hold a sexual past against her? What if obedience leads to a life of suffering?

I’m thankful for the words of C.S. Lewis:

I do not say that you and I are individually responsible for the present situation. Our ancestors have handed over to us organisms which are warped in this respect: and we grow up surrounded by propaganda in favour of unchastity. There are people who want to keep our sex instinct inflamed in order to make money out of us. Because, of course, a man with an obsession is a man who has very little sales-resistance. God knows our situation; He will not judge us as if we had no difficulties to overcome. What matters is the sincerity and perseverance of our will to overcome them…

When an adolescent or an adult is engaged in resisting a conscious desire, he is not dealing with a repression nor is he in the least danger of creating a repression. On the contrary, those who are seriously attempting chastity are more conscious, and soon know a great deal more about their own sexuality than anyone else. They come to know their desires as Wellington knew Napoleon, or as Sherlock Holmes knew Moriarty; as a rat-catcher knows rats or a plumber knows about leaky pipes. Virtue -- even attempted virtue -- brings light; indulgence brings fog.

-- From Mere Christianity, emphasis added

I must remember that should this world do me no favors, my Father will consider every question that Paul could not foresee. I will not be judged as a man with a lawful or willing outlet for my sexuality. God will not condemn me in my suffering as He would in my justification of sin. While there are no guarantees that God will allow me to end the suffering, I must recognize that He will be glorified according to my obedience. Should my life serve as nothing more than a thankless symbol -- should I be the man that never exploits the opportunity for a quick kiss, that teaches a teenage girl or young lady how to trust again, that models for men the sort of husband I believe we should be -- He will receive His honor and I must find my joy in Him.

freedom

My timeline with alcohol:

In 33 years, I have never seen my parents drink. There was never a drop of alcohol in our house and I was raised in a church with people of similar conviction. Here in Northern Indiana, certain practices are associated with “sinners.” Michiana bars reflect this -- they’re as trashy as they come. Believers assuming the freedom to partake often do so conspicuously in a private residence: while recognizing that their behavior is considered sinful by the general public, they openly test the waters to see how their brethren might respond to their "rebellion," always ready and willing to defend themselves. I find this behavior silly and childish.

I abstained from drinking through college. In the tradition of the Mennonite/Amish/Anabaptist conservatism surrounding us, Bethel College has students sign a covenant upon admission that discards this right. Unlike many students, I held to the covenant through school session and summer. It wasn’t that I gave a lick whether a 21 or 22-year-old student drinks a glass of beer; I determined that the integrity of my word was worth something greater. Were Bethel’s expectations an issue for me, I could have attended one of a million other schools.

[This is my general attitude concerning chosen authority. If you have an issue submitting to authority, you need a new authority or a changed heart. Perhaps you need both. You have no right to complain about poor or inconvenient decisions made by an authority whom you have chosen, particularly if you must neutralize your complaint with a defense of your willingness to submit. If your complaint is valid and refuses to be addressed, leave. If your complaint is not meaningful enough to leave, shut your mouth. Tangent complete.]

A couple friends from my graduating class shared my first drink with me: a Killian’s Irish Red on the Monday following our commencement. Having never made a practice of drinking or seeing people drink, I limited my experience to a glass or two over the next five years. I moved to Missouri on Labor Day of 2006 -- the native attitude towards alcohol couldn’t have been further from my homeland’s.

Having never held a strong conviction against the moderate consumption of alcohol and having never exposed myself to the sin of drunkenness, I regularly shared a happy hour pint with my unbelieving co-workers. Since returning to Indiana 2 1/2 years ago, this freedom has returned to prolonged periods of abstinence. Some might wonder why. Am I afraid of being seen? Am I concerned with what my friends may think of me? Would it be a sin to drink in one location as opposed to another?

Now about food sacrificed to idols: We know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. But whoever loves God is known by God.

So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.

Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols? So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall. (1 Cor. 8)

Those who know me recognize that I'm not too concerned with others' perceptions of me. I live in such a way as to have a clear conscience before God -- in this way, many of my behaviors may seem less conservative than my Christian friends while others are more restrictive. If I drink, work on Sunday, or date a younger woman, I'm confident that loved ones recognize me as a person of integrity and of pure motivation. When other Christians cringe on my behalf out of concern for how I might be perceived by others within my culture, I tell them to worry about themselves.

