Credibility

Credibility.  Credibility.  CREDIBILITY!!!

Sorry to choke your inbox.  I'm trying to blog a few times a week and not more than once a day, and two days this week I've hit you twice.  However, I've got a bit of a fuss to make to those of you who either preach and lead or who allow people to preach or lead.

DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE ABOUT SOMEONE'S CLAIMS ABOUT THEMSELVES!!

I am personally fed up with the number of times when someone has risen in the esteem of the multitudes, especially among Christian preacher and leader circles, only to be brought down because they've fluffed their background.  It's beyond imaging why we keep letting this happen. 

For those of you, like myself, who are meandering your way through church ministry, do not fake your background.  Be honest.  Is it fair that the church with the nice parsonage won't consider you without a seminary degree?  Maybe not.  But if you don't have one, don't fake it.  If you haven't finished it, say so.  Be clear.  Be abundantly clear.  Put "CURRENT STUDENT" in bold or something on your resume.  Make it part of your personal narrative.  Use it as a sermon illustration.  If you haven't got a Ph.D. or D.Min. and will never pursue one, don't be afraid of that.  Say so.  If they are led by the Spirit to want to call you anyway, they will do so. 

If you are a vanilla life story, born and raised in Baptist churches, never all that bad, never all that good, guess what?  You are what the vast majority of your church will be.  Don't add in troubles you never had or experiences you didn't have.  Don't exaggerate.  Be humble, be modest.  Not falsely modest, but modest.  And don't let people assume your grandeur when you know they're jumping to an unreal conclusion.  For example, I've preached in 6 states and 2 countries.  1 of the countries is the United States.  My first sermon was to a crowd of 8 in Delaware on a youth mission trip.  Now, what am I doing claiming 6 states and 2 countries?  Allowing someone to think I'm greater than I am.

And don't get grouchy when someone questions or wants to check your background.  You don't want them to pull your credit, that's fine.  There's lots of reasons to discuss that.  But if someone needs a transcript or wants to check your criminal record, then you better be willing to let them.  If you can, make sure you are noticeable as you do school and your various activities.  That way someone will remember you were there.

Now, to those of you on Trustee Boards or Search Committees: be proactive and willing to spend some money.  Ask questions.  Be willing to offend.  Pay for transcripts and background checks.  Follow up on questions.  Call and verify experiences.  Ask for documentation.

IF YOU HAVE DOUBTS, GET ANSWERS BEFORE YOU PUT SOMEONE IN A POSITION OF RESPONSIBILITY.

And when questions come later that you didn't think of, be quick to demand answers.

Why?  Because it is far better to address these things on the front end than to have to clean up the damage to yourself, your organization, and anyone else after it's over. 

Check to make sure you're using quality wood and that the fence is up.  It's much easier than having to gather the herd again.

 

Doug

Healthcare Reform Part 2

Not that there's been any clamoring for me to follow up on yesterday's healthcare reform commentary, but here's the follow up anyway:

1.  I don't like the healthcare reform package.  It's a mandate to buy a product which will strengthen an industry without fixing the reason costs are spiraling as it is.  HOWEVER:

I.  This is not the end of American Liberty as we know it.  I think it's too far, but we already have: government run retirement called Social Security; government run schools; government run medical for seniors and the poor; government run food programs; government operated disability insurance.  All of these take from some, many, or all and redistribute.  All of these have already begun the shift to a socialized country.  Each of these creates two classes: those dependent on the government system and those wealthy enough to do whatever they please.  This is just another in a long slide towards a socialized economy.

II.  This is not the end of freedom of religion in America.  A few comments on this: your tax money already subsidizes abortion.  It's true.  Else how did a girl I knew in high school have an abortion at an Arkansas Health Department Clinic? (At least that's where she stated it was).  That there is an accounting trick to ease our consciences doesn't matter.  It's still being done.  Also, government is already involved in pushing back against any religion it dislikes.  That's why terrorists are just terrorists but recent ATF raids were on the "Christian Militia." 

