Author Archives: geoffsnook77

Unknown's avatar

What to do with personalities?

by

Yesterday I continued my slow sermon series through the Beattitudes, landing on “Blessed are the peacemakers….”

I mentioned the ways our personalities tend to get in the way of real peacemaking, primarily because our personalities more often than not, become our starting point for peacemaking. We tend to either be peacefakers (ignore the truth) or peacebreakers (ignore the love). Sometimes I find myself fluctuating between the two, and I think that might be common as well.

I call this personality-based peacemaking, which is often not real peacemaking. 

But then two questions may arise (at least in my mind): 1.) What role should our personalities play in peacemaking2.) To what extent CAN or SHOULD our personalities change?

1.) What role should personalities play? Whether you tend to fall into one of these two camps, or fluctuate back and forth, it is necessary to honestly examine your own tendencies. We naturally run from conflict or run over “conflicters.” So self awareness is key.

Here’s a practical difference it can make in your relationships. 

Ken Sande’s The Peacemaker encourages folks at times to “look over” an offense. Because the gospel is the motivation, you can now do so. How do you know when to do so? Consider your personality. If you are naturally someone who enters into the fray, often times with your “truth guns” blazing, it’s probably wise to not voice every concern you have. Even if you’re right. Why not overlook or keep quiet at times? Like George Costanza, who chose to do the opposite of what he naturally thought (he realized he was always wrong) why not consider doing the opposite of your natural reaction? There’s a good chance you could be mistaking the Holy Spirit for your personality. If you tend toward peacefaking, then it might be wise to pull the trigger a bit quicker, because you know you’re tendency is to say nothing.

2.) What extent CAN or SHOULD your personality change? Unlike Lady Gaga or Oprah, Christians never make “just being ourselves” our highest aim or standard since we are now honest about ourselves: the thoughts of the natural man/woman are “only evil continually (Gen 6:5).” Now of course Christians have had hearts of stone replaced with hearts of flesh (Ezek 36:26), but we still have left-over sinful residue. So just being yourself is never the goal. 

However, personalities that are tainted with sinful residue still bear the image of God and so some parts should not change. Only you can be you and only you can image God in a unique way. So when the gospel is applied to a personality, the sinful parts experiences tweaking. For instance someone very timid may tend to overlook all offenses (because of fear), but that same person can and will speak up when necessary (now having a Spirit of power). And it’s beautiful when that happens. The gospel has now freed that person from their personality constraints (always peace-faking) and enabled them to speak truth humbly and gently. And yet its that person’s personality, now freed and highlighted by the gospel, which makes them a great truth teller when they need to be.

So personalities can provide limits on what we naturally do, but when the gospel gets a hold of them, individuals can then uniquely image God.

How much can personalities change? For some folks, personalities are changed by the gospel in the same way a sprinter improves from race to race. Allyson Felix is fast. Allyson Felix has always been fast. But in the last two Olympics, she has only landed the silver. Through much training, she is now the fastest lady at 200 meters in the world. Sometimes personality changes but a “hundredth of a second.”

For other folks, who may have sinfully dominated personalities, the opportunity for change may look more like a distance runner. With much training, a 1500 meter runner, can improve by 5 seconds, whereas a sprinter may not change more than 5 hundredths of a second. Sometimes personalities can change a lot. 

Regardless, the gospel can redeem the sinful parts of our personalities and highlight those which best image God’s glory. And when it comes to peacemaking, a careful look at Jesus, then an honest look at oneself, can make a big difference than if you simply start with “that guy” who needs to change.

Unknown's avatar

Allyson Felix, Lashinda Demus, and Ricky Bobby

by

Last night I had the opportunity to watch someone win and watch some “lose.” The gal who won, Allyson Felix, had been a “loser” the last two Olympics. Now that is accurate you want to define “loser” in a traditional Ricky Bobby “If you ain’t first, you’re last,” sort of way.

