by chrisaiken | Aug 26, 2016 | America, American, culture, Leadership, politics, Uncategorized
Just saw this interview of a SC pastor on a liberal news talk show. He was definitely outnumbered.
HERE is the link. A couple of interesting observations from my perspective:
- The panel (all of them) have a strong bias. [It’s a talk show so I am not against that, just observing a fact].
- DT has said some things that are outrageous and unhelpful to himself, his campaign, and conservative causes. (I don’t think he cornered the market in that regard either).
- This pastor may have done a bit better to just say that he disagreed with DTs characterization of HRC and other weird stuff. Just say you don’t agree. We are men of God…so speak for God and let the chips fall.
- Al Sharpton speaking about “moral authority” is laughable. I intentionally left the clerical reference off his name since I find his actions to be a blight on the calling of ministry. He is no reverend in my book and I am very charitable in this area. (Does he still owe back taxes?)
- AS saying that it is wrong to ask a people to vote for a man who has not laid out all of his policies is crazy and politically motivated. (Hope and change anyone? The POTUS was as light on policy declarations as any candidate I can remember going back to the 80s when I first came of age to consider these things as an adult.)
- The pastor’s answer was dead on. Look at the man’s values and convictions. No one knows what policies are possible or likely to be implemented. A proper understanding of our government is that laws are enacted by a Congress and carried out by the Exec Branch.
- The pastor’s transparency should resonate with believers. If you are TRULY a follower of Jesus, you MUST consider how a vote will affect things. If you can vote for HRC who is unapologetically pro-abortion rights…you need to be able to articulate how that syncs with your theological understanding…because there will be a test. Judgment seat? If you vote for HRC who sees no value in traditional marriage and supports every stripe of union outside of the ONLY Christian understanding of marriage, you need to be able to square that with your theology. The Department of Education…whatever (who cares?) It is not a biblical issue. In the same vein…if a candidate can and will marginalize a person or a group of persons based on race or religion…you must be able to define how that is reasonable according to your theology. There is a test folks.
I was in a meeting with faith leaders and Republican Party leaders in Pensacola a few weeks back. I haven’t been invited to a meeting with Democrat Party leaders yet but would certainly attend and speak if invited to. This seemed to be a consensus from what I heard at my meeting:
- DT is a hold your nose and vote candidate for a lot of evangelicals. He is better in most every area over HRC, but it is a hard pill to swallow.
- A vote for an unelectable 3d party conservative candidate is effectively a vote for HRC. No way around it.
- An evangelical refusal to vote for any candidate is by default a practical vote for HRC. Her base is in lockstep. They are not sitting it out. You may feel principled in your position but if you truly understand the times in which we live…it is a vote for HRC.
- You don’t have to agree with every aspect of a Candidate to like them or to vote for them. I disagreed with (I think) every aspect of the current POTUS platform, but I liked him. He was fun…and living during the reign of the first black President is kinda cool. (Yes, I know I said reign). That being said, I can’t remember any candidate that I agreed with everything…but I do generally vote moral/social/religious concerns and let God work out the economy.
Here are a couple of truths I have settled on based on evidence, not party talking points or FOX/CNN/MSNBC bias.
- HRC lied about Benghazi. People died and she lied. She was in the “know” and possibly complicit in the decision to leave an Ambassador and Security personnel in jeopardy…but she continues to avoid responsibility. (She lacks character!)
- She lied about her emails. She intentionally broke security protocol, mishandled information, and withheld cooperation in the investigation in substantive ways. (She lacks character).
- She mishandled classified material. (Lack of responsibility for job performance).
- She scares me on national security issues.
- DT has a sketchy past. He has done some goofy stuff and seems like a pragmatist in many ways. (Several question marks about his character).
- DT seems like a patriot. I assume HRC is also patriotic in her motivation.
- DT could not serve as a pastor, deacon, or small group leader in my church. I’m not sure he could even be a member. What I am sure of, is he is not running for any of those positions in November.
- I have a Christian responsibility to seek the welfare of my nation and as far as I can tell, faith alone cannot be a valid litmus test for either candidate…or they both lose because they are both sketchy.