And even if this does cause the government to finally lock down on freedom of religion, what of it?  Are Christians free in China, where the church is growing?  Are Christians free in Iran or Pakistan where, again, the church is growing?  Has anyone heard the Nigerian Baptists calling for a Great Commission Resurgence between being slaughtered by the Muslims there? Or is the church growing there anyway?

III.  This is not evidence that President Barrack Hussein Obama is the Anti-Christ.  An anti-Christ? Perhaps.  The Big One?  No.  When you get someone that both the Israelis and the Arabs like, then you'll be on to something.  He's a President leading America in the same direction as FDR, LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton did.  Let's not idolize FDR, folks.  He was effective as a wartime President, and his programs helped a lot of folks in the Depression, but did he protect free markets and small government?  Nope.  He's another big government tax and spend liberal.  Nothing great or greater about him.  Whether he's 1-term or 2 will show how Americans really feel.  If it's 2, then we're in trouble.

Now, I've expressed reluctance before at the "repeal it" response, but I'm going to waffle back on that.  Repeal it, fine, if you've got a better, more sensible plan.    Not just to put us back where we were going, but something.  And make sure it includes tort reform.

 

Doug

Book Review: Winston Churchill by John Perry

Winston Churchill (Christian Encounters Series)

My latest review for Booksneeze is Winston Churchill by John Perry.  It's another biography in Thomas Nelson Publishers' Christian Encounters Series.  Booksneeze provides free books in exchange for honest reviews.  Check it out at http://www.booksneeze.com (and no, I didn't pick the name).  I've previously reviewed another book in this series, the biography written of John Bunyan. 

This biography of Churchill is, by the nature of the series, quite short.  Considering all of the aspects of any life, much less one as crucial to the 20th Century as Winston Churchill, a book this size will not cover everything.  That's neither a strength nor a weakness.  Just a fact.

To consider the value of this work, I'd like to take a look at what is included and excluded.

Included: quick summaries of the action points of Churchill's life.  This is good to provide background.

Excluded: Details of large blocks between the points of action.  For example, how did Churchill spend the whole of his time in the Boer War in South Africa?  These details are left out.  That's not all bad.

Included: An emphasis on his nanny and her role in raising him.  Alongside this are consistent criticisms of the role, or lack of role, his parents held.  This shows some insight into Churchill's behaviors.  However;

Excluded: More than one passing reference to the fact that Churchill's parents were as personally involved in their son as any other parents in their class and wealth at the time.  It's pointed out once, but then not recalled in other statements. This isn't to say that Churchill's parents were ideal, but that more balance would have preferable.  Not every time that his parents were criticized, but more often than just the once.

Included: A brief statement about Churchill's acknowledgment of God and the benefits, especially socially, of Christian beliefs.

Excluded: In-depth information showing Churchill as a devout or committed Christian.  This is a place not to be disappointed in this book.  It's very easy to assume that a Christian Encounters biography will primarily feature great heroes of the faith and detail their faith, prayers, and Christian activity.  I'd like to see a little more of that, but there might not be more of it.

So, don't look to this biography to give you an example of faith to walk in.  Look to it for what it is: a brief synopsis of the life of an individual who did, at some points, agree with and follow a part of the Christian faith.

I'd give 3 stars out of 5 to this one, since I've got to rate it out of 5 stars!  Remember: free book provided by publisher.  Read Disclosures! for more info.

 

Doug

Healthcare Reform

For those of you just waiting for my opinion on the Healthcare Reform Law that passed last week, as well as the embedded Student Loan Reform Law that was in it, here it is:

I don't like it.  Not that I hate sick people.  Not that I hate Democrats.  I still don't like it.

Why?

First reason: is this making it illegal to not have health insurance?  If so, why does the IRS get the power to administratively charge you more taxes for breaking the law?  Don't we get trials for committing crimes?

