As Iron Sharpens Iron: A Test

Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. (Proverbs 27:17 ESV)

This verse is, rightly I think, interpreted as a general wisdom that people need the input of each other to hone our hearts and minds in the pursuit of spiritual growth in God. I like the way Matthew Henry wrote it in his commentary:

"One man is nobody; nor will poring upon a book in a corner accomplish a man as the reading and studying of men will. Wise and profitable discourse sharpens men's wits; and those that have ever so much knowledge may by conference have something added to them."

Perhaps the writer of Hebrews had this sort of thing in mind when he wrote:

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. (Hebrews 10:24-25 ESV)

The ESV Study Bible comments on this verse:

"The third and final exhortation in vv. 22–25 calls for serious thinking about other Christians with a purpose to stir up (or “provoke”) them in their love and service (good works). Christian perseverance is thus also a community endeavor."

As Christians, we need other Christians in order to grow in godly wisdom. We need the mental correction of others to keep us from going astray. We need to seek and submit to each other’s correction.

As a Christian, I need interaction with other people. As one with a penchant for thinking outside the box and as one who loves truth above my desire to understand it, and yearn to grow in ministry, I earnestly desire the meaningful interaction of my fellow Christians. My hope has always been to develop the relationships with other Christians necessary for provoking them to grow in their Christian walk as well as receiving the same. I enjoy building others up in Christ as much as anything.

But I need to be built up as well. I blog in order to organize my thoughts. As a non-linear thinker I need to be able to make my thoughts linear in order to communicate them. As one gifted with a certain brand of intelligence, I’m prone to eccentricity. Therefore, it’s necessary to have meaningful feedback if I want to use this gift to edify people.

I’m already aware that few people read my blog articles. It’s extremely rare to receive any feedback from them. I have to consider that there are a few people who may read but never comment. Therefore, I have this request. If you regularly read what I write please leave a comment and let me know how what I write helps you or if I need to pursue some other activity that would be more fruitful. And I want to encourage you that doing so would be exceptionally meaningful. The response I get from this will let me know how important my thought life and spiritual growth is to other people.

To all who respond: thank you in advance.

The Perfect Church is Not Perfect

Looking for the perfect church? It doesn't exist for two reasons: First is because churches are made of people who are at best still undergoing sanctification. That is, we have been saved from the penalty of our sin, but we are still in the process of learning how to live like it in a world that remains fallen.

But the second reason is similar to the first: Sanctification provides the rest of the world with a practical view of the nature of God. It's one thing to say that we are graciously forgiven. It's another thing to handle ongoing sin as though we are graciously forgiven.

We may be called to glorify God individually in how we handle our sin, but it's a mistake in light of original sin to think of sin as being a purely individual phenomenon. More importantly than how the individual handles sin is how a church body handles sin.

Therefore, if you are looking for the perfect church, look for how a church handles sin and submit yourself to the church that will help to purify you in a practical way - not because the church is perfect, but because the people therein have been through their own struggles with sin and have submitted to the same pattern of corporately ministered mortification of that sin.

Stay away from any church that makes you feel good about yourself and ignores your sin. That provides the temptation to worship the church rather than Christ. Submit rather to churches that demonstrate humility in overcoming struggles with sin with honesty, repentance, grace and reconciliation.

HT: Resurgence

Confession, Repentance and Forgiveness

Recently, I made a reference to confession, repentance and forgiveness. I’ve been thinking about these things lately.

I go to church with a bunch of very godly people. I can’t say I’m one of them. They’re all my heroes. And I’m not writing this with my tongue in my proverbial cheek. I have a hard time believing that these people really sin much. I know they must sin some. I know that a few others sin more than I do. But I know who I was and I know that although I am forgiven, patterns of the past sometimes haunt my thoughts.

I consider that it is wise to preserve dignity when someone sins to avoid disclosure among the general membership of their church if they repent quickly. That’s certainly a Biblical thing. Even if one is unrepentant and his sin must needs become public, it is wise to put the matter away quickly and not discuss it lest some are tempted to gossip.