That said, when it comes to physical things, I partake in knowledge while abstaining by love and conviction. It is by knowing God (and secondly knowing myself) that I determine what freedoms are available to me. It would be unrighteous and arrogant of me to justify my freedom in opposition to your conviction. For what is an earthly freedom to me on the day of judgment? If I abstain from alcohol because of what others may perceive, I do so out of fear or shame. However, should I abstain for the sake of my brother or sister, I demonstrate love through the dismissal of my freedom.

I think it's the church's knee-jerk reaction to justify itself when confronted with issues of freedom. We want to demonstrate that God has privileged us to drink beer, eat bacon, cover (or uncover) our heads, share a frontal hug, make dinner on Sunday, or allow a woman to speak in church. Paul's contemporaries may have stumbled over sacrificed food and circumcision, but the principle is the same. There is no greater privilege than to share in the crown of Christ's glory with fellow believers, and no freedom is worth disunity on account of well-reasoned justification. I pray that if any freedom causes a brother or sister to stumble, even if exercised in clear conscience, I might approach with the grace of releasing that freedom.

honestly...

I can't write about 1 Corinthians 7. Not again, not yet. I've read it, I tried, but I believe God must show me something about myself before I am ready to understand Paul's point of view within our modern context. I think Paul is incredibly right, I just don't know that men have any control over these matters for it to make a difference. Except the bit in verse 36... commit already!

As for the cut and dry part: believers, don't leave your wives and husbands. That's a hard enough lesson for the church these days. The end. :)

idolatry

Confession: I suck at moderation.

I can only maintain self-control through abstinence: food, sex, gambling, hobbies, work, rest, relationships… loving Jesus… you name it. When I order a pizza, I plan to eat it all. When I compete, I play to win. I beat my body as I work (and crash hard when I finish). I cannot love a little, enjoy a little, sacrifice a little, or offer a little of my time. My compulsive personality draws me to the fullness of Christ and is tempted toward the depth of despair.

I’d hoped that maturity would even the scales, placing me at a disciplined equilibrium that says “no” to the second half of the Cool Ranch Doritos bag. Not so much. Others consider me to be mature, primarily because I’ve learned to abstain from most unsavory vices, moreover receiving praise for the indulgences that are God honoring.

[True story: I’ve often wondered if God has spared me from a relationship because there would be no end to my verbal and physical affection. Getting married would be like untying the knot of a running fire hose that has been kinked for 33 years. I wish I was joking… no woman should be subject to that.]

Scripture has surprised me. Nowhere does God’s word promote moderation. I looked and looked again, expecting to find humble rebuke for my personality. Plenty of passages endorse self-control and abstinence, as we’re commanded not to be ruled by unrighteous indulgence. But the concept of moderation as a pursuit is Aristotalean rather than biblical. When are we going to stop modeling our lives after the Greeks?!?

What if there’s merit in the black-and-white lifestyle? What if none at all is truly better than a little?

As I was cleaning the espresso machine Saturday night, I watched couple after couple stroll past the storefront -- holding hands, laughing, making non-verbal gestures, etc. A good part of me wanted that, if only for an evening: the simplicity of a good time with no expectations or immediate repercussions. I stopped by Applebees on the way home and made chit-chat with an enjoyable 30-something barkeep. Subtly attractive and pleasant, I knew how easy it would be to gratify my immediate desires by asking her on a date. I could convince myself that a spiritual connection was unnecessary because I wasn’t planning to make it sexual.

Funny that while moderation never accompanied spiritual maturity, these are the sort of worldly justifications that have been laid to waste. This woman’s kiss could never be just a kiss. The scent of her hair and the softness of her skin could not be drunk without the sin of idolatry. It would never satisfy and I know it. The compulsive design that God has geared towards mesmerized allegiance to Him would be undermined by placing something else ahead of His word.

“Everything is permissible for me” -- but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is permissible for me” -- but I will not be mastered by anything. (1 Cor. 6:12, NIV)

This verse has always spoken volumes to me. It’s a simple concept, but how often do we justify our behaviors by what is permitted by the world (or the church) as opposed to what we have to gain? If I muster the restraint to deny myself the second half of the Doritos bag, thus enjoying the first half in clear conscience, have I gained anything? [Besides bad breath?] Not really. I have partaken of an action that gratified an immediate desire and have nothing to show for it in the end. Should I restrain myself, I have no less desire for the second half of the bag -- I bear the fruit of dissatisfaction and frustration, same as any less accepted idol.

