“Can any good come out of Nazareth?”…or Brownsville or Toronto or 312 Azusa Street?

‘Scrupe said: “I don't get it…God doesn't dwell in temples made with hands…And if we reduced that mindset to its most direct form, i.e., “I’m going to Brownsville Assembly to get God’s anointing from Billy Burke”, does it begin to sound just a wee bit insane (if not downright un-Biblical)?” 

‘Scrupe, I agree that Christians can too easily become obsessed with "anointed" people, places, churches and movements. I also agree that "God does not dwell in temples made with hands” (Acts 7:48-49). Nevertheless… 

I am not willing to go so far as to say that since God does not live in material temples, that all meetings in buildings will never experience his power or presence. In 1906, in Los Angeles, California, there was the Azusa Street Revival. Thousands visited this little run-down building on Azusa St. to see what God was doing.  I don't consider their interest or even curiosity wrong or automatically unnecessary. Tens of thousands have visited Toronto for the same reason. I was blessed to have gone twice myself and both times had a wonderful experience in input. 

After coming home, however, I felt it was my responsibility to take the blessing that I had received and share it freely with others (cf. Genesis 12:2). I knew that I should not horde the blessings by telling others that the only place that they could experience God was in Eastern Canada; neither did I dare to twist true visitation into emotional manipulation. 

Your post raises a legitimate question: Why does God seem to visit certain places at certain times and use certain individuals? I don’t know. God is sovereign and he does whatever he wants to do whenever and wherever and through whomever he wants.  “God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:3). 

Some people in Jesus’ day did not believe that any good thing could come out of the small town of Nazareth (John 1:46), but that did not stop God from having Jesus raised there and begin his ministry in the town (Luke 4:16; Matthew 21:11). 

Naaman, the leprous commander of the Syrian army, became furious when Elisha’s messenger told him that he would be healed only if he dipped seven times in the Jordan river (2 Kings 5:10-11). The Syrian commander replied with pride and indignance: “Are not the Abanah and the Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Could I not wash in them and be clean?” (I Kings 5:12). He walked away angry and unhealed (cf. Luke 4:24-27). 

Did Jesus not appear uniquely at one point in history? Did he not travel around specific areas like Galilee calling disciples and healing the sick? Was there not a special day of Pentecost in a particular upper room where 120 disciples were filled with the Spirit of God (Acts 2)? Yes, these were all time- and place-specific events.

Accordingly, if I had been living in those days, I would have made every effort to get to the mount or the plain or the desert or the city or the lakeside or Solomon’s porch in the Temple to be wherever Jesus was. I would not have cared where Jesus was teaching or doing the works of God; I would have wanted to have experienced or at least to have observed for myself his multiplying of the loaves, his raising of the dead, his anointed teaching, etc. I would have rented a donkey, if necessary, to get to the upper room before Pentecost so that I could have been a part of that spiritual outpouring. By attempting to get to the upper room with the other disciples before Pentecost, I would not necessarily be saying that I felt that God dwelt exclusively in that upper room. I would simply be saying that I would like to experience the divine visitation that Jesus promised was soon to come (Luke 24:49). 

Such efforts, in my view, do not automatically indicate carnality, “unbiblicalness,” or a lack of faith for God to do the same mighty deeds in one's own home or place. They can simply indicate a sincere spiritual hunger to personally experience a sovereign move of the Spirit wherever it is occurring.    

Jesus told his generation that many of them missed their time of divine visitation because they rejected him when he walked among them (Luke 19:44). I think that Christians can also miss out on spiritual blessings – throughout church history – if they hold too strict of a definition of who, what, where, when, why and how God moves or “should” move. Jesus’ words to Nicodemus come to mind: “The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit (John 3:8).” 

Theologically speaking, God brought revival in New England through Jonathan Edwards who was a Calvinist. He also brought great revival in England through John Wesley, who was an Armenian. God chose to use two men even though they held opposite theologies to bring revival and spiritual awakening to people. When the famous evangelist George Whitfield preached to thousands seated in open fields, it was no more or less spiritual or biblical a place or event than when John Wesley, founder of Methodism, sat in a chair or a pew in a society meeting on Aldersgate Street in 1738 and exclaimed, “I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ, Christ alone for salvation…”   

God was in both places because the true message of Jesus Christ was being preached – not because one was outside and the other was in a material building. We know that God does not restrict himself anymore to living in “temples made with hands,” but history, experience as well as the Bible show us clearly that God certainly chooses often to visit them – for the sake of those “temples made without hands” that are hungering after him on the chairs or pews inside (Luke 24:53).  

 

* * *

Suggested reading: Accounts of a Campus Revival: Wheaton College 1995, ed., T. Beougher and L. Dorsett; I Saw the Smithton Outpouring by Ron McGatlin; In the Latter Days by Vincent Synan; The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States by Vincent Synan; The Pilgrim Church by E. H. Broadbent; www.azusastreet.org

OBAMA AND SAME-SEX UNIONS

 So, has anyone seen the latest on Obama?

Here are the highlights. Pretty interesting stuff…

Barack Obama defended same-sex civil unions Sunday by referring Christians against the practice to look at Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, which he contends supports gay civil unions. 

"I believe in civil unions that allow a same-sex couple to visit each other in a hospital or transfer property to each other," Obama said, referring to unions that provide all the legal benefits of marriage but the title, according to Christian Broadcasting Network. "I don't think it should be called marriage, but I think that it is a legal right that they should have that is recognized by the state. 