Lashinda Demus the 400 meter hurdler, lost just a bit before Felix won. She got the silver. If you had seen the look on her face-which maybe you did since a number of people actually watch the Olympics-you probably thought someone had just kidnapped her cat or something. As though she had stumbled on a hurdle while in the lead as Lolo Jones 4 did years ago in Bejing.

Maybe she listened to her inner Ricky Bobby?

Silver on the highest stage possible with her husband and boys cheering her on is not too bad of a gig. She belied a tiny bit of thankfulness in the post race interview, but vowed to keep vying for the gold. Only gold would seal her “legacy.” Although I would have preferred she use more accurate terms like “personal worth,” or “reason for living,” because I think her kids are probably OK with a silver legacy. They probably just love their Mommy for who she is and want to spend time with her. But maybe I’m reading too much into her twin 4 or 5 year old boys.

The interview was quite sad. But I didn’t feel sad for her loss, just sad for her. Sad for the idol she had put her hopes in: behind the gold was a real search for significance.

Allyson Felix didn’t “lose.” She got gold after 4 years of intense training with a somewhat unlikeable at times coach Bobby Kersee (husband of Jackie Joyner Kersee). She wanted that gold bad. She might have tried-and might still try-to get that gold in Rio. But from what it appears, I think the interview might have gone in a different direction.

I’ve always pulled for Felix. Now I know why. She grew up a preacher’s kid and her father is now a professor at The Masters Seminary. Check out this great article about her. Here’s but a snippet.

My faith is definitely the most important aspect of my life. My dad is a pastor and I grew up in a very strong Christian home. Our family was very involved in our church. I came to know Jesus Christ as my personal savior at a very young age. Ever since then, I have continually been striving to grow in my relationship with God.

She plans to be a school teacher some day. I can imagine the kids not in her class will be quite jealous of the lucky ones some day!

Unknown's avatar

Tim Tebow’s meekness

by

When one thinks about a Christian athlete, one who works hard and plays tough, he can’t get around Tim Tebow. Clearly this guys is as tough as beef jerky.

However many in the media, besides Skip Bayliss (who is a huge Tebow fan), critique or rather criticize Tebow for his inability to throw a crisp spiral and complete more than 50% of his passes. 

It’s hard to find great examples of meekness in today’s culture, and I’m not willing to nominate myself either. For good reasons. But I think Tim Tebow gives us a more than a picture of strength, but one of meekness. And I think this is helpful, because we usually think of meekness as weakness or timidity. But I really think meekness flows from a poverty of spirit and expresses itself in an unwillingness to defend oneself. Your strength is used to defend others and you simply let God or others defend you. At least that’s the picture I see in Numbers 12 and Matthew’s Beattitudes. 

Yet another media personality and former QB Boomer Essiason-those guys seem to be the greatest of the Tebow haters (remember Bronco’s Hall of Famer John Elway got rid of Tebow)-has spoken out against Tim. I’m OK with people who don’t like Tebow, for any reason. I really am. But it has become almost cliche to pull against this kid. Kind of like the word “interesting” or the expression “It is what it is.” I expect a little originality.

Here is a good display of meekness in action:

“I’ve heard nothing but great things about Mr. Esiason,” Tebow said, in comments distributed by the team. “I know he was a great player here, and I just wish him nothing but the best in his announcing and God bless him.

No need to defend.

Tebow later goes on to explain that he’s heard all of this stuff before in high school, in college, and now in the NFL. In other words, “I disagree with him, and I have reason to disagree.” But I don’t need to defend myself or attack him; instead I’ll let God make this guy look prophetic or idiotic. He’ll take care of it and He’ll take care of me. 

Meekness.

Unknown's avatar

Non-political reflections on "You didn’t build that"

by

The other day President Obama ruffled a few feathers with his statement on business, “You didn’t build that.” These words below have certainly rubbed Republicans the wrong way, and I would imagine perhaps Democrats-though I can’t confirm that. I’ve just seen facebook post after facebook post mock Obama’s infamous or in-famous (depending on your vote) speech.