On the other hand, what model for normalization do we have for confession, repentance and forgiveness? This, not to mention church discipline. When we sin against another and the sin is not obvious, do we let it drop or will we hear each other's confession in private, accept the attitude of repentance displayed and offer forgiveness? Or do we fear that the blissful view of fellowship we hold so dear will be disturbed by the sinful disclosure of another, withhold forgiveness, and allow the broken relationship to go unmended?

Whose private sins are disclosed in the Bible of righteous men? Job sinned. Abraham sinned. Moses Sinned. Sampson sinned. Saul sinned. David sinned. Solomon sinned. Peter sinned. Paul sinned. These, just to name a few. How do we know they sinned? That is, how was it not held private that it ended up in the Bible? We know one sin of Peter’s that Paul openly wrote about. Yet these men each repented. We are neither justified by our appearance, nor are we justified by the disclosure of our sin openly in confession and repentance. We are justified only by Christ.

Christ taught in the Sermon on the Mount that “if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.” Do we do this or do we merely pretend to be reconciled to our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ?

As I've said, we keep each other at a distance to preserve some idealized level of comfort. But keeping our distance for this reason is self-centered and shows a lack of concern for our brothers and sisters in Christ. we need to be uncomfortably close in order to bear one another's burdens. Our sins chafe one another. Do we dare approach the forgiveness Christ showed us? He went to his death to bear our sin before the judgment of God. How uncomforatble was that? Can we so bear each other’s momentary sins as the body of Christ unto a more perfect fellowship?

I say these things because I do not think we do this very well. We focus more on appearances. It is certainly wise to preserve the dignity of our brothers and sisters who confess and repent by not disclosing the nature of their sin. However, it’s an easy transition from dignity to pride and the latter can be insidiously deceptive, especially to the proud. It’s a sin and needs to be confessed and repented of.

Old Photos: Late 1960s

Here's another interesting photo from the wedding. Mom and Dad were married at Middle District Church of the Brethren in Tipp City Ohio. I can't remember the name of Dad's best man, but you can see my grandparents in the right of the photograph, my mom's parents flanking my dad's parents. Just behind my dad is Mom's sister, my aunt Wilma, the Matron of Honor. Then the best man and his wife. Then Wilma's husband, Uncle Jerold Brewer. Beside Jerold is my mom's brother and his wife, Norman and Betty Reeder. The last couple is my mom's youngest sister, Ann, with her husband, Norman Weaver. The kids, from left to right are Marie Brewer, Jeanette Reeder, Bill Brewer and Sheila Brewer, who are my four oldest cousins and whose parents are also all in the photo.


The Church of the Brethren is an offshoot of the Mennonites. I can't say their distinction is great theology. As it is, the most I can come away with is that they are pacifistic and practice "trine immersion". Otherwise, they don't seem to really push theology as a denomination. This seems rather wishy-washy to me. Nevertheless, while some in the denomination have gone wrong in their teaching, most that I have seen have managed to keep it pretty close to center, although I can't say that it's a very deep center.

I do recall some in the church I grew up in still wearing the older style clothing. This is a gathering of the Brethren of some sort:


Here is my dad directing one of his high school bands:


My family always enjoyed camping and we often camped with our extended family. From right to left: cousin Bill, Uncle Norman Reeder, cousin Marie, cousin Jeanette and Aunt Betty:


At the other angle (with cousin Bill again in the foreground) from right to left: Uncle Jerold, Aunt Wilma, Cousin Sheila, Cousin Eric (being entertaining), and my little face being fed by my dad:


It seems I may have jumped ahead slightly. I had to come into this world at some point:


For some reason everyone always commented on my hair. Yes, it's standing straight up on it's own. It'll curl some if I let it, but it's too easily unkempt that way:


My little brother, Mark, also came along right at the end of the 60s. Hi, bro!


