Increa Technology |Engineer |Aviator |Educator

“Children’s Church” is intended to be a time of children ages ~3-7, having a dedicated time of song, teaching, and sermon(ette), separate from their parents, who simultaneously attend the normal church service. When I ask about children participating in the normal church or home group activities or Bible studies, I hear a number of reasons. I documented my thoughts as I reconciled these reasons against the Biblical witness.

Q: Children can’t sit still, and they would be a distraction to me and those around me.

A: A parent should be sacrificing to mature a child. Do we choose to study how to do this well, while declining to do it? Children are taught and adapt to the norms that are expected of them. They will come to adopt behavior as they are allowed to exhibit. If a child is taught that they can avoid adult disciplined settings to something they “want more” or “like more”, loving parents that allow it or choose it must believe there is some reason to teach this expectation. I don’t know what it is.  What children are taught is was they become.  Doesn’t this idea just grow children into adults who try to escape disciplined settings?

• If a child is disrespectful toward parents, and allowed to be this way, it teaches the child to value individual wants instead of deference for the respect and honor shown to another.
• I’ve heard it said that it’s best to not spank children, lest they learn to hit back. This attitude appears to be unaware of God’s teaching in this area. Spanking is not hitting. Neither the motive nor the action are the same.
• As a child, if we are trained to have our time away from responsibility, then as an adult, this manifests into other ways of escape – guy time “with the men” when we don’t care for our family, sometimes going to excess with alcohol or other female company. Or “time for the women” to get away from their families – for dinner, nails, and a movie – declining care for others that God speaks well of.

Q: It’s difficult for younger children to understand an adult message in the sermon.

A: For a child, maybe it’s not as much about hearing and applying the sermon, as it is about watching and being part of their parents doing so. If a parent runs to and fro trying to manage many projects, but cannot find time to sit still and peacefully absorb and live God’s Word, then that’s probably what they’re teaching their children to be like, also. If a parent respectfully works to hear God’s Ways, and demonstrates a life-changing effect, then the children will model after this.  Intellectual dissection, or even being smart, is not something God puts a premium on.

Q: Teaching and activities must be age-specific, or “different people learn in different ways”.

A: This theme doesn’t seem to be present in the Scriptures. If we are taught to amplify and esteem our differences, rather to appreciate our sinful similarities in the face of God, there are costs:

• Age-appropriate expectations later manifest with gender-appropriate, and race-appropriate, and income-appropriate expectations.  At the extreme, they become “I’m breathing, so I deserve my rights” expectations, which are burdensome to society. The family of God is fractured away from being a purposeful functioning body where differences can come together and become more.
• I levy my preferences to become the burden of others, and require that others respect my individuality — usually again manifest in “I get to do/be what I want”. Instead, we should be taught that others should be put first.
• Learning the knowledge in the sermon – being smart – getting the grade – answering the test – becomes the value and espoused beauty of life. This is contrary to Scripture. Why have we replaced behaving well with being smart?

Q: You haven’t met ~my~ children. They require exceptions to the otherwise fine ideas.

A: There is no temptation to someone that hasn’t been played out many times before for others. Any person’s life is not a special case. Honoring exceptions is a dangerous theology and social paradigm to model or teach to our children (see previous question about differences). When grown up, such an attitude allowed in the presence of children manifests itself as (for example):

• A belief that divorce is wrong. Except, in my case, you haven’t met my spouse…
• Parents should be honored. Except, in my case, I have this job vocation I have to pursue…
• Debt is wrong. Except, in my case, we need this car, house, furniture…

Q: I love my children and want the best for them.

A: The act of loving children is often incorrectly framed or measured by physical provision. A shopping spree. Christmas presents. Clothes they need or want. Fun time with friends. A lack of complaining from them. God explains that loving children is a much wider concept than that, and may be opposite.

Vagueness keeps you returning to God. If God wants you to keep coming to him, would he lay out a set of black and white rules and set you free to go execute them all? Would you do this with your child when she was 8 and then say good bye, leaving her alone to continue life? No. You want your children to return to you and trust you and learn from you even if they know all of today’s rules. This is true for God and you, too! Continued prayer. Continued searching. Continued study at His feet, asking for guidance. Continued consult with a community of believers.

In his blog, Phil Gons was puzzled about the following quote from N.T. Wright. (Wikipedia).

“I believe firmly and passionately in scripture, and even more firmly and passionately in Jesus himself.”

I respond only to this quote, not a full understanding of Wright’s theology. I would agree with what Wright wrote because Jesus himself basically advocates exactly this to scripture-followers of his time. Let me explain.