Love ya. Feel free to chime in…
Like this:
Like Loading...
by chrisaiken | Jul 31, 2016 | Devotions, Leadership, pastor, Pastor's Reflections
“She opens her mouth with wisdom, and the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.” Prov 31:26.
This is but one of the incredible observations/affirmations of the “virtuous wife” in Proverbs 31. As I read this today I reflected back on a recent conversation with my precious wife Jodi, and was mindful of how this verse describes her. Now, this post may come across a bit sappy…and I get that…and it is not unintentional in that regard, but I want it to serve as an example to us all…if, in fact, we desire to follow biblical examples of virtue.
First, she “opens her mouth,” which speaks well of the absence of apathy or complacency. In a world of subjective truth and self-centered focus…many people refuse to open their mouths at all. Eventually when someone does…others whisper that they thought the same thing but just did not say anything. There is something to be said about those who will take the initiative to make their corner of the world better for all.
Second, she speaks with “wisdom.” Biblically speaking, this word is pregnant with meaning. It affirms true knowledge of God; not simply facts ABOUT Him, but wisdom acknowledge His character and sees the beauty in His person…His existence. Many know facts and doctrines about God but miss the beauty and majesty of His person. Further, wisdom relies on practical knowledge of life. It is one thing to know how a four cycle engine operates and to have gotten a perfect score on your written driving exam, but wisdom drives the car in an efficient and effective manner. This is the product of listening, learning, experiencing, and acting.
Finally and perhaps most admirably…”kindness” typifies her words. As a practitioner of communicating with words, I know that words can both edify and destroy. They can hit you in the head as with a blunt object, or they can pierce your soul as with a sharpened dagger. They have the ability to multiply confidence, or leave the hearer in a pool of tears and self-conscious paranoia cowering in a darkened corner of the room. But words spoken KINDLY edify even when they are difficult to hear. They communicate motives of love and encouragement.
I know a number of wise and kind people…but I know no one who typifies this verse better than Jodi. She recognizes the responsibility of her life…a responsibility to speak up, with wisdom and kindness/graciousness in every syllable.
How can we apply this?
- Take the initiative to speak up.
- Figure out how things work. Process that information and consider carefully the implication. Don’t simply blast out 140 character twitter rants! Discover why that thought is important to you, to others, and how it relates in the meta-narrative of life.
- Finally, with a purified heart that seeks the betterment of others over our own benefit…speak with the kindness of God.
This is beauty. This is the virtuous charge and commendation of Scripture. This is Jodi.
SHAMELESS PLUG ALERT: If you want to read or hear more about Jodi and her ministry, visit her on her site: jodiaiken.com.
Like this:
Like Loading...
by chrisaiken | Jun 16, 2016 | America, culture, Leadership, politics, symbolism
The US Senate voted this week to require all women turning 18 years of age to register for Selective Service (the draft). a NY Times article covering the development can be accessed HERE. Dr. Al Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Seminary offers commentary HERE, approaching the issue from the perspective of equality.
It is important to note that the Senate decision does not make a law. There will have to be a conference committe to reconcile House and Senate versions of the bills and then it will require executive action for the bill to become law.
My opinion is continuing to be shaped but my concern, that which grieves my heart, relates to the moral implications of this decision.
Though this decision is the logical extension of the current Administration’s policy change requiring that even the most physically grueling and dangerous jobs of combat be opened to women, this next shift make women serving in these roles no longer ONLY voluntary but potentially compulsory. It may also be argued that since our nation has had an all volunteer military since the early 70s, that the issue is merely proforma and is practically unrealistic. My opposition to this Senate action relates not to the likelihood of compulsory combat service for women, but to the possible compulsory service of women in combat.
If this provision of a much larger military bill is signed into law, the proponents and signer of the bill MUST assume that their daughters and granddaughters WILL be called to fight in hand-to-hand combat with a jihadist (for example) in a distant land or within the borders of our beloved country.
This bill requires every able-bodied woman to take up arms to defend a nation if the government requires it. A young mother will be required to stand before an enemy and kill or be killed according to the orders of her officers even if her commander is an able-bodied man in a tent miles behind the protected line.