Paul continues his letter by discussing the danger of “immorality.” Old school translations prefer the term “fornication”; the NIV, NKJV, and NLT have modernized to “sexual immorality.” The Greek word is porneia, accurately described to be “illicit sexual intercourse,” but is used metaphorically by Paul to refer to idol worship in Acts 15. I like the NASB translation of 1 Cor. 6, because I think it offers a wider context for the point Paul is trying to make:

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything. Food is for the stomach, and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both of them. Yet the body is not for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord is for the body. Now God has not only raised the Lord, but will also raise us up through his power. Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take away the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? May it never be! Or do you not know that the one who joins himself to a prostitute is one body with her? For He says, “The two shall become one flesh.” But the one who joins himself to the Lord is one spirit with Him.

Flee immorality. Every other sin that a man commits is outside the body, but the immoral man sins against his own body. Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body. (1 Cor. 6:9-20)

My roommate and I were discussing idolatry the other day, and I mentioned how much I liked Neal Anderson’s material -- idolatry is defined as anything removed from its proper place to be positioned ahead of God. Jesse offered a more “Tozeresque” explanation:

“I think it’s simpler than that. When the Father is understood in His appropriate place, everything else can’t help but be lessened.”

Thus, idolatry is not defined by the lifting up of other things, but by lowering the expectation of who we believe God to be. Ever wonder why Aaron saw it fitting to construct a golden calf? The Israelites no longer believed God to be who He is. Had they considered the God that brought about the plagues, delivered them across the sea, or provided manna in the desert, the calf would have seemed ridiculous!

This jives with Paul’s words about mastery. Whether through sex or another idol, if I believe that God is less than I’ve known Him to be, less than He claims to be in scripture, less than the physical desires of my heart, etc… I will prostitute myself away from the Christ that has made covenant with my body.

One characteristic of an addict is that he/she will often replace one addiction for another upon remission. This explains why my struggle with lust went on hiatus during my romantic relationships. Yes, I took pride (and fear) in the fact that my relationships kept me sexually pure. In hindsight, I had merely replaced one idol for another: the idealized fantasy of sexual sin for the well-intended affection of a woman. The common thread was a lack of belief that God had my best interest in mind or knew how to bless me with what I needed.

Let us explore the magnitude of having been washed, sanctified, and justified in Jesus! While many things are available to serve as “harmless” idols, we can rid ourselves of these masters through our intimacy with Him. No other lover will suffice once we’ve tasted the goodness of our Heavenly Father. Of that which is physical, only that which reminds you of Him is worth our compulsion. Let our relationships, hobbies, and work be considered through our love for Him. I’m reminded of a hymn written 90 years ago:

Turn your eyes upon Jesus
Look full in His wonderful face
And the things of earth will grow strangely dim
In the light of His glory and grace

-- From “The Heavenly Vision,” by Helen Lemmel

judgment

When I was seven, the church I grew up in decided to find a new pastor. The rationale was probably less than spiritual -- hard to say, seeing that I was seven. Anyway... having received my spiritual diet from the same man through eleven years of childhood and adolescence, I remember exactly three sermons. The first and second were Sunday night messages on eschatology and generational shifts -- interesting, but not exactly life-changing material. The third was on the front end of a church split.

My pastor could easily be described as passionate, but I never found myself passionate about the same things. Amidst the innocence of my high school Christianity, an ugly division was occurring at my church. A deacon began a sexual affair with a family member of another congregant. This deacon's brother (also a deacon) had an employment-related falling out with another congregant, who happened to be friends with the family affected by the initial impropriety. As I blindly attended youth group every Sunday and Wednesday, our leadership was being split at the seam.

Behind the public scene, our pastor had ineffectively addressed the issues with the parties involved. Imagine my surprise on a random Sunday morning when our pastor called out the sin to the congregation! I will never forget these words:

"You can fire me tomorrow for what I must say, but this Body cannot tolerate corruption."

[Or something like that.]

A couple thoughts crossed my mind: 1) A pastor can be fired for doing his job? 2) Why was I unaware that there was sin in the camp? 3) What happened to our awesome deacon's wife? [Sudden realization that I hadn't seen her in weeks; she used to be my junior high leader.] 4) Who are these people that attend my church?

The fourth question rang the loudest. If I can go to a church for eighteen years and not know the people's hearts or struggles, is something lacking?