I am coming to believe that Christian life is a more rich and textured fabric than narrow readings of the Bible allow. I accept what Jesus spoke about breaking the Sabbath and calling himself God in John 15:16-40. I think the story speaks to this issue.

Why do fundamental Christians insist on obeying the Scripture? It shouldn’t be about “getting to heaven” or “being saved”. It shouldn’t even be about being right and Holy, per se. Those are all pieces of the journey to the destination, or something you find at the destination. But the destination of the journey – the fundamental reason to do this thing called obeying God (therefore the Scriptures) – is to Honor the Father.

Jesus gave this answer about why His behavior was not acceptable to the people of his day who staked their lives on conservative readings of their Holy Word. In John 5:23, he says the intent of the Father is “..that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.”

In the same conversation, Jesus prioritizes himself, words of a great prophet, and words of the Scriptures, starting in verse 36. He puts himself at the highest priority of all three. “I have testimony weightier than that of John. For the very work that the Father has given me to finish, and which I am doing, testifies that the Father has sent me. And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form, nor does his word dwell in you, for you do not believe the one he sent. You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” Scriptures don’t give life. Jesus does.

I note that an alternative reading of the original Hebrew could lead one to translate “Diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.” (In other words, an imperative command to action that will take them toward eternal life.) I think it’s more likely Jesus meant to parallel the previous sentence which identifies their error. The first translation is also more consistent with Jesus next sentence which basically says, “Even though you are reading the Scripture, you refuse to accept their lead.”

Jesus wraps up the discussion again pointing out that the audience’s claim to Scriptural authority is undermined by the precise fact that they don’t believe (and act on) what it says. Remember that Scripture the audience had at the time was the books of Moses. Jesus said in verse 45 and following, “Your accuser is Moses, on whom your hopes are set. If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?”

If you deny Scripture, you deny Christ because you have no pointer to him. This much a narrow reader of the Scripture agrees with. Yet there is an additional step. If you pick up a lecture pointer and fail to use it to understand the content of the slide show on the screen, your pointer is useless. I see too many Christians waiving pointers around doing an excellent laser light show called “quoting the Bible to others”. Many have forgotten the content of the presentation.

Perhaps a better analogy is a long-barrel rifle. The rifle barrel can be the Scripture, which sets a believing Christian toward an answer (the bullet). Once the bullet leaves the barrel, it meets the currents, eddies, and turbulence of air (life) that would deviate it from its path to the target. Jesus is the escort through those twists and turns of life. It would be nice if the end of every barrel (God’s Word) could be placed directly against each target and the trigger pulled. It sure would be easier to hit targets. That’s not what life is about because that’s not what God has chosen life should be about. He is interested in a relationship and continued upholding and obedience – your “flight path” (you’re the bullet in my analogy) – as you move in life. Peter Mayer has released a beautiful song brushing this same issue, titled, “God is a River”.

More important is the life lived in obedience to Christ, than the Scripture, per se. Hence, it makes total sense that someone would write, “I believe firmly and passionately in scripture, and even more firmly and passionately in Jesus himself.”

Originally posted July 2008 in the Increa Wikilint. Links to other pages are not active in the edition posted here.

Sacrifice will be part of a Christian’s life if they are making that life available for God’s service. However, what would it look like with “too much” sacrifice? What if sacrifice becomes a goal, unto itself? In an attempt to live for God, a person might find themselves doing sacrifice.

Sacrifice must have a object. Nobody does sacrifice by sitting alone and doing nothing, separate from the world. For example, you sacrifice something for your spouse. Or you sacrifice something for your new recreation. Or you sacrifice something for your child’s education. Or you sacrifice a career to take care of aging parents. You always sacrifice for something.

I propose the appropriate Christian sacrifice is for/toward godliness in yourself or another. The object of your sacrifice must be God, not another person. Instead, among some communities, conservatism tends to occlude godliness. For example, if your sacrifice is to preserve your marriage, or sacrifice is to provide for your children, I believe conservative values can occlude godliness. I understand this claim challenges many nominal American Christians. However, the Bible says a marriage (and children) are a blessing. They are not targets of sacrifice, rather they are one of the blessings received when you sacrifice to God with obedience to His ways.

The most stark example I can think of is particularly strong because it does not leave a person with two good options, which is a quandary for many Christians. In other words, most Christians I know would say sacrifice for God is good and sacrifice for their children is good. However, leaving the conversation here leaves one in an ambiguous state because God has given each person only 24 hours per day. Reality is that you can’t line up all the good things and do them all. Instead, you have to prioritize, and some things are become a higher priority, preempting less important goods.