I think I take after my Ma-maw.

I remember always liking to play on the farm equipment, much to the chagrin of my parents. Not always, though. Mom was pleased enough to snap this photo of me on grandpa's tractor:


I showed this photo to my kids and asked them who it was. They thought it was my yongest son, Paul.

Here's an Easter photo of the kids for comparison:


God is good!

The Incarnation of Christ Through His Body, The Church

We may be a good church, but we still "represent Christ badly often". How do we handle it with unbelievers when we don't represent Christ the way we should? Romans 12:

1 Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.
2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

What was the purpose of Christ's actual human body?

So what does the metaphor of the "Body" of Christ mean for us?

Romans 12:

3 For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith.
4 For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function,
5 so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.
6 Since we have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, each of us is to exercise them accordingly: if prophecy, according to the proportion of his faith;
7 if service, in his serving; or he who teaches, in his teaching;
8 or he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness.

I Corinthians 12:

12 For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ.
13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
14 For the body is not one member, but many.
15 If the foot says, “Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body,” it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body.
16 And if the ear says, “Because I am not an eye, I am not a part of the body,” it is not for this reason any the less a part of the body.
17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense of smell be?
18 But now God has placed the members, each one of them, in the body, just as He desired.
19 If they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now there are many members, but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; or again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.”
22 On the contrary, it is much truer that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary;
23 and those members of the body which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our less presentable members become much more presentable,
24 whereas our more presentable members have no need of it. But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that member which lacked,
25 so that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are Christ’s body, and individually members of it.

Perhaps the most important observation from the metaphor is that the body must be subject to the head. You want to know how to have unity in the church? Listen to this next clip. If we shouldn't think to highly of ourselves and be in submission to one another, how much more should we be in submission to Christ?

Old Photos - Mission in Caney Valley: 1959-1961

I had earlier made mention of my mom having spent a couple of years as a missionary in the Appalacians. This is Caney Valley, Tennessee, circa 1960:

At the bend in the road you can see a small cabin. This was where my mom and the girl who partnered with her as a missionary lived. Here's a closer shot of the cabin during the winter:

This is a closer shot of the cabin with my grandparents and aunt Ann. She's younger than mom was and was still in high school at the time.


Here's a picture of my mom and the kids she taught Bible to:

Mom was always thin, but she gained a few pounds these couple of years. Perhaps it was because the people of the valley ate well as is evidenced by this photo taken next to the cabin:

Such a sight didn't bother mom. She was raised on a small midwestern farm and was well acquainted with agrarian food production. Besides, you have to slaughter the hogs if you want the barbecue:

Actually, that looks like it might be cake, but you can't have your cake untill you've polished off your lunch. These kids were my mom's kids as they sat in front of the church on what may have been a special Sunday. It didn't have to be a special Sunday for ball games. I've been told that many summer Sunday afternoons the people of the valley gathered to play ball:

It Was Only A Dream. However...

I don't remember many of my dreams anymore. The ones I do remember are often bizarre: crawling on a spider web stretched horizontally over a great glowing chasm, maze-like buildings filled with people I don't know, or the time I escaped the grim reaper by flying off the roof of a 3-story school building somewhere in the Midwest. I had a dream last night. I'm sick right now and my dream was made rather lucid by the combination of drugs and fever. You would think I'd have another bizarre dream.

It was actually a rather normal dream. I was younger, perhaps an adolescent, and so was my younger brother.

We were visiting a small town that had two churches. We had been to one church and found the congregation welcoming and the teaching sound. We liked it there, but my brother wanted to visit the other church.

It was an independent fundamentalist (indy fundy) church. My brother went in as people were seating and tried to find a seat. The building was small and there were only a few inches between the outside ends of the pews and the walls. (I don't know why the fire marshal ever approved that. But, hey, it's only a dream.) Therefore, the only way to get into the pews was from the center aisle which at the moment was congested with people making their way to their pews. As is typical, the coveted positions are right next to the pews so the first people to sit often sat right on the ends next to the aisle. As is also often typical in may churches, people had places that they preferred to sit.