“If you’ve been successful you didn’t get there on your own….I’m always struck by people who think ‘well, it must be because I was just so smart’. There are a lot of smart people out there!  ‘It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.’ Let me tell you something—there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there!”

And you can imagine that within the same dialog, this probably didn’t endear him any further to many:

“If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

Now this blog is for the most part like myself, fairly a-political. So I won’t comment on the political or economic component, but instead the anti-individualistic undertone which comprised Obama’s speech. Mitt Romney and other Republicans have opposed this idea, as well want to remain consistent with their own ideology. But I want to say that I think Obama is actually on to something here, that would be quite beneficial to all Christians. Let me explain.

Obama’s driving force behind this comment is his own democratic ideology: successful businesses should pay a larger amount of taxes than those less successful because they have benefited from someone else’s hard work or government structure. At least I think that’s the gist. They didn’t do it entirely by themselves: they sprang up from good soil.
 
I think the Christian has to agree with this to a large degree. For instance, none of us could run a succesfull business in communist China, right? But consider the other factors of success. Yes some folks work harder than others; that’s hard to argue! Yet who gives man the intellectual and physical capability to do hard work? Clearly some folks just don’t have it; they were not born with the right tools.

Now think of environment. There are always rags-to-riches stories, but consider the fact that these are in fact “stories,” meaning they are not the norm.

Now none of this obliges you to pay higher taxes to the government. I get that and don’t necessarily see the tit-for-tat connection.

But don’t we (I’m saying those of a more Republican persuasion-which is my personal bias) carry the, “Yes I did build that with my hard work” sentiment into church? I worked hard and continue to work hard at this job, therefore it’s my money. It is my house, so I’m not accountable to use it for hospitality. These are my kids and this is my family so why should I bring someone else into the picture for Thanksgiving or Christmas?

On the contrary, we are dependent upon the Lord who ordains all things. Perhaps this passage may help remind us (I’m pretty forgetful) that ultimately we didn’t build our families, houses, or businesses independently. This is what God has to say on the matter in James 4:13-16

13 Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— 14 yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. 15 Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” 16 As it is, you boast in your arrogance.

God does ordain all things and has ordained your opportunity, experience, background, situation, environment, and even ability and drive to do hard work.

I think its hard at times to tithe-though I get that I’m a pastor and it would incredibly hypocritical not to-because we have to trust that God will take care of us when we give back 10% of our income. But I really don’t think fear is the primary driving force.

I think it is primarily an issue of ownership. Whose money is it? If it’s God’s money, God’s house, God’s business, God’s family, then it’s much easier to trust Him with continuing to provide the money, or provide for our houses, businesses, and families.

If you are one who has worked hard, regularly works hard, has taken great risks for a business venture, I personally applaud you. Any sort of work, particularly starting businesses, takes guts, vision, determination, risk, and perseverance. I just think that the hardest working among us are perhaps the most vulnerable to forget the truth found in James 4:13-16.

Distinctly Republican thinking (of which I lean) or distinctly American individualistic thinking (of which most people lean) can sometimes replace-albeit in a subtle way-distinctly gospel-centered thinking and living.

Unknown's avatar

Missy Franklin vs. Gabby Douglass

by

Last night I had the opportunity to watch the Olympics “live” (I know that technically that is not true, but its more “live” than 2 degrees removed on the DVR) with my 4 year old. His nap “promoted” him to watching gymnastics and swimming “live” with Mom and Dad. 


When I look at him, I wonder how good he will really be at baseball (he is better than most 4 year olds I know-though I confess to know a dearth of four year olds). Right now I think he’s pretty good. But does that mean a decent player, an all-star, high school standout out, college scholarship, etc….?

Parents want the best for their children. That is typically the case and it should be so. However “their best” can present quite a problem when “their best” becomes the ever-consuming-yet-leaving-you-drained idol that “their best” most often is. For the kids, but more often for the parents.


