Blog

by Nathan Buck

Editor's note: We'd like to thank our readers for the consistency of helping this blog to keep growing and growing. We so appreciate you. Here is a post we shared in the recent past that we hope you enjoy reading again.

I am still a fan of Star Trek, Star Wars, and many other sci-fi related storylines. Yes, I can quote specific lines, moments, and character references, as well as pick out the “nods” to series prequels, historical canon, etc. All that to say, when it comes to wondering about aliens and life on other planets, I started asking what the Bible had to say about that when I was a teenager. It was one of the questions that often caused me to doubt God’s existence and the point of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection.

As a teenager I discussed this at length with the pastor of the church I started attending. He asked me, “What difference would it make if there was life on other planets? What would it change about God’s relationship to you?” It was a great question in that it focused me on why I wanted to know and what assumptions I was making. Part of asking that question was expressing a doubt about God’s existence and the validity of the Bible. Then he took me to Genesis 1, and asked me, “What did God make?” My answer, of course, was “everything.” And he said, “So, whether there is or isn’t life elsewhere isn’t really the question. The question is who made it and who is in charge. If it’s God, then we need to take His Word and apply it in our relationship with Him and let Him reveal what we need to know as we need to know it.”

That was a great start to answering the question, by refocusing on what’s important. As I grew in my relationship with God, I discovered Psalm 8, Hebrews 2, and most significantly Colossians 1. Now, just to be clear, I am not lifting these from their context, but I am drawing conclusions from what these passages do teach in their context. The Bible never speaks of life on other planets directly, but these passages do clearly make statements that should inform our understanding of life in the universe. Another point of clarity for those who do word searches of the Bible is that you will find the word “alien” in the Bible, but it is always referring to people on earth from other nations.

Psalm 8 explains how God created humanity and where we fit in the realm of all creation, and Hebrews 2 takes that understanding and relates it to Jesus. Both explain that we are God’s creation, given honor and glory, and although our form is a little lower than the angels, God has put us in authority over creation. That is an important affirmation. We tend to overlook our God-given place and authority in creation and seek alien life forms when we don’t believe that God created ALL of this universe for us. We seek out alien life when we struggle with the idea of being ‘alone’ in the universe, again because somehow 6+ billion people and God himself are not enough to satisfy our loneliness, sense of belonging, or purpose. We seem to enjoy the idea of other cultures, other humanoid inhabited worlds, and other intelligent species typically for two reasons: because it is entertaining fantasy, or because it gratified some longing that ‘there must be more.’

Colossians 1:15-20 puts a rather clear and precisely focused point on the entire issue. Read the passage and reflect on it. Look at how specific the language is:

• ALL things are made through Christ, and for Christ. 
• In Him all things hold together. 
• JESUS IS the image of the invisible God. 
• He is before all things.
• In Him all things on earth and in Heaven are reconciled through Him.

So, if He is THE image of God, and we are made in the image of God, and all things are made through Him and for Him, then it stands to reason that any sentient life anywhere in the universe would be humanoid and share the same attributes as us. And if there are other worlds inhabited by humans, and ALL things in Heaven (meaning the heavens/universe) and earth are reconciled through Him, then that means they have the same story as us - fallen by choosing sin and separation from God, and needing rescued, redeemed, and reconciled to God through Jesus. This also means Jesus then would have been born, walked among them, died for their sin, and resurrected to reconcile them to God forever.

Did Jesus die on multiple planets over and over again in their history? Romans 6:10 quenches this idea by stating that Jesus died “once for all” - meaning “once for everybody at all times.” So, is it possible that he lived simultaneously on multiple planets, and was sacrificed and resurrected at simultaneous moments on all planets? I find that unlikely and not genuine to the understanding the Jesus was fully present and fully involved in His earthly ministry and His sacrifice on our behalf. It wouldn’t be an atoning sacrifice if Jesus wasn’t really present in the flesh and didn’t really die.

So, what does the Bible say about space aliens or life on other planets? Directly, nothing. Indirectly, a couple of things:

• Seeking life on other planets is a reflection of our pride, insecurity, or denial of the evidence of the universe and earth as a created and intentional place for human existence.
• Seeking life on other planets is a denial of Jesus’ significance and our significance to God.
• There is no dynamic of the universe or life that is separate from God, and all of it holds together and exists because of Him.
• Humanity is God’s treasured creation, and He did ALL of this to express His love for us, His creativity toward us, and the lengths He would go to in making a place for us to live to the fullest of the potential He gave us.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

It's no secret that young adults have been leaving congregations across the U.S. for some time. While certain mega-churches have attracted young adults with the many programs they offer, the decline is generally across the board. The reason for the decline is explained in 6 key areas that this study from Barna Research reveals.

I don't intend to unpack the study completely, so please read through it for context. I do want to connect this study to something important for followers of Jesus to consider. If you look across the 6 reasons listed, you may notice two rather glaring threads of consistency. The first thread is that ALL of these reasons for leaving are relational at their core. Yes, we can discount the "me" focused complaint, but we cannot dismiss the fact that these reasons for leaving stem from a relational disconnect. Essentially, these young adults are complaining there is no relational culture of "know and be known," which comes from cultivating attitudes and actions designed for understanding one another. The U.S. Church may have illusions of this with the coffee culture, informality, and small groups, but at the heart of community there are walls around truly being connected to one another on a personal level.

This shouldn't be a surprise when we look at young adults, who as a whole are trending more liberal than conservative. This is not because they are trending that way, but because the church has developed "systems" to grow church programs, without maturing people to be fully developed followers of Jesus. That takes one-on-one relationship, mentoring, and intentional investment in one another's lives – in short, relationships.

It may be easy to make excuses about the "cell phone" generation who cannot have an eyeball to eyeball conversation, but seriously, who allowed that to happen? Who allowed the internet and the media to become the primary sources of life learning and information for an entire generation? Where was the Church, when an entire generation of young people were being entertained into indoctrination of the world? The Church was busy clamoring for attention, building its platform to compete on an entertainment level to try and hold their attention. And the sad reality is, they saw the shallowness of the world's entertainment and the self-interested nature of worldly programming. They learned it, and now they see it clearly in the survival mode of the U.S. Church.

My hunch is that young adults long to see that the love and power of God is REAL. But, the mechanisms of the Western Church and the insecurity of Christians keep validating these 6 perspectives.

OUCH!! Does that strike a nerve? How can I say we are insecure? Well, aren't we? Think about it. Why do we need bigger shows on weekends and more programs to satiate attendee demands? Why are we concerned about declining numbers and closing church buildings? Why are we "raising money" for ministry from the people we should be ministering to? Why are we so uncomfortable disagreeing with someone and yet remaining a friend and loving them? Why are we unable to sit eyeball to eyeball, one-on-one, and invest in the life of someone who is trying to figure out what this whole Jesus thing is all about? Why do we act as if the life and the power of the Church originates in our creativity, consumer appeal, emotional experiences, or business strategies?

What if the Church demonstrated what we see in Acts? What if people being healed, addictions being broken, lives being completely changed, and demonstrations of God's power and presence were the norm in the Church? What if we stopped sensationalizing emotional experiences of "spiritual drunkenness," we stopped trying to win with our intellectual prowess, and we let God's true nature and power be seen? What if we fasted and prayed for our nation and our politics instead of bashing and complaining? What if we held our tongues, held out our hands, and with every ounce of strength we have, centered our attention on God's presence and purposes for each moment? Would we be debating the morality of our politics and obscuring good while pandering for political points? Would we be trying to make the institutional church survive? Would we be quibbling over these 6 reasons young people are leaving? 

Certainly not. This brings me to the second thread that is obvious in the 6 reasons: our culture is primed for a movement. In the midst of all the divisive rhetoric and vitriol, in the midst of the verbal jousting that covers for empathetic impotence, there is a longing for something to believe in. The surest sign from all the impotent chattering in our culture, and from all the disillusionment with the Church, is that people want someone or something to believe in. The harsh criticisms and the rhetoric have power because they expose the shortcomings and valid reasons to not trust your life to the cultural 'saviors' we have in politics and churches. 

So, how are we primed for a movement? The good news is that Jesus hasn't changed, and His power isn't diminished. The good news is we have an entire generation wired for one-on-one relationships and horizontal connections with their peers, like few times in human history. In this culture, if we would do what Paul entrusts Timothy with in 2 Timothy 2:2, we may see a shift we haven't seen for a very long time. We may see a true reviving of people through faith in Jesus Christ.