It would be really nice if God would compare the two objects (sacrifice toward God or sacrifice toward family) and identify for us which is more important. Well, he does…

Abraham’s story is the most vivid example because it lays the two targets of sacrifice in direct conflict. Also, it’s a non-trite example for us because it is the core and foundational and vivid root for the entire Jewish story.

Abraham, sacrificing for God, is asked to make a sacrifice of his child. The situation is not presented as two good things to pursue or two good ways to sacrifice. One relationship is promoted at the expense of the other. One sacrifice is good and the other becomes the sacrifice.

How is this balance in your life? One of the turning points in my life was when my wife and I realized we were doing well because we were not sacrificing for each other. We were not engaged in a transactional relationship. Other church members will glance furtively around and feel uncomfortable if you ever publicly say, “I don’t do things for my wife. I don’t sacrifice for her…” Saying such a thing will really get the attention of others. And we usually are able to drift the conversation toward obedience to, and sacrifice for God.

What follows that initial statement is a discussion of priority. I sacrifice and do things for my God. I enjoy the blessing of my wife. Same thing for my children. They do not run the show and bury my life. They are a gift to me. And this works for them, too.

Horizontal (person to person) based metrics are not good to use as a justification for anything. Instead, I believe a person should do something because the vertical (person to God) metric is right. However — watch the effect — when you choose to do right, you automatically get the good horizontal stuff.

There are multiple horizontal, relationship type effects that are good:

1. The other person hears my assertion that they are a blessing, someone valuable my your life.
2. They know they are valuable because of who God made them, not because I chose them.
3. Since I am not choosing their value, there is no transactional relationship to bargain through. “I love you if you will…” is never on the table.

Sacrifice to God first. Lay aside your family, your wife, your children. Challenging words, eh?

7 April 2009

I stepped out of my office and decided I’d go do some electronic paper grading and thought it would be fun to try using a new laptop. Then I wondered how long I’d enjoy using a new computer until it became a boring tool. Then I realized I like the spunk or life or interesting-ness that a new computer gives. It gives me life, interest, and provides an environment where I like doing other things with it. Then “poof!” a bigger idea came into my mind.

Defining Change

If you disagree that people like change, then what you really mean is that you don’t like change right now, in some way that is forced on you. But you do like change, when you choose it to be. You get bored. I believe this is not inherent or intrinsic in people, but it has become trained behavior. I’ve concluded that change damages our society and damages individuals.

I should point out one subtlety not present in the English language; be careful about this when you talk of “change” or quote me. My claim is that we don’t like to change-diff (morph, improve, enhance, build), however we do like to change-swap (displace, replace, switch out). In fact, plying open this difference is the heart of what I’m trying to talk about in this article.

We like change-swap instead of change-diff, and that is bad for our character. We get bored with our car and choose to buy a new one. We get bored with our job and start acting up for any little excuse. Dating tends to enrich and honor the process of get bored with our boyfriend or girlfriend and dumping them. Worse, we get bored with our spouse, divorce them, and look for a new model (or do the same thing in a different order). These days, people even get bored with their gender and choose to change-swap it.

Change-diff requires work and commitment that comes from nowhere but ourselves. Change-swap requires money or resources, which can be earned or taken from others. Change-diff requires embodiment of the process into ourselves. Change-swap includes a consumerism attitude of handling and controlling our environment, resources, or people around us.

Religion Speaks

Do you have a theological streak in you? Consider that God chooses to not change-diff or change-swap. “Whatever is good and perfect comes to us from God above, who created all heaven’s lights. Unlike them, He never changes or casts shifting shadows” or “the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning” (James 1:17). “For I, the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.” (Malachi 3:6).

Lastly, God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM”; and He said, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.‘” With an analytical and logical frame of mind, I see here that perhaps God defines non-change, so rest of the world moves in comparison to him. A being that is defined by who he IS (with no concept of to be or has been) defines no change.

Satan wanted to change-swap with God, defining his own character.

Therefore..

Notice we rebel against God when he tries to change-diff us. Instead, we tend to expire or deplete our patience with any given belief, and then we wander off to find something better. We want to find a new book or a new theory that will turn us into something wonderful and make the change-swap worthwhile. When titillation becomes boredom, we want to move on. We tend to pursue change-swaps throughout life: our job, our house, our spouse, our clothes.

What would the world look like if people only did change-diffs? What if everyone had their head down on the task, while their heart was up. Intently disciplined at change-diffing for the better and helping others do the same?