“If people find that controversial, then I would just refer them to the Sermon on the Mount, which I think is, in my mind, for my faith, more central than an obscure passage in Romans,” the Democratic presidential candidate contends. “That's my view. But we can have a respectful disagreement on that." 

Media agencies speculate that Obama was referring to Matthew 7:12: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.” 

Obama was responding to a question posed by a local pastor during an appearance in Nelsonville, Ohio. Pastor Leon Forte had asked the candidate how he plans to win the support of evangelical voters who disagree with him on moral issues. 

But not all Christians were happy with Obama’s use of the Bible to defend civil unions.  Pastor John Barner, manager of pastoral care at Focus on the Family, said: 

"We are always saddened as evangelical Christians when others who identify themselves as Christians do not have the high view of Scripture that we believe is so important. We believe isolated portions of Scripture should not be used to justify a personal preference or a social position that goes in a different direction than the overall message of Scripture.” 

The FOTF pastor said the Scripture is “pretty clear” in defining and affirming that marriage is “an exclusive, lifetime relationship between a man and a woman.” 

“The compromising positions of these candidates are a disappointment to us as evangelical Christians,” he added. 

Sen. Hillary Clinton has also expressed her support for civil unions. 

“It’s a personal position,” she said in August, according to FOTF. “I am absolutely in favor of civil unions with full equality.” 

Denny Burk, professor of New Testament at Criswell College in Dallas, also criticized Obama for insinuating that the Sermon on the Mount should be given greater emphasis than the teaching in Romans about homosexuality. 

"The fact is that Jesus appointed Paul to bear his name before the Gentiles (Acts 9:15), many of whom were living in homosexual sin (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)," Burk said, according to the Baptist Press. 

"The passage in Romans condemning homosexuality was not obscure to first century readers living in the Roman Empire. It’s only obscure to modern readers when they are looking for biblical grounds to justify that which God condemns,” the New Testament professor argued. 

“As a matter of public policy, the best way to honor God’s intention for marriage and human sexuality is to keep monogamous, heterosexual marriage privileged in law,” he said. “Unfortunately, the policies of Senator Obama fall far short of the biblical ideal." 

Amid ongoing questioning about his religion, Obama defended his personal faith while responding to the Ohio pastor, saying: 

“I am a Christian. I am a devout Christian. I’ve been a member of the same church for 20 years. I pray to Jesus every night and try to go to church as much as I can.” 

The Illinois senator explained that he hasn’t been home on Sunday for several months now.

-joe 

Hood to Coast Relay

Sorry about the lack of posts lately. I am fairly busy at work, and there doesn't seem to be much religious news for me to write about.

Though, for some fun, listen to Dick Iverson's recent sermon at the City Church where he tries to promote Portland Bible College by mentioning a bunch of teachers that no longer work there or were fired by Frank Damazio. Also, when he starts listing all the great teachers, he deliberately cuts himself off as he's about to mention Frank Damazio. It's high comedy. And clearly, he is concered about the direction of that school.

However, I'm not here to discuss PBC. I'm here to discuss HTC. The Hood to Coast Relay. Basically, I have a group that is running the relay this August, and we have an opening for a couple more participants. So, I thought I would throw out an invitation to any of you runners who are interested in doing this.

If your idea of a great Summer weekend is cramming into a van with 12 other people and running in a 196 mile relay from Mt. Hood to Seaside, then email me and we can work out the details. My email is justin.morton (at) gmail.com. This invitation is open to anyone.

Thanks again to everyone who reads and participates on this blog. My intense anger and bitterness wouldn't be possible without you.

Stuff White People Like

I just found the greatest blog ever. It is called Stuff White People Like and is devoted to, you guessed it, stuff white people like.

Number 2 on the list is:

Religions their parents don't belong to:

White people will often say they are “spiritual” but not religious. Which usually means that they will believe any religion that doesn’t involve Jesus.

Popular choices include Buddhism, Hinduism, Kabbalah and, to a lesser extent, Scientology. A few even dip into Islam, but it’s much more rare since you have to give stuff up and actually go to Mosque.

Mostly they are into religion that fits really well into their homes or wardrobe and doesn’t require them to do very much.

So true.

Other stuff white people like includes:

Oscar Parties

- Having Black Friends

- Bicycles

- Having two last names

- Marathons

- Making you feel bad about not going outside

The blog could alternatively be called, "Portland, Oregon."

A little Jesus with your Coffee?

 ebemezer.bmp

The coffee shop I visit every day on my way to work (Ebenezers) just got a nice little write up in the Washington Post. And I thought I would share the love:

The shop is religious without being self-righteous and could easily be just another coffeehouse. It's in the finishing touches (the pastor's book on sale at the register, the Bible verses on the coffee sleeves) that patrons will find the preaching. Though it hardly feels like an imposition.

As someone who is admittedly ultra-sensitive about the use of Religion in everyday life, this place does a very good job of subtly spreading the message of Christ. The staff is friendly and kind.  The TV's are usually on ESPN or CNN. And you're just as likely to hear Amy Winehouse playing as you are to hear MercyMe.

All in all, it's a good example of how to spread the message of Christ without being manipulative. 

That and their coffee is really good. And they sometimes give me a discount.

Kingdom Giving

I just want to highlight a sentence from a new reader who defends City Bible:

They're not all about the money, just about Jesus!, although kingdom giving does need to be taught on, not so the pastors can get paid more money, but so the kingdom of God can be fully established.

Somehow, that statement makes me so sad. God does not need your money to establish His Kingdom, He needs your love.