As I walked into the back of the church I saw that my brother had tried to sit in a pew and was being forcibly removed by the owners of the pew. I came up and told him that we'll just find another pew. This became easier as people cleared out of the aisle and into the pews. However, all the ends of the pews were filled. There was space in some of the pews, but the owners of the pews were set against getting up and letting us in so we could sit down. There was even one man who blocked the way to an otherwise empty pew who refused to even make eye contact with me.

I told my brother we would just leave and go back to the other church. Then I called out and said, "We're leaving now! Bye!" The sad thing to me was that many people responded, "Ok. Bye!" Just as we got to the back of the church I heard a lady call out, "Wait! We have some room on our pew!" It had to be the fullest pew in the house. Her whole family was in it. They were scrunching together to make room for us.

It's a good thing it was only a dream. However, it's not implausible. My dream didn't really have to be about indy fundies. It could have been about anyone. I had a brief conversation recently about acquiring a taste for an indy fundy service. Add to that yesterday's post about false professors and you have the makings of an indy fundy dream.

I've had good and bad experiences with indy fundies. My dad's dad was a Southern Missionary Baptist preacher. I don't understand the association between the churches that he served, but it seems that he was always preaching in a different church. There was one church near his home that he ministered in regularly. So, each of the churches may have been associated somehow - would you call that "independent"? Even the Independent Baptist churches I know seem to be associated. So, I don't know. Nevertheless, he was as close to an indy fundy as any I've ever heard preach.

I sang the indy fundy circuit with a trio once. I had been adopted by a family of wild indy fundies a couple of years before I was married, and we used to sing together. This was a good experience. However, I was still a Lutheran at the time. The pastor of one church found this out afterward and said that he wouldn't have let me sing in his church if he had known I was a Lutheran. That was a bad experience.

Fundamentalism has a bad rep. Theoretically, fundamentalism holds a good foundational view to theology, which is good. However, many fundamentalists are not very foundational. Take the preacher in the next video for example. TomintheBox called his approach to exegesis "Sqirmeneutics" and I agree. For those who don't know, hermeneutics is the set of rules we use in order to properly understand the scriptures. Squirmeneutics, according to TomintheBox is "1. the science of misinterpretation, esp. of the Scriptures, to such a degree that it causes listeners with any common sense to squirm" or "2. misinterpretation of the Scriptures so absurd that it causes one to question whether or not it could possibly be for real."



This preacher has issues. First of all, unless he would call boys "men", he needs to consider that those who urinate against the wall include boys. "Males" is appropriate. Second, the males that are referred to here are not being referred to in a favorable light. They are marked for destruction. Thirdly, the expression "[urinate] against the wall" was an ancient Hebrew idiom for "males", not an admonition for men to stand up when they urinate. His conclusions are completely unfounded. Therefore his fundamentalism is nothing of the sort.

The point to this article is that Whether you're an indy fundy or some other breed of church member, we tend to become rooted more in our ecclesiological habits than in seeking to glorify God. We need to learn to recognize the difference.

There are so many expressions of worship, whether corporately or otherwise, and different styles of preaching that are legitimate to get stuck on a single routine. I love to see the exuberance of African worship or the intricate synchronization of Messianic circle dancing. I love to see the poignant dramas of Hispanic churches and hear the cries of prayer of a multitude of people calling on God at once. I love the sound of large choir and the singing of a lone soul in mourning. I loved the glottal punctuation of my papaw every time he breathed as he preached. I love the natural flow of words as a preacher speaks off-the-cuff from notes or the careful wording when he has written the sermon out ahead of time. I love a congregation that is involved in worship.

I hate sermons that are vapid and vacuous or simply untrue. I hate worship that is full of pretense and self-aggrandizement. May we all seek the better things.

