Moving to New York

The past month has been absolutely crazy! In late April and early May, I spent two weeks in Georgia taking some seminary classes. Following that study adventure, we only had two weeks to pack before heading east to our new home of Waverly, New York. I feared that those two weeks would not be enough time to pack up everything, say goodbye to all our friends in Ohio, not to mention finish up all my pastoral duties at Hope Church. However, it was amazing to see how things came together. Yes, packing is a lot of work. Yes, it is emotionally draining saying goodbye to those you have come to know and love through the years. And yes, there are a lot of extra things that need to be done any time you change your address. But God has been faithful through it all.

I am sure that most of you have heard that I recently accepted the senior pastor position at Waverly Christian and Missionary Alliance Church (you can access the website at www.waverlycma.org). To say the least we are very excited about this new ministry endeavor. The people of WCMA Church have been amazing, helping us in so many ways. Last Saturday, a team of 4 men from the church made the trip out to Ohio to pack up most of our belongings in order to transport them to New York. By the time we arrived in Waverly, late Monday afternoon, a team from the church had unpacked everything from the moving truck and gave us a much-needed head start in settling down in our new digs. Each night this week, a family from the church has provided us with a meal for Supper, and we have been overwhelmed by the support of our new church family.

Every step of the moving process has been a step of faith. God has forced us to trust Him and then showed us His great sufficiency. With Stephane being 31 weeks pregnant with our 3^rd child, the timing of this move was obviously not our choice, but Stephane has faired amazingly well throughout the entire process. God has given her strength and stamina, even during those late night packing adventures. Though life has been stressful at times over the past month, we praise God for giving us this new opportunity to serve Him and the people of Waverly Alliance.

So yes, we have moved to the Empire state of New York. You can call me a “Yankee” if you like, but as my good friend Randy Monk reminded me – I’ll always be a Canuck! He’s right.

“Now to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen.” (Ephesians 3:20-21)

The Family: “A Little Church”

Jonathan Edwards:

Every Christian family ought to be as it were a little church, consecrated to Christ, and wholly influenced and governed by his rules. And family education and order are some of the chief means of grace. If these fail, all other means are likely to prove ineffectual. If these are duly maintained, all the means of grace will be likely to prosper and be successful.

Let me now therefore, once more, before I finally cease to speak to this congregation, repeat, and earnestly press the counsel which I have often urged on the heads of families, while I was their pastor, to great painfulness in teaching, warning, and directing their children; bringing them up in the training and admonition of the Lord; beginning early, where there is yet opportunity, and maintaining constant diligence in labors of this kind.

Remember that, as you would not have all your instructions and counsels ineffectual, there must be government as well as instructions, which must be maintained with an even hand, and steady resolution, as a guard to the religion and morals of your family, and the support of its good order. Take heed that it not be with any of you as it was with Eli of old, who reproved his children, but restrained them not; and that, by this means, you do not bring the like curse on your families as he did on his.

This is an excerpt from “A Farewell Sermon” by Jonathan Edwards, preached in Northampton, MA in 1750.

How Should A Christian Vote?

This is the last in a series of posts on Christianity and Politics by Steve Dobo.

Here are a few suggestions I would make to any Christian voter:

First, I believe a Christian should vote.  There are those who say that Jesus would have been apathetic towards politics and not even have voted.  However, I would argue that we should vote.  The prophets often talked about Israel’s need to stand up for the oppressed and the poor (Zechariah 7:8-10).  One of the ways we can do this is through voting for the rights of all humans whether rich or poor.  Also, if we do not vote, we are not taking advantage of our rights in this country to help this nation look more like the kingdom of heaven.  As Plato once said, “The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” Thus, if we do not care about politics as Christians, we are inviting the likes of tyrants such as Hitler or Stalin to rule America.  If we were to sit and let something like this happen, we would be guilty of committing the sin of omission.

