There are several major stereotypes and/or doctrinal errors that are either common or inherent within the church system today. These things must be corrected and overcome  in order for the church to continue to exist, much less function properly. The problems the church faces today are threefold:Stereotypes, Doctrines, and Cultural Issues.

Stereotypes – Christians are:

Hypocrites, Judgemental, Ignorant, Not Creative (lame)

Key Doctrinal Issues:

Church Discipline (Accountability), Tradition/Preference vs. Biblical Commands, Gods Blessings (Health Wealth & Joy)

Where American Ideals clash with Christ’s Teachings:

Ownership/Stewardship (who is the true owner of your possessions?)

Individualism (We are not our own highest priority, instead we work for God’s glory and the best interests of others)

Materialism (We are not here to accumulate wealth, power or fame)

These are some serious problems that are sinking the ship that is the church. Some of these are merely surface level expressions of deeper issues within the church, while others, such as the doctrinal issues, are indications of where we went off course and pursued what God never intended us to.

 I am a Christian. This does not mean that I am a churchman. It does not mean I am a pastor. It means that my first and foremost commitment is to glorify God through obedience to His commands. This means that I have a responsibility to read His word often to find out what He wants me to do. The following things are principles I believe are supported by Scripture, and I am just trying to have the bravery and commitment to Christ to follow Him whereever He leads. Even if I get killed for it.

 I believe that Christ’s major message was that of repentance. A message where people turn from their sin, where their hearts are changed and their desires are not the same. A change in what people think, not just what they say is what occurs in salvation. Sure, this isnt an instantanious thing for most people, but sanctification should be a measureable process, at least for the person engaged in the process. In addition to this message of repentance, Jesus had an equally weighty message that is pretty simple at its core. Religious activity without a heart change is just as likely to blind a person to their sin as anything else. Jesus often referred to the Pharisees as the blind leading the blind. He often ended their guided tour by saying they fall into a pit together, meaning they both go to hell because they chose religion over Christ.

 So if religion is just as likely to blind a person to the truth as anything else, why did God start the church? If the church can be just as dangerous as sex outside of marriage or illegal drugs, then why make it? Why allow people to deceive themselves into thinking they are going to Heaven, when in fact they are just playing with religion and not allowing God to penetrate their hearts?

 Because religion is the natural outpouring of the change that occurs after salvation. Church is not a valid expression in and of itself. If all you do is go to church, but cant let God be King in your heart during the week, then you have no religion worth speaking of. If all your religion calls you to do is sing songs on Sunday morning and sit in boring classes with boring people for a couple of hours a week, then your religion is a joke.

 Actually, its doing more harm than good.

 You see, the Pharisees had religion down pat. They knew the ins and outs of what it meant to be religious.

They kept the law. All of it.

They spent their lives trying to follow the law better than Pharisees before them had.

They were morally perfect in ways that we will never be.

But Christ rejected them. Why?

Religion blinds people. Religion without Christ blinds people. Religion without Christ results in things like the Inquisition and the Crusades. Or the terrorism that we deal with in the world today.

 I am trying to get one thing across here. Religion is meaningless without Christ. Without the heart change He brings. I am trying to get that across so that I can make you understand that I dont want to be a part of a church that encourages religion. I dont want to be a part of a church that is more about money or numbers than Christ. I dont want to be a blind man leading blind men to Hell. Please God no!

 So my goal is to design a church that encourages sincerity in the search for Christ. Sincerity in belief. True heart change. Real obedience. Actual worship. I dont want it to be about me! I want lives to be impacted by the change that occurs there. I want to go deeper in my relationship with God and His people before I go wider in my attendance. I want to stay true to Jesus’ overeall message of repentance.

 Another weakness is that people are often left with little or no choice as to which Bible study they would like to be in. You might be able to choose between two classes, if you are kind of in between, like college and career or single adults. But most of the time the choice is, “Do you want to go to the class for your age group, or volunteer to teach somewhere else?”

Also, what happens when you dont click with your group? There are no alternatives if that is where you fit. Unless you want to be the only 21 year old in a group of 50 year old married couples. Or you could try to awkwardly named single adults ministry, which sounds like a room full of people more interested in finding a mate than learning their lesson. Get ready for a lot of pressure to date once you join that class right?