In that passage, there are four generations of believers represented - Paul to Timothy, Timothy to trustworthy learners, and trustworthy learners who teach others. This isn't just education and information. This is discipleship in the midst of sharing life together - intentionally growing in relationship and understanding with God, as we relate to one another. What Paul taught Timothy could not be done in a Sunday School class, or an hour a week in a classroom with a curriculum. This was in-the-trenches living with God and for God. That is something different than what our U.S. Church culture has been producing.

If you want to help turn the tide and light a match for God's movement in our culture, I highly recommend the tool Small Circle, created by Steve McCoy. Its available as a free app for Android or iOS, or as at-cost workbooks available from XChange.

The large gathering of believers has value, and small groups have value, but they cannot replace the necessity of fulfilling the Great Commission, face-to-face and side-by-side.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

If you didn't read last week's blog post, please click here to do so before continuing.

When I went to the doctor a few years ago and complained of abdominal pain and spasms, the doctor checked my bowels, my muscles, and my lower digestive organs to see if there might be issues with any of them. Because I am male, these were the standard things to check. If I had been female, my doctor would have considered my symptoms differently and checked my reproductive organs as well as asked me about any abnormalities in my cycle. The same complaint from a male or female prompts different responses regarding diagnosis and treatment, because each is different and distinct. In fact, over 6000 genes in our bodies express themselves directly related to our sex. Biologically, sex is not fluid. Classically, sex has been equated with gender as one in the same. This is why psychology has maintained for a very long time that those who believe they are male when their sex is clearly female, or vice versa, had gender dysphoria. Simply stated, it’s a psychological confusion about their gender.

Modern psychological trends are attempting to re-write the definitions and standards around this topic to separate the idea of gender from sex - making "gender" a perceptual norm and "sex" a physical norm. By doing so, there can be support to set aside the classic diagnosis of gender dysphoria. Why? Because it presents this disconnect as abnormal (broken) and indicates that treatment to helps realign perception with biological reality should follow. In the new methodology, gender dysphoric separation in psychological perception is validated as normal (not broken). Counsel given under this method supports changing physical reality to match perception through gender reassignment.

I explain all of this not to engage in debate about the topic specifically, but to point out the shift in assumptions regarding what is broken or not broken, and what is helpful or not helpful. With the rise of relativist morality, the self-centered determination of reality has been promoted as normal and good. In other words, if it feels good, do it; if it's right for you, do it. The problem is there is no objective standard to settle conflict in this way of thinking. Even "social contracts" fail, whenever it is more beneficial to an individual to no longer honor the contract than to keep it. Everything becomes based on our perception of what is real, rather than any evidence, fact, commitment, etc.

Here's another way of seeing this. The expression cogito ergo sum ("I think therefore I am"), was originally meant to express consciousness. It was an expression of what we can be certain of, even in the midst of doubt. Descartes coined the phrase while trying to explain that in the face of uncertainty, our ability to doubt and think about our doubt is an expression of the certainty that we really exist. Ok, I know that is deep stuff. But look at this subtle shift I can make to that quote.

What if I said, "I think therefore I am," was a statement to support that I control my own reality? What if I said, "my thinking determined that I am," or "my thinking creates my reality"? I would be taking Descartes’ proof of existence and twisting it into a justification for bending my physical reality to how I think, which would be a very different focus and result for his statement. I would be borrowing the credibility of Descartes’ legitimate proof and turning it into a statement of my assumption. My assumption has glaring holes that Descartes would never agree with, the first and most obvious being that I have no real control over my reality - thinking a thing to be true or factual doesn't make it so. This is what is happening constantly in our culture right now. Elements of fact or truth are loaded into political statements, pop science, media stories, etc., and are then layered with perceptions and beliefs that people desperately want to be real. Many of these statements attempt to validate exceptions as normal and make what is accepted as normal to be evil or oppressive by nature just because it's the most prevalent. The ultimate goal behind all of this is power and control, and it stems from the thinking that we can force reality to become what we think it should be. This is the heart of vanity and the foundation of all human conflict.

Here is the counter story. Humanity was created to live fully in the design God gave us, in His image and with gifts and abilities that display His character and nature. We decided to take our lives into our own hands and go our own way. The consequence of our decision was separation from God and an inability to live up to the design and image we had been given, as well as an inability to control the consequences for our shortcomings (Genesis 1-3). Our design had been made to function in relationship with the one whose image we reflected. Apart from that relationship, from our own desires, our existence and example became counterfeit. Humanity, apart from God, is broken and sick. Our sickness is our desires to satisfy ourselves, and it continues our brokenness, just like a virus that keeps evading our immune system. If we do not acknowledge that brokenness and seek correction, healing, redemption, and/or rescue, we will become more sick. Or worse, we will recover from this sickness and be vulnerable to an even greater sickness that follows.

I encourage you to read what James had to say in the very first chapter of his letter to the early believers in Jesus. Reflect on each verse and write down your first thoughts as you read through the verses. Then go back and consider how you respond to verses 22-25. Do you adjust your thinking to the reality and the standards God has given, or do you try to adjust God to your thinking? Have you accepted the world's perceptions of what is or is not broken, or are you willing to see your own brokenness honestly and seek God's help?

His promises to Israel are still true: I will rescue you, I will free you, I will redeem you, and I will take you in and protect you as my family. What started with God's promise to Israel and a hope from Israel for the world, Jesus Christ made true and available for anyone who will trust Him with their life.

Will you?

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

Recently, I battled a sinus infection that tried desperately to become bronchitis and pneumonia. From fever and congestion, to coughing, draining, more coughing and fatigue, the battle lasted over three weeks. During that time, my focus was on getting better. I knew I was sick, I took steps to fight the virus, and I focused on the hope that I would prevail and be well. This is common to all of us. Some of us fight with optimistic confidence in our journey to be well and some of us lament and talk about our sickness while seeking comfort, but we all take some form of action to be well again, because we know we are sick and something is broken.

This reality of our experience is being denied and aggressively silenced on many levels within our culture. The common cold is still accepted, but other more difficult and personal levels of brokenness and sickness are being "normalized" under radical ideologies. The intent is to make certain broken behaviors and dispositions "normal," and to vilify or outlaw the acknowledgement that there is something wrong. The goal? The same as it has always been: to "feel" ok. The difference? Facing brokenness to get well feels good because it is good to be restored and healed. Denying brokenness and promoting behaviors that mask it as "normal" may feel like relief temporarily, but the brokenness will continue to eat away at our body, mind, and soul - just like a virus - until we are so broken that wellness and healing seem impossible.

The knowledge that humans have brokenness in us, or as a part of our experience, has always been true. The need for healing, rescue, and redemption back to being healthy has also always been true. This is the basis of the four "I WILL..." promises God makes to Israel in Exodus 6:6-7. These promises are celebrated every year by the Jews at Passover as they remember their history and as they pray for these promises to apply to all people everywhere.

The context of these promises from God is important. We will look at them closer next week. For now, reflect on this question: "Where is the media and the world telling me things are normal or ok, and yet it still seems broken?"

Maybe you have a solid grasp on that. Maybe you don't see any place where this is happening. Let me prime the pump for some deeper reflection with additional questions:

* If the vast majority in any situation has a consistent set of norms based on biology, psychology, morality, etc., how can the exceptions to the major trends be called "normal"? And if we classify the exceptions as "normal" to that exceptional group, then what other factors are evaluated to determine if the exception has a good, unhelpful, or destructive divergence?

* If exceptions are "normal" and "good" just because they are divergent, then how do we evaluate climate change, the opioid crisis, sex trafficking, violence, isolation, gender and same sex attraction issues, biological expression vs. psychological perception, racial issues, etc.?

* If what is most prevalent is "evil" or oppressive, just because it is more present than the exceptions, then how do we determine when something has become too common and therefore can no longer be "good" because it excludes the exceptions?

Our ability to know right/wrong, good/evil, and truth/fiction, is all dependent upon being able to understand those things that are unchanging factual realities, and those things that are relative to perspective or experience. We then have to be able to take our changing perspectives or experiences and evaluate them in light of unchanging factual certainties. Where this gets messed up is when we change out facts for relative perspectives and skew what is good toward our experience. The tendency then is to ignore what is broken, or worse to make it normal and good. Our aversion to admitting our own faults and flaws comes from vanity, and vanity will do anything it can to look good in the mirror of public opinion.