Second, we should vote people into office that we feel are the most virtuous.  This idea comes from the ancient philosopher Socrates, and I think it’s a good one.  If there is a God fearing person with a proven track record running for office, great, vote them in.  We must use the guidelines given in the Pastoral Epistles (regarding qualifications for church leaders) when deciding on a candidate.  They too should be “above reproach” (1 Tim. 3:2).  We should do our homework to see how virtuous they are and also look at their voting records.  Voting records often show a candidate’s true colors.

Thirdly, when deciding on issues or candidates, a Christian should use a biblical worldview to aid their decisions.  The great theologian Karl Barth is said to have encouraged some younger theologians “to take your Bible and take your newspaper, and read both. But interpret newspapers from your Bible.” We should also evaluate candidates and issues on this same basis.  Thus, our votes should show that we care for the disenfranchised and poor (Mt. 25:35-36), that we care about justice (Isa. 61:8), that we care about personal responsibility and integrity (2 Thess. 3:10, 1 Tim. 3:2) just to name a few.  We should ask ourselves with each issue or candidate, “If I vote for this/them, would I be loving God and my neighbor?” (Mk. 12:29-31).

Lastly, when there is a choice between picking the lesser of two evils, I feel that we must inevitably do so.  The last Presidential election of 2008 is an example of this.  Both candidates espoused Christianity, but both seemed to have the opposite track record in different ways (ex. Obama advocating pro-choice and McCain’s support of what I thought was a meaningless war).  In this election, I feel that I will have to do the same thing.  Mitt Romney is not conservative enough for me and I do not agree with many of the liberal policies that Obama has passed and plans on passing.  What am I to do?  I will vote!  Why?  Because quite frankly I will vote for a moderate rather than a liberal any day.  I believe the conservative view to be closer to the Christian value system than that of the liberal view.  Thus, I will vote conservative this coming election.  Nonetheless, I believe God will hold us accountable for whether or not we voted. So, no matter where you fall on the political continuum, make sure that you vote your conscience and vote for the things that matter to Christ first and foremost!

 

What Does the Bible Have to Say About Government?

By Steve Dobo

You probably have already noticed that nowhere does the Bible tell us whether we should vote for Democrats or Republicans.  I do think that certain principles of one party tend to line up more with Biblical principles than the other.  However, it is my belief that the best candidate for president, congress, senate, governor, mayor, etc., would be none other than Jesus.  He alone is the Person we should strive to emulate. But given that we live in a fallen world, no one comes close.  This being the case does that mean we should have no opinion on politics at all?  I think not.  What I hope to show in the next section is that our ultimate allegiance should be to God alone (Jesus).  In the government of our soul, He is the only worthy candidate to rule over the hearts of men.  So, you ask: what does the Bible have to say?

First of all, God seems to have always advocated for leadership among His people.  This was first shown with Moses being the lawgiver and spiritual leader of Israel.  It was followed with Joshua leading them into the Promised Land.  Then under the Judges, there were times of spiritual renewal in Israel as well as times of great moral failure.

Our next form of government in the Bible takes the form of a king.  Israel wanted to be like other nations and have a king to rule over them (1 Samuel 8).  But on the contrary, God was to be their king.  It is clear that Israel would have been better off governed by God than by kings.  As we see in I and II Kings, and as I recently learned in class, no king is ultimately able to govern and rule as a righteous king in the same way God can.

As the Monarchy started to decline, we see the emergence of the prophet come next in our survey of governance in the Bible.  The prophet proclaims the Word of God and promises either deliverance for obedience to the law, or judgment for disobedience to it.  At times this applies to governing rulers, and at other times, this applies directly to the nation of Israel in general.  I think the advent of the prophet also shows us that the office of king was ultimately inadequate in governing God’s people.  Many times they, not the kings, were the ones that God used to bring his people back to spiritual wholeness.  Finally, there is silence for roughly 400 years.  This brings us to the New Testament where Jesus, the Messiah appears.