As a parent, will I be willing to do all that I can to make sure he is able to do his “best?” There might be good things which I should ask myself will I be willing to sacrifice? Like fishing, watching football, sleep, etc..

But there is another pertinent question for parents: should I do all that I can do so that he can do his “best?” What should parents sacrifice and what should they not sacrifice? I’m at somewhat of an advantage (in my opinion) in that I’m a pastor, and so travel leagues taking Connar away from worship on Sunday are an impossibility. So will he then be able to do his best? Most parents jump to the conclusion and say “no.” But I would caution folks to not jump to such a conclusion.

For many Olympic athletes not in communist countries, yet still in high school, the question really resides with the parents. Will parents do ALL that is possible to see the young athlete succeed?

When that “best” is not the all consuming idol of power, significance, fame, pleasure, I do think that it is possible to do your “best” without taking the normal “at all costs” sacrifices to which most parents willingly offer. 

Let me give you two examples of different approaches, yet both seem to have done their “best.”


1.) American gymnast Gabby Douglass moved from Virginia Beach to Des Moines, Iowa, to get the best training possible. Wow. Her older sister had to convince her to keep training, when she clearly wanted to quit. Looks like it paid off as Gabby is competing in the individual all around competition in place of favorite Jordyn Wieber. Doing her best however, meant sacrificing much of her childhood.

2.) By contrast, let’s look at Missy Franklin. Missy is just a teenager. An incredible swimmer already with a gold medal, she’s still just a normal kid. When questioned about moving away to Florida (would have been tempting for me!) or California from Colorado because it wasn’t a “swimming state,” she responded, “Why leave family or school or friends?” In other words, the pursuit of swimming was not an “at all costs” thing. It wasn’t an idol upon which she would sacrifice other more important things. She stayed at home, even resisting the sponsors which would have precluded her from competing on her high school swim team. She didn’t sacrifice her childhood.


Now whether her parents had a say in the whole “we’re not moving so you can do your best at swimming” decision, I don’t know. The interview was silent on this part. But perhaps they had parented her in such a way that “her best” didn’t become an idol? She could do her “best” in Colorado, alongside family and friends who would love her even when she fell short of her best.

Was her training stunted because of inferior coaching? Doesn’t seem to be. This girl is gifted and a hard worker. In this case, that seems more important than the “opportunities” she could have had elsewhere.

I wish more Christian parents would think through these two questions more carefully

1.) Is honoring Jesus more important than my/my kids’ performance?

2.) If my kid is really gifted and works really hard, can he/she still compete at the highest level, even when my commitment to Christ may preclude some “opportunities” which would regularly take him/her away from corporate worship?

We see the answer to the latter question is yes. Talent and hard work makes some “opportunities” superfluous. You can say NO and still see your kid succeed. 


Just some things to think through when we look at our little ones and genuinely want for them to be the best that they can.


Unknown's avatar

Andrea Kramer and asking questions

by

Sideline reporters often have little to offer the coach, the athlete, or even the viewer. Their questions are often obvious, ill timed, or just plain dumb. With the Olympics happening only every 4 years, one might think that we would see an exception to the rule. One might be wrong.

Andrea Kramer, the gal entrusted with interviewing the successful or struggling swimmers just minutes after their races, has completely bombed. Now I realize that she is a two time Emmy Award winning broadcaster. But in my opinion, she seems to have miserably failed to “read” the interviewee. She has routinely asked the losers ridiculous questions (and even the winners-“which Michael Phelps will show up?”), so much so that when she thanks them for the interview, several have just walked away quietly and unresponsive with a gracious perturbation. The athletes don’t like it. The viewer doesn’t like it. So does NBC?

If we can learn anything from Andrea Kramer, it is this: Bad questions + Bad timing=people who don’t want to talk with you.