If we cannot grasp our own brokenness, and we believe our faults and flaws are normal and to be celebrated, what harm could that do?

Continued next week...

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

Please read last week's blog post before continuing with this one, if you haven't already.

We are helping the adolescence of tyranny every time we pick up our tribal issues, and equate them to Jesus' mission.

Look at Luke 19:28-44. It’s lamb selection day for the Jewish Passover, and Jesus comes riding into Jerusalem on a donkey. The people cheer, shout "Hosanna!" and lay down their cloaks on the road to pave the way and express allegiance. But allegiance to what? Why are the Pharisees so nervous? And why did Jesus weep outside the city, as if the city was already lost?

According to scholar Ray Vander Laan, the palm branches and the shouting of "hosanna" reflect the victory of the Maccabees just before the Hasmonean Dynasty. It was a time when the Seleucid Empire had conquered Israel (called "Judea" at that time). Antiochus III promised Israel they didn't have to be Hellenized (made to forsake their beliefs and practices for Greek ones), but many Jews started taking on Greek religious practices anyway. Antiochus IV came to power when Antiochus III died. Antiochus IV replaced the Jewish High priest, Onias, with Jason who bribed his way to power and was committed to Hellenizing the Jews. 

Jason removed Judaism as the religion of the city. Jason is later replaced by Menelaus, who let his brother steal valuable religious items from the Jerusalem temple. This lead to revolts by the Jews, after which Antiochus IV made it illegal for Jews to observe Jewish religious practices. Then came the revolt of the Maccabees (lead by Mattathias and Judah). They overthrew the Greeks, freed the land, and set up the Hasmonean Dynasty. There was a great procession (parade) as leaders entered the city, during which the people waved palm branches as a sign of the peace they would now enjoy as a result of the final battle that cleansed the land of Greek influence.

Going back to Luke 19 and Jesus' procession into the city, why does He weep after he gets there? Why does he say the crowd is missing the point on what would bring them peace? Why is it that eventually their cheering would lead to a siege on the city and the destruction and death He describes in verses 42-44?

According to Josephus, the early church historian, every so many years on lamb selection day, there would be parades like this. A hero or group would march into the city and a riot would start as people hoped this might be the moment when Rome was driven out of Jerusalem - just like in the time of the Maccabees. The Romans would often respond with ruthless violence, slaughtering everyone participating as well as anyone in the area of the riots.

So, that's why we see the Pharisees get nervous as Jesus rides in and the people start cheering. What the people are cheering is, "hosanna" which means "save us" or "deliver us." This cheering is also why Jesus weeps. He knows the hearts of the people, and He can see they are looking for political freedom, a savior from God who had divine power to wage war and overthrow the Roman occupation. Jesus could see the path they were committed to walking and where it would lead them. The warring, the unrest, and the tribalism would never accomplish the peace they needed, even if for a season they gained the peace that they wanted. The people would always be primed for tyranny, unless something significant changed inside of them.

Jesus' way did not continue the tribalism and division that allows tyranny to take root. He went to the heart of the issue and invited us to follow Him FIRST, above all other concerns. Following Jesus will enable us to exemplify His unity and peace, even as we go through turbulent times. Following Jesus will raise our eyes to what is True in and beyond our experience, so that we can commit to His mission and not imperfect shadows of His mission. Whether we are engaged in evangelism, social justice, politics, or any other sphere of our culture, if we are divided against other followers, then we may NOT be following Jesus, no matter how noble or emotionally powerful our narrative may be.

Jesus did not participate in intersectional ideology, and he didn't quibble over the immorality of worldly governments or leaders. Jesus saw the truth of every circumstance. He was gracious toward the hurting, whom preservationists had overlooked or oppressed. He confronted the progressives for their departures from God's morality. He taught those who thought they knew what the right answer was. He avoided the entanglement into political agendas by recognizing we should "give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God's." And He passionately laid His life down for the mission to redefine this world's values, through followers who would maintain their focus on Him and teach others to do the same. He undid sin and death, overturning the primary forces that motivate the evils of our world. Never is there a relent by Jesus in regard to His Spirit and His followers influencing the world. And never was that influence partial to the tribalism that leads to tyranny.

Reflect on this (often):
- Am I divided against fellow believers? If so, why? How can we both believe something is of God so strongly, and yet be divided? What are we missing?
- If I am going to confront other believers on an issue, why am I certain I see it clearly? What could I be missing that they see?
- If I speak publically, will my words build up, heal, unify, and bring to discussion? Or am I venting my grievances and fertilizing the soil of tyranny?
- How do I interact within the unity and peace of Holy Spirit, already given to followers of Jesus, if my ideas may be in conflict with other followers? What unifying thread does God see, that we are missing? Am I willing to let Him show me?

In all things, even the disarray of our culture and politics, God is sovereign and He sees the path forward. Only He can prevent us from walking down the path to tyranny. Are we willing to pause and seek Him and His perspective beyond the narratives we play and replay? Will we lay aside the temptation to preserve or progress our interests, so that we can advance His way of living as of FIRST importance?

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

I have continued to see posts and articles among "Christians" that mirror what I see in the U.S. culture right now. I see some people blasting evangelicals about hypocrisy and losing their way, alongside fearful articles about Trump laying up a power grab to become our first Tyrant by diminishing the powers of the UN. I see others writing a blank check for anything Republican, Trumpian, or aimed at preserving an America that once was. Every one of them feels they have the most valid argument and some solution for the ills of our culture. And all of them are participating in building a foundation for tyranny. 

How is it that tyranny takes root in a society? Is it because some leader is just so powerful that he/she simply overwhelms the will of the people? Rarely, and I would venture to say never, has it happened that way.

The infancy of tyranny is when people begin to isolate around emotionally charged arguments. It takes hold because of the polarization. As people become tribal and fragmented, the unity of agreement around what is good is destroyed. Facts and evidence take a back seat to feelings, experiences, and anecdotes. Our ability to sort out what is factually true for all people becomes skewed by what is experientially true for whatever tribal affiliation we are closest to. Our ability to know when specific actions are necessary to address an isolated wrong is clouded by our perspective within our tribe. The specific wrong gets overlaid on every circumstance. In short, the whole world becomes a nail, and we just need a hammer to drive it home.

The net effect of this tribalization is that the power of the people is diminished into tribes who are fighting with one another. This is the adolescence of tyranny. In this phase, the tribes feel more passionate rage around emotionally charged issues close to their tribal identity, and at the same time they recognize they don't have the power to convince everyone else or protect their position. In this phase, the tribes are consumed with progressive ideas that jettison the moral and societal framework of their society, or they are consumed with enshrining moral and societal principles to try and help their way of life survive. Both perspectives come from deeply FELT ideologies, and yet BOTH are out of touch with reality. The progressives tear down good fences because the peace and prosperity those fences brought have prevented them from experiencing the original horrors that lead to those fences being built. The preservationists know the fences are important, but they can no longer remember or effectively relate the reasons why the fences are needed in the current context - so their arguments sound like, "just because." (Meanwhile, if anyone happens to notice anything suspicious in regard to a tyrant, it only takes a mild "stirring of the pot" with the tribal conflicts to get them distracted again.)

The amnesia of time and the chaos of tribalism set the stage for a tyrant to rise. They present some great threat, vilifying some notion, person, or ideology. They offer a bright future, change for the better, and protection from the "villain" they present. Often times, the idea or person being vilified represents some of the remaining fence posts of moral standards that could unravel their plans. (This is why it's always important to examine the one(s) calling someone else 'Hitler.') 

By getting the people to hate and reject the "villain" themselves, the tyrant is able to have power handed to them instead of seizing it. They also get the added bonus of wielding guilt over those who tore down the fences and handed them power. They are given broad authority for decisions and legislation that ultimately influences who lives and who dies. That is the maturity of tyranny.

We are not there, but we are on our way. And we are helping the adolescence of tyranny every time we pick up our tribal issues and equate them to Jesus' mission.

Look at Luke 19:28-44. It’s lamb selection day for the Jewish Passover, and Jesus comes riding into Jerusalem on a donkey. The people cheer, shout "Hosanna!" and lay down their cloaks on the road to pave the way and express allegiance. But allegiance to what? Why are the Pharisees so nervous? And why did Jesus weep outside the city, as if the city was already lost?