 So, what is the alternative for setting up education within the church? I think that having two sets of classes (Sunday Morning, Wednesday Night?), with only one being gender/age/maritial – educational status oriented (Discipleship Training or Sunday School) and the other being topic/teacher oriented. (Pedotheology/ Dr. Garza or Worship / Drs. Williams) What this does is allow people to connect with others of the same age and life experience, while at the same time actually choose what they wish to learn about in the other class.

 But, this goes way beyond just how we set it up. As a church, the pastor needs to be more intentional about what is taught every week than essential connections. Making classes based on specific topics and having qualified people teach them is a system much more likely of generating a positive attitude about learning.

 I would suggest that every church have a mandatory new members class, that was several hours long, spread over the course of at least a couple of days, maybe a couple of weeks.

 I would also suggest that every church have a couple of church-wide functions that were applicable to everyone’s lives. (Financial Stewardship – a one day seminar with Dr. Atwood or Healthy Relationships – a two day seminar with break-out sessions on marriage, dating, parenting, friendship and leadership. Dr. Borofsky, Dr. Brown, and Dr. Komatsu.) Obviously Ive thought about speakers and topics ahead of time that would be beneficial to the entire church body.

All this is to say, are churches even putting thought into the way we disciple our members? Or are we just putting the normal cookie cutter systems in place everywhere we go? We have got to do a better job of maturing people properly both spiritually as well as emotionally.

1. Atheism does not allow for an absolute system of morality.

 All moral claims within Atheism are subjective to a certain extent. There is no absolute reference point for determining what is right and what is wrong. What do you appeal to in order to prove that murder is wrong, or that marriage is the only proper outlet for sex? Personal opinion? Those differ from one person to the next. National Laws? The Holocaust was perfectly legal and in accordance with the laws of Germany, as well as the philosophy behind those laws. Cultural opinion? While culture might have a consensus on certain issues, it definitely changes over time. Look at abortion, 100 years ago, culture in general overwhelmingly believed it was wrong, even murder. Today, society  in general, with the exception of religious conservatives, believes that the right to choose is an unalienable right of a mother. In a world without God, without a moral-law giver and a moral-law-sustainer, there is no reason to do whats right unless you want to.

2. There is no Hope.

 What hope do we have to see justice carried out if not in this life? What hope is there to see loved ones again after death? Everything will end, and there is no hope for anything more. Those that do wrong and get away with it have no higher authority to call them to account. When your wife is gone she is gone. When you child is killed by a murderer and they never find him, the pain is doubled. What cause for hope is there in such an evil world? Ah, but according to the last point, this is not evil, its just life. So why do we blame God for the bad things in life if according to the atheistic worldview there is no evil? Because we as humans know that certain things are wrong, and need a  reason to hope! We want to see our loved ones again. We want justice beyond this life. We know there is a natural order to things, that there is a proper way for things to function.

3. Atheism provides no meaning for life.

  Atheism says that we are the accidental result of nothing. If we are accidents, the result of chance, then what meaning is there to life. What purpose is there for our existence? There is no intention behind our lives, our being. Nothing means anything. And yet we are encouraged to be good citizens. To find meaning in our achievements. What is this? Zacharias point out this looks like small dots of “punctuated purpose” beneath an “over-arching meaninglessness”. Basically, we are encouraged to distract ourselves, and lie to ourselves and say that more money, a bigger house, a prettier wife, or more kids will satisfy us. Distract yourself with shiny things until you die.

Atheism tells you to live as though you were able to take comfort in the ideals of religion – to lie to yourself in order to make life bearable. To pretend, that life has meaning, that there is a reason to respect each other, and a reason to hope that tomorrow will be better than today. I wont lie to myself. I believe in these things, and I take comfort in the assurance that there is a God that cares.

     First of all, this argument deals with determining what the Bible would say about physical intimacy, not about what the culture would say. I really dont care what culture has to say about this issue because it has shown its ability (or lack thereof) to satisfy with sex. Its meaningless outside of God. Everything is.

     So, the Bible very clearly states that the marriage bed is undefiled, and that people should not commit adultery. Essentially, the Bible very clearly states that God designed sex to be between one man and one woman, within the confines of marriage. Now this is important for me because it helps to answer the age old question that me and my friend were discussing tonight, and that is, “how far is too far?”

     From what we know of the Bible, it describes sexuality in general as being MONOGOMOUS. That means that if you are practicing proper sexuality, you are ONLY practicing it with one other person. To be monogomous sexually means you have only one sexual partner. The Bible mandates that we all be monogomous sexually. That sex is, by design, a monogomous occurrence.

