Winter Preaching Series: Relationships and Sex

Given the wide and various assumptions and prohibitions many of us have experienced in the church when it comes to relationships and sexuality, we thought it pertinent to explore and unpack what God actually tells us.

This winter, we will begin a series entitled, "Relationships and Sex." As we have been prepping the teaching for this series, we wanted to make you aware that we'd like to answer questions that you might have, so we'll be saving two weeks to strictly answer questions that a) are already on your minds and b) come up during the study.

You may already have a plethora of questions and can begin asking immediately.

The series will include the following topics:
Manhood
Womanhood
Singleness
Sexuality
Marriage
Kids
Dating
Divorce

You can post questions to this blog (questions will not be answered on the blog) or fill them out anonymously on a connect card during a gathering.

Plant & Thrive

I cannot express enough gratitude for the influence and sharpening that I get personally and Missio Dei recieves through the Acts 29 Network. Their concern for the clear preaching of the Gospel and the attention and care for the men preaching the Gospel is top notch.

In February, Vintage 21 in Raleigh will host the Acts 29 bootcamp Plant & Thrive.

This bootcamp is required for all Acts 29 applicants and is helpful for anyone thinking about church planting, no matter your denominational affiliation.

Main sessions include speakers, Mark Driscoll (Mars Hill Church, Seattle), Tyler Jones (Vintage 21, Raleigh), Daniel Montgomery (Sojourn Community Church, Louisville), Dr. Wayne Grudem, and Dr. Andreas Kostenberger among others.

You can get more information including registration on the Acts 29 Network website.

I'll be there assisting with assessments and if you're thinking about going, would love to get a chance to dialogue about your plant.

Cal Thomas Endorses Missio Dei Church

Below is an article published last week by Cal Thomas, a famously known Social Conservative who is reiterating the very purpose for Missio Dei Church. Whether or not the typical Cal Thomas conservative opinion resonates with you, he is resounding many of the same things we have been talking about for the past two years. I've highlighted some of his most pertinent points.

RELIGIOUS RIGHT R.I.P.
on November 05, 2008
By Cal Thomas
Tribune Media Services

When Barack Obama takes the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, he will do so in the 30th anniversary year of the founding of the so-called Religious Right. Born in 1979 and midwifed by the late Rev. Jerry Falwell, the Religious Right was a reincarnation of previous religious-social movements that sought moral improvement through legislation and court rulings. Those earlier movements — from abolition (successful) to Prohibition (unsuccessful) — had mixed results.

Social movements that relied mainly on political power to enforce a conservative moral code weren’t anywhere near as successful as those that focused on changing hearts. The four religious revivals, from the First Great Awakening in the 1730s and 1740s to the Fourth Great Awakening in the late 1960s and early ’70s, which touched America and instantly transformed millions of Americans (and American culture as a result), are testimony to that.

Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed. The question now becomes: should conservative Christians redouble their efforts, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?

I opt for trying something else.

Too many conservative Evangelicals have put too much faith in the power of government to transform culture. The futility inherent in such misplaced faith can be demonstrated by asking these activists a simple question: Does the secular left, when it holds power, persuade conservatives to live by their standards? Of course they do not. Why, then, would conservative Evangelicals expect people who do not share their worldview and view of God to accept their beliefs when they control government?

Too many conservative Evangelicals mistake political power for influence. Politicians who struggle with imposing a moral code on themselves are unlikely to succeed in their attempts to impose it on others. What is the answer, then, for conservative Evangelicals who are rightly concerned about the corrosion of culture, the indifference to the value of human life and the living arrangements of same- and opposite-sex couples?

The answer depends on the response to another question: do conservative Evangelicals want to feel good, or do they want to adopt a strategy that actually produces results? Clearly partisan politics have not achieved their objectives. Do they think they can succeed by committing themselves to 30 more years of the same?

If results are what conservative Evangelicals want, they already have a model. It is contained in the life and commands of Jesus of Nazareth. Suppose millions of conservative Evangelicals engaged in an old and proven type of radical behavior. Suppose they followed the admonition of Jesus to “love your enemies, pray for those who persecute you, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit those in prison and care for widows and orphans,” not as ends, as so many liberals do by using government, but as a means of demonstrating God’s love for the whole person in order that people might seek Him?

Such a strategy could be more “transformational” than electing a new president, even the first president of color. But in order to succeed, such a strategy would not be led by charismatic figures, who would raise lots of money, be interviewed on Sunday talk shows, author books and make gobs of money.