Next week's post will answer those questions and help us avoid being pawns in political plots for power.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

I had a chat recently with a registered nurse from a prestigious hospital. We were talking about the shifts in our culture and how it is affecting the social dynamics of almost every situation. She shared with me that there are nurses in her group that are brilliant and gifted people, but when it comes to the basic tasks of their job they are paralyzed or terrified to engage. The simple tasks of caring for a patient, like bathing or giving meds, are irritations or interruptions for them. They want to be leaders, but cannot bring themselves to do the most basic chores of the job they were hired for. When it comes to caring for terminal patients, she said they are truly paralyzed emotionally and unable to deal with it. Some even become physically ill when they face a patient dying.

I asked her if they are primarily millennials, and she said yes. Not all of them are, but most of them are. I asked why she was surprised by that. She said, "It’s just odd. They went through school, they are really smart and know so much, but they just seem unable to handle the human factor." 

I asked her to consider the messages in our culture right now and what we all are being indoctrinated with. I connected the dots between the "have it your way right away" and "speak your power" messages with the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche and his work "Beyond Good and Evil" (see my previous posts here and here). If we are constantly being told "you be you" and that our highest motivation is to use our "will to power" to influence our world, then is it any wonder that we see an entire generation being self-focused? The sad reality is that this "will to power" way of living comes directly from a nihilist philosophy that believes there is nothing after death, just an end of existence. This means there is no hope, no higher motivation, and no moral bearing than what our own desires, goals, and influence can accomplish. If we believe that this material life is all there is and death is the end of our adventure, is it any wonder that we fear death?

And let's be honest, this is not just a millennial problem; it is increasingly a Western cultural problem. The moral standards that transcend our existence have been rejected. We are encouraged to "change the world" in whatever way we see fit. Without those standards, all we have is "feel" and "felt" as our guides. The experiences of our flesh that we like to "feel" and the ones we "felt" that we don't like become the guides to moral certainty. And when feeling and experience is our guide, everything becomes more base, more crass. We develop a tunnel vision around our flesh.

Death and suffering become things we never want to feel, because they end or diminish our influence. The idea that what we are living for could suddenly blink into non-existence is terrifying and paralyzing because it contradicts the real reason we use our influence in the first place: to make a name for ourselves, be remembered, leave our mark, and transcend our time. But if there are things that matter, that transcend, then there has to be a reason why they transcend, which is beyond our influence.

In 1 Corinthians 15:19-25, Paul addresses this issue head on. He says, "If our hope in Jesus is only for this life, we are to be pitied above all others." Why? Because he is making the point that if there is no life after death and Jesus was not resurrected, then all we are left with is a handful of teachings that have no power to make any lasting difference. If all there is is this "will to power" and nothing transcends this life, then there is no point in believing Jesus (or anyone). If Jesus didn't have the power to overcome death, then His claims could not be trusted, and His teachings were the ramblings of a delusional person.

But since Jesus DID rise from the dead, and over 500 eyewitness accounts established the truth of it, then two things are irrefutably true: 1. There is life after death, which means there is purpose beyond this life (and the "will to power" isn't it). 2. Jesus is verified as God, and everything He taught is both the standard and the purpose for us to live by.

In the same passage of 1 Corinthians, Paul makes it clear that the "will to power" will be undone. Jesus is going to undo every dominion, every power, and then hand the Kingdom over to God the Father. That means every human effort, every influence we establish, will be undone. On top of that, only the accomplishments and standards that are aligned with God's way of living will remain.

So, it makes sense that anyone who is living to make a name for themselves, to influence their world, or be the best "them" possible (by their own standards), would struggle with caring for others or grieving with others. When we realize there is life after death and there is one who was resurrected - meaning brought back to life forever, not just temporarily - we gain hope that allows us to experience life WITH other people. We stop being the purpose of our own story, and we start seeing our purpose in and through the stories of others. We start to see a greater story, where death and suffering are experiences along the way to a more meaningful existence. And we realize that what we do FOR God and TO others has transcendent value, for them and for us. Through hope, we gain compassion. Through compassion, we gain empathy. In empathy, we are compelled to serve the needs of others, not to embellish or advance our story, to accomplish God's purpose in His-story.

Listen to the messages in our culture and recognize how many times you are encouraged to seek your own advantage and advance your own story. To live by those messages is to live by the "will to power" and to reject Jesus' resurrection as well as His teachings. To live by those messages is to sacrifice the real power for world change, for illusions we manage to conjure up in our own strength. How will you respond to the next opportunity you have to assert your influence? Will it be like the world expects you to, with self-advantage or self-protection first? Or will it be like Jesus, dying to self and being made alive to greater purpose for the sake of others? 

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

We finally got to see Black Panther this past weekend and get caught up on the Marvel Cinematic Universe. The whole movie was well done and there is plenty to appreciate throughout (even seeing Smeagol from Lord of the Rings as a buff bad guy was quirky and fun). But I want to write about one specific scene at the end, as it relates to my previous post. Spoiler alert: if you don't want to know how the movie ends, wait till you see the movie to continue.

The final battle between King T'Challa and his cousin Erik Killmonger is a profound interplay of good vs evil vs history vs healing and hope. When T'Challa learns the truth of how his father handled the rebellion of his uncle and how Erik was abandoned to grow up an orphan in the streets and completely separated from Wakanda, he realizes this was a huge mistake and created a far worse problem. T'Challa is motivated by compassion for Erik, even as he fights to regain his throne from him.

In the final scene between them, T'Challa carries Erik out to see the sunset in Wakanda - a sight Erik's father had told him about. As they kneel together, exhausted from battle and Erik with a spear through his chest, T'Challa says, "Perhaps we can still heal you." This was clearly a reference to the physical wound about to end Erik's life, but also a more profound reference to restoring Erik as a person and as a citizen of Wakanda. It's a palpable moment of grace and compassion, where we see T'Challa's integrity and we are hoping for Erik to accept.

Erik says, "Why, so you can lock me up?" He references the slave trade in Africa, and how many Africans would jump overboard rather than be sold in the Americas as slaves. He says, "They knew death was better than bondage." Then he pulls the spear out of his chest, which was preventing him from bleeding internally. He collapses and dies next to T'Challa.

I was moved deeply by this moment. Grace and healing are offered, but the assumption of consequence and the inability to see a future different than his past prevented Erik from accepting the hope T'Challa offered. The pain, the wounds of the world's tribalism and tyranny, blinded Erik to the potential of a future without those things.

The movies ends with T'Challa making a statement to the UN that Wakanda will no longer be hidden and will help the world with its technology and culture. He says, "We are ONE tribe."

I cannot help but hear the echo of Galatians 3:26-29 as I consider where the movie landed. As Paul writes to the Galatians, he is addressing their divisions and their choices to live according to the desires of the flesh and legalisms of their religious history. Prompted by the influence of Judaisers (religious Jews who tried to force early Christians to keep all of Jewish customs), the church at Galatia was being pressured to not only follow Jesus by grace through faith, but to also live under all the ceremonial and religious practices of Jewish law. Paul reasons with them at length that Jesus' death and resurrection satisfies the religious law and freed them from trying to EARN God's favor through religious works. In this section, Paul is trying to help them see that the distinctiveness of Jewish customs and laws are ultimately meaningless in Jesus. The playing field has been leveled and everyone has opportunity for God's love and grace, through faith in Jesus Christ. And it's not just an issue of race, but of gender, class, and circumstance.

In Jesus, no one is above or below anyone else, and no one has to earn it by being indoctrinated into becoming a different tribe. We have been made into ONE tribe, God's tribe through Jesus Christ. And every follower of Jesus is a citizen of that tribe, regardless of race, age, gender, economic status, etc.

The real question for us in Western culture today is, are we able to see and accept that grace, or are we stuck in the pain and experience of our past? Will we be like Erik and die rather than experience the grace being offered, because we fear there is some bondage or trick behind it? Or are we able to forge a new path together in the opportunities for grace and understanding? Are we committed to being ONE tribe, in the Kingdom of God? Or are we still holding on to our worldly tribalism, demanding our place and expressing our will to power?

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

Have you noticed how tribal our culture has become and how divided we are by experience, ideologies, and opinions? How did we get here? Is this progress?

It goes without saying that in many areas of life, business, culture, etc. that progress is a good thing. But progress toward what, and from what? If we are talking about improving our health, sales in our business, or educating or employing more people, that kind of progress is good. But what about moral progress? Is there a point at which all moral values are really relative to experience and don't really apply to everyone? That is the basic principle of moral relativism: the idea that what is true for me is true for me, but not always (or even ever) true for others.