      SEX = MONOGOMOUS

     I would say that sexuality has no place in any relationship that is not by definition a marriage relationship. That means a man/boy has no claim on the body of the female he is dating/courting, and vice versa. To put any kind of sexual claim on the other person’s body is sin, cut and dry – crystal clear.

     The debate for most then becomes, what is the difference between sexuality and love? My buddy’s argument was that the difference is not just in the action but in the motivation behind an action. I agree. This divides all physical intimacy into two distinct categories. 1. That which is by its very nature sexual and 2. that which could be either sexual or a demonstration of innocent love, depending on the person’s motivation/intention.

     The real question is, where do you draw the line between the two categories? Holding hands? Kissing? Making out? Oral sex? Honestly, people fall all over the spectrum in their personal convictions on the issue, and the following is the guiding factor in my decision.

     Sexuality is monogomous by its very nature. Love is something that is to be freely given as much as possible. Love is the proof of Christianity. So we could set the test up in this way. Would you, as a boyfriend to a certain little lady, be ok with her holding hands with someone else, as a demonstration of her love for that person. Maybe its her sister, her mom, her brother, her cousin, her close girlfriend? Almost everyone says thats ok. What about kissing? My sister kisses me on the cheek every night before she goes to bed. Dont even try to tell me there is an ounce of sexual motivation occurring on either side of that tender transaction. Some families even kiss each other on the mouths. Its weird for most of us, I know, but it happens, and its just how that family shows affection. Its a generally accepted practice for some people.

    I have never encountered a family that made out with each other. Never. No one can convince me that making out is not a sexual act. No self respecting Christian male is going to let his girlfriend make out with anyone else, including her father, mother or sister. The thought is repuslive isnt it? Rightly so. Our spirits bear witness to a natural law.

     I do think that making out is where every Christian should draw the line. I understand that people disagree and they have that right, but I have the right to my interpretation as well. I think that making out with a person before you are married with that person is a sexual act occurring outside of marriage, and therefore, by its very nature, sinful. It doesnt matter whether a person’s motives or intentions were pure or not.

      Comments?

My Institutes

Major Sections

I.                    The Bible

a.       Definition

b.      Evidence

c.       Hermeneutics

II.                 Theology

a.       Trinity

b.      Attributes

III.               Anthropology

a.       Creation

                                                               i.      Questions

1.      How can God allow evil to exist?

2.      Why would God make billions of people and send them to hell?

                                                             ii.      Purposes

1.      For the man

2.      For the woman

b.      Imago Dei

                                                               i.      Trinitarian views on

1.      Sexes

2.      Relationships

                                                             ii.      Theological view of

1.      Man’s will

2.      Man’s nature

c.       The Fall

                                                               i.      Its effect on nature

                                                             ii.      Its effect on man

                                                            iii.      Its effect on woman

IV.              Christology

a.       Four Major Christological Passages

                                                               i.      John 1

                                                             ii.      Colossians 1

                                                            iii.      Hebrews 1

                                                           iv.       Philippians 2

b.      Jesus’ life

                                                               i.      Virgin Birth

                                                             ii.      Education and young years

                                                            iii.      Calling the disciples

                                                           iv.      Years of ministry

                                                             v.      The Last week

                                                           vi.      Resurrection and Ascension

c.       Jesus’ mission

V.                 Soteriology

a.       The Biblical process

                                                               i.      The gospel call.

                                                             ii.      The drawing of the HS.

                                                            iii.      Repentance

                                                           iv.      Justification

                                                             v.      Sanctification

                                                           vi.      Glorification

b.      The problem of the will.

c.       The problem of infants.

VI.              Ecclesiology

a.       Church government

                                                               i.      Definition of pastor

                                                             ii.      Definition of elder

                                                            iii.      Definition of deacon

                                                           iv.      Problems with deacon rule

                                                             v.      Problems with Congregational rule

                                                           vi.      Problems with a single pastor rule

                                                          vii.      Biblical support for a plurality of elder rule

b.      Church Purposes

                                                               i.      Witnessing

                                                             ii.      Discipling

                                                            iii.      Fellowship

1.      Eating

2.      Singing

c.       Church sacraments

                                                               i.      Lords Supper

                                                             ii.      Baptism

                                                            iii.      Church Discipline

VII.            Eschatology

a.       Is there a tribulation?

b.      Is there a rapture?