If it's not illegal, then we're seeing a continuation of something that my conservative friends have long done: creating a set of behaviors that are legal but "taxable."  It's a way of manipulating behavior while technically claiming you're still free to do as you please.  Why do you think there are extra taxes on alcohol, tobacco, and firearms?  It's to discourage the use while still allowing it.  It is a method used by various interests to attempt to limit liberty.  We didn't like it when it was tea, and we shouldn't care for it now.

Second reason: Are we putting more power over the life and death over American lives to the same outfit that was responsible for: 1.) Safety enforcement of Toyota? 2.)Fixing General Motors? 3.) Supervising banks and lending so that bad loans don't destroy banks? 4.)Finding Jimmy Hoffa? 5.)Making the existing tax code comprehendible? 6.)Government education? The American school systems that consistently rank mediocre compared to the world? 7.)PBS and NPR and their balanced, quality programming?

Third reason: Congress didn't read it.  So they don't know what's in it.  And they blended it with making the Federal Government the only lender for Federal Student Loans, rather than independent banks.  Brilliant.  And has what to do with health? None.

Finally: we're putting too much trust, power, and provision in the hands of Washington D.C.  Do I trust them with it?  No.  I do not. Whether it's the current politicians or the next ones, I do not.  Those controls need to remain as close as possible to the people.

 

Doug

1 & 2 Samuel and 1 & 2 Kings

Tonight at church, we're going to be talking about all 4 of these books.  Yes, I recognize that I'll spend 30 minutes preaching on 1 verse at times, and covering 4 books in one night seems a tall order.  It'll be fun.

These 4 books are also called by some 1,2,3, and 4 Kings, because they contain the records of the kings of Israel.  It starts with the origin of the monarchy, then covers the 120 years of united monarchy.  By the time we're 12 chapters into 1 Kings, we're into the divided monarchy.  Then we're into the decline and fall of both countries, Israel and Judah.

Authorship issues for Samuel and Kings (they're each 2 books because of the original medium: scrolls. Well, scrolls without vowels.  Insert vowels and then put it all on 1 scroll each and you'll kill yourself carrying it about) abound.  First of all, they cover a substantial portion of history.  True, Genesis contains more, but many conservatives have embraced a Moses as final compiler of records viewpoint of the authorship there.  The likely solution to understanding authorship of Samuel and Kings is similar. 

A word here about Biblical inerrancy:  We have generally held, as Baptists and a "people of the Book" that the original texts the Scriptures are without error.  There are some who take further steps to hold to a divine textual transmission, that the copies available at certain times (up until 1611) or continually until now are also without error.  There are also those who hold that the text is without error in its intent or its theology, while allowing for errors in history or science.

I, for one, accept that the original text said what God intended it to say.  As He does not lie or mislead, where the text contains obvious history or science, there are no errors contained.  Theology is understood as explained by the special revelation that is Scripture.  Now, the idea of an error-free text bears a special mention of quotations: where people speak, their words are recorded accurately.  Whether or not they were correct in what they said has to be established through their credibility and other statements.  It's much like a court transcript: the court reporter is not determining if the witness is honest or not, just recording what the individual said.

That being said, I do not hold that there has been perfect textual transmission.  I believe that God has preserved the general accuracy of the text, but He has left it to people to respectfully examine the available texts and determine the most likely textual reading to utilize.  Also, I don't think any specific translation is inspired or perfect, and if there was adequate evidence that portions of the NT, like the Gospels, were definitely originally written in Aramaic, that would extend to the Greek translations that top the textual tree.

Not wanting to bore with too many details, keep in mind that the vast majority of the text is without dispute among the available variants.  If I recall correctly, we're talking something on the high side of 90% agreement.  As a comparison, FedEx delivers packages on time and undamaged around 80% of the time, and they're considered reliable.  (ahem, there's another package company that hits 98%, and it's not the Postal Service). 