Now in Kramer’s defense, she has no option in regards to timing. Time is of the essence as the events just keep coming. But for most of us, as parents, pastors, and just plain people, we have time to let people cool down. Even good questions asked at the wrong time can lead to not so good answers and attitudes. Yet good timing probably even covers over not-so-good questions. Something for me to think through when teaching my passionate 4 year old soon-to-be Tee-baller, “There is no crying in baseball” (unless you get hurt of course).

Patience may be the difference in getting a good interview or just making folks walk away angry without listening to you.

Unknown's avatar

Don’t Waste the Olympics

by

I’ve been digging the Olympics. It’s only once every 4 years that I find myself caring bout such seemingly insignificant sports/events/hobbies that would have trouble finding their way onto ESPN8 “the Ocho.” But because these games only occur once ever four years, I care that the USA wins Water Polo over Montenegro. I can legitimately say that I care.

But one thing that has put me in a more contemplative mood has been the losers. Micheal Phelps not medaling and Jordyn Wieber not being able to compete in the gymnastics all around have been my major “stand-outs.” But since there is pretty much a new crop of gymnasts every four years, an every four years “fan” can’t get to know them. So I’ll briefly share some thoughts on the former American golden boy Michael Phelps.


Four years ago, this guy could simply jump in the pool and he’d win. According to an interview with his family, his sisters recounted that he had become more desirable than famous male celebrities. I can’t remember which one, but then again, I’m not really into male celebrities or movies stars. And yet, during the grueling 400 meter medley, he didn’t even medal. Losing to Lochte, who described these Olympics as “my time,” had to sting just as badly.


The winner was now a loser.


How will he fare in the rest of the Olympics? Will he garner more gold or miss out on the bronzes again? 


But more existentially, who will he really be, now that he cannot describe himself as the best anymore? Who we really are is shown not in victory but in defeat. In victory, we can hide behind gold medals. We can hide behind successful careers, well behaved kids, new houses, thriving churches, approval ratings. But when we “lose,” those things are revealed for what they often are. Simply places to hide behind.


I hate losing. I hate it when my team loses. I cannot imagine training for four years for an event or events (though Phelps did only for 9 months in that medley), and then blowing it. But sometimes God will tear down those walls. He tears down walls that not only serve as barriers to the horizontal relationships, but to the walls we erect in our relationship with Him. It’s at that point, that we are no longer Olympic athletes, successful businessmen, parents, or pastors, but we are just His children. Or we’re just losers grasping at something else to hide behind. Being is children is plenty enough. When it’s not, God will in His goodness, show love by allowing you to lose. When the tears dry, lets remember to thank Him because losers can see Him more clearly.


My four year old asked if Micheal Phelps tells people about Jesus. I told him that Phelps, to my knowledge, doesn’t love Jesus. His response, “Well then we need to tell him.” I told him that we probably won’t be able to meet him. So I guess we’ll have to pray.


There are many ways to not “waste the Olympics.” Here’s just one: Pull for winners, but remember to pray for the losers. They’ve just had their walls broken down but they need their hearts to be made alive (Eph 2:1). As a family, we’ll pull for Phelps (Lochte is way too arrogant) to win, but we’ll pray that his losses, and/or even his medals, will only lead to his ultimate gain (Phil 3:8).

Whether the athletes win or lose, here is a fitting verse to pray for the athletes and thus participate in the games, even as you spectate. 

“Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ”-Phil 3:8



Unknown's avatar

When kids say, "I don’t want to go to church!"