BTW: Our church was growing. Just months before we had wrestled with adding a service and were on the verge of hiring a full-time associate pastor. We had every reason from our pew seats to believe that we were moving in the right direction. I was proud to be a member of my church.

Most of you do not like what Paul has to say in 1 Corinthians 5, even if you don't know it yet. If you read it as God's word, and you should, it'll get under your skin. I would guess that 95% of American believers do not attend a church that operates according to this passage, which leaves the American church open to a corruption that Christ did not orchestrate or intend. We can justify it or we can deal with it.

Brothers and sisters: if you love the Church, deal with it!

It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that does not occur even among pagans: A man has is father's wife. And you are proud! Shouldn't you rather have been filled with grief and have put out of your fellowship the man who did this? Even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. And I have already passed judgment on the one who did this, just as if I were present. When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

Your boasting is not good. Don't you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough? Get rid of the old yeast that you may be a batch without yeast -- as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old yeast, the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with bread without yeast, the bread of sincerity and truth.

I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people -- not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the reedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, and idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you." (1 Cor. 4, emphasis added)

My first thought is how backwards the church has become. We have no problem exercising judgment on those that do not claim to hold to the teachings of Christ. We want to change American laws and call out the media for their blatant disregard of Christian values. To this I say, what should we expect of the lost but to behave like the lost? The same was true in the Old Testament: God never asked His people to condemn the pagans for their practices; he was concerned with the Jews for adopting them, as if they hadn't been set apart for holy living.

A few summers ago, I reconnected with one of the girls (Lauren) that used to work on my camp staff. She had always been a brilliant girl; she admittedly struggled to connect with other female Christians because she felt "above" them. While in college, she began a relationship with a male believer and the two fell into sin. During this season, her boyfriend began attending a scripturally sound church and received strong rebuke regarding their relationship. As a result, she began attending the church purely out of obligation. Here are her words:

...There is so much I could say. I can't understand what happened but I do know that God used my sin, my idol of Andrew [her boyfriend] to keep me going to church and eventually He freed me from it. We broke up in January. Andrew didn't repent, he is in another relationship and has left the church -- to the surprise of many people. He was living with men from the church by this point and they followed scripture to the point of not eating with him. This was really hard to watch, I saw my own sin and didn't understand why God hardened his heart. I had a really hard time submitting to the people who were leading me at this point and continually commanded me not to talk to him after we broke up, trusting God's sovereignty and letting Him lead me. I only stayed at the church after we broke up because they were the only people who really loved me in my life and I was so broken and humbled that God could teach me.

These last 8ish months have been so painful and so glorious. God has been disciplining me over and over and bringing my sin to light. And I finally know myself as a sinner and God as God. It took quite a few months of rote obedience before God gave me pieces of understanding. God is my rock and I fail so much to obey but the fruit of obedience is wonderful and I'm so thankful for what God saved me from (by now on our plan Andrew and I would have been married almost a month).

Lauren continued to submit to the leadership of this body and grew in grace. The church's willingness to operate under scripture allowed her to approach God in humility for the first time and eventually led her to meeting her future husband under pure circumstances.

That said, this teaching is hard. I'm not going to sugarcoat it. If the American church began operating under this passage, we would lose a lot of people. The majority would find it impractical -- even if we desired to know the hearts of our people well enough to know their sin, most growing churches are designed in such a way that leadership doesn't even know the names of every congregant.

Here's my take: if the structure is the barrier to exercising this passage, then the structure is corrupt, not the passage. Tear it down! A spirit-filled pastor can give a sound message every single week (and many do), but if he does not know the hearts of his people, the church risks being infiltrated by the so-called believers that regularly commune with those seeking His face.

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God -- having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.

They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. (2 Tim. 3:1-7)

By not exercising judgment upon our own body, we corrupt ourselves and harden the hearts of those living in sin. When Paul says that we must hand them over to Satan to destroy their flesh, he is suggesting that some may find grace in the firmness through which we deal with their sin. Continual acceptance and tolerance of a believer within a life of sin can only lead to a seared conscience. For that heart, there is no return.

Our culture (church culture included) has taught us that we are not in position to judge one another. From a believer to one that doesn't accept Christ or his teachings, I would agree; Paul says this much. But if we assume that it is not our place to speak judgment upon the sin of other believers through the love of Christ, we have given the church over to the enemy. If our only excuse is that the church could not facilitate this passage because of its size or structure, then our church needs to reform itself in a manner that allows itself to exercise obedience. No structure is too sacred and no believer too untouchable to submit to the Lord's commands and His desire for purity.

riches

To meet someone in Bremen, IN with unmet physical needs is rare. The same is true for the entire county in which I reside -- for that matter, the majority of the adjoining counties are not in need. Relative to the entire United States, Michiana maintains strong church attendance and an evangelical moral compass by which young people are expected to adhere.

