by | November 10, 2013 · 10:22 pm

Sunday Wind Down

The day is about over, and here I sit at the computer. I am tired, my feet hurt, my throat is sore, and I am brain-drained. On top of that, I am emotionally and spiritually spent.

It’s Sunday night, and I’m a pastor.

Others go to church, sometimes for both morning and evening services, but usually just for an hour a week.

I worked all week in a regular job, worked a few odd jobs, visited sick people in hospitals, answered late-night calls, prayed with the hurting, studied for three sermons and a Sunday school lesson, when I could squeeze in the time, and then put in more study on Saturday. Did I get a day of rest? Did I play golf? No.

I’ve been up since 5:30 a.m., it’s Sunday night, I’m tired, and I’m a bi-vocational pastor.

I did watch some TV (Duck Dynasty) with my family and four visitors who came over after church, had a late snack, and turned on the clothes dryer for my wife. So, it’s not like I haven’t done anything fun.

I’m about ready to go to bed in order to get up at 5:30 a.m. (again) in order to drive a school bus. I’m not complaining, however – at least I still have a job.

It’s Sunday night, I’m tired, and I’m a pastor.

Tomorrow, I will start my work week all over again. I will face the morning with hope and a joy unspeakable and full of glory. I’ll do my best, with the Lord’s help, but it will be Monday…(I hate Mondays).

So, if you see me tomorrow morning and I don’t offer you a “hallelujah,” give me a break. If I don’t look like Joel Osteen after a visit to a spa, cut me some slack. At least let me drink a cup or two of coffee before you start judging.

I’m a pastor, but I’m only human.

7 Comments

Filed under Do not judge, General Observations, Life Lessons, Preaching

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | November 5, 2013 · 6:03 pm

Kissing Deer and Talking Sharks

This morning, as the first elementary children entered my bus, one child said to another, “Granny said to sit down!” Evidently, Granny had been giving some instruction on the way to the bus stop.

Teaching wisdom, one child at a time.

Teaching wisdom, one child at a time.

As we started to pull away from the stop, I glanced back to my right and saw the youngest little girl standing, along with the grandmother scowling and pointing a finger from the sidewalk. “You shouldn’t be standing,” I said, “especially if your granny said not to.”

Then, after a 2-minute story of what this little kindergartner did for her birthday, I proceeded to share with the rest of the children and her what other things they shouldn’t do. Why did I do this? I don’t know, but it was certainly interesting to here their responses.

Things You Shouldn’t Do

  • Don’t eat worms with syrup. No matter what, they don’t taste like spaghetti.
    • “I did. They taste like chicken! And they’re slippery!”
  • Don’t ever kiss a deer on the lips.
    • One girl asked, “Why not?” Another answered, “Because it might want to go out on a date with you, and dear won’t fit in a car.”
    • “I saw a video where a guy made a dear mad because he took its picture.”
  • Never take a picture of a deer until you know it has makeup on and its hair done.
  • Never take a dear, or especially a moose, out to dinner on a date.
    • “Why not?” asked one girl. “Because a moose won’t fit into your car, for sure, and they won’t serve a moose at a restaurant!” said another. I said, “And a moose has no table manners and can’t use a fork,” to which a little girl replied, “that would be a mess.”
  • Never, ever, lick a cheese grater.
    • “Why not?”
  • If a bear comes up to you and asks, “Can I scratch your back?” say, “NO!”
    • “What if it wants to drive your car?”
  • If you are ever walking by the water, and a fish sticks it head out of the water to talk and says, “Hey, come over here,” don’t.
    • “Why?”
    • “Iffa shark eva stick it head outta da watah un say, ‘C’mere, I wanna tell you somp’n,‘ DON’T DO IT!”

Wisdom

Really, it is amazing how children can show practical wisdom, even when they have no experience. All some kids know is that if it ain’t natural, like a shark trying to start up a conversation, then run away.