Scripture teaches that God’s power (if that is what conservative Evangelicals want and not their puny attempts at grabbing earthly power) is made perfect in weakness. He speaks of the tiny mustard seed, the seemingly worthless widow’s mite, of taking the last place at the table and the humbling of one’s self, the washing of feet and similar acts and attitudes; the still, small voice. How did conservative Evangelicals miss this and instead settle for a lesser power, which in reality is no power at all? When did they settle for an inferior “kingdom”?

Evangelicals are at a junction. They can take the path that will lead them to more futility and ineffective attempts to reform culture through government, or they can embrace the far more powerful methods outlined by the One they claim to follow. By following His example, they will decrease, but He will increase. They will get no credit, but they will see results. If conservative Evangelicals choose obscurity and seek to glorify God, they will get much of what they hope for, but can never achieve, in and through politics.

(c) 2008 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.

Election Day

I wanted to remind/encourage all of you, who either vote or out of conviction (not laziness or apathy) do not vote, to proceed prayerfully. Bryan and I spent yesterday fasting and praying asking wisdom on behalf of our congregation and all of God's people.

Do not forget the words of St. Paul, who said, "There is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God" (Rom. 13:1). Remember that "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to (Jesus)" (Matt. 28:18). We need not put our hope in the election, but in Christ, who is seated at the right hand of the Father and grants His people true freedom.

If your guy does not win, it will be okay. If your guy does win, Jesus is still the Savior.

PS - I WAITED IN A LONGER LINE FOR MY FREE STARBUCKS THAN I DID TO VOTE - HA!

Human Slavery and Sex Trafficking

Our event with International Justice Mission was a tremendous success. We were pleased with the turnout and response at UNCA for Victor's presentation.

While he demonstrated the ugliness of human trafficking, we'd like to take a deeper look into some of its causes. Therefore, tonight, we will be screening the documentary, DEMAND produced by Shared Hope International.

The documentary features investigative footage of the dark and hidden world of sex traffickers, pimps and buyers. It exposes the roles that pornography and prostitution play in viscous crimes against our neighbors, even when the actions seem private.

We will be screening the film tonight at 7 pm at our building downtown 297 Haywood St., at the corner of Patton and Haywood, across from Hunter Volvo.

Because It contains graphic images, nudity and sexual content, the film is inappropriate for anyone under age 18.

Shocked by Grace

Our friend Carolyn is fighting cancer. About two weeks ago her kidneys shut down. She's now on dialysis and among other things is unable to walk. I spent some time with her at the hospital, just listening to her story and praying with her. I've since been following up and checking in.

Today I phoned her as I have a headcold and didn't want to risk getting around her while her immune system is not up to par. I called to listen and to encourage and to pray. As soon as she heard my voice, she began asking how I was feeling and praying for me, asking what she could do to help. She can't even get out of bed and her desire is to encourage and help. I was shocked at the picture of grace she painted for me.

I feel physically down, but spiritually loved. Thanks for praying for me Carolyn.

Sarah Palin and Point of Contention

The choice of John McCain to name Sarah Palin as his Vice-Presidential running mate was both stunning and politically brilliant. While the left wing is still dazed over the thought that perhaps he was choosing her to win over the Hillary Clinton supporters, my guess is that he actually chose her to prevail among the right wing camp; particularly, the right wing, conservative, evangelical camp. And triumph he did.

While prior to the Palin choice, I could get away with not supporting the Republican ticket among Christian social conservatives, I no longer have that luxury. I have been inundated with pro-Palin messages via email, facebook, etc. as if she were the Republican candidate for President of the U.S. all of which carry the message that if I don't vote for McCain-Palin, then I'm lined up with a Muslim terrorist who wants to kill my babies and eat them on national t.v.

What is so disturbing to me about this (besides the obvious absurdity) is that it seems to blindly follow partisan politics. Very few and far between are conservative evangelicals who even raise the question of the appropriateness of this choice. In fact, the first public statement I have seen on the issue was raised in an LA Times article just over a week ago.

Here's the point of contention: Is it really a God-centered, biblical family value to support a woman who has a teenager with a "crisis" pregnancy, a baby with Downs-Syndrome and two other daughters living at home, to neglect her role as wife and mother to advance a political career? And without a doubt, if she is going to effectively execute the office of Vice-President of the U.S., she will most certainly neglect the precious gift of being Mom. Perhaps we're seeing a little of that fruit in Bristol (Palin's 17 year-old, pregnant daughter) already at the governor level.