That said, churches are dying at an alarming rate. Attendance has not grown; it has been shuffled. Large churches are growing larger, providing services for the same individuals that have gone to church their entire lives or returned to a modernized church following a wayward season. While it is difficult to statistically identify conversion rates, transfer growth has reigned supreme.

It begs the question of whether the growing churches have targeted an already established demographic (albeit, more effectively) or legitimately communicate the Gospel of truth that transforms lives. I get the impression that the church in Corinth was growing numerically (I'll address this in another post) therefore carrying a sense of pride in their "riches." We also know that the church was marked by immaturity, sexual immorality, spiritual arrogance, and a tolerance of sin. Only the Galatians receive as strong a rebuke from their apostle.

Already you have all you want! Already you have become rich! You have become kings -- and that without us! How I wish that you really had become kings so that we might be kings with you! For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men. We are fools for Christ, but you are so wise in Christ! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, we are dishonored! To this very hour we go hungry and thirsty, we are in rags, we are brutally treated, we are homeless. We work hard with our own hands. When we are cursed, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure it; when we are slandered, we answer kindly. Up to this moment we have become the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world.

I am not writing this to shame you, but to warn you, as my dear children. Even though you have ten thousand guardians in Christ, you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I urge you to imitate me. For this reason I am sending to you Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord. He will remind you of my way of life in Christ Jesus, which agrees with what I teach everywhere in every church.

Some of you have become arrogant, as if I were not coming to you. But I will come to you very soon, if the Lord is willing, and then I will find out not only how these arrogant people are talking, but what power they have. For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk but of power. (1 Cor. 4:8-20, emphasis added)

Paul makes three comparative statements that distinguish between the way the Corinthians were operating and Christ's expectation for His church:

[Don't I feel all pastoral!]

1. The church boasted in their physical standing to the detriment of personal transformation. Scripture has much to say about those that equate physical comfort with spiritual favor, but we still struggle as a Christian community to discard this idea.
   
   Shortly before the last presidential election, my homeland was stricken by an excess of unemployment due to the fallout of the recreational vehicle industry. Having been the staple of the Michiana economy for years, panic broke out among the evangelical throng -- the sort of panic that identified the shaky foundation of its Christian faith. Presidential nominee Obama campaigned in the Republican stronghold to capitalize on the dire circumstances, becoming the first Democratic candidate to receive electoral votes from Indiana in 48 years.
   
   The evangelical community was willing to address every physical variable to preserve its riches, but did not repent. What could have been a prime opportunity for the church to minister to the spirtual poverty of its people was squandered for the wisdom of Dave Ramsey. If Michiana could once again boast in its financial stability, it would indicate that God was on their side.
   
   In contrast, Paul's life was not one to be loved by the world. For congregants to resign to the apostolic call, it requires a humility that cannot be satisfied by worldly riches. How many would drive by the church marquee promising weakness, dishonor, hunger, nakedness, abuse, or homelessness and walk into its doors? How many recognize this as the cross that Christ has asked us to bear as His people? Paul's words remind me of one of my favorite passages:
   

   You say, "I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing." But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked. I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover you shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see.
   
   Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me. (Rev. 3:17-20)

   I don't want to be rich. I love Jesus and want Him to come into my home to heal me.
2. The church was led by subservient teachers rather than spiritual fathers. When Paul refers to "ten thousand guardians" in verse 15 (often translated "tutor" or "teacher"), the Greek term is paidagōgos: a slave that supervised and modeled proper morality for children of affluent families. [Lewis connoisseurs can consider "the Fox" in Till We Have Faces or Doctor Cornelius in Prince Caspian.] The paidagōgos lived with the child and served as teacher and disciplinarian, but was ultimately subservient to their student regarding authority.
   
   The spiritual climate Paul describes is one in which the Corinthians have many leaders, but none that have received position to speak into lives with authority (which I'll cover in the next post). Sin and boasting were tolerated because leadership modeled moral behavior, but did not hold people accountable to Christ's teachings.
   