The major problem with moral relativism is that truth becomes a construct of my experience, and morality is only what furthers the narrative that I identify with. The trap is that we get caught in a moral framework that only exists in our experience and has no transcendent value. This means we have to create a counterfeit transcendence of value by convincing others to live according to our narrative and forsake their own personal narrative to become intertwined with ours. Now, sometimes it's easy to do that, because there are people around us whose experience agrees with ours. This is where the rise of tribalism begins: the battle over the strongest narrative and who can assert their version of reality the best.

Philosophers like Plato and Aristotle assumed there were absolutes, and with good reason. They understood there were major problems with this idea of progressive morality, because eventually it devolves into what Friedrich Nietzsche called "the will to power." This is the idea that every living thing exists to exert its power, put another way, the motivation for life is to exert our influence on the material world. The problem with Nietzsche’s thought is that he was a nihilist, which basically means he believed everything is meaningless. He believed ultimately that there was no eternal purpose for our existence or our accomplishments. We are here, and then we blink into nothingness.

It is interesting that in Western culture, we have married secular humanism to this "will to power," and try to ignore the gaping "nothingness" at the end. We have tried to say that we are here to make a difference in the world for the sake of human improvement, because all humans are basically good, and we can continue to progress the more we congeal humanity into one big community of stories that affect each other for the good.

There are a ton of assumptions in that way of thinking. But the truth is, evil exists and is not extinguished by relativism, because true relativist thinking has no standard by which to judge something as evil. Good or evil are constructs of individual or collective experience. The one(s) doing evil, can state that their experience justifies their actions, and so therefore it isn't evil, but good. To put it more simply, when the basis for good and evil is just our experience, when there is no transcendent standard, we are left with only the "will to power," and a giant battle of "king of the hill" ensues. No matter how much common ground we seek to build, and no matter how much we try to influence others by listening and telling stories, there will always be places we refuse to surrender our perspective. Those places will bring conflict that cannot be resolved, because they assume we don't have to resolve our own story and we are supposed to exert it upon the world in order to achieve our greatest good.

The trap of moral relativism is that it leads to tribal warfare every single time. For example, look at current Western culture, every war in history, every social conflict, etc. Somewhere at the root of each of these is the will to power.

Paul said something similar to Timothy when he was mentoring him as a leader ministering to the early Christian Church. Read 2 Timothy 4:1-8. Notice how Paul addresses tribalism and relativist thinking. When people want it their way, they gather around them a critical mass of people willing to support their viewpoint. They turn aside from truth and turn toward myths. In other words, they reject facts and data for the experience of the narrative, even if the narrative never really happened.

This is why debate and discourse have disintegrated in much of the Western world and in countries where tyranny rules. Countries ruled by dictatorship are just places where the many tribes have been replaced by the strongest tribe. If you want to see where moral relativism leads, it isn't to egalitarianism; it is to tyrant under those with the strongest narrative or the strongest army pushing a narrative.

Paul's encouragement to Timothy is the keep his head in all situations - to recognize there is a standard, endure the hardship of both submitting to the standard and in facing the push back from those who reject the standard. Be an evangelist, a herald of what is good. Yes, of course, share the Truth of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection with people, but also demonstrate and speak about what is True for all people in all places at all times.

It is not ok to let people go their own way and become tribal. If we do, then we become just as tribal and we join a game that can only be won by overthrowing others. We must continually live and discuss the Truth that unravels relativist thinking. We must help people restore the identity of their design instead of the identity of their experience, on whatever level it's been overwritten. We must continually point out transcendent Truth and the end result of relativist thinking simultaneously. This means we have to resist tribalism and resist the skirmishes that help someone's will to power.

We must first submit ourselves to the standard of Jesus' example and teaching. We must purge ourselves of tribalist interpretations of Jesus' example and teachings. We must care enough about those around us to be in meaningful dialogue. We must ask questions that draw the relativist assumptions into the light and help unravel the power the mythical narrative has over their beliefs and actions.

This is hard work, and it requires patience and compassion. I suggest we get practice by examining ourselves and whatever tribe we find ourselves a part of. Can the things we say we believe and fight for pass the scrutiny of Jesus? Would He approve of everything we think He approves of? Would He condemn everything we think He would condemn? Are we willing to hear Him speak to our assumptions without adding assumptions onto what He actually said? I would hope the answer is yes. Sadly, I see tribalism at work within the Church and those who say they follow Jesus. I see progressive moral perspectives where Jesus was quite clear on God's standard. Judgement, division, and warring exists among the people Jesus said have received His unity and peace. Why is that? What excuses do we really expect to stand before God's scrutiny?

If you don't wrestle with that question daily, then perhaps relativism is already at the core of your thinking, and your efforts have become the will to power for a future tyranny. Take caution, lay down anything that does not position Jesus at the center of the focus.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

There is an old saying, "follow the money," that is used when people are implying that there is a financial motive behind a situation, decision, corruption, crime, etc. It is a saying that is considered a "truism," because although it is not ALWAYS true that people's motives revolve around money, it is OFTEN true that getting or keeping wealth (or some form of security) is at the heart of how decisions are made. When the Apostle Paul writes his letter to Timothy, he states that "the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil." Take a moment and read 1 Timothy 6:3-21.

Notice the two issues Paul ties together as he mentors Timothy: the love of money, and an unhealthy interest in controversies. It's important for us to realize that these two go hand in hand. Whenever someone is determined to get rich, or keep their wealth and security, it leads directly to - or may require them to create - conflict and controversy.

Consider the story by Dr. Seuss called The Sneetches. One group had stars on their bellies and one did not. The ones with stars thought they were better. The ones without thought if they had stars they would be better. Along came Sylvester McMonkey McBean, with a machine to solve their problems - for a price. He capitalizes on their class/race war and rakes in the money as the sneetches go round and round adding and removing stars from their bellies. Eventually, they have no money left, and all of them are a mix of star-bellied and non-star-bellied sneetches again. The sneetches are left with the consequences of their vanity and discontentment, and McBean drives off with the cash.

In that one story, Dr. Seuss captured the heart of greed, the nature of discrimination, and the insidious destruction that comes from pride. He also perfectly illustrated what Paul was writing to Timothy and lays a groundwork for considering our current events.

Let's look at a couple recent examples. Few considered there may have been a profit motive for the Parkland, FL school district. According to an editorial article by The New American there was an alliance between the school district and local law enforcement, with a specifically stated goal to end the pipeline of students going to jail. Federal funding is not favorable toward schools with high crime rates, because funding is linked to attendance numbers, and attendance is directly affected by crime rates. If a school holds kids accountable for crime and expels or suspends them, then their attendance drops and so does funding. The pressure to keep kids in school at any cost and report a low crime rate is very high. So, was money part of the formula for disaster in Parkland? Very likely.

In the last few days, news analysts have questioned if there is incentive for sanctuary cities/states to hide their crime and illegal immigrant numbers in order to keep federal funding dollars. The law suit between the Justice Department and California will bring to light a lot of legal, jurisdictional issues, and financial motives.

It doesn't take long to realize that there are very few decisions that we make on a daily basis, for our work or personal lives, that do not involve money or financial security in some way. We are naive if we think money doesn't play a significant role in the situations boiling over in our culture today. If we look closely, the conflicts over gender norms, wage gaps, abortion, healthcare, immigration, etc. all have underlying profit or security motives. In every one of them, the strife is created by wanting something we think we need, or the strife is being provoked by someone who stands to gain from the conflict. We need to be able to see the REAL motives and not get caught up in the controversies. The controversies are the smoke screen to hide what is really going on politically, morally, or socially.

When the surface level reactions are all we see and respond to, when the media frenzy and emotional stories are all we hear, we lose sight of the facts and get caught in the spin cycle just like the sneetches, all the while we are being fleeced by Mr. McBean.

So, how do we break the cycle? Paul tells Timothy how, in verse 6 and verses 11-21. He says, "Godliness is a means for great gain, when mixed with contentment." There were those in Paul and Timothy's day who thought they could use their religion to get rich. Paul has pointed out previously that their lifestyle was not godly because the motive was wealth and not true godliness. Here he is telling Timothy that if someone is truly godly (God focused) and is content with who God has made them to be and where He has placed them in life and society, then they will have everything they need. In fact, he indicates they will have something more valuable than any worldly wealth or security they could try to get.