Men whom I greatly admire for their stance on the biblical, complementarian role of men and women have suggested that we compartmentalize and advocate that such roles are good for the church and the home, but that politics is a separate arena. I couldn't disagree more. Just as she cannot incise her home life from her political life, we cannot either. Perhaps Palin could offer glorious public service as Vice-President, but not during this season in her life.

Scripture unequivocally places family relationship as the priority. I am not raising the question due to a chauvinistic belief that women cannot work outside of the home, since Prov. 31 states that the virtuous woman does, in fact, work outside the home, but not at every season. And we are beholding a woman who is making political advancement a priority over her family, which according to Paul "has denied the faith and is worst than an unbeliever" (I Tim. 5:8).

I must caveat this with the fact that I'm not pushing a pro-Obama standpoint as there is much to his political agenda with which I prayerfully struggle. I simply ask, are we blinded more by a cultural expectation to vote Republican, no matter how unbiblical the choice or do we think more creatively (like third party write-ins). Wish I had more answers, but we're in a season where we should be asking tougher questions.

I post this with hesitation as I'm unsure of the willingness of evangelical Christians to dialogue...

Big Sweep Clean Up

Special thanks to all who came out and pitched in to clean up our section of the Swannanoa River.

Robbie & Kelly Greene
Josh & Sarah Lowe
Jackie Raffa
Michelle Robinson
Joshua Janis

From the pictures below, it appears that Robbie did the majority of the work (at least in front of the camera).

John 13: Part 2

The passages in John 13, 18, and 19 taken together seem to indicate that the Passover supper had not been eaten before Jesus was crucified. However, it is clearly taught in Matt., Mark and Luke that Jesus instituted the Eucharist after the Passover supper, which he consumed with His closest disciples. I suggested that the contradiction is only interpretive and that the text in John's account does not teach that Jesus was crucified before the Passover. Let's take a look at each verse:

1. John 13:1 - "Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that his hour had come...." This verse is not setting up the timeline of the footwashing, but is telling the time when Jesus knew that His hour had come. In the original language, the participle "knowing" (translated "knew" in the ESV) refers to the time when the knowing took place. In this case, "Before the Feast of the Passover." John was pointing out that the events about to take place were no surprise to Jesus. He knew them before they came. The context reinforces this. The second point will make this a little more clear, but if the footwashing took place "before the feast of the Passover," then it could have been before Jesus was annointed at Bethany. But that doesn't flow with the text.

2. John 13:29 & 18:28 refer to "the feast" and "eat the Passover." It is an interpretive error to force these versus to refer strictly to the day when the Passover supper took place. Passover was a 7 day Feast (Ex. 12, Lev. 23, Deut. 16:1-3), much like the other multi-day feasts throughout John's account. The Lamb's were slain and consumed (Passover supper) and unleavened bread was to be the feast for seven days.
In John 13, the disciples could anticipate (even after the Passover supper) that more would be needed to continue the feast, especially in light of how hastily the supper was planned.
In John 18, the officers and chief priests and Pharisees would not want to participate in anything that would prohibit them from continuing to participate in the Passover feast.

3. John 19:14 states, "Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover..." and Jesus is rejected by the chief priests and sent to be crucified. Again, the text is not stating that this was the preparation "for the Passover," and if you notice, "Preparation" is capitalized. The reason is because the Preparation day was for the Sabbath on Passover week (i.e. Friday). We get this explanation in several other passages (Mark 15:42, Luke 23:54 and even in John 19:31).

The only way to get the text to teach that the Passover supper had not taken place is to make some interpretive mistakes. Hopefully, looking at this a little more carefully will instill in your faith an uncompromising, steadfast hope in God's Word to us. It is reliable and without error and you can trust it.

Human Slavery

Missio Dei Church is joining up with InterVarsity Christian Fellowship and Montreat College to bring in Victor Butros of International Justice Mission to present his work.

We are also taking a look at the domestic problem of Human Slavery and Sex Trafficing by inviting Susan Hinz of the Hope House Project to present ways that we can get involved in assisting those who have been devastated by this horror.

The Hope House Project
International Justice Mission

John 13: Did Jesus Eat the Passover Supper or Not?