However, as we grow older and “wiser,” the things that used to be so simple grow more complicated. We desire the forbidden pleasures Granny used to warn us about, along with every other experience a liberated mind can dream up. We date the moose and schedule tickle fests with grizzly bears.

But in a day when men and women pride themselves in experience and boast in the knowledge gained from sin, Wisdom cries out like the little old granny from the street, “Listen to me! I’m warning you!”

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” declares the Psalmist (111:10). But fools, captivated by the unnatural, politically-correct, whatever-makes-me-happy talking shark, jump into the water.

Too bad real wisdom gets left on the bus.

Note: For 4 hours this post was up and running with a major misspelling – “dear” was supposed to be spelled “deer.” The only one to clue me in was my daughter, Katie. She cared. How sweet. The rest of you must have been sleeping at the computer.

Related articles

2 Comments

Filed under Culture Wars, current events, Defending Traditional Marriage, General Observations, Humor, Life Lessons, wisdom

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | November 4, 2013 · 10:18 am

A Long Post About “Begotten” and Awkward Outbursts

I hate it when someone tells me that they are listening to me, but then do other things while I am talking. For example, when I talk to my wife, I prefer that she put down the phone, the dishes, the laundry, and quit sending emails and texts when I have something important to tell her (notice I used the word “and,” not “or” in the list of things she does). Call me selfish, but it is important to me that I know someone is listening when she says she is.

The reasoning for this preference of mine became embarrassingly evident last night at Taco Bell. My wife said she was listening to me, but only partly so. I will now share with you how I know this to be true.

The Subject

Yesterday (Sunday) morning I preached a sermon drawn from John 3:16. It was a powerful message stressing the grace of a loving God who would give His One and Only Son, Jesus, as a ransom for our souls. It was a message that also stressed, among other things, the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. Therefore, part of the sermon dealt the Greek word monogenēs (translated “only begotten”).

So, last night, after church and choir practice, my family and a friend went to Taco Bell for a late night gut bomb. As we sat there in the restaurant, my wife asked me to go back over some of the things I shared regarding the King James word “only begotten.” As I began to do so, I noticed she was only half-listening as she tried to maintain another conversation with our two daughters sitting with us.

I shared how that it was unfortunate for so many KJV-only-ers to come down harshly on other translations that change “only begotten Son” to “One and Only Son.” Many claim that the change is an attempt to pervert Scripture; to deny the divinity of Jesus. Yet, what many don’t understand is that the word “begotten” is not the best word that could be chosen to support the very biblical doctrine of the Trinity.

“Only-Begotten”

The King James Study Bible’s notes on John 3:16 explain monogenēs (translated “only begotten”) in the following way (note the highlighted parts):

The Greek word monogenēs is used by John to convey only the unique relationship between God the Father and Jesus as the Son of the Father. It serves to distinguish Christ as the only Son of God, in contrast with the many children of God. The uniqueness of this relationship is further emphasized by the fact that we become the children of God whereas Jesus always was the Son of God.[1]

Note, nothing is said about why the word “begotten” was used in the first place, nor what the  definition of monogenēs actually is. According to sources such as A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, the Louw-Nida Greek Lexicon, the Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint, and the Greek Lexicon of the Septuagint, the word translated “only-begotten” actually means “unique,” “only,” and “the only member of a kin, only-begotten, only (of children) Jgs 11,34; id. (of God) Od 14,13; alone in its kind, one only.”[2]

So, even though “only-begotten” can be used to translate monogenēs, it is obvious that the actual theological meaning implied is that Jesus is the One and Only, totally unique, never created, always God, Son of God – the Word made flesh. Therefore, in my opinion, it is unnecessary for KJV-onlyists to condemn the translating of monogenēs into language that more accurately reflects the theology they are actually trying to preserve.