The hard part is being content with God, with ourselves, and with our situations. Humans have a tendency to lay aside moral standards to suit themselves. Friederich Nietzsche, the famous nihilist philosopher wrote in Beyond Good and Evil, "A living being wants above all else to release its strength; life itself is the will to power." In His view, the 'will to power' was the driving force behind life. Not moral goodness, not the betterment of humanity, just power. Because once you remove moral standards and morality is relative to your perspective, then really no one else matters. All that matters is your expression, your narrative that leads to power. We cannot have it both ways, either everything is meaningless beyond our own grasp for power, or moral standards by God are essential for the common and the extraordinary good. Now, consider this: are intersectionality, identity politics, gun control, sanctuary cities, gender norms, the new feminism, etc. a result of godliness mixed with contentment?

Are we willing to look at who is pulling the strings and what they stand to gain? Are willing to look at what we stand to gain (or lose) by participating in the spin cycle? Don't misunderstand my point in looking at what Paul tells Timothy. When there is injustice and discrimination and abuse, we need to address each with facts and take action to hold people accountable with evidence. We should make policies to correct it with sound judgement and facts as well. But if we think we can make good policy or bring justice without godliness and contentment at our core, then we are mistaken. And if we think, as an ally to any of these, that we are safe from examining our motives because we "don't stand to gain" from helping a cause, we should take caution. Even on issues we don't directly gain from, we may be being used as the machine of Sylvester McMonkey McBean.

Take some time and read 1 Timothy 6:3-21 again. Reflect on what Paul is telling Timothy. Then consider the news items that get you stirred up. Consider why they matter to you, what you actually know through verified fact, and what God has actually taught on the subject (not just what you heard in a sermon or on a TV show claiming what the Bible says). Then prayerfully consider what action you should take that will help others take hold of the full life God has intended for them.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

[This is my third blog post on recent events, and builds somewhat on the previous two. You may want to read my last two posts here and here for additional insights on navigating policy, public debate, and checking our motives.]

A recent trend in our culture has been to elevate someone who has experienced a trauma or suffering, as if they were an expert on making policies that may be related to their experience. Jimmy Kimmel positioned himself as a spokesperson on healthcare, because of his child's experience with tetralogy of fallot. Soon after, the #metoo trend went around, and women who had experienced sexual assault or harassment positioned themselves as spokespersons for women's rights. Then we had the Florida school shootings, and students who suffered severe trauma were put out on the media and encouraged to make statements about policy and gun control.

In each situation, the policy changes requested, the platforms advocated for, and the legislation demanded were narrow and tuned almost exclusively into the one slice of experience that impacted these individuals so greatly. Now let me say that each of their situations are worthy of our listening, support, compassion, and care. They are experts in their own experience, and it is worthy of our respect and attention to hear their story, to consider our role in helping them move forward, and to guard others from unnecessary pain - in so far as that is possible and purposeful. I would think that any human being with half a heart would want to see healing and wholeness come to the hurting, the broken, the abused, and the grieving. That is a given.

It is a separate issue though to consider policy measures and laws based solely on their experiences. It is a fair question to ask if their experience had in some way endowed them with an expertise or insight that should dominate the focus of policies on related issues. Consider the story of Job (pronounced “jobe”). In chapters 38-42 we see the conclusion to his story, which answers that question pretty clearly.

Let me set the stage with Job. His story challenges the notion that those who are suffering are cursed and those who prospering are blessed. In his day, there was an assumption that God always blessed the righteous, and as long as you didn't do anything wrong, God would make you wealthy and healthy. Now Job is a guy who did everything right. He was wealthy and everything he had was healthy and prospering - his family, his herds of animals, his fields, etc. Unknown to Job, there is a conversation Satan has with God. It's essentially a dare; Satan dares God to let Job experience pain and loss to see if Job will curse God. God accepts the challenge and is confident that Job will pass. The only condition God ultimately puts on Satan is that he cannot harm Job himself.

What happens next is so traumatizing that most of us would go insane with grief. Job's herds of animals, his crops, and all of his children are stolen, destroyed, or killed in ONE day. Then when Job doesn't curse God, Satan afflicts his body with sores from head to toe. It's so painful and dramatic that Job's wife even tells him to "curse God and die." I can't imagine the pain, the grief, or the suffering.

Job's three friends come and sit with him for 7 days and say nothing. It's the most compassionate thing they do. Because after the 7 days, each of them speaks in turn and each of them tries to get Job to admit to some fault or sin that must have caused this. Chapter after chapter of Job's story is their discussion with him, insisting he MUST have done something wrong. Eventually, Job has defended himself against their accusations long enough, and he demands an audience with God to vindicate him and show that He committed no sin, even in the depths of his grief. 

Now, if we were to accept the idea that Job is an expert by his suffering and that somehow he had gained insight into the workings of the universe and wisdom for policies that would benefit humankind, then we would expect God to vindicate Job and the story to be over. This is not what happens. Yes, Job had not sinned to cause any of this. But in his suffering and frustration with his friends' assumptions, he stepped into a place that appears to be indignation. Somewhere, in the midst of his pain, the absolution he wanted became something he felt he deserved, to the point where he accuses God of denying him justice. And after the youngest friend speaks to defend God and convince Job of his own guilt, then God speaks.

“Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me..." (Job 38:1-2)

In the very first sentence, God demonstrates the simple truth that Job has not seen and cannot see what God sees. I love the "brace yourself like a man" statement; I can hear both sarcasm and a loving father about to deal a hard truth to his child. God goes on to ask Job if he was there at the start of creation, if he helped build all that exists, if he has the power to put the stars in place, if he can create or tame the great creatures of the earth, etc. By the end of God's questioning, the one clear thing displayed is that Job is NOT an expert on justice, or creation, or anything in comparison to God. And it's important to notice Job's attitude in Job 42:1-6.

While Job's experience was painful and his suffering worthy of compassion, it had not imparted him with greater knowledge of who God is or how God works. He also didn't have greater insight into justice or policies to protect people from bad things happening.

We learn that our lives and experiences are part of a greater story in which our gains and losses all play a part in the victory of good over evil. God revealed to Job what He planned from the beginning after the testing by Satan. He blesses him with more than he had previously and let him see his grandchildren to the fourth generation. God also confronted Job's friends and affirms that Job had represented Him well throughout their accusations.

In Job's story we are reminded that not only are those who suffer not experts in regard to passing law and policies, but also those 'friends' who seem wise may not be experts either. There is only one sound way to have good laws and policies, and that is to have insight beyond our own experiences. We need to have God's perspective on things if we hope to have laws and policies that benefit society and build people up. So, we can listen and learn from those who are hurting, and we should. But before we set to writing laws and policies, we need to take a breath, pause, then discern God's guidance for the decisions ahead.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

It is with anguish and anger that I set to writing this week's blog post. The horrific evil of 17 students killed in Florida, gunned down by a fellow student, is gut wrenching and I grieve with their families and friends.

There are so many questions around this latest shooting, and so many things that as I write this are still coming to light. The initial outcry against guns and government and conservatives has started to fade as questions arise about the 39 sheriff calls to the shooter’s home, the multiple FBI reports on him, and the 4 minutes armed law enforcement officials stood outside waiting while children were being mowed down by gunfire. All of it doesn’t add up, and it clearly suggests there is more going on here than just an issue on the availability of weapons.

I will let our leaders hash out issues of policy, based on sound evidence and good judgment. I will make my personal contributions to that discussion as needed in my community and to support freedom, personal responsibility, and safety for society. But, I find myself coming to this question over and over again: what would Jesus say about gun control? 

Considering guns were invented much later than when He walked the earth, He obviously didn't speak directly to gun use. However, he did address weapons, war, fighting, etc. in ways that I believe were forward looking and hold implications for us, NOW on THIS issue. And since He is God, I am sure He was aware of the implications and intentionally addressed them for our benefit today. 

Read Matthew 26:47-56 and Luke 22:47-53. This is the moment when Jesus is being taken into custody by Roman soldiers in order to be questioned by the religious leaders and eventually by the Roman governor of the province, Pontius Pilot. Notice that one disciple is passionately moved to defend Jesus. He sees the threat that this is and the betrayal of Judas and literally lashes out with His sword, as if to say, "Stay back, we will defend ourselves." He ends up cutting off the ear of the high priest's servant.