This week, we are approaching yet another controversial passage in John's account of Jesus' life, death and resurrection. A cursory read of a few passages seem to indicate that John, the beloved disciple of Jesus, didn't accurately record the details of Jesus' last night before his brutal murder, or that he changed the details so that he could emphasize a certain theology about Jesus.

If you consider the accounts in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke), it is very clear that on the first day of Unleavened Bread, the day when the Passover Lambs were sacrificed, that Jesus and His disciples ate the Passover supper the night before His arrest, trial, and crucifixion. The accounts can be found in Matt. 26:17-25 (which mentions the first day of Unleavened Bread, but not the lamb. This was because the Hebrew audience to whom Matthew was writing would know the details of the day of Unleavened Bread), Mark 14:12-21, and Luke 22:7-23.

When we arrive at John's account, several passages seem to indicate that the Passover meal is a day later. John 13:1 starts, "Now before the Feast of the Passover..." and then tells the story of the footwashing, the betrayal by Judas and the denial by Peter. In John 13:29, after Judas has left the supper, the disciples think that Jesus told him "Buy what we need for the feast," indicating that they had not yet eaten the Passover supper. A few chapters later, after Jesus had been arrested and was being taken to the governor's headquarters, those who arrested Jesus refused to enter, "so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover." And finally, in 19:14, John mentions that "it was the day of Preparation of the Passover" when Jesus is delivered to be crucified.

I am of the persuasion that there is no disagreement. Contradiction can only be found in interpretation, but not in the text. In the next post I'll explain how and why this works.

September Sessions

September was a busy month for Missio Dei Church. To bring you up to date (and to give you an excuse as to why I haven't posted anything for nearly 7 weeks), here's what's been happening.
1. We've moved into our new building and I have been praying through and writing out a theology of ministry to "walk-ins."
2. We've nearly doubled in attendance at our Sunday morning gatherings (around 80 or so adults in worship gathering)
3. We have been enfolding our people into community groups (60 adults committed and 5 groups around the city).
4. We did a four part series called "The Space Between" exploring our experience from the tree in the garden at Eden to the tree in the city of God.
5. We conducted a Free "Sale," which was a huge yard sale where we gave everything away for free to be a blessing to the working folks in the neighborhoods around our building. A tremendous success.
6. We conducted a baptism and baby dedication.
7. We are organizing a river clean up for this weekend and have a speaker from the Dept. of Jusice to present his work with the International Justice Mission at UNCA


It's been a busy month.

John 8: Part 4

Most of you have lost interest in this thread, but I am no quitter and I mean to finish sharing my thoughts.

Let me recap the arguments against the inclusion of the story regarding the woman caught in adultery at John 8.
1. The author couldn't be John because of the use of uncommon words.
2. Oldest collections of the text put it somewhere else in John, the NT, or do not include it.
3. No comments are made about the story from bible commentators in the first and second centuries.

The first argument was already concluded to be unsatisfying as it proved too restrictive to limit an author's vocabulary, fails to note that there are other places where the author uses unique word choice, and does not explain how the story fits so well into the context.

In dealing with the second and third arguments, it should be noted that by the time the Bible was being circulated as a whole (the 66 books of the OT and NT), the episode was included at its location in John 8 and was received as authoritative.
In the early 300's AD, Eusebius, a critic of Constantine's administration (he felt Constantine made it too easy to take on the name "Christian"), "the most eminent of early Church historians” and “usually discriminating in his evaluation of data” believes that this story is a part of John’s gospel and should be included in the text (Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A History of Christianity, vol. 1, p. 91-92). He equates it with a story that is told by one of John’s disciples (Papias) in other places.

St. Augustine explains why it is difficult to find the earliest copies of the story. He states, "Certain persons of little faith or rather enemies of the true faith, fearing, I suppose, lest their wives should be given impunity in sinning, removed from their manuscripts the Lord's act of forgiveness toward the adulteress, as if He who had said 'sin no more' had granted permission to sin." If the story was removed from the lessons, then early teachers would not make comment on the text.

Given the wide support for the historicity and the likelihood that the event took place, the fact that it follows the nature of Jesus' attitude toward sinners, the fit into the context, the tie to Papias (a disciple of the Apostle John), and the inclusion into the formal Scriptures, the burden lies with detractors to prove from where the story came, and why it became associated with the Apostle John and his gospel if it were not part of the original.