Of the variances that make up the less than 10%, most are things like spelling of names.  A quick illustration: my full name is Douglass.  Not Douglas, as most names that get shortened to Doug are.  Douglass.  Now, if you read an official story about me, say one that referenced my stellar work on jury duty last week, what would name would you see?

Most likely John, which is my official first name.  (Got you!)  However, one of the local media types in court knows me as Doug.  I signed in as John Douglass Hibbard, and you might find me referenced, as Mid-America Seminary has me down as, "Douglas."  So, name variations aren't major.

The biggest issues are where meaning is confused by textual questions.  There are not very many of those.  Generally, anything that would be called into question by a textual variant should not be the sole basis of any doctrine of the church, and fact is, they are not.  Typically these variances go to different expressions of time and place.  A major example is found in 1 Samuel, where there are additional explanations of the behavior of Nahash the Ammonite that Saul defeats. 

The books of the Kings contain the greater proportion of variances in the Old Testament.  This is likely because of the age of the sources and because of alternate texts available, like Chronicles, that discuss the same material. 

In person, we'll try to hit some of high points of what is contain in these 4 books.

 

Doug

Thirteen Tips for Leading the Congregation in Prayer

Here's a good read on doing public prayer well.  It's from someone I wish was a friend of mine....but I've never met him and so won't claim him.  He might not want me anyway.  But he's a good read, a good writer, and a decent preacher.  Although he's never, to my knowledge, broken a pulpit to make a point. (ask someone at Calvary Monticello about that.  I'll say no more.)

Thirteen Tips for Leading the Congregation in Prayer

Posted using ShareThis

Repost from Emil Turner's Blog

For those of you that don't navigate much through the blog world, I'll repost this from Emil Turner's blog on the ABSC website.  It's worth the read:

Upward Basketball is a tremendous ministry in many of our churches.  An Upward Basketball coach commits more than 3 hours a week to this program.   An AWANA worker gives a minimum of 2.5 hours a week, and an AWANA group leader gives about 5 hours a week, while an AWANA commander gives around 12 hours a week.  In addition, most of these people attend two or more services a week.

Do members have time to volunteer at church? AWANA and Upward volunteers have the time and give it gladly.  From these two examples we can learn that it is not a shortage of time that keeps most people from volunteering or serving in their churches.

How do you get people to volunteer?  To attend training classes? To work in the Sunday School or to attend on Sunday evening or Wednesday evening?

First, recognize the inverse relationship of time and commitment. The greater the demand on time, the fewer people you will involve.  This has always been true.  If you are to staff programs, populate training classes, you must first intentionally raise the commitment level of church members.

Second, in a healthy church if it is important to the pastor, it will be important to the church members. So the activity you are trying to staff or promote must be seen as a priority to the pastor.  He should talk about it in announcements, mention it in sermons, and help recruit the volunteers and participants.  If the pastor takes the time to promote and participate, he will rally the congregation to do the same.

Third, volunteers, trainees, and church workers need to eat. AWANA usually includes a meal doesn’t it?  Would there be as many workers if no one could eat at church?  This is a convenience that helps workers with busy schedules.  If I were serving as a pastor, every evening meeting at church would involve a meal.

Activities, classes, and projects that involve church volunteers should be well planned. Members should not wonder why they are present, what happens next, or why the leaders aren’t better prepared.  And every meeting should begin on time, and unless the Holy Spirit intervenes, should end on time.

Relevance should be communicated in eternal terms, rather than temporal ones. If one pupil in an adult class draws closer to God, an entire family’s spiritual future could be change.  If one of the little girls in GA’s becomes a missionary, a nation could be saved.  If a deacon visits prospects on Thursday nights, a family can be reached for Christ.

They WILL attend prayer meeting, become Outreach Leaders in Sunday School, attend teachers’ meeting, or work with RA’s if it is important enough to do so.  Pastor, church staff member, you are the one who makes it important.

From Doug: What is stopping us from implementing some of this?  How can I communicate better how important some of these things are?

Doug