False Professors

Dusman at Triablogue wrote an amazing article about church members who profess to be Christian, but are not.

Ask yourself if you are faithful in the following areas of the heart. Don't be surprised if you find yourself in one or more of these descriptions.

1. Immorality - pornography and adultery run rampant in evangelical churches. Christian men will desire to kill this sin and put it to death. False professors will covertly look for ways to continually hide it...
2. Impurity - pop evangelicalism is generally devoid of people with chaste and pure behaviors and motives.
3. Sensuality - pop evangelicalism, Christian Contemporary Music, and modern emergent "preaching" is rife with limelight guys and sultry chicks in tight garb, wiggly hips, complete with sassy, red-hot lyrics and lowbrow messages.
4. Idolatry - many pop-evangelicals have traded the biblical Jesus for a functional savior that only gives them temporal hope and joy. This functional savior can only last so long and when their creeping unbelief shatters that idol, a major paradigm shift takes place and they either outright leave their former profession in the dust or they jump from the frying pan into the fire by trading in their kit-car Jesus for another idol.
5. Sorcery - horoscope hunters and rock-rubbing pop-evangelicals and emergents are cool with mixing New Age mysticism, medieval monastic mysticism, and other sorcery with their "custom-fit" Christ.
6. Enmity - false professors always show a general hostility towards the true Christ of Scripture, His message, and His people (Rom. 8:7-8).
7. Strife - the false professor enjoys creating contention by pointing the finger at everyone else's sin as a means to show that they possess superior sanctification (Matt. 7:3-4).
8. Jealousy - some false professors are not happy with your natural display the fruits of the Spirit, and they want the gifts without submitting to the Giver of the gifts.
9. Outbursts of Anger - this is a chief characteristic of many false professors, as they have not the deep God-given desire nor the ability to control their anger when their idols are assaulted or their egos are exposed by the light of Christ.
10. Disputes - they enjoy a good fight for the sake of a good fight; whether its intellectual, verbal, or physical.
11. Dissensions - the false professor is a contentious quarreler. They love the fight and if you think they don't then just try to lovingly confront them with their divisive behavior and watch the sparks fly upward!
12. Factions - one of the characteristics of some false professors is that they are theological nitpickers who use very minor theological differences between believers as a reason for avoiding biblical accountability and discipleship.
13. Envy - since they really can't have Christian love, joy, peace, patience, . . . . self-control, et. al. because they don't have the spiritual equipment needed to produce these fruits, then they don't want *you* to have them either.
14. Drunkenness - because they lack self-control, some false professors show that lack by abusing alcohol and recreational/prescription drugs or they use their prescription drugs as an excuse to avoid being sober-minded.
15. Carousing . . . and things like these - the life of the false professor is characterized by a libertine lifestyle.

Go here to read the whole article.

How Do You Do Church?

I don’t mean to keep harping on the Regulative Principle, but the matter of ecclesiology keeps pegging away on the radar screen of my intellectual air space and I can’t help but to think that if I write about it it’ll go away and leave me to write about other things.

Tominthebox News Network continues to use exquisite humor (with the caveat that this compliment comes from someone whose sense of humor has been described recently as “corny”) to illumine our penchant for theological error. A recent article shared the pamphlet of a fictional church that combined a poor hermeneutical principle with the Regulative Principle to produce some interesting ecclesiological (how we do church and why we do it that way) results.

Hermeneutics are the principles we use to understand what the Bible means. For example, we use hermeneutics to determine if the word “all” in a passage means everyone everywhere, or just all of a certain type of people (population of a city or faith affiliation), or all ethnic groups but not everyone of every ethnic group. Perhaps you’ve heard a preacher refer to the number of times the Bible says something. I’ve heard this with regard to the teachings of Christ. It is noted by good teachers of the Bible that Christ mentions eternal condemnation at least as much as He mentions the kingdom of heaven. This isn’t necessarily a bad observation, but it makes for a poor hermeneutical principle. In other words, all Christ had to do was mention it once for us to know about it. Multiple mentions may indicate emphasis, but not necessarily.