We follow the conclusion of William Hendricksen who writes, "Though it cannot now be proved that this story formed an integral part of the Fourth Gospel, neither is it possible to establish the opposite with any degree of finality. We believe, moreover, that what is here recorded really took place, and contains nothing that is in conflict with the apostolic spirit. Hence, instead of removing this section from the Bible it should be retained and used for our benefit” (Hendricksen, William. New Testament Commentary, The Gospel According to John, Vol. 2, p. 35).

The Urban South

Missio Dei moved into our new building at the beginning of July in time to gear up from a core group to a church "in the city, for the city." But moving from our West Asheville location to the edge of downtown is causing me to pray very differently.

Our building is located just two doors down from the Western Carolina Rescue Mission and the Labor Ready Building. We're around the block from the Salvation Army and from the ABCCM (a relief organization funded by many of the churches in Asheville and around the county). That said, most of the physical needs of the homeless can be met (food, clothes, work, a place to sleep), and yet, on nearly a daily basis, I've got people showing up needing some assistance.

I've not wanted to turn anyone down, but as the pastor of a church start up with little financial stability and as the father of three kids, I'm going broke trying to help.

Thankfully, we've got some big hearted creative thinkers at Missio and we are develop a system to build bridges and restore the dignity to many of our friends on the streets.

My confusion, anger, and frustration with the problem grew today on my walk from the building to meet one of our guys for lunch (only about a 6 block walk).

First, I ran into a guy whom I bought lunch for a few weeks ago. I was glad I could remember his name and when I asked him how he was doing, he tapped on his ear and walked away saying, "I'm on the phone." He was talking on a mobile phone with an earpiece. Too poor to buy food, but not to own a mobile phone.

Then, after about a block, I watched as three police darted across Patton Ave. to arrest a homeless man who was being fed by someone sitting outside a restaurant. The guy offering the food tried to defend the guy eating, but the police instructed him to "keep your mouth shut...sir."

About 2 blocks later I saw a guy sitting in front of the Sister's McMullen with a cup, begging for change. Having just watched a dude get cuffed for getting some food and knowing that it's against the law in our city to panhandle, I thought I'd let the guy know he needed to watch out. As I dropped some change into his cup I told him, "Be careful, the police are right down the street making arrests." At that point, the dude started yelling, "well then get going...I know what I'm doing...just because you're white and I'm black don't mean anything." I thought to myself, "your welcome."

All in all, I ran into a guy I helped who doesn't seem to need help, a guy who was being helped that constituted a crime, and a guy who resists when help is offered. All this in a 10 minute walk in the urban South.

Men's Midrash (מדרש)

I will try to conclude the John 8 post in the next week or so, but have been sidetracked by various events at Missio lately.

We have been planning to kick off the fall with our first "public" gatherings. Up to this point, we have been trying to develop a core group to develop a Gospel embracing community. Over the past several weeks, I have been developing our theology of community and Bryan and I have been teaching the various aspects of that community (possibly fodder for more posts on this blog). Two of the main aspects we have been developing include small group life and service to the city. Developing these has been time constraining, and has kept me from blogging, but as things are being put into place, I will have more time to publish.

That said, we are holding our first Midrash tonight at Barley's Taproom. Midrash is a Hebrew term that involves study, interpretation, and commentary. For four weeks, we will discuss various questions about Jesus. tonight we will ask, "Is Jesus the only God?" We've had a decent number of our guys sign up and look forward to some good discussion.

John 8: Part 3

I hope that the thought process has been convincing to either embrace the episode of the adulterous woman (the Pericope Adulterae or P.A. from hereon) and learn from it as inspired by God, or to remove it from the texts of Holy Scripture and consider a nice story, but not as authoritative in how we learn of God's grace and Kingdom. We cannot have our proverbial cake and eat it on this.

There are basically three arguments against including the P.A. in the text of Scripture:
1. Some of the words used in this passage are not common in the rest of the account (i.e. terms like "Scribes," etc.).
2. The most ancient manuscripts (collections of Greek texts) do not have the story, or it is placed somewhere else (usually at the end of John's Gospel or after Luke 21:38).
3. The earliest church Fathers (Ante-Nicene) do not comment on the story.

The focus of this post will address the first argument.

It is entirely indecisive to determine that a Scripture text was not written by a particular author simply because of the use of vocabulary. The same argument has been made by many to claim that Paul was not the author of the book of Ephesians. This is far too assumptive and restrictive as it limits an author to a particular vocabulary, style, etc. which is far too narrow in reality.