I imagine this moment as one where everything slowed down and everyone stood still, stunned by what just happened. While all their minds are racing over how to respond, what the high priest might do, how to help the servant who is bleeding and likely screaming in pain… Jesus takes control of the situation. Even though there is a host of soldiers there to take Him, in this moment Jesus has control and no one moves. He touches the ear of the servant and heals the man - a miracle that everyone saw, and the servant could easily be proof of. But here, healing wasn't the lesson, nor was it about who really had the power to make things happen in this situation. Everyone there had just seen the power and control Jesus could choose to have. No, the lesson was about weapon control.

He said, "Put away your sword. Don't you know that he who draws the sword, dies by the sword? Do you think that I cannot call on my Father, and at once he would put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?" In this simple phrase, Jesus says several things we need to take to heart. Every soldier, police officer, and weapon owner knows (especially in regard to guns) that you never draw or point your weapon at something you care about. The role of the weapon is to destroy, and by initiating the use of the weapon (even as protection) you are initiating a situation of destruction. By doing so, you also initiate the potential for your own destruction. When we escalate any situation to violence, even if it is to meet a violent threat, we must acknowledge that destruction will happen, and be ready for the aftermath.

Some have taken this statement to indicate Jesus was a pacifist. I do not know how conclusively we can make that assumption from the Scriptures. What I do know is His point here appears to be clearly focused on the inappropriate nature and timing of using the sword, as well as the limited power of the sword in comparison to God's power. His caution and correction directly support the first lesson in gun ownership - don't point a gun at anything you don't intend to destroy - as well as emphasize the double edged nature of using a weapon, that once a weapon is in play, it is likely a weapon that will end the scenario.

Jesus also has the disciple put his sword back in his sheath, and He doesn't ask the question, "Why did you bring a sword?" It seems Jesus acknowledges there is a time and a place for every tool, even weapons. This, however, was not the time or the place. This time was intended for Jesus to be taken. It was intended for no one to be hurt except Jesus, who was about to sacrifice His life for ours. As painful as that was for his followers, the rest of God's plans for us were based on His sacrifice for our salvation.

Using the proper tool at the proper time and understanding the risks is essential to how we address this issue in our culture. Broad sweeping legislation often has unintended consequences that we are blind to when making policy in a heightened emotional state. Abandoning personal responsibility in favor of legal restrictions is just as unacceptable when it is legislating morality as it is when trying to legislate societal protections. Law is never an effective way of producing thoughtful humans of good will. Law is only a deterrent, with a method of consequence and punishment. It is the values of purpose and personhood, as we look at each other, that cause us to pause and consider doing good for one another instead of harm. It is also the knowledge that if my action is to draw my "sword," whether in weapon or word form, then the escalation will likely bring about an end result that is also a "sword."

The very nature and tenor of the over-reactive conversation around gun control has liberals, conservatives, non-religious, and religious people all striking each other with blows. The media is filled with liberal filtered narratives promoting total confiscation in the name of safety. The backlash of conservatives is to blast the shortsighted surrender of freedom in the name of rights. Within the Church there is derision and division, with broad insults toward evangelicals and fundamentalists for supporting a conservative administration, as well as plenty of blow back toward progressives for supporting a relativistic position in regard to morality and identity politics. Everyone has their swords out taking a swing at each other on the latest political or social issue. And to all of us, I say what Jesus said: "He who draws the sword will die by the sword."

To be more blunt: sit down, shut up, and take a moment to consider what God may be doing here, instead of launching all these volleys of vitriol and viciousness. Our words must be Truth, spoken in love, seasoned with salt, and giving a reason for the hope that we have. If we are joining the fray with our sword out, then we should take care to realize the minute our flank is exposed we will be cut down the same way we cut into the fight. To be more precise, I will let Paul's words give us something to consider, "If you keep biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other" (Galatians 5:15). Read the verses just before and after for a reminder of how we should be approaching every situation.

Let us be present in this world and in the culture, but as a unified force of good empowered by God's power, avoiding being drawn into skirmishes that divide and distract, no matter how emotionally charged an experience is or how baited we are. Use the proper tool for the proper job at the proper time. Take responsibility for your own thoughts and actions, and teach your kids the same. And in the meantime, with respect, love, and all grace and charity, do your best to live in peace with everyone, without compromising the Truth, but continuously and creatively loving people toward the one who is always True.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

Regardless of your political affiliation, read through this, as it is important for all of us. In the last week, we have seen the termination of an NBC commentator for his comments during the Olympic Opening Ceremonies, the negative Twitter flurry over an appropriate quote from Hamilton used to congratulate US figure skater Mirai Nagasu, and the admonishment of other commentators for any statement that could be taken wrong by anyone. We saw the use of Twitter by Adam Rippon to amplify his spotlight by taking a shot at Vice President Pence as being hateful toward gays, and then duck and cover when the VP offered to meet in person and have a conversation to get to know each other. The climax of the week was Joy Behar, on The View, stating without hesitation or reservation, that to be Christian and to say you 'hear God' is a sign of mental illness. Her comments were specifically directed at VP Pence, but they were insensitive, slanderous, and hurtful.

The outcry from religious people and mental health community was swift, and many demanded her termination. VP Pence responded with respect and disappointment, pointing out the damage this kind of careless speech can have on those who do struggle with mental illness, and also on people of all faiths - whose relationship with their god was stated as illness.

Now, I am not advocating for Pence, nor am I stumping for action on any of these specific events. I AM wanting to point out the extreme irresponsibility and damage that can be done when people publically speak out of ignorance. If there is a call to action, it is in what we learn from these situations. Look at what these events have in common. In each of them, someone tried to be smart, funny, popular, recognized, or powerful by stating something publically that they thought would help others see them this way. And in each circumstance, they said something out of their lack of knowledge or experience, and they ignited criticism and backlash. Maybe they did it knowing what would happen, maybe it was calculated, but it appears to just be stupidity given voice. We used to just tolerate these comments and ignore them - knowing that person would eventually encounter reality, or maybe we would thoughtfully share the truth with them. But NOW the culture is trained to be 'triggered' every time someone says something stupid, inflammatory, etc. The reactions are sharp, tribal, and often just as ignorant.

Ok, this is not a new phenomenon, even if we feel like it is new to us in our culture. Even Charles Dickens included in the Christmas Story that the two most dangerous "creatures" were Ignorance and Want. Consider the ways in which ignorance and desire have lead us to racial division, wars, class separation, and genocide. There is a heavy price for ignorance, which brings me to Jesus' example in Matthew 15:1-20.

Jesus and his followers just finished traveling across the Sea of Galilee by boat, teaching people and physically healing people. They are tired, and yet empowered by God and doing amazing things, and apparently they grabbed a snack. Religious leaders there decided this was a time to challenge Jesus and try to invalidate what is happening. Instead of acknowledging the good and celebrating that people have been miraculously healed, instead of acknowledging the work Jesus and His disciples are doing for people, these religious leaders focus on the fact that the disciples didn't pause to ceremonially wash their hands before eating.

Why am I calling this out? The religious leaders thought they were uber smart and tuned into God's plans. They knew the rules and believed that they were in a position to correct Jesus and discredit Him. They spoke out of what they were certain they knew, and they never considered the potential of their ignorance.

Read the rest of the passage carefully. See how Jesus responds to them. What does He call out? 

Jesus counters their appeal to the 'clean hands' tradition that they FELT was sacred, and exposes how they have used their traditions to break God's commands which ARE sacred. They had become so confident of their position and interpretation of events that they couldn't see where they were getting it wrong. They spoke from the silo of their experience and forgot that God sees everything and can consider every perspective in helping people live out what IS true and right and good.

But here is what is critical: Jesus said, “It is not what goes into a person's mouth that makes them unclean, but what comes out of it... the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart and these defile them... from the heart come evil thoughts: murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander...these are what defile a person.” As we face another day of reactive media attention, violence in our schools, and division within our nation and our neighborhoods, let us fully acknowledge this simple truth. Unrestrained lips are destructive, no matter who may be speaking.

If we are going to stop the downward spiral of our culture, it is going to start with people who care about knowing the Truth and speaking words that heal and restore. The path forward for us as a nation and as the human race is to shut out ignorance and the reactiveness of our short-sightedness. We need to assume our ignorance, position ourselves as learners, and in the places where we get to speak God's Truth, do so with gentleness and respect. Even if we are pressed to defend ourselves or others against the ignorance that perpetrates all kinds of evil, we must do so with humble restraint toward what is actually true, and with every effort to open the eyes of those who are acting in ignorance - just like Jesus did.