by
One of the struggles of Christian parenting is shepherding your children into the desire of following God. If I make them learn catechism questions, or go to church, they will grow up and reject the church and the gospel because I have made them do it. That’s sometimes what we think, and perhaps that’s a legitimate fear, or “concern” if you don’t like to admit to being afraid.
At what level do you “make” your kids do anything? How “religious” in nature should something be before you say, “OK, I don’t want you to have to do this.” For instance, school and breaking the Law are pretty much non-negotiables, right?  It doesn’t matter if they want to do it, they have to or don’t have to do it. 
Should it be the same for regularly coming to church? Bible study, catechism questions, etc…? Should we just say, “You have to come to Church?”
Right now my 4 year old lives for church. He has 3 years of children’s church before he hears his daddy preach. Will he enjoy it then? What will I do when he says, “I don’t want to come?” What should you do as laity with your kids? Instead of a road block, this is an opportunity to lead your family to Christ and His Church in a deeper way.
Here are some thoughts about the subject which have bounced around in my head for a bit.
1.) Don’t assume that making your kid go to church will necessarily make him not want to go to church when he/she gets older. My wife and I had to go to church growing up, but I only missed a few Sundays even when in college. There is not a tit-for-tat relationship for every child and mandatory church attendance. However, some of had experiences of having to go to church and decided to be done with it later in life. Experience varies.
2.) The Christian life is not easy. There are things that I want to do that I can’t. There are things God calls me to do that I don’t want to do. Following Jesus involves taking up our crosses daily (Luke 9:23). If our kids only do the things they want to do, and as parents we regularly foster that attitude by giving into the demands of our children to stay home on Sunday, then we are setting up a pick-and-choose Lordship of King Jesus. But his lordship is to be entire (though obviously impossible, that is the direction we are moving toward). So just leaving them at home doesn’t help in the long run either.
3.) The motivation of the human heart is never going to be perfect. Even when someone doesn’t want to be at church, and is only there because of duty-on his or his parent’s part-the Holy Spirit can still show up. He really can. I hear it all the time. When you put yourselves in the way of the oncoming train of grace, you are likely to get hit. His work of sanctification is there for the asking and we need to regularly point our kids to Him. Even folks driven by duty and gasoline can find grace in the preached Word, congregational singing, sacraments, and fellowship.
4.) Ask “Why” and get to the heart of the matter.  Don’t simply make your kids go without any explanation. Don’t simply just let them stay home from church whenever the want. Both will produce people who are either bitter or see no need for the church. Either of those methods completely ignore the gospel. But they are in fact easiest options in this saga, and so the tendency is to deal with it on a simple black-and-white level. Do or don’t do. Very Yoda-esque, just not gospel-esque.
Instead of saying, “We’re going no matter what” or “We’re going when we/you feel like it,” why not ask the deeper question: why don’t you want to come to church? Sounds like a simple question, but simple questions are often windows into our souls. 
Here are some excuses which have come up in my discussion with adults and youth over the years on why they didn’t want to come to church.
1.) Boring. Why is something boring? Having something not pertain to your life as a teenager makes things boring very quickly. But as a parent, you have the opportunity to follow up after the sermon and talk through the points, illustrations, gospel connections. Even if the pastor doesn’t do a good job speaking to teenagers (which ours does), you as a parent can play a big role in discussing and applying the sermons. It also sets you up to talk to bigger issues. Boring is the response of the soul that doesn’t really get the gospel. No one was ever bored with Jesus. Ever. They loved him and worshiped Him, or hated and tried to kill him. You never get to Jesus by simply a “come at all costs” or “just stay at home” mentality. Both stop short.
2.) Relationships. Sometimes interpersonal drama (I wish it were only the case with teenagers!) makes kids not want to come. There may be something more than “I just want to stay home.” Now you can apply the gospel to their relationships: forgiveness, peacemaking, truth telling, etc….I once heard an adult describe coming to church as “doing a dance.” This woman didn’t get the gospel. Even though the church was less than healthy, staying home allowed her to not apply the gospel to her situation. Perhaps she was right or perhaps it was simply her perception, but the gospel which tells her she is now in right relationship with God frees her up to not care what others thought of her dress.
3.) We want our kids to sense a “need” to come to church. Not that Jesus will like us more, but because we are dissatisfied with the substitute mini-saviors. Tell them, “Daddy needs to hear about Jesus big time. He desperately needs to hear about grace so that the mini-saviors begin to lose their appeal.” They’ll begin to see it’s not an obligation but a need.
4.) We also want them to want to come to church. Tell them, “Daddy wants to hear more about Jesus big time. In light of what He’s done, is doing, will do, I want to hear about Him and be among His people.” Tell them-if it is true-that Sunday morning is the high point of the week and that you hate to miss. Let them see and hear not only your need but your desire. They’ll begin to see it’s not an obligation but a delight.
In conclusion-which I know is not how you should conclude anything (but this was a bit of ‘stream of consciousness writing so I felt it necessary), don’t fall into the easy route of saying, “OK, you can stay at home,” or “You’re coming with us.”