Probably the nature of the story required John to use words that he didn't use elsewhere. John includes a comprehensive view of Jesus life and ministry, from His creative activity to time before calling out the first disciples to time spent after the resurrection. Therefore, his vocabulary would be broad and many of the individual stories would include words not used in other writings (i.e. the way John uses "Word" to refer to Jesus is unique in Chapter 1, this does not mean he didn't write it).

Beyond this, the story fits quite well into the surrounding context. Consider the following:
a. While subtle, the story fits into the theme of light and darkness, as Jesus is presenting himself as light in contrast to the darkness of the woman caught.
b. The religious leaders are consistent in John's account as being more concerned with the Law of Moses than with broken people (consider the cleansing of the temple in John 2, the discussion with the Samaritan woman at John 4, the healing of the lame man at John 5...)
c. The teaching of Jesus is consistent with what he has been teaching in regards to the religious leaders. Namely, that they expect people to keep a law that they themselves do not keep (consider the argument about circumcision at John 7:19-24).
d. The character of Jesus that John is stressing is also consistent. Jesus is presented in this account as coming not "to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him" (John 3:17). Here he tells the woman, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more."

The grammatical argument falls far short of being convincing and we must dismiss it as a legitimate reason for doubting the authorship by the Apostle John and authority of the P.A.

John 8: Part 2

We are evaluating the inclusion of the adulterous woman episode in John 8. The main issue that must be resolved in determining the authority of the episode is whether or not this story is part of the original text that was inspired by God.

If the self-disclosure of God is contained in the Bible, then to ignore the words of Scripture is equivalent to ignoring God. But to say, "Thus saith the Lord," when God didn't say it, is taking His name in vain, a practice which is tragically too frequent various churches and is equally offensive as ignoring Him. This is one of the "big ten" rules that we're not supposed to break (it's number three).

Most theologians (i.e. the theologians who go by their initials) consider the event to be a true event in the ministry of Jesus. In fact, Stephen Harris, a fellow of the Jesus Seminar (a group of college professors who got together to vote over which sayings of Jesus could be attributed to the Jesus they considered "historical") says, "Whether this episode belongs in John or not, it is consistent with Jesus’ nonjudgmental attitude toward individual ‘sinners’ in all four Gospels” (Harris, Stephen. The New Testament, p. 180). Harris seems okay with the text because it promotes something he wants Jesus to be, "nonjudgmental." However, we don't have the luxury (or perhaps the audacity) of voting on which texts are authoritative and which are not. It would be a better practice to simply reject the Scripture as authoritative at all, rather than picking those teachings that we like best (I realize that people do this practically all the time, but that does not mean it is a good practice and we all could stand to repent on this one).

Determining whether or not the episode took place in the life of Jesus is superfluous and is not the issue. John tells us at the end of his account that, "There are many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John 21:25).

If the episode was not in the original text, then it cannot be said to be Inspired by God and it is not useful for preaching and teaching as a source of authority. It should be demoted from the text into a footnote or removed entirely.

In the next post, we will take a look at the arguments against including the adulterous woman episode and whether or not they are strong enough to constitute removing it from the text and we'll look at the arguments for inclusion....

John 8: The Issues

At Missio, we believe that the Bible (the 66 books comprising the Old and New Testament) were verbally inspired in their original languages. While some teach that God was directly involved in the translation of these copies into English (i.e. the King James Version), we do not. But we believe that the texts, in their original form are inspired by God and seek translations that preserve the original form.

Thus, John 8 presents a big question. If you have a copy that is worth reading, it will note that the episode involving the adulterous woman brought to Jesus is not found in the most ancient copies of the text. Untold amounts of ink have been spilled speculating on this issue and because it directly effects us in the study of the Gospel according to John, we are looking into this matter.

At Missio Dei, we utilize the English Standard Version (ESV) for teaching and preaching. In the spirit of the NASB, the ESV follows a word-for-word translation of the original languages and in the spirit of the NIV translates it into a readable format. This seems to be a good corrective for the often difficult syntax of the NASB and the idea-for-idea translation of the NIV.

At John 8, the ESV includes in the text, "The earliest manuscripts do not include John 7:53-8:11." This poses a big problem for our view of Scripture and our approach to the text. If it is not an original part of John's Gospel, should we view it as the authoritative word of God?

