Over at DesiringGod.org, John Piper has written another excellent article. This one is about my favorite subject, Prosperity Teachers. In it he lists five pleas to Prosperity Teachers asking them to stop their false teachings. Here is the first:

1. Don't develop a philosophy of ministry that makes it harder for people to get into heaven.

Jesus said, "How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!" His disciples were astonished, as many in the "prosperity" movement should be. So Jesus went on to raise their astonishment even higher by saying, "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." They respond in disbelief: "Then who can be saved?" Jesus says, "With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God" (Mark 10:23-27).

My question for prosperity preachers is: Why would you want to develop a ministry focus that makes it harder for people to enter heaven?

Why WOULD you want to develop a ministry focus that makes it harder for people to enter heaven??? We've been asking that question for years…and I think I know the answer: Because it sells better than the truth…which is quite despicable, in my book.

Anyway, I highly recommend reading the full article. I would especially like to invite the members of Any City Church to read it and send in a response. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

Let me know.

A new survey by Lifeway Research found that many young adults have stopped going to church. 

Seven in 10 Protestants ages 18 to 30 — both evangelical and mainline — who went to church regularly in high school said they quit attending by age 23, according to the survey by LifeWay Research. And 34% of those said they had not returned, even sporadically, by age 30. That means about one in four Protestant young people have left the church.

And why do young people stop going to church:

Among dropouts, nearly all (97%) cited life changes, such as a move. Most (58%) were unhappy with the people or pastor at church. More than half (52%) had religious, ethical or political reasons for quitting.

For myself, I don't go to church because the environment in most evangelical churches feels completely fake. It feels copied from the Willow Creek playbook. "How to waste two hours of your life and still be sanctimonious."

The best service I've been to in recent memories was a chatholic service in an urban area of DC. The worship was fabulous, and the sermon really spoke to me. I loved it! But I'm not Catholic, and I have little interest in converting (that child-sex thing and all), so I find myself still looking for a church that is real.

Recently, a church in Dallas Texas refused to hold a memorial service for a church member's brother, after finding out the brother was gay. The pastor, Gary Simmons, defended his decision this way:

High Point Church opposes homosexuality, and there was no way the church could host a service that appeared to endorse it, Mr. Simons said.

"Can you hold the event and condone the sin and compromise our principles?" he said. "We can't."

While I disagree that homosexuality is a sin, I'm down with letting churches preach what they want. (Unless, of course, they preach about tithing, and then I WILL RELEASE MY UNHOLY WRATH ON ALL INVOLVED!) …but I digress…. anyway, Mr. Simmons goes on to further explain the churches decision…

The issue was not so much that Mr. Sinclair was, from the church's perspective, an unrepentant sinner, he said. It's that it was clear from the photos that his friends and family wanted that part of his life to be a significant part of the service.

The pastor said that he could imagine a similar situation involving a different sin. Perhaps a mother who is a member of the church loses a son who is a thief or murderer, Mr. Simons said. The church would surely volunteer to hold a service, he said.

"But I don't think the mother would submit photos of her son murdering someone," he said. "That's a red light going off."

This, of course, begs the question, "Is homosexuality a victimless sin?"

Our Blogs BFF, Chris Snethen, is leaving Oregonlive and starting up his own independent blog called The Vig.

Here he explains his decision to leave Oregonlive:

Applying the principles of The Dip to my writing, things became pretty clear. There's no future in writing about politics. There are a ton of blogs out there focused on all things politics and mine was just another voice in the ether. I mean it was nice and all to be called the 19th most influential blog in Oregon politics earlier this summer (true story), but really…who am I kidding? There are others locally who's views I read and take far more seriously than my own. Besides, as I said back in May, there are only so many different ways I can say "this sucks, I'm voting for Obama." And really nothing has changed

So what to do? It's became clear I need to start my own site.

I've been reading Chris since 2003 when Oregon Live asked undecided voters to blog their decision making process for the 2004 Presidential Election. And I really identified with what Chris was going through. I'm convinced he has a great future in writing. So check out his new blog, I promise you'll like it:

The Vig 

Ok, on to Divorce. Le's see what Matthew 5:31-32 has to say on the subject:

"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.' But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery. (Matt 5:31-32)

Seeing as how this scripture falls closely on the heal of the "eye gouging" verse how do we interpret it? I'm not sure…let's look at what is said about Divorce in the other Gospels:

Mark 10:2-12

 2Some Pharisees came and tested him [Jesus] by asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?"

 3"What did Moses command you?" he replied.

 4They said, "Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away."

 5"It was because your hearts were hard that Moses wrote you this law," Jesus replied. 6"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 7'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, 8and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. 9Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

 10When they were in the house again, the disciples asked Jesus about this. 11He answered, "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. 12And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

Mark just complicates things for me…first we see that "the Law" written by Moses permits divorce, but then Jesus says "No. No Divorce for you" (and in this scripture he doesn't even give an out for "marital unfaithfulness"). So, who/what do we follow? The Law of Moses? The words of Jesus that say that we must follow that Law (Matt 5:19)? Or the teachings of Jesus in Mark that we just read? Let's skip ahead to Luke:

It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery". (Luke 16:17-18)

It seems a little contradictory if we are to take Jesus exactly at His words here in these 3 scriptures. Let's break it down:

• 1. There is a Law that says you can divorce,
• 2. Nothing will ever "drop out of the Law"
• 3. Jesus says Divorce = Adultery
• 4. Audltery is a sin

…hmmmnnnn…I guess he isn't really creating a new Law disallowing divorce here, He's just saying if you get divorced you are breaking another Law, but go ahead…by the way, the punishment for Adultery is death by stoning…who's first?  