I find the following selection from Eardmans Bible Dictionary very interesting…

The KJV translation of Gk. monogenḗs “only, unique, one of a kind,” used (following Vulg. Lat. unigenitus) with reference to both Jesus Christ (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9) and Issac (Heb. 11:17). Most other translations consistently read “only,” while the NIV translates “the one and only” with regard to Jesus. In English “only begotten” implies a created being, an implication not conveyed by the Greek term (cf. Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38).[3]

As I explained to my wife and a friend, there is nothing wrong with changing a word to better reflect the actual meaning, especially when the modern understanding of the word being used tends to give credence to an un-biblical, heretical theology!! Consider the following section (especially the bolded parts) from Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible…

The phrase “only-begotten” is not an accurate translation and should not be used in any of the nine passages. This phrase is derived from the Latin Vulgate (a translation of the Bible from about the 5th century which has been quite influential on other translations) and reflects certain theological debates about the person of Christ. …Ultimately the phrase “begotten not made” leads to what theologians call the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son. …“Only-begotten” is an incorrect translation. The idea being stressed is the uniqueness of Jesus’ relation to the Father. [4]

The irony is that I am the one who will be slammed and denigrated as a liberal “operative of Satan” who wants to change the Truth of Scripture. In the meantime, I am doing nothing but trying to “take heed unto…thy doctrine” (1 Timothy 4:16).

The Punchline

So, sitting in Taco Bell, I talked with my friend about monogenēs, at one point breaking down the word into its two parts, “mono” and “genes.” Unfortunately, sometime in the conversation I made a slip and mixed my words, saying “homogenes” (as in homogeneous). When I looked at my wife and asked, “Are you even listening?” She loudly, where everyone in the whole stinking place could hear her…

“HOMO! I got it! I GOT the HOMO!”

Here’s a lesson: if Greek bores you, keep silent about it in public places.

[1] King James Version Study Bible ., electronic ed. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997).

[2] Johan Lust, Erik Eynikel, and Katrin Hauspie, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint : Revised Edition (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart, 2003).

[3] Allen C. Myers, The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1987), 782.

[4] Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 1590.

1 Comment

Filed under God, Humor, legalism, Love of God, Preaching, Theology, translations

Tagged as , , ,

by | November 2, 2013 · 12:04 am

Legalism In Pink

Football

It’s called football, but it’s not soccer, which is football everywhere else. It’s a game in which boys and men (if you can distinguish the two), and now sometimes even females, put on helmets and plastic body armor in order to give coaches a job and colleges a way to make money.

Football is a game that is so associated with testosterone and adrenalin that even the girls who now play in the game are said to be growing beards. There is supposed to be nothing wimpy, wussy, or feminine about football.

However, due to the rise in popularity of promoting breast cancer awareness, the color pink has infiltrated the formerly masculine gridiron.

“Save the Ta Tas”

To be honest, I am sick of the sexualization of such a deadly disease. Each October the adds start appearing everywhere, seemingly promoting more breast awareness than cancer awareness. And even though I have family who have been hurt by this disease, I question the ultimate value of “ta tas” and “boobies” around every corner.

pink footballBut just when some thought football was one of the last bastions of male chauvinism and immune from feminization, along came the publicists and promoters of pink ribbons. Now, every October, football players of every age, from elementary school to the NFL, wear more pink than a newly birthed piglet.

Legalism on Display

Now, just in case you are getting angry with me, as if I want women to get breast cancer, just chill and listen to what I have to say. What really irritates me is not the attempt to raise breast cancer awareness; it’s the attitude shown to those who don’t want to wear pink.

Not long ago I had to drive a middle school football team to a game. As these tough, smelly, sweaty football players were preparing to load the bus I started asking them, “Why are you wearing pink socks?” The reply was typically, “I don’t know, they just gave us this stuff to wear.” Literally, none of these boys had a clue why they were wearing pink. All they knew was that they were supposed to wear pink because that’s what they were told to do, just like the professionals whom they idolize.

 Legalism: “Do what you’re told and you won’t get in trouble.” Legalism: “If you aren’t wearing pink, you must want women to get cancer.” Legalism: “I want the girls to like me, so I’ll wear these pink shoes and wrist bands.” Legalism: “I don’t know why I am wearing this, but if I don’t, people will get angry and look down on me.”