When Jesus comes on the scene, he is not silent about government and politics, but does not offer any clear guidance on voting.  There is the famous story where he is asked whether or not they should pay taxes to Caesar.  Jesus does not pick political sides in His answer.  He seems to let the hearer seek to understand “What are the things that are to be given to Caesar?” and “What are the things that are to be given to God?”  I believe he may of been advocating that we should give to Caesar (government) what they ask of us, i.e. taxes or respect, or honor (Rom. 13:7).  However, our respect to him cannot and should not go above our love for God.  More on this in a moment.

There is another instance of Jesus being asked a question pertaining to government.  He is asked to pay a temple tax in Matthew 17:24-27.  Tax collectors come to Peter and ask him whether or not Jesus pays the temple tax.  Peter replies that he does indeed pay it.  Jesus asks him about it later and asks a rhetorical question as to whether a king asks tribute of his children or others.  Peter says “From others” (v. 26).  But Jesus concedes and asks Peter to cast his rod in the sea to catch a fish that will be able to pay both his tax and Peters’.  This passage is puzzling to say the least, but I think Jesus admits that he and Peter should not have to pay the tax because they are part of God’s family, which would mean they are exempt from paying as the verse stated.  With Jesus being the eternal Son of the true King, God, He does not need to pay the tax, but he still does.  This leads me to believe that even though Jesus recognizes certain injustices that happen within a governmental structure, it is better for the Christian to remain compliant rather than be disobedient.  Although, there is a passage in Acts that seems to suggest just the opposite.

You might remember in Acts 4 there is a story about Peter and John.  The Sadducees and the religious leaders ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus anymore after they had healed a paralyzed man.  Peter and John reply, “Whether it is right in God’s sight to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge; for we cannot keep from speaking about what we have seen and heard” and later they said “We must obey God rather than men!” after being told not to speak in the name of Jesus (Acts 4:19-20, 5:29, NRSV, NIV).  This is a crucial passage in understanding our relationship to government as Christians.  Ultimately, Peter and John had to obey God, rather than men.  We too must follow in their footsteps and exercise civil disobedience when we are asked to obey men in a way that is contrary to our Christian beliefs and moral values.  But wait, this is not the last thing that is said about how we are to respond to government or voting.  Probably one of the most famous passages regarding our response to government is in Romans 13:1-7.

In Romans 13, there is a different voice regarding our response.  It seems to advocate submission and obedience to government.  Paul describes the governing authorities as having been put there by God in order to be his “servant” (v. 4).  They bear wrath for those who do wrong, and protect those who do right.  It is difficult to understand this within the context of Romans, however, Paul seems to advocate for followers of Christ to obey rulers and authorities whenever possible.  This is argued in v.6-7 which says “This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing.  Give everyone what you owe him: if you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor” (Rom. 13: 6-7, NIV).  This passage does not, however, address matters of voting, as the concept of voting did not come about until the period of the enlightenment in the 18^th century and the advent of democracy in government.  Paul is saying these things in the context of having dictators and some governors under those dictators.  Choice of leadership probably would have been a laughable concept in those days.  You respected and did what the king asked.  If not, you were punished.  Perhaps Paul is saying these things because there were extremist political groups at the time such as the zealots who wanted to overthrow Rome with force in order to free Israel from their captivity.  All in all, this passage offers no direct statement for what type of person we should vote for in an election.  Let us turn now to some other books.

The Pastoral Epistles can be of some help in looking for electoral candidates.  For example, these books (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus) list qualifications for leaders in the church.  I think we can also use these lists to help evaluate who we should have running our country.  If these qualifications are good enough for God’s standards, why should they not be applied to secular politics and how we vote as Christians?

Let’s look at one example in 1 Timothy 3.  This list goes as follows: “Now the overseer must be above reproach (one of our most virtuous people), the husband of but one wife (someone with commitment who is not an adulterer), temperate (balanced, not extreme either way, able to keep from being easily angered), self-controlled (able to show restraint and discipline), respectable (has a good reputation, people speak highly of them), hospitable (knows how to give to others, generous), able to teach (shows humility and not pride), not given to drunkenness (someone who does not live excessively), not violent but gentle (knows how to resolve things in a diplomatic way), not quarrelsome (able to respectfully disagree), not a lover of money (not greedy; realizes money is not the end all, be all).  He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect” (being faithful in the small things, i.e. running one’s family well, will enable a person to be faithful in larger things, i.e. running a country well) (1 Tim. 3:2-4, NIV parentheses mine).