I am disturbed that the morality, not to mention the common decency of this action, is even open for discussion. How does this fit in any narrative that honors God? Have we as a nation moved so far from a moral compass that we would demand that our granddaughters take up arms to kill on our behalf?
As for me, I cannot with good conscience ever expect or willingly permit a woman to stand between me and evil. My perspective is not based on her ability; rather, it is based on her value as precious and my GOD ORDAINED responsibility to protect and care for her…as a man.
I am interested in your thoughts as I grieve over this atrocity and malfeasant reckoning of logic by our elected representatives. I pray there is still time to draw a line between opportunity and responsibility as it relates to women in military service.
Like this:
Like Loading...
by chrisaiken | May 30, 2016 | culture, Leadership, parenting, Pastor's Reflections
Is Faith “Taught or Caught?” The Answer is YES! In this article in the Huffington Post, which may or may not be on your daily culture reading list, we find the conclusions drawn from a recent survey on the factors that most effectively contribute to faith practices in young adults. In short…parents who communicate and demonstrate the importance of faith in THEIR LIVES through their PROCLAMATION and their ACTIONS transmit the importance of faith to their children/teens…and it “sticks” through their young adult years when most studies claim that most people fall away from their faith.
Note:
“…sociologists Christopher Bader and Scott Desmond found that children of parents who believe that religion is very important and display their commitment by attending services are most likely to transmit religiosity to their children.“
Of course it is anecdotal on my part, but I believe that my faith was directly communicated by my parents…both good and bad. I came to faith in Christ at a church service when my dad AND mom took me to church (age 9). When “mean people” in that church acted judgmentally toward my dad (age 10 for me), we stopped attending. I did not see the inside of another church until around age 14 or so. Then, dad took us to another church where he was committed and served and invited me to serve alongside him (as a Junior Usher no doubt). I even began wearing a slick little sport coat to church and everything.
In fact, dad taught me my early beliefs about “giving an offering” at church in those early days. I still remember the message he taught me (which was biblically wrong then and he would reject himself today). Later in my late 20s and 30s as I felt the calling to ministry and began to preach, Dad again shaped my faith. He went with me on most occasions that I preached in other churches. [This deserved the big award…since those were horrible sermons…but he went and offered great encouragement. He even called around to help me schedule additional opportunities.]
The point is, I learned much about the importance of faith through what my dad said and did. Honestly, I learned much of the substance of theology, hermeneutics, homiletics, apologetics, etc. from my pastor, Bible college, and Seminary…but my “heart” for “faith” was first transmitted to me by my dad. Many of the early anchor points (good and bad) were transmitted to me by my dad.
So, as a pastor and dad myself now, it often grieves me when I see moms and dads transmitting dangerous faith lessons to their kids: when they prioritize travel ball over church, or cheer practice over student ministry, or fishing over soul winning. I am grieved when they teach their kids to hold loosely to community allegiance by changing churches so that their kids can experience the latest “cool” thing in ministry (insert your flashiest new outreach or ministry program here). I am grieved when faith is rarely discussed in the home or when opportunities to demonstrate reliance on God are passed up in times of major decisions or planning.
In closing let me offer one last tidbit: moms and dads, you communicate more about the importance of depending on God when you speak of and live dependently. Actually PRAY before major decisions. Actually plan vacations around church events. Actually be “caught” reading your Bible and serving in your church. If you do or do not…you’ll be amazed at how your faith shapes the faith of your children throughout their lives.
NOTE: I spoke of my dad throughout this article. In no way am I diminishing my mom’s contribution. She was a woman of faith. She was there throughout the journey. I simply watched and emulated my dad more. I believe part of that is the fact that, well you know, I am a guy. The other part relates to the biblical reality that dads have amazing and God-ordained leadership roles in the lives of their children. Single moms have it tough. Married moms with husbands who are disinterested in practicing their faith have it TOUGHER since mom now has to counteract the influence of the father and attempt to win her children to a strong faith position even though her husband is ACTIVELY leading the children to another faith position, though not faith in God. THANK GOD my mom did not have to overcome my dad’s influence…and THANK GOD she too was influenced by it and communicated a consistent message to her children.