Grace: Playing the game without feeling you have to change the way you look in order to please someone else, then donating to breast cancer research because you want to.

Related articles

5 Comments

Filed under legalism

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | October 31, 2013 · 12:16 pm

Is There a “Hired Heretic” Union?

Happy Whatever!

Whether you are celebrating Halloween or Reformation Day, I hope your day is a happy one. I don’t wish anyone ill will, even if you’re dressed like a witch with a sugar craving, or sneaking around nailing lists to church doors. Just have fun and be safe, OK?

Bus Sitting

At this moment I am sitting on a school bus in Riceville, Tennessee. After my morning route I drove 60 kids from Battle Elementary to a farm. So, while the little munchkins are out finding pumpkins and petting goats, I’m trying not to freeze.

My only problem is that I forgot to bring a hat, a jacket, or any kind of food or drink. All I have is my iPhone, so that’s why I’m blogging. It will take my mind off my hunger.

Caustic Comment

A while back I wrote a post entitled “Was John R. Rice a Heretic?” In that piece I dealt with the issue of KJV-onlyism and the fact that Dr. Rice, founder of Sword of the Lord, was not a KJV-only subscriber. What came after were a slew of hateful comments from KJV-onlyists (preservationists).

Therefore, instead of complaining about being cold and hungry in a bus parked in a corn field, I wanted to share with you the latest and greatest comment I’ve received. I hope you will be encouraged and uplifted as you read the following words most assuredly written in love…

My beloved, nothing is ever going to change the truth that God has preserved his word in the English language only in the old king james 1611. Frankly speaking,If you don’t see the truth it is just because the god of this world has blinded you.
Your modern versions translate the word virgin to young woman,perverting the virgin birth of our saviour. Are you not ashamed of that,you hired heretic from the pit of hell?
You can say I’m harsh but the fires of hell will be more harsh on you because these modernists who pervert God’s word have hired a candidate of hell like you to speak good of them.
Who do you even think you are to copyright God’s word? CAN’T YOU SEE WHY GOD WILL THROW YOU INTO HELL AND LEAVE YOU THERE FOREVER?

Besides never knowing I owned a “copyright” on any version of the Bible, I am surprised to find out that I was hired by modernists to pervert the very doctrines I thought I believed. If the dark forces of liberalism paid this “candidate of hell” anything, it wasn’t negotiable at the bank. I’ve been cheated!

I guess that’s why I’m sitting, shivering, and starving on this bus as I try to earn a few extra dollars. Evidently, being an unknowingly hired heretic from the pit of hell doesn’t pay very well.

4 Comments

Filed under baptist, blogging, legalism, Martin Luther, Theology, translations

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | October 29, 2013 · 11:09 pm

The Non-Boyfriend Boy Friend

Girls

Here I am, 46 years into my trip toward room temperature, and I am still having to deal with girls’ emotions. I have been coming to terms with not understanding women, or at least knowing when to stay away when they feel like expressing their intelligence. And nearly 20 years of marriage has conditioned me for another 20 years of “whatever’s” and “yes dears.” So why now, after I have paid my dues, must I once again deal with teenage girls?

My dating years were not the best of years. My self esteem was irreparably scarred by the time one of my first dates asked me to drop her off early…in a parking lot…alone. Girls were like a fire to which I was drawn, and I was the helpless bug continually getting squashed. Therefore, since I am convinced teenage girls are hosts to alien invaders, why must I be forced to give aid and comfort to the enemy of mankind?

If I had to guess, part of the curse of the Fall was having to raise teenage girls. You can’t live with them, and you can’t ______ (you fill in the blank – I’m not going to incriminate myself) their boyfriends.

Boyfriends

I was once a boyfriend, and I hated myself for it. That is why I think it is my responsibility to guide other young men away from my daughters. Being a boyfriend is the last thing they should want to be. Staying away is best thing they can do.