   Meanwhile, a father is given all authority regarding the discipline of his own children. The reason that Christ commands us to make disciples is that we are expected to maintain a personal responsibility for our spiritual offspring. We should be able to ask our children to imitate us with a clear conscience, as Paul does with his children, assuming that they are imitating us as we are imitating Christ. Just as a father bears the image of his ancestors, the son should bear the image of his. If the church allows its congregants to assume any likeness it desires, even with the integrity of a moral leader, it welcomes corruption and disunity.
3. The church's image depended on its lofty words rather than the manifestation of the Holy Spirit. The dichotomy here is obvious, yet still we stand convicted. We can state our vision until we're blue in the face, but if we do not allow the Spirit to guide our actions, we will become disconnected from our theology. The unbelieving world does not need to hear more about our church or the standing we feel we've earned among our community. It needs to see that the God we serve has the power to transform lives, including my own. Which message are we promoting by the way our church operates?

men

This post is a mesh of current thoughts and others I published last spring upon studying 1 Corinthians 3.

She fidgeted with her hands as I awaited the answer to my question. Cautiously, she framed the thoughts that plagued her mind.

“I can’t live that way because I’m not strong like you. And you… you’re something supernatural.”

My head lowered with her response. Had another loved one missed the point? Why was it presumed that my faith was about something I had accomplished? Aside from God’s incredible grace in my life, my résumé was a absolute mess. Without the Holy Spirit’s intervention, I was angry, bitter, selfish, and weak. To believe that I had assembled this transformation with my own hands, she employed a dangerous lie. It frustrated me that Satan could twist her perception into what I had done.

I rebuked her, but it didn’t matter. She had already determined that a perfect man was better than an intangible God.

*************************

I’m generally leery when men want to argue hard and fast rules about faith. When talking about an issue that God has already settled (through written or revealed word), there’s not much room for discussion if in fact you ascribe to His word as truth. However, many Christians prefer to develop their understanding of God through one another while engaging scripture as an afterthought.

This may paint me as a rebellious creature, but I want to vomit when the bulk of spiritual discussion is based on another man’s words. My disgust is less with the leaders than their followers (something I’ve officially dubbed “The Coldplay Principle"), but Christians can’t seem to stop talking about some dude. It’s Francis Chan this and Mark Driscoll that, or Rob Bell wrote about this and John Piper refuted with that. I wouldn’t mind having a cup of coffee with them, as I’m sure they’re fine individuals and have insights that would be valuable to my life. My beef is not with a particular pastor.

Rather, how often are they placed in the center of Christian conversation, and how often do these debates lead to a clearer understanding of Christ and communion within the Body? It’s inevitable that a leader will gain a certain prominence for their diligence, and this can be advantageous in spreading the Gospel. After all, Paul must have been an early church rock star as congregants crowded to hear his teaching.

This is a stale phenomenon: since God has designated “His people,” they have desired a tangible, human representative that could be honored. We all like to be the kid that tweets, “I know him personally!” as if Pastor X changed the landscape of Christianity. While our chief foreign missionary had every worldly reason to receive such acclaim, Paul had this to say:

Brothers, I could not address you as spiritual, but as worldly -- mere infants in Christ. I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere men? For one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere men?

What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe -- as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow. The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor. For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s field, God’s building.

By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.

Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy him; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.

Do not deceive yourselves. If any one of you thinks he is wise by the standards of this age, he should become a “fool” so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: “He catches the wise in their craftiness”; and again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile.” So then, no more boasting about men! All things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future -- all are yours, and you are of Christ, and Christ is of God. (1 Cor. 3, emphasis added)

I would welcome an equally humble retraction from modern leaders. While we cannot prevent man from placing leadership on a pedestal, it would be awesome to be reminded that they are not the Story, and it would be liberating to hear it from them with the same repulsion that Paul demonstrates.

Paul suggests that such petty arguments and leader-worship are a sign of spiritual immaturity. What does that say about the church today? When our faith must assume a human face, we absorb their words as a substitute for the richness of scripture and the simplicity of the Gospel message. It’s totally vogue in the 21st century to say something fresh or present a new context through which to appreciate the mysteries of God, but we must remember that the foundation already laid is the Christ that saves and redeems our lives. Everything else is flammable material on the day of judgment.