Many conservative scholars including B.B. Warfield and A.T. Roberston exclude the passage from John, but consider it authoritative. In fact, D.A. Carson (there must be something about writing theology books that allows one to drop his name and go by initials), a scholar whom I lean upon heavily, writes, "Modern English versions are right to rule it off from the rest of the text (NIV) or to relegate it to a footnote (RSV)…. On the other hand, there is little reason for doubting that the event here described occurred” (Carson, D.A. The Gospel According to John, 1991, p. 333).

This approach seems too good to be true and severely untested for my taste. If this is not an original text, then I cannot say with confidence that it is inspired and authoritative. While I respect the work of these men, I do not embrace this approach to the text. And, for those of you in the Missio Dei community, you are aware that I preached from the text and consider it to be authoritative. I will explain further reasons why in a later post....

A29 Pastor's Retreat

I can't say enough good about our retreat in Vail. The accommodations were superb, the time spent with brothers "in arms" was unbelievably uplifting, and since Shannon and Evangeline came, I got to spend time with my girls.

Probably the biggest lessons I'm taking away from the retreat (though there are too many to recount), are two. They came from Mark Driscoll's talk with us this morning.

1. Bitch less and pray more
2. Be careful who you're shooting at

Is John 8 part of John's Gospel?

In three weeks, after the move into our new building, I will be preaching in the first story of John 8.

Much debate surrounds the inclusion of this text in the English Bible. In the coming days, I will post some thoughts on how we should approach the passage.

Something to Do

If you're looking for something to do, tonight kicks off Downtown After 5 on Lexington Ave. at I240. There is food and drink and free jazz music.

Downtown After 5 is a monthly event sponsored by the Asheville Dowtown Association.

Many of our favorite restaraunt vendors will be on hand as well as a majority of our favorite local microbreweries.

Organic Community

Church planting for Missio Dei is not the development of a Sunday morning worship activity. Rather, it is the development of a community that is shaped by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As such, we've been doing a considerable amount of praying and reading on the development of community.

In a very short time and in many ways, I've witnessed tremendous failure and moderate victory as God uses me to develop a gospel-centered community. But I am always looking for refinement and growth. This lead me to read the book Organic Community by Joseph Myers.

Overall, some very helpful questions were asked, but as is often the case in the "Emergent Village," when conclusions are made, they are often over-reactionary in nature. This treatment is no exception.

Myers has an either/or attitude that comes across as arrogant and downright untrue. He presents several false dichotomies in an attempt to welcome a new way of thinking.

While there were several helpful tools that I was able to pull from the book, I'd like to see a more synthesized approach to community. One that doesn't guarantee success if you follow certain prescribed methods, nor look at suspiciously every method prescribed as if it were evil and oppressive.

Tax Rebate and Good Stewardship

I am very disquieted in my soul about the Economic Stimulus rebate the US government is poised to disseminate beginning this week. Most of us (Christians included) are not thinking much beyond "What can I get for myself with this free money," and that troubles me.

I recognize that the purpose of the rebate is to give a boost to the economy by encouraging spending. Perhaps this will work, but perhaps not. If I decide to put the money in a savings account, am I giving to Caesar what he requires?

Yet, if I give to Caesar, and I put the money into the economy by spending on, say, a flat screen tv, am I giving to God what is God's?

Perhaps, the most Gospel oriented thing we can do is to buy something for another's sake and not be selfish and greedy, like we are most of the rest of the time. Or is there enough Gospel pictured by making an offering with the money and spending a portion giving thanks to God for the bountiful provision?

Thoughts?

New Direction

I'll be taking the blog in a new direction over the next few months. In the past, I've used the blog as a sounding board of sorts to process ideas and occasionally rant about...whatever. I would like the blog to serve as a tool for growth in understanding how the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth has bearing on modern life and culture. Therefore, I will be using the blog to supplement sermons, counseling sessions, classes, etc. When it seems like I can't fit ideas into the time frames I have when I meet with people, I will do my best to articulate them here. Perhaps when we kick off the new Missio Dei Church website, we can have others join me in sharing their thoughts.

Baseball Season

I've lived in the South for almost 12 years and have only found a handful of baseball fan buddies in all that time. By fan, my standard is one who enjoys watching the games. Unfortunately, when we moved to Asheville, we moved away from those guys.

So now, with baseball season underway, I'm going to go where the fans are made. I will be coaching my four year-old's t-ball team. Spring training gets going tomorrow and the games begin in two weeks. My purpose and goals for the season are to make it as much fun for the players and parents as I possibly can.