I hope the above examples prove my point.  Even though these qualifications concern leaders in the church, they are still great guidelines for any person seeking a position of leadership.  Now, let’s turn our attention to the book of Revelation.

Though Revelation is generally viewed as an eschatological book that deals with last/future things, there are some references to government.  We must first remember that the original audience happened to be under persecution from the emperor Domitian.  The book of Revelation is apocalyptic literature, which means it was written during a time of suffering to encourage the recipients that in the end God wins, so endure faithfully whatever may come.  The writer, John, is constantly trying to remind his hearers that God will prevail in the end, so be steadfast in enduring persecution because your name will be written in the book of life (Rev. 2:7, 2:11, 3:5).  This is the general message, but what does it have to do with politics?

I think the main point politically, of Revelation, is that our ultimate allegiance, as I stated earlier, should be to the Lord Jesus.  At that time, “Lord” was a general term of respect for Caesar.  When one said this, it meant that you believed him to be God or a god.  So, when the writer of Revelation calls Jesus “Lord,” he’s saying that He is the only “Caesar” worthy of complete surrender, even if that means giving up one’s life.  This is helpful for matters of civil disobedience, but we have still not found much help for how to vote in a Presidential election, or any election for that matter.  I hope to clear up some of the fog in my last blog post where I offer some suggestions.

Republican or Democratic? Understanding the Key Differences

By Steve Dobo

In this post I will attempt to lay the fundamental beliefs of both parties (Democratic and Republican) because I feel many people do not understand the key differences.

First, the Republicans believe in having a government in the form of a republic.  Hence, they are defined by the term “Republican.”  This form of government believes in having elected officials by the people, for the people.  In other words, they believe in having a representative government.  Democrats, however, believe in “mob rule,” or the rule of the people.  One dictionary defines it as “a state in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them rather than by elected representatives” (The American College Encyclopedic Dictionary).

Second, Republicans have a strong belief in holding to the Constitution.  They are often labeled “Conservative” because of this belief.  Whatever it says, we must follow, is the general consensus among Republicans.  However, Democrats believe that each new generation faces different kinds of problems that may or may not be addressed in the Constitution.  Thus, they are many times labeled “liberal” for taking this view of the Constitution.  They believe that the Constitution must represent the times in which we live and should be amended when necessary.

Thirdly, Republicans believe in the ideal of having a “limited government.”  This means they believe that the government should only exercise the power that is given to them within the Constitution.  In general, they believe the sole purpose of the government is to protect (have a strong military) and collect taxes for essential things.  For the most part, however, they believe a government should stay out of the private lives of the people they govern.  Republicans generally frown on regulations of businesses and work hard to protect the freedoms of the people in their constituency.

On the contrary, most Democrats believe that great achievements to help humanity can happen through government intervention; hence, they are labeled as believing in “big government.”  For example, they believe in making new laws to help social progress.  Democratic administrations often pass labor and wage laws in an attempt to control the greed and injustices of businesses taking advantage of their control of wealth.  This government intervention has also happened in the form of civil rights and suffrage laws that have gone into effect from democratic policies.

Fourth, both differ on economic policies.  Democrats believe that great things can be achieved through generating revenue via taxes.  For example, the new health care bill demonstrates the belief that all citizens should have health care.  They are also given the label “liberal” because of their generous use of tax revenue.  All in all they believe that high spending is necessary if we are to provide a great place to live for the inhabitants of our country.  This is evidenced by their support of social programs such as social security, medicare, health care, food stamps, etc.