In looking closer at these verses, it appears that in Matthew 5 Jesus says divorcing a woman causes her to become an adulterer (not the man) and the rest of the verses deal with re-marrying. Sounds like women are getting a raw deal here…this might make Jesus sexist…I'll let our resident feminists make that call though.

Here is another thought. If we are supposed to gouge out our eyes and cut off our hands if they cause us to sin, couldn't we apply that scripture to our spouses? Wouldn't it be better to sever a marriage if it were causing us to sin than for our "whole body to go into hell"? Maybe I'm just playing word games here.

To sum up what my interpretation of these scriptures are…I don't. I don't know what to do with all this…go ask a Bible scholar.

My personal opinion on divorce has always been this: God will not be pleased with you if you get a divorce…and God will not be pleased with you if you have a miserable marriage and only stay together because you are afraid of divorce.

Matthew 5:21-30

Jesus has just finished talking about fulfilling the Law and saying "…unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." He then goes on to talk about some specifics, starting with MURDER!!!! This is where (I think) he starts explaining the difference between the way the Pharisses hypocritically followed the letter of the law and the way we need to follow the essence of the law…for example:

You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, "Do no murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.' But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, ‘Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell. (Matt 5:21-22)

Simply avoiding Murder is not enough, we must avoid anger and name calling as well. (For those of you keeping score at home, I am currently 0-1 on this…it's the name calling, not the murder that gets me).

Moving on to Adultery, Jesus makes a similar statement

You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.' But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matt 5:27-28)

And I'm 0 for 2. Then JC throws us a little curve ball in verses 29 through 30

If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell. (Matt 5:29-30)

Now, if we are to take Jesus literally, as some have suggested, then I imagine we would all be blind, deaf, limbless, people rolling ourselves around…which then makes me wonder if it would be better for us to simply kill ourselves to avoid sinning…that is, if we really should take Jesus literally. Of course maybe Jesus is just "speaking in extremes to get his point across"…you tell me.

The next paragraph deals with Divorce, (a rather hotly debated subject within the church). I think it deserves a post of it's own, so we'll save it for later. Of course, just so I can get on the board…if we include Divorce the score is 1-2…I'm back in the game.

This warms my heart:

At 8 on a Saturday morning, just as the heat was permeating this sprawling Orlando suburb, Denise Kirsop donned a white plastic moon suit and began sorting through the trash produced by Northland Church.

She and several fellow parishioners picked apart the garbage to analyze exactly how much and what kind of waste their megachurch produces, looking for ways to reduce the congregation's contribution to global warming.

"I prayed about it, and God really revealed to me that I had a passion about creation," said Kirsop, who has since traded in her family's sport-utility vehicle for a hybrid Toyota Prius to help cut her greenhouse gas emissions. "Anything that draws me closer to God — and this does — increases my faith and helps my work for God."

Working for God by cleaning the environment. It's nice to see.

This text may a little bit over my uneducated head. In it Jesus mentions that "The Law" is not going away and that if you aren't more righteous than the Pharisees you aren't getting in to heaven.

17"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

So "the Law", as I understand it, is essentially the first five books of the Old Testament. If any of you have read those books you might recall some pretty crazy stuff. For instance (and I'm just flipping through the books at random…there is so much crazy stuff in here)

Exodus 22:5 Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death

Leviticus 19:19 Do not mate different kinds of animals

Leviticus 19:27 Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard

There are rules defining Clean and Unclean Food, Purification after Childbirth, Regulations about mildew including directions on how to cleanse from mildew, and many other interesting Laws.

If "the Law" stands until "heaven and earth disappear", what are we to do?

I'll tell you what I did…I cheated and read on ahead. In the following scriptures (Matthew 5:21-7:12) Jesus lists off a bunch of rules defining Murder, Adultery, Divorce, Oaths, Prayer, Fasting, and other things. Very interesting stuff which we will get to later.

In reading ahead, I found that that Jesus speaks a lot in extremes, overemphasizing a point to drive it home. I'd say Jesus is trying to balance out His message of Grace by making it very clear that there is a still a standard by which we should live. He ends by saying:

So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 7:21)

After first saying "Unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisee's…you will not enter the kingdom of heaven", He simplifies "the Law" that the Pharisee's followed so strictly, by saying "Do unto others…". It could be that Jesus is saying don't get caught up in the hypocrisy of the Pharisee's, who followed the letter of the Law but missed out on the bigger picture by being consumed with legalism… I'm not sure.

What I take from Matthew 5:17-21 is this: Jesus has come to offer a new way of Salvation apart from following "the Law", BUT He is not dismissing that Law in any way. We are still responsible to follow the essence of it which is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".

This makes me wonder why Christians and Churches spend so little time working to help those in need and instead focus mainly on themselves (see my previous rant here).

Which future New York City Pastor is still living in Portland Oregon because his home loan fell through for his house in NYC?

According to this Time article, ATM's are expected to become even more prevalent in churches. The IRS is requiring greater documentation on charitable contributions, and since ATM's leave an electronic record that fulfill this new requirement, more churches are expected to install them in their buildings.

Beginning with gifts given in 2007, the IRS will demand documentation for charitable contributions under $250. Once, all one needed was a diary entry to vouch for such donations. Specially designed ATMs at church will help document such spur-of-the-moment cash gifts, as well as planned giving. Also as a result of the new IRS rule, credit card donations and tithing are likely to increase too because such electronic fund transfers leave a paper trail.

How long before they end up in City Bible? A year. 6 months?