I recognize that there was a season in my life where I was hyper critical of the mystical, like Joy Behar, and may have even dared to speak outrageous things. Fortunately, I did not remain ignorant on the things I had spoken so firmly against, and I pray the same for her. I also hope all of us are able to acknowledge our own ignorance and be willing to discuss, discover, and discern, so that we and others do not have to pay the heavy price of ignorance.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

I recently saw a post from a colleague about an unexpected miracle his congregation experienced. They were having a dinner for the community, and they planned for 100-150 people. But, they had double that amount show up! Their kitchen staff had planned for the original numbers, there was no extra food, and no one had time to go to the store. A bit panicked, the leadership, the prayer team that was praying for people coming to the event, and the kitchen staff all stopped and prayed. They asked God specifically for a "loaves and fishes" miracle like in Luke 9:10-17. Then they all prepared and started the event trusting God. Halfway through the meal, the lead kitchen person came into the gathering and announced that there was enough for anyone who wanted seconds. People ate their fill. At the end of the night, my colleague walked back to thank the kitchen staff, and there sitting on the counter was the leftovers. They had placed them in Styrofoam carry-out containers. With nothing wasted, and nothing stretched, there were EXACTLY 12 carry-out containers left. A miracle, exactly in line with what they prayed, and beyond the power of any human there.

Miracles are real. Miracles don't just "happen." Contrary to popular mystic psychobabblers on TV, the universe is not some powerful anonymous force conspiring to occasionally help us win at the casino or be more confident about our personal power to influence the world. THAT is delusion. Miracles are specific, and they are usually directly related to causing someone to lay down their sin and shame and trust God, or to amplify people's faith in God. If you read through the Bible you will see that all miracles, even creation itself, was intended for human beings to encounter the existence, power, and love of God.

So, I am not going to spend this blog post defending whether miracles "happen" or why they occur. They do, and they are intended to provoke faith in God. What I am going to do is look at what happens when we try to divorce the miraculous and supernatural from God.

Can empty spiritism and personal power do anything? Look no further than a recent speech at the Grammy's. The mask of spirituality, hides the obvious truth that "personal power" is really a reflection of pride. See the contrast. Using power words in speeches or evoking emotional responses in your followers, while directly benefiting and overlooking the very "casting couch" abuse that now conveniently serves political ambitions by supporting #metoo, is no different than thousands of other charismatic cultic leaders in history. Sadly, legitimate power to hold sex offenders accountable and give support to the abused is hindered by the blurred vision from this kind of virtue signaling. Saying we should "speak our personal power" reminds me of Acts 19:11-20.

In that passage of the Bible, God has been opening people's eyes to the truth of Jesus' resurrection. God has been doing incredible miracles of healing and restoration and people are giving their lives to God. But there is a group of religious Jews who don't believe in Jesus but see power being demonstrated by Paul, and they try to imitate it. They go and they try to face off against an evil spirit possessing a person. They say, "...in the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches..." (verse 13).

You know that moment when you say something, and then you realize what you just said makes no sense? I like to hope these guys had that moment here. But even if they didn't, what happened next surely confirmed to them that what God was doing through Paul, because of Jesus, was not some magic incantation they could wield. I laugh every time I read the demon's reply to them, "Jesus I know, and Paul I know, but who are you?" Especially because they get a thorough thrashing and are sent away naked and bloody. It's hilarious, because God's power is not some magic spell, and miracles are not a manifestation of human power or effort. Beyond that, it's hilarious because they get their butts handed to them for being fakes.

Think about all the empty spiritual messages constantly being offered up in our culture. It doesn't matter who says it, how popular they are, or how much influence they have in the world, if they present ANY offer or secret to power that is not directly from and in relation to God through Jesus Christ. It is at best a fantasy, at worst demonic, and most likely a trope to comfort their conscience and bolster their position.

Miracles are real, and they only occur for one reason: to demonstrate who God is and who and what he cares about. The Bible is clear: only one has the power to truly do miracles, and our experience of the miraculous is directly related to Him. I encourage you to read Acts 19 and 2 Timothy 3. Reflect on the differences between Paul and the imitators. Let God lead you to any place where you may be imitating godliness but denying its power. 

May you discover a deeper relationship with God and walk in His power in such a way that you see the kinds of miracles Jesus has done and continues to do.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.

by Nathan Buck

It was several years ago now that a man visited the local church I was leading, and as we got to know him he shared that he had migraines and neck pain. It was after the worship gathering, and 3-4 people were hanging around chatting with him. I asked him if he had any ideas about the cause for it, and he said, "A brick... to the face." I laughed at first because I thought he was joking. He laughed too and then said, "No seriously, I took a brick to the face."

As I recall his story, he had been working construction, and one day when the crew he was with was driving back from a site, another truck with bricks on it passed them. A brick fell off that truck and came through the open passenger window and hit him in the face. Since then, he has had these headaches and neck pain.

This was one of a few specific times I have felt the Lord strongly prompt me to pray for healing to restore a broken body part. I remember this one because I was overwhelmed with an urgency to pray, I felt my hands and body get warm and a rush of energy I can't really explain. I asked him if the couple people there with us could pray for him, and he said, "That would be great." Now, keep in mind that I just met this person, and he just met us. I had no idea of his trust level with God, and this was way more forward than I am comfortable being on a first meeting.

We prayed, and as we did, I had an image of his head and neck appear in my mind, almost like an x-ray, and I could see something wasn't right in his neck. I didn't know what specifically, but I knew I had to place my hand there as I prayed. I laid my hand flat on his neck as he stood in the middle of the group of us. There were not many words. I recall asking God to heal, and specifically to re-align his neck and skull, take the pressure off any nerves, and remove the pain, in the name of Jesus.

A week later, he told me that something happened during that prayer, and he didn't want to jinx it by saying something, but he knew he had been healed. He went all that week without pain and was amazed that God did that for Him. As far as I know, that pain didn't return.

I am aware of the scientific fact that something as simple as physical presence can influence heart rate. In fact it has been shown that within just 3 feet, another person's heart rhythm can have a psychophysiological effect (here's a fun link). Perhaps we do have some influence biologically on one another in our desire to help someone be well. But there is little evidence to show that this contact is enough to reverse the types of disease, deformity, and death that has been reversed by praying to God, in Jesus’ name.

Does God heal people? Yes! Does he always heal people when or how we want Him to? No. Do I have a formula for figuring out when He will or won't? No. But, there are some things we can learn from the Bible accounts when God healed people.

1. God healing someone is usually connected to their faith - either the beginning of it or in response to the faith they have. And it always has to do with relationship with Him. (John 5; John 9; Luke 8:40-56)

2. Physical healing by God doesn't mean we never hurt again, or never die later. Even when Jesus raised his friend Lazarus from the dead, which was a tremendous miracle, Lazarus still later died. (John 11:38-44)

3. There are no magic phrases or words that make healing happen. It is a God-lead thing, and God-powered thing. (Acts 8:9-25; Acts 5:12-16; 1 Corinthians 12)

4. Sometimes total healing by leaving this life is how God heals or ends suffering. (Acts 7:54-60)

5. If God doesn't heal, it may be that there is more value to us and to His mission in our suffering. (Philippians 1:21-30, Job)

6. Healing or not healing isn't a sign that God loves us more, or less. John 3:16 indicates clearly that God's expression of love was through His total sacrifice of Jesus in our place, so that we could have eternal life with Him. He cares about our eternal destiny more than our temporary journey, and He will do what is BEST for us in this part of our journey. It's a self-centered assumption to believe that what is always BEST for me is for me to always feel my best.

7. We can trust His promise to heal and should freely and openly ask Him for it. We should boldly believe the promise in Isaiah 53:5 that "by His wounds we are healed." But we should understand that THAT healing was focused on the eternal healing of being restored to God. We may see Him physically heal our temporary situation as a direct reflection of that permanent healing promised. But the big thing we need to avoid is bitterness, doubt, and withholding our trust in Him, if in His wisdom He would choose not to heal our temporary situation.

Again, no silver bullets here, but the quick summary is this: Is healing a real thing? Yes. Can we trust Him to do it? Yes. Is it always BEST for us? No. Do we have a greater hope than just temporary healing? Yes. Does God desperately love us no matter what we face in this life? Absolutely yes, and He goes through it with us, not only by our side but feeling our pain and working it toward His good, just like He did with Jesus.

If you are in need of healing, I pray God heals the situation you are asking Him to. And whether He does or doesn't, I pray He shows you how He is carrying you through, and exactly how He will use this temporary hurt for eternal and great good (Romans 8:28).

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.