Republicans believe the opposite.  Their view of spending is labeled “conservative” because they do not believe in using revenue primarily to support social programs.  They tend to believe that these social programs are not rights that should be given to people, but privileges.  For example, recently a Republican Congressional Representative, Paul Ryan, introduced a bill that plans to help balance the budget by gradually reducing spending for social programs.  They feel that government is putting the country into debt under the guise of helping people.

There are also differences in how people view who each party is really trying to help. Democrats are traditionally viewed as helping the poor.  Their plethora of social programs proves this belief.  Furthermore, Democrats traditionally favor taxing the rich rather than the middle class or poor.  They believe in what is called a “bottom-up” mentality when it comes to taxes.  By helping the little man, the economy is bound to get better is the underlying belief of this ideal.

Republicans on the other hand are viewed as helping the rich.  They believe in a “trickle-down” effect of economics.  They generally believe that if you make it hard for the rich, by taxing them, you will make it hard for everyone.  If the entrepreneurs are taxed, they will have a hard time growing their businesses, and thus, there will be less jobs and opportunities for the common man.  Republicans argue that in taxing the rich, we are hurting everyone’s ability to succeed and achieve the American Dream.

This list of differences is not exhaustive, but I hope it has provided a general framework for you to understand the fundamental differences between the two parties.  In my next piece, I hope to show that regardless of where your political affections lie at this point, you will see that there is an ultimate allegiance we have as Christian’s.  We will explore what the Bible says about government to see how it should influence the way we vote in any election.

Christianity and Politics

As you already know, this is an election year in the United States. In early November, voters will decide if Barack Obama is worthy of another term in office or if Mitt Romney will take his place as President. Just like any election year, Christians are left to wrestle with the question of how our faith in Jesus Christ should affect the way we cast the ballet. For this question I turned to my good friend Steve Dobo, who hails from Canton, Ohio. Steve knows a lot more about politics than I do and he is a committed follower of Christ. I hope you will tune in over the next few days as we look at Christianity and politics.

The Effects of Revival

What happens when God brings revival? Jonathan Edwards explains:

 

“This work of God, as it was carried on, and the number of true saints multiplied, soon made a glorious alteration in the town: so that in the spring and summer of 1735, the town (Northampton, Massachusetts) seemed to be full of the presence of God: it never was so full of love, nor of joy, and yet so full of distress, as it was then. There were remarkable tokens of God’s presence in almost every house. It was a time of joy in families on account of salvation being brought unto them; parents rejoicing over their children as new born, and husbands over their wives, and wives over their husbands. The goings of God were then seen in his sanctuary, God’s day was a delight, and his tabernacles were amiable. Our public assemblies were then beautiful: the congregation was alive in God’s service, every one earnestly intent on the public worship, every hearer eager to drink in the words of the minister as they came from his mouth; the assembly in general were, from time to time, in tears while the word was preached; some weeping with sorrow and distress, others with joy and love, others with pity and concern for the souls of their neighbors.

 

Our public praises were then greatly enlivened; God was then served in our psalmody, in some measure, in the beauty of holiness. It has been observable, that there has been scarce any part of divine worship, wherein good men amongst us have had grace so drawn forth, and their hearts so lifted up in the ways of God, as in singing his praises. Our congregation excelled all that I ever knew in the external part of the duty before, the men generally carrying regularly, and well, three parts of music, and the women a part by themselves; but now they were evidently wont to sing with unusual elevation of heart and voice, which made the duty pleasant indeed.

 

In all companies, on other days, on whatever occasions persons met together, Christ was to be heard of, and seen in the midst of them. Our young people, when they met, were wont to spend the time in talking of the excellency and dying love of Jesus Christ, the glory of the way of salvation, the wonderful, free, and sovereign grace of God, his glorious work in the conversion of a soul, the truth and certainty of the great things of God’s word, the sweetness of the views of his perfections.”

 

Edwards continues on for many more pages in his Narrative of Surprising Conversions.