Simply taking your kids to church every Sunday is not “doing all that we could do as parents.” When they don’t want to come, take pains to understand why. You will have ample opportunities to point them to Jesus, both to his commands and His promises. But you’ll miss out if you don’t take the time to ask the simply question, “Why not?”

Unknown's avatar

Why have an annual men’s camping/fishing trip?

by
The men of Redeemer headed for our 59th (creative license) annual camping/fishing trip. Due to my 2nd son’s birth, I missed the trip of two years ago, but have had the opportunity to go on the last two. Part of what excites me the most about these trips is that they are almost entirely planned by someone not named “Geoff” and therefore not dependent upon me. It’s always exciting to see guys take ownership of ministries.
On this last trip I really began to reflect upon why such a trip is really a ministry. And it doesn’t depend on your definition of “is.” I really think these trips play a part in all the discipleship, shepherding, and mobilization of men.
Let me explain.
Whether today’s folks like to hear it or not, women and men are just different. And so you if you are targeting men, you can’t do the same things you do for women and expect to get the same results. Often times men really need to get away in order to go deep. Women can have a brunch and get deep pretty quickly. Men can’t. There is something about getting away, getting out of town, and pitching a tent that brings out depth and openness. Men take a longer time to know and be known. But this certainly speeds up the process.
I learned things about guys who I thought I was pretty close to this week that I had no clue about. I learned about parents who had passed away young, sibling rivalries (and sibling violence-a guitar broken over the head of another!), family backgrounds, war experience, a common love for Belize. I learned of church backgrounds, what people were reading and how Tim Keller had connected with them (and not to eat a pound of hamburger meat in a 16 hour period). 
I briefly mentioned a book I’ve been reading In the presence of my enemies, and found out one of the guys was actually in the Philippines at the time of this missionary couple’s kidnapping. He even gave me some inside info.
None of this stuff had to be forced. If people love Jesus, and get together in such a setting, stuff naturally comes out and there is no need for a planned devotional time.

A shared experience draws men more so than a shared meal. I wouldn’t have learned half of what I had if we went out to eat, even on a regular basis. I like going to eat, and that’s a start, but men need relational help. We really do. This is a huge help in connecting people who would otherwise only have a surface relationship at church. Now that church relationship is enhanced. The lads may have little in common, but they have an experience now. When guys taste deep relationships, they want more. They are ripe to be plugged into small groups.

Maybe this is just as much true for women, but I think men profit to a greater degree from it.

With the glory of nature, I had the opportunity to worship God. With the glory of community, I had the chance to be know and be known, and then worship God in thanksgiving. And I needed it.
The fishing was OK, with lots of small fish and the monster small mouth bass that broke my line. But because of the two aforementioned reasons, I’m thankful for this ministry. So if you are one of the women who sacrificed or were willing to sacrifice a weekend away from your husband, I thank you. Nay, I salute you.
Unknown's avatar