I gain encouragement from the end of this chapter. We should be thankful that Christ has made all truth available to those that are filled with His Spirit. While He has given us the blessing of the Body to minister to one another and bring truth to light, He intends for us to mature so that we might receive Him without an intermediary. Christians that place leadership on a pedestal rob themselves of the greatest gift He has offered through His grace: intimacy with Himself.

wisdom

Does anyone else find it peculiar that the man most noted for wisdom lived an indulgent life?

I know I shouldn't be such a pooper -- sometimes I have difficulty lending due credence to Proverbs or Song of Songs because of the king's shortcomings. Surely I have my own vices as I've never discredited the angry, stubborn, or depressed for their own contribution to God's word, but accepting the folly of adultery from a man married to every third woman on earth raises a proud, virginal flag.

[Dearest Anthony, you have read the title to your own blog... right?]

Ecclesiastes has always been the neutralizer for me, the redemption amidst a life of folly. The only thing more intolerable than living a life of folly is pretending that you haven't. Solomon's life demonstrates the futility of fleshly pursuit. He does not speak as one that has abstained from the finer things and deemed them vain. No man had greater opportunity to gratify himself. It is through Solomon's indulgence that the word "meaningless" carries weight.

And Solomon's lesson is my lesson -- likely it is your lesson. Having asked and received the greatest gift on earth (intimately understanding the ways of his Father), Solomon often chose to disregard that gift. He chose the natural over the spiritual.

And why not? He was king! Polygamy was acceptable. Israel was experiencing its most lengthy period of peace, certainly a result of Solomon's negotiating "efforts." His world (our world) would encourage Solomon to take what he can get. Well, he got it.

This has always been the dichotomy between man's ways and God's way. We have the ability to reason and justify the most logical solution, often to a selfish end. Given the opportunity to serve God or serve ourselves, we are continually taught that creating a life for ourselves will make us happy. I've bought it. I would presume to know exactly what I need. What ridiculous folly.

We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written:

"What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived" -- the things God has prepared for those who love him -- these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit.

The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. What we have received is not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may understand what God has freely given us. This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, explaining spiritual realities with Spirit-taught words. The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments, for,

"Who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?"

But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Cor. 2:6-16)

Equating human wisdom with Godly discernment is the greatest folly. Our natural inclinations are more often than not contrary to Godly discernment. One desires to find solutions that defend or construct our own position; the other is concerned with glorifying Him. How could these align?

When I was eighteen, I made an unexpected friend named Michelle. With prom season around the corner, I deliberately sat Michelle aside to deliver my intentions: how God had laid the Bethel community on my heart and that beginning a relationship would be foolish. She shook her head in agreement and we continued to enjoy one another for the next month.

We ended up having an incredible time at prom. On the way home, I took her first kiss because I knew we both wanted it. I felt justified. Nobody -- not my friends, her friends, our parents, our youth groups -- would have condemned me for demonstrating my affection towards a girl that loved the Lord. As a result, we decided to further our relationship.

My circumstances had not changed. I was still leaving for Bethel in the fall and still planned to make a life for myself there. I had taken what was available, what others perceived as healthy. It would have been considered foolish to share mutual feelings with a girl and let them go to waste. After all, how often do two people truly connect?

The most frustrating element of my relationship with God is that He knows me better than I know myself. The Spirit offers discernment to manifest His righteousness within us so that we might know His heart. What an incredible privilege! And yet, I choose to fight for what I perceive fits my vision instead of allowing Him to shape my life into His.

Byron and I recently watched an episode of LOST in which Jack refuses to give up on a dying Boone. At the climax of the story, Jack is ready to cut off Boone's leg in order to give him a fighting chance. Already resigned to his own death, Boone pleads with Jack to give up on him. Jack wasn't persisting on account of Boone's best interest; he simply wasn't ready to let go.

My friends consider a billion reasons in which I had left the Facebook world, but it boils down to the same principle: I'm awful at letting go. I know that given the opportunity to maintain my relationships from Indiana, Kansas City, St. Charles, Wyoming, Bethel College, each coffeehouse, each youth group, each camp, each school, blah, blah, blah... I will react according to my natural inclination. I will never let go.

It's okay for me to let go. God needs me to let go.

I've diverted from the original theme, so I'll return to the topic at a later hour. Suffice it to say, Godly wisdom often seems foolish to me. It can be painful, lonely, inconsistent, or irrational. Within it, His grace abounds. He longs to protect me from the impulsive desires that I justify through worldly logic. More than knowing how to access spiritual discernment, He'd have me accept His wisdom to keep my paths straight. Like with Solomon, both are available for the taking.