                                                               i.      Post?

                                                             ii.      Pre?

                                                            iii.      Con?

c.       Is there a millennial kingdom?

VIII.         Pneumatology

a.       Who is the HS?

b.      Who does he dwell in?

c.       What are the fruits of the spirit?

d.      What are spiritual gifts?

e.       What are the spiritual gifts?

f.        What is the gift of tongues?

g.       Is it necessary to speak in tongues in order to be saved?

h.       What does it mean to quench the spirit?

                Romans nine talks about how God is in control of all things. It talks about how God has predestined certain people to go to Heaven, and how He created certain people with the intention of sending them to Hell. The problem with this is not, “how is it possible,” because it simply is. This is the way things are.  The question for Christians is, “why?” Why would God allow such a world to exist – a world where He allows evil to exist and even flourish when He has absolute control – a world full of what appears to be needless pain and sorrow. The Bible says that it was so that He could show us His mercy. That God allows evil – Death, Hell, and Sorrow, so that He could “make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.”

In order to understand His mercy and His glory, it is necessary for us to understand how bad sin is, by looking at its consequences. Another thing we need to understand is God’s justice, and His just response to our sin.  We also need to understand that we are all sinners, of our own wills and by our own desires, and that we all deserve Gods just response to our sinful selves and actions. Knowing these things enables us to understand the fantastic unbelievable mercy of God, that He would sacrifice Himself for us! And not only that, but that God would invite us to live with Him for eternity, count us as sons and co-heirs with Christ, AMAZING LOVE! HOW CAN IT BE?

Talking about death, as an example of evil in the world and how it is part of God’s pre-ordained plan, and NOT an accident by any means. This should give us hope, peace, and even joy about the fact that God is actively involved in the process of our deaths.

But not being able to see how our death fits into His plan should also inspire us to trust Him. Dying for something we feel is worthwhile is somewhat easier than accepting what might seem to be a meaningless, unimportant death. Look at certain people in the Bible who were martyred and God gives no apparent explanation. (John the Baptist, Steven) The book just moves on without ever making you feel that person’s sacrifice is worth it. No earthquakes, no masses coming to Christ, just cut to the next scene. And its not like this stuff doesn’t happen all the time. Christians are martyred all around the world and we never hear about it. No one ever hears about some of them.

 This is where the rubber meets the road, and we have to decide that we  really do trust God even more than we trust our ability to decide whether or not the sacrifice He is calling us to make is worth it or not. We must be willing to die for Christ, whether we can see the good in it or not. How hard is that?

     Truth should never be completely reactionary. Just because something is false does not mean that its opposite is true. Truth usually isnt that easy to discover. An oversimplification of this point would be to say that since the statement, “all Muslims are terrorists” is an untrue statement, its opposite is not necessarily true either, “all Muslims are not terrorists.” This principle can be applied in varying degrees.

     Truth must always be applied in some way practically. What this means is that once you have encountered something true, it changes the way you live, look at life in general – it changes you. Jesus said the truth would set you free. The truth leaves its mark on all of us, and hopefully leaves us all different than when it found us.

     The whole reason I delved into a discussion of the truth is because I have found in my experience that Christians in particular are a very closed-minded group of people. I dont mean that as a compliment. I mean that they are unwilling to prayerfully consider an alternative to their beliefs, and equally unwilling to even examine their own beliefs and make sure that they are based on sound evidence.

     I am not talking about changing your faith, or not believing in Jesus anymore. I am simply saying that if a person has not left room for enlightenment and sanctification within their theology then have they left room for Jesus working in their belief system? We hear it said all the time that all truth is God’s truth, and that is true. With that in mind, should we as Christians have anything to fear from a well constructed argument – no matter who is constructing it? All truth is Gods truth, and if what we believe is true, it should stand up to the evidence. The unexamined life is not worth living, said Plato. I would contend that the unexamined belief is not worth believing, but unfortunately, most of the people I know are afraid of what they will find if they truly examine their belief system.

     BE COURAGEOUS! Truth is not alway gentle, or kind. Sometimes it breaks us. Are we willing to be broken, and follow the truth whereever it leads us? In the end, Christ said, “I am the way, the Truth and the life.” If our God IS truth, then why should we fear seeking Him?