In the case of this fictional church, they took this principle and counted the number of times different types of worship were mentioned in the Bible to determine their importance in worship. If it’s mentioned in the bible, it’s fair game as far as the Regulative Principle is concerned. If it’s not in there, don’t do it. Here’s the breakdown according to this pamphlet:

• Singing: "The Bible mentions "singing" 20 times (NIV)."
• Lifting Hands: "Not coincidentally, the Bible also mentions the lifting of hands 20 times (NIV) proving that the lifting of hands is equally important as singing."
• Dancing: "In the Bible, dancing is referenced 14 times in the NIV. It's referenced 19 times in the KJV! So hop to it!"
• Ripping Clothes: "Mentioned 29 times in the NIV (32 in the KJV), individuals would "tear," had "torn," or unashamedly "tore" their clothes as a sign of humility [in worship]... Why not participate in an activity that is 50% more important than singing or hand lifting and up to 100% more important than dancing? Sackcloth is available in the foyer for 1st time visitors."

The logic sounds plausible, but the conclusion is silly. So what’s the answer?

Dusman has posted a couple of articles [one and two] at Triablogue regarding the form and function of church. These articles are a response to a theological error fueling a movement of house churches called the New Testament Reformation Fellowship. There’s nothing wrong with house churches, but it’s erroneous to think that meeting in homes is the only legitimate way to do church. (Tominthebox has addressed this one as well recently.)

Dusman’s articles trace the form of church back to the conversion of believers. Soteriology (the gospel – the area of theology that deals with our salvation) is the crown jewel of theology with Christology as it’s setting and Theology Proper (the doctrine of God) as the crown itself. This means that Christ’s work on the cross is singularly important to our being able to know God. Pneumatology, Anthropology, Harmatology, Bibliology, etc. all encircle this crown jewel and are unknowable without the gospel. The act itself, written accurately in the passages of Holy Scripture, transcends the capacity of mere words to convey the depth of God’s self-cohesion.

This cohesion is to be illustrated in our local fellowship as we bear one another’s burdens. Dusman argues therefore, that the function of a local fellowship follows conversion. Only then do we derive the form of church – from the function. Whether a fellowship of believers is a small house church or a megachurch, the form must bring believers together for the sake of propagating the gospel. He offers an abbreviation of 58 “one-anothers” found in the New Testament for our consideration:

In sum, we promise to…

honor one another,
be members of one another,
live in harmony with one another,
build one another up,
be like-minded towards one another,
accept one another,
care for one another,
serve one another,
bear one another's burdens,
be kind to one another,
forgive one another,
abound in love towards one another,
comfort one another,
encourage one another,
stir one another up to love and good deeds,
confess our sins to one another,
be hospitable to one another,
greet one another,
fellowship with one another,
submit to one another while
not passing judgment on one another,
not provoking one another,
not envying one another,
not hating one another,
not slandering one another,
and not bearing grudges against one another.

We do all this because Christ has loved us in each of these ways and this frees our hearts to love one another as He has loved us (John 13:34; 8:32).

And He loved us sacrificially. Consider this: do you focus on the form or the function of the church with regard to the glorification of Christ and the ministry of the gospel? Do you treat your fellow Christians like this?

Infidelity and Divorce Among the Faithful

Emotional attraction is a mysterious thing to me. It seems that there are so many factors in the attraction equation. In all cases, the question of attraction can be boiled down to one observation, and that is this: that one is attracted to something or someone because there is a need that one perceives, often not consciously or deliberately, that the object of the attraction can meet. We tend to be attracted to people for friendship because the personality of certain others is such that we wish to identify with them. They may resonate with us in some way or exhibit characteristics that we don’t have, but wish we did.