Revival and Awakening

Many people would agree that the church needs revival today, but what does that mean? Dr. Garth Rosell, professor of Church History at Gordon Conwell Theological Seminary defines revival this way: “A renewal of spiritual vitality sent to the church by God’s Spirit and always producing in the life of the believer a deeper love for God and a more active concern for one’s neighbor.”

 

You might be wondering, is there a difference between revival and awakening? Perhaps you have heard about the Great Awakening’s of the past but are not sure what they refer to. Dr. Rosell explains that an awakening is “a general sweep of revival throughout a wide geographical area and across traditional boundaries.”

 

Here are a few more insights:

-       Genuine spiritual renewal is always the work of the sovereign God

-       No individual or institution is ever beyond hope of spiritual renewal

-       Christians can prepare for spiritual renewal through: (1) repentance, (2) united believing prayer, (3) obedience to the Holy Bible

 

Psalm 85:6 “Will you not revive us again, that your people may rejoice in you?”

2 Chronicles 7:14 “If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”

 

Christopher Hitchens and the Myth of Liberal Christianity

I came across something not too long ago that really struck me.  It involved Christopher Hitchens, one of the most well known atheists in the world up until his death last year and a Unitarian minister named Marilyn Sewell. The following exchange took place near the start of their interview:

Sewell: The religion you cite in your book (God is not Great) is generally the fundamentalist faith of various kinds. I’m a liberal Christian, and I don’t take the stories from the Scripture literally. I don’t believe in the doctrine of atonement (that Jesus died for our sins). Do you make any distinction between fundamentalist faith and liberal religion?

Hitchens: I would say that if you don’t believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ and Messiah, and that he rose again from the dead and by his sacrifice our sins are forgiven, you’re really not in any meaningful sense a Christian.

Sewell wanted no part of that discussion so her next words were, “Let me go someplace else.”

Hitchens absolutely nailed it – you can call yourself anything you like, but if you don’t believe that Jesus is the Son of God who died on the cross for our sins and then rose from the dead, you are not “in any meaningful sense” a Christian. In one of the sad ironies of our time, an outspoken atheist grasps the central tenet of Christianity better than many professing Christians do.

Learning to Pray

I have been learning some things lately. I am learning that if I stretch consistently (once per day), my back feels better. I am learning that if I eat a big healthy breakfast, I have more energy throughout the day. And I am learning that if I don’t eat a massive meal for supper, I sleep better at night.

 

The truth is, I already knew these things before. I am sure that you did too. The problem for me was that I never had the discipline to implement these basic health practices into my life. Now that I am being more intentional about following them, I feel better and healthier.

 

But there is something much more important that I have been learning about – the power of prayer. Once again, it’s not that I didn’t know prayer was important. Every Christian knows that. It was more a matter of implementation. In the busyness of life, prayer is often the first thing that suffers even though we know that shouldn’t be the case. As a pastor, a husband, a father, and a neighbor, I simply can’t function (at least effectively) without God’s power and strength in my life. So rather than letting prayer get pushed aside, I have made prayer a much higher priority in my life. Whether it’s during my morning devotional time, throughout the day in whatever I am doing (1 Thessalonians 5:17), or with my family, I am learning to pray.

 

I love the story of how Jesus taught his disciples to pray. In Luke 11:1-4 we read, “Now Jesus was praying in a certain place, and when he finished, one of his disciples said to him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples. And he said to them, When you pray, say: Father, hallowed be your name. Your Kingdom come. Give us each day our daily bread, and forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation.”

 

Obviously, the disciples recognized that Jesus had a remarkable relationship with His Father. They knew they had a lot to learn about prayer, which I think is what motivated this question. So Jesus taught them a simple, but powerful little prayer. It’s not that as soon as they learned it, they had mastered prayer. Rather, Jesus gave His followers a model to follow, so that they might grow in humble dependence upon their Father in Heaven.

 

If you are “in Christ” then you have the great privilege of learning to pray for the rest of your earthly life. When you reach glory, there will be no need for prayer as you will be in the presence of Almighty God. How delightful and joyous that will be! “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God.” (Revelation 21:3)