Sports are an often overlooked and under-rated tool for development. Sports teach many biblical values like community (learning how to function as a team), accountability, setting priorities, humility, etc. In fact, Brian Kilmeade (one of the obnoxious guys on FOX and Friends on the Fox News Channel) wrote a book that I read several years back entitled The Games Do Count. He relates the role sports played in very prominent cultural figures and how various aspects of sports shaped their lives.

So this Spring, our family will pack into the white whale (our minivan) and head out to the ballpark to celebrate my four year-old's development. And perhaps we'll homegrow a baseball fan, because the Braves are playing the Mets and the Braves have not started their season well thus far...and I need someone to cheer them on along with me.

Men's Night

Join the guys of Missio Dei Church every first & third Thursday at Barley's Taproom on Biltmore Ave. We hang out on the second floor to shoot pool, throw darts, enjoy a pint and discussions of theology, politics and life. The next Barley's night is this Thursday between 5 and 8.

The Reason For God

Tim Keller released a book earlier this year entitled The Reason for God. Below, he gives an explanation of why he wrote it.




Perhaps this would be a good resource for you. For more on the book, check out the link The Reason for God.

We're Moving

For the past several months, our community has been renting space from a Baptist Church in our West Asheville neighborhood. While it has worked out "okay," it has not been an ideal situation.

In Jan., I caught wind of a downtown congregation that was dissolving and contacted several people to find out what was happening with their building. They are doing good things with it and we wanted to join them in keeping it a multi-use facility and continue the worship of God in their "sanctuary."

After several months of proposals and discussions we have secured use of the building to house our offices and worship space. We are elated at this move as it will allow us to move out of our core group phase and into a public worshipping community. Please continue to pray for us as we are seeking to bring the gospel of the kingdom of God to the people of Asheville.

We will continue to meet as a core group in West Asheville and in July, we will make our move into the new location at the corner of Patton and Haywood St. downtown.

Thanks!

I want to give an extra special thanks to folks that are part of our Missio Dei Church community.

I spent Holy Week taking care of my boys while my wife traveled up to Cincinnati to help her parents as her mom was recovering from Emergency surgery.

Our people pitched in to help so that I could prepare to preach for a group at UNC-Asheville on Tuesday and prep for our Passover Seder for Holy Thursday. I wouldn't have been able to minister without God's people ministering to me. Our people continually checked in on us and prayed for us.

It's great to see that folks who just months ago were total strangers have, in the name of Christ, very quickly gelled into a believing community that behaves like a family. Thank you my brothers and sisters.

Vintage Jesus

One of the fringe benefits of being part of a great network like Acts 29 is the resources. Mark Driscoll, the founder and president of the Acts 29 Network, of which Missio Dei Church is a proud member, has just released his latest book, Vintage Jesus. I received my copy early this week and have been thoroughly enjoying it.

Vintage Jesus offers a fresh, winsome, down-to-earth look at the real Jesus. One doesn't need a Masters degree to unpack the bold truth in the book.

Let me whet your appetite with a quote from chapter two, "How human was Jesus?":

Jesus was a dude. Like my drywaller dad, he was a construction worker who swung a hammer for a living. Because Jesus worked in a day when there were no power tools, he likely had calluses on his hands and muscles on his frame, and did not look like so many of the drag-queen Jesus images that portray him with long, flowing, feathered hair, perfect teeth, and soft skin, draped in a comfortable dress accessorized by matching open-toed sandals and handbag. Jesus did not have Elton John or the Spice Girls on his iPod, The View on his TiVo, or a lemon-yellow Volkswagen Beetle in his garage. No, Jesus was not the kind of person who, if walking by you on the street, would require you to look for an Adam's apple to determine the gender.

Men & Women: Similar, but NOT the Same

I've been hanging on to this resource for some time. I'd like to introduce you to Wendy Alsup. Wendy and her husband Andy were members at the South Carolina congregation that helped to plant Missio Dei Church before moving out to Seattle and becoming a part of Mars Hill Church. Wendy is now a deacon at Mars Hill Church and has a tremendous resource in the form of a blog. Check it out at Reforming the Feminine.

Awakenings

So, it's been a crazy few months since my last post. Things have been unbelievably busy to say the least.

The good news is that Missio Dei is capable of paying me a full time salary (at a reduced rate for the next six months to one year, but full-time nonetheless), and we are looking at moving into our own building in June. Pray that things keep going in a positive direction.

We have published a new community blog for lent season 40 Day Journey.

Peace