I’m attracted to unique individuals because I am a unique individual and most everyone else has a level of predictability that fails to stimulate me interpersonally. We may choose a certain automobile because we think that others will see us favorably, or at least more accurately, behind the wheel. I know people who drive vans and call them SUVs. Why? Because they perceive a certain sociological stigma with driving a van and they fear being identified as one who is in such mean estate as to warrant driving a van.

One thing my wife and I learned in premarital counseling is that it is unreasonable to expect one’s spouse to meet all of one’s emotional needs. We are to be identified with one another explicitly, exclusively, mutually and mortally with regard to our marital covenant. However, while we are principally and in principle to meet one another’s needs, realistically we will each have needs that may preclude our capacity to fulfill our purpose from time to time. God is certainly aware of this.

No married couple is an island. We have the sociological context of family, church and community, all of which may overlap. We must develop good relationships with those outside the marriage who likewise support our marriage. When the struggles of daily life present the temptation to play the Adam, Eve and serpent blame game, we need the ear of someone who won’t be put off by the disclosure of our distress and who is trustworthy to provide the proper perspective on the sacrificial service we are called to bear for our spouse.

The divorce rate is alarmingly high. The divorce rate among Christian churchgoers is no different than that outside the church. Perhaps it is because mature Christians don’t cohabitate sans marriage like many non-Christians. If you throw the breakups of cohabitating couples into the statistical mix, then a striking difference may be noted. Nevertheless, Christians should not be divorcing each other.

What has changed to cause the divorce rate has escalated? Perhaps it is that sociological expectations have changed. Commitment to a marriage was once expected of spouses by those who knew them and had some influence in their lives. But the influence of others has changed. Wher we were once influenced locally by others who knew us, we have been increasingly influenced by the opinions of celebrities in the media who decidedly don't know us.

Who gives others influence over our lives? We do. However, it is a sign of weakness to allow others to have influence over us. We know this because we allow those who espouse such a view to have influence over us. We see the view espoused in movies. We see popular people and strong leaders who have other bend their will to theirs by for no other reason than they have a charisma that draws other people to them - not because they are particularly wise.

The people who should have influence over us are those who who would improve our marriage. First, our spouse, inasmuch as he or she is obedient to Christ. Secondly, our freinds and family inasmuch as they are obedient to Christ. Thirdly, our church family and ministers inasmuch as they are obedient to Christ. Christ established the pattern for a marriage in the willingness to sacrifice all for your spouse.

The same sociological degredation that is destroying our marriages also causes distrust in the community at large. We suspect, often correctly so, that when others ask how we are doing today they don't really want to know the truth. We are often more concerned with whether we are being awkward than with building true friendships. We don't engage others on a level where they are in a position to influence us positively because we don't trust that they will actually want to help us. Furthermore, and not so tangentially, the homosexual agenda has caused otherwise straight people to fear this sociological intimacy that is necessary for personal influential accountability.

When we don't recieve the emotional intimacy we need through appropriate means, we are prone to percieve that the need can be met in otherwise inappropriate ways. A husband who finds himself attracted to a woman who is not his wife percieves that she will meet the needs that are not being met otherwise. For a church to handle an adulterous husband with proper church discipline is good. However, when the church fails to encourage the appropriate relationships that would have prevented the adultery in the first place, then the church as a body needs to repent for they have not ministered to the sinful man and encouraged righteousness. Indeed, the ills of fallen society have permeated our Christian fellowship.

I've become increasingly convicted of this and have sought to find a means to encourage the growth of a men's ministry in my church which has a corporate foundation, but draws on the strength of the personal invesment of individuals in the ministry. A program will fail, but changing sociological expectations is the only way to succeed in changing the viability of marriages in the church. If you are a Christian man, I encourage you to take steps in your own church to these ends for it is only on a local level through the actions of individuals that this trend will change and we will become truly faithful to Christ in our marriages.