However, what I find troubling is the attempt my daughter is making to fool me. She insists that her friend, a boy, is not a boyfriend. Yet, whenever a letter comes in the mail (in between the 42,584 texts), she grins and squeals as she reads it over and over. She invites him over to bake for him on his birthday and have pictures made together with their cheeks touching each other’s goofy faces. Believe, where there is chocolate, followed by physical contact of any kind, I am not fooled.

Between the Lines

So, tonight I made a comment that got Katie asking me all kinds of questions. In casual conversation, my so-far-alien-free daughter, Haley, asked, “When Katie and ____ (insert name or expletive, doesn’t matter) get married…” Excuse me?

That’s when I interrupted with, “She is not gonna marry _____.”

My single, unmarried, unspoken-for, and alien-inhabited daughter, Katie.

My single, unmarried, unspoken-for, and alien-inhabited daughter, Katie.

Later, when I was sitting at the computer, Katie came to kiss me goodnight and asked, “Why did you say I couldn’t marry ______ (insert name of endangered species)?”

Correct me if I am wrong, but was I not told that the non-boyfriend was just a friend? Then why would my statement about who she’s not going to marry be an issue? If my dad had told me I wasn’t going to marry my friend Kevin, it wouldn’t have hurt my feelings one bit. So what’s the deal with endangered boy and daydreamer?

If she marries he-who-walks-on-thin-ice, then I’ll be forced to like him. Until then, what’s wrong with simply protecting a non-boyfriend from a danger he can’t understand? Who knows? If I spare him from being abducted by an alien, I might be the best friend the non-boyfriend boy friend could ever have.

He will thank me, later.

1 Comment

Filed under Defending Traditional Marriage, Defining Marriage, Future, Life Lessons, Parenting, Relationships and Family, wisdom

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | October 28, 2013 · 11:25 pm

Trying to Understand the Undead

Halloween

I hate Halloween. But if you are a big fan, one who looks forward to the glorification of death, evil, and the grotesque, then ghoul for you. My minimal desire for bags of candy and apples bobbed for in spit-filled water is not enough to make me dress up like a satanic mass murderer, which is what most costumes seem to portray.

Actually, this time of year gets on my nerves, and one of the biggest reasons is the proliferation of horror movies. Horror movies don’t scare me that much; they tick me off! They are always full of idiots walking into the dark asking, “Buffy, is that you?” And what’s worse, so many of today’s horror flicks involve ghostly, demonic hauntings by creepy dead kids. HINT: if a soaking-wet dead girl crawls out of a well and starts climbing through your TV, change the channel (preferably to a Christian station).

On a side note, has it ever occurred to anyone that all the demonic activity pictured in horror movies is nothing more than an attempt to convince us that the spiritual realm is real?

Really, I hate Halloween. I find no pleasure celebrating the very Enemy taking my friends and loved ones to hell.

The Undead

But what I really don’t get is the “undead”…zombies…Michael Jackson’s dance partners. Can somebody help me understand the logic behind the capabilities and actions of walking corpses?

English: A participant of a Zombie walk, Asbur...

English: A participant of a Zombie walk, Asbury Park NJ, USA. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There has been so much talk about zombies, lately. There have been a lot of movies and television programs devoted to grossing us out with their nastiness and appetite for human flesh. What’s the deal? Is it just an attempt to shift our attention away from the spiritual to the natural or animalistic? Who knows?