Magic Mike, 50 Shades, and actually asking real questions

by
Perhaps a week or so ago, I came across an intriguing (the Jesuits taught us never to use the word “interesting,” but never suggested any alternatives!) article reflecting on the general issue of “Mommy Porn” in its specific expression through Magic Mike and 50 Shades of Grey
I commend the article to you, as a thoughtful and gracious resource to help women (though I think its helpful for men too) wrestle with in applying the gospel. Since God’s grace teaches us to say no to ungodliness (Titus 2:11-12), then we should not be surprised that the gospel, which gives real freedom, enables us to say no to certain books or movies. I was reading in Thessalonians 4 today and reminded him of God’s call to purity and abstaining from sexual immorality. Paul even reminds this group that “Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.”
It is no undocumented struggle that many men in the church struggle with pornography addictions. But to limit the struggle only to men looking at naked women is looking more and more foolish. Guys and gals don’t have to be naked in order to be objects of lust. For instance, one could look at a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue and not technically be looking at pornography. But the goal of looking lustfully on another woman not your wife is what is happening. 
When I was a youth director, I walked in the pastor’s office on two young gals looking at “hot guys” on the computer. They were fully clothed (both the gals and the “hot guys” that is). But what was the point? I can’t speak to what was going on in their heart, but I can speak to the tendencies of the human heart. I can ask the question, and I think I did-its been 12 years or so-how is that different than me looking at “hot babes” on-line? Whether an object of lust is wearing skinny jeans, jean shorts, no shorts, tankini, bikini, or no kini, the real issue is not what he/she is wearing but the heart of the observer.
Below are some of real questions that I think are overlooked in what we should/shouldn’t watch or how, or how much we should watch what we watch.
  • Are you going to that person/image to simply feel pleasure, meaning, purpose, release from a hard day? How much more so when that object feeds your lustful appetite? That is called an idol, and anyway you slice it-fellas or ladies-that is not good, because that is not God.
  •  “Why am I watching this?” Is it to look at “hot guys” and drool over them? Is it to be sexually stimulated by someone other than your spouse? I don’t see Jesus being OK with that. Do we really need a bible verse here?
If you can say that you are reading books, going to websites, staring at guys and girls and NOT doing so for sexual arousal and/or intimacy you should be getting from a relationship with Christ, your spouse, your church community, you may be OK (doesn’t mean it is wise though).
Clothes, no clothes (as in Magic Mike) are not the issue. The issue is you and what God’s will for you is: your sanctification (I Thess 4:3)
Now to apply the gospel, we have to get specific, don’t we? That always opens you up to the charge of being legalistic or pharisaical. But there are times when you need to stand up and say, “These are the issues, and to partake in such a movie/book/activity is nearly impossible to live consistently with the gospel you claim to believe.” I do believe this is such a time and am thankful for this bold young lass’s assessment.
There are also other times when things may not be as clear but the issue is still the same: why are you watching it, and does watching it move you to sin? This is a slightly different scenario where you can’t tell so and so not to watch something (pharisaical), but for you to watch something it would be sin (personal conviction).
For instance, I intentionally didn’t watch a popular show because of a certain lead actress (she just happens to be from WV). My friends could watch the same show and be OK, but I couldn’t. So I didn’t. I don’t say this as a pat on the back, but simply to show the fact that the problem is sometimes in the viewer.

Here’s a more recent example. I recently received the “Body Issue” of ESPN the magazine. I did open it up and saw a naked Patriots TE Rob Gronkowski holding a football over his ______. I almost vomited. But the pictures of women would have put quite different thoughts into my head. Amy suggested I throw it away and how could I not agree? You don’t have to throw away your “Body Issue,” but it wouldn’t be a bad idea to pose the question.

The scariest thing to me in the church as a whole right now is our relaxed sexual ethic. I’m not talking about being able to talk about sex, struggle through issues on premarital sex, bad sex, same sex attraction, etc…I’m talking about the fact that we have limboed our sexual standards so low that it seems we are competing with non-Christians. 
I wonder how often Christians actually ask the question: should I watch this (as opposed to “can” I watch this)? I’m more concerned about the question then the answers. If people honestly asked such questions, and allowed the gospel to shed light on the issues, we would be in a lot better shape. Challenging people to really ask the hard and heart questions will keep Christians moving toward holiness and away from both licentiousness and legalism.