Iredell County Goes High-Def

I love Google Earth. I have visited places I haven't been in awhile. I've visited places that don't exist anymore. I love to scan places around the world both remote and well populated alike. I wonder about the people there. I pray for them and long to see them. I look at ancient sites and wonder how much they've changed. I pan, rotate and tilt the view to look at mountains, canyons, hills and valleys.

Over the past few years I've seen more and more sites updated to high definition. I saw Easter Island go from a fuzzy blob to a place where you can see tiny little statues dotting the hills. I saw the Arecibo observatory go from a dot to a place where you can see the suspended collector. I saw our places in Venezuela become more than just some lines and dots. now I can see where we visited people, and the places we've laid our weary heads after a long day in the Venezuelan heat.

Until recently, much of North Carolina was low definition save for Charlotte, Winston Salem and parts of the coast. Now it appears as though the whole State has been updated to moderate definition, but Iredell County of note has been updated to high definition. In downtown Statesville, one can see tiny little people on the walks. I have screen captured my places from above so you can see. We have determined that the photography was done early in 2006.

Here is my home in the country:

The mobile home was where Lois and I first lived. We now rent it out and live in the house. We own the wooded area behind the land the buildings are on as well as the garden. My father-in-law owns the trees on the other side of the garden and the field beyond that. The roof of the main house has since been rebuilt. The addition on the south side is where my office is. The extension behind the house is a living area, garage and garden porch that my father-in-law and I built. in this photo you can note that my father-in-law has just done some landscaping next to the garden. We have since landscaped the area between the house and the driveway and put new gravel in the driveway.


This is where I work:

Kewaunee Scientific Corporation. I am the Production Controller of the Resin Materials Division. The Resin Plant makes those heavy black tops you've seen in school laboratories.

Finally, this is the church where I am a member:

Western Avenue Baptist Church. You can find out all about us at the web site.

Festival of Tables

It's been a few days since I've posted. We've been getting ready for Festival of Tables. Also, I've updated the "I Will Go - Yo Iré" video with a live recording of yours truly. I'm no Steve Green, but it personalizes it.

Ok - Festival of Tables is a time to have fun and create an environment where women can relax at a nice table, have some good conversation, be waited on hand and foot by a team of men and be presented life-changing information. I wish I could get a picture of all the people, but it's not conducive for photo-bugging once the evening gets started. One does the best one can prior to the evening and theres only a limited time once the candles are lit.

Now, it must be said, that the tables are typically decorated by women who in turn invite friends to sit with them. There are often enough places left for women who want to come and dine to have a place. The women who decorate a table will typically serve as hostess to the table. There have been a few creative husbands who have greatly desired to gotten roped into decorating their wives' tables over the years. Some have suggested that we start a men's Festival of Tables. Masculine themes like yardwork, engineering, home improvement and great theologians sound like fun. I would say sports, but a few of the women are doing sports themes.

My table My wife's table this year was a Venezuela theme. I created a Venezuelan Flag using three pieces of material three yards each - yellow, blue and red. I cut the 8 stars out of felt. I used a cake riser with a small flag on the bottom tier and yellow tissue paper to cover the top two. The top tier had a mixed array of three candles to emulate the eclectic nature often found in Venezuela out of necessity. On the other two tiers and on the table around the cake riser I arranged various pieces of pottery and clay craft trinkets we have received as gifts from our brothers and sisters there. The place settings were chosen to emulate the traditional thatch huts that still dot the water's edge of the rivers. These huts were the reason Spanish explorers named the area "Venezuela" or "Little Venice".




My wife's table Heather Canon's table, was a theme based on a women's ministry that grew out of Girlfriend Connection. This new ministry is called "Silver Boxes". That was the theme at the table:




This was the lobby:



These were the rest of the tables. Click on any to see them closeup:





One notable table was by Katie Hatchet. She had some sort of decorated structure with a tree from the table growing up through the top. Her theme was "Thanksgiving":