Like this:
Like Loading...
by chrisaiken | Apr 7, 2016 | Leadership, pastor, preaching
The observation has taken a couple of different forms in recent days. One was an admonition from Dr. Thom Rainer, the President of Lifeway to not compare “your pastor” to “a pastor/preacher” that you heard on a podcast. You can read the post HERE. The second appeared yesterday in a post noting the “7 personality traits that guests like in a pastor.” In this latter post, Dr. Rainer provided observations about the qualities that guests find “attractive” in a communicator. From looking at some of the comments (a certain way to drive yourself ‘nuts’ on the internet), it seemed that there was an inadvertent leap by some to an expectation on “the pastor.”
For the record, I don’t think Dr. Rainer is even slightly confused, nor do I think he is trying to overtly correct pastors everywhere and tell them to use humor or more self-deprecating talk as they shepherd their own people. (Certainly though there is a need for some of us to take ourselves less seriously). His observations, which I affirm by the way, are related to the ability of the speaker to connect with an audience that has yet to learn to trust him. There is certainly something to be said for “the pastor” gaining influence with his people by adjusting his style of communication a bit, but that is not the focus of the post.
It is an incredible opportunity for a pastor to stand up in a worship service and present the truths of Scripture in a winsome manner and with such a sweet personality that others who are new to “the room” are drawn into engaging the proposed truths. In other words, a smart communicator uses techniques (or develops personality traits) that attract newcomers to the message.
This is FAR DIFFERENT than the “personality” of the preacher being responsible for the success of seeing souls converted to Christ or seeing attendance grow. Personality is primarily about how to keep people engaged long enough for the Holy Spirit to arrest their rebellious hearts! Personality is not a reason for a church member to love, listen to, or learn from “the pastor.” Could you imagine that argument with Jeremiah or Ezekiel? How about Moses? But you might say, “they weren’t pastors.” True…so what about Jesus? Read John 6. He said some stuff that was not considered winsome and most of the crowd left Him. In fact, the 12 said that the reason they stayed around was because Jesus alone had the words of eternal life! What kept these disciples engaged was the Gospel…not Jesus’ self-deprecating humor or relational skills. What about Peter? There’s a dude that had some personality challenges. Or…Paul maybe? Peter said that the way Paul taught was sometimes difficult to understand…and Peter walked with Jesus for 3 years! Many in the churches charged Paul with being unsophisticated in his communicating ability. Was Paul’s personality really the problem facing the Corinthian Church?
Am I arguing that a pastor should have no personality? Certainly not! Heaven forbid! I am making the case though that if you really understand the Word of God and the will of God for your life as a disciple, your “reason” for sitting under the teaching of “your pastor” MUST be more than his personality. It SHOULD be that you recognize that He labors in prayer for you. He is concerned with your soul. He is on guard against the enemies that come to destroy you. He is sympathetic to your pain and struggle. He tries constantly to grow you to maturity in Christ. He is intensely jealous for you with a godly jealousy! He desires to present you to Christ with no shortcomings.
If you are a pastor hoping to keep a church together with your winsome personality…you are in for a tough life. Grow in areas that make you attractive to your people, but don’t have the people fall in love with you; rather, help them fall in love with Jesus. Otherwise, when you’re gone, they will be too. If you are a church member intently focused on the mechanics of a message or the smoothness of your pastor’s speech…you’ll soon be gone. Another more winsome guy will preach down the road and you’ll go there claiming that “God moved you,” which is, in my pastoral opinion, probably not the case. You are probably giving God credit for what really amounts to a form of manifested spiritual immaturity.
Pastor, be kind, but don’t bear the weight that people grow or die spirituality because you can or cannot use humor in your teaching. In the words of one of my dear friends who used to preach to students in a suit, tie, and wingtip shoes, “Be comfortable with who you are. Don’t try to become someone you’re not. They can smell it on you.”
Like this:
Like Loading...
Recent Comments