All I know is that the walking dead make no sense. Consider the following:

  1. Health. Why is it that when I have the flu I feel as good as dead, yet when a zombie is dead he feels more alive than me? If I break a bone I can’t function, but a zombie can have all his bones broken and break into an armored car! Have you seen what people die from? Why is it they have more energy once they’ve rotted away than when they were still exfoliating?
  2. Appetite. Why is it that the walking dead never seem to recognize that their fellow walkers are also human, and edible? And why are humans the only meat worth eating? Why don’t the walking dead break into grocery stores, butcher shops, and kennels? Seriously, don’t the dead understand that there is far more meat and brains in a cow?! Why eat the farmer???
  3. Blood. I’ve had too much experience in funeral homes to buy the idea that zombies coming out of graves have bright, red, flowing blood. How many walking dead have you seen dripping embalming fluid? Hmmm?
  4. Speed. Why can’t healthy people, including clumsy women in high heels, outrun people with muscles falling off the bone? Bones don’t work alone to cause movement; limbs need muscles to function. Even if one tripped over every blade of grass in an attempt to flee a rotting granny, how fast could granny be?
  5. Practicalities. If old people become zombies, do they have to keep their false teeth in order to chew their neighbor? Also, what is the life expectancy of something that is already dead? Oh, and when a zombie eats a human, where does the meat go? Do zombies poop?

The Real Undead

To be very honest, I am more afraid of my own stinking flesh than some dancer from Thriller.

“O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” (Romans 7:24)

I must crucify it on a daily basis and live in the life of Jesus Christ (Romans 13:14). For if I live in the power of my own zombie-like self, I will die: but if through the Spirit I put to death the deeds of this stinking body, I shall live (Romans 8:13).

24 Comments

Filed under Christian Maturity, current events, General Observations, Humor, World View

Tagged as , , , , ,

by | October 23, 2013 · 3:44 pm

Embarrassing Local News

The News

What is it about being on “the news?” We go home and grab the wife and kids and say, “Honey! I was standing by a horrible car crash when the T.V. station pointed a camera at me! I’m gonna be on the NEWS!”

I have been written about in the news paper several times for different reasons (none crime-related). I have even been seen on local television news defending prayer at football games and chastising the city council for misappropriating tax dollars. But even if all I was doing was standing in line to buy fuel, it’s still fun to be spoken of in “the news.”

But sometimes being in the news is just plain embarrassing.

Dateline: Soddy-Daisy

Some places have a reputation for rearing bright, intelligent, first-class thinkers and leaders, like scholars, inventors, CEO’s, and U.S. Presidents (ok, we can discuss that last one later). But Soddy-Daisy needs to be careful of who they allow in the news, or before long they will have a reputation of bringing up idiots and fool-headed morons.

Soddy-Daisy, please don’t get angry with me! I lived there for years, as my mother and grandmother still do. I have lots of friends in Soddy-Daisy and consider it a great place to live. But seriously, you need to be careful about what kind of news stories you allow to get out. The one about the guy falling from the tree is now going global (thanks to me, ha!).

So, here’s the story….late last night (Tuesday, Aug. 22) a man was rescued from the woods after falling 70 feet from a tree. He suffered several fractures, but was lucky to be found alive after spending several hours calling for help.

(Puma concolor) aka: Mountain Lion, Puma

(Puma concolor) aka: Mountain Lion, Puma (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

But here’s the REST of the story….he climbed the tree because he was chasing a mountain lion!

Just a few observations, then I’m done…

  1. Don’t go into the woods (forest) without a shock-resistant cell phone. They make calling for help much more effective.
  2. Mountain lions are not cuddly kittens. You don’t want to catch one in the wild.
  3. If you feel the need to chase a mountain lion in the woods, seek psychological help immediately. I mean, seriously, what did it do, steal your wallet?
  4. If a mountain lion decides to run from you and not towards you, one of two things should be done: a) you should stop, drop, and pray to God, giving thanks that your life was spared; or b) take a bath.
  5. If for some reason you desire to chase a fleeing mountain lion up a tree, remember gravity is not your friend. Therefore, while in the tree you will be fighting two enemies: a big cat with knives for fingernails and the laws of nature.
  6. If you fall out of a tree after chasing a mountain lion up the tree, don’t tell anyone, especially the news! Otherwise, you will be considered the biggest moron on the face of the planet, thereby further contributing to the bad press banjo-dueling rednecks already get.
  7. The mountain lion should have killed you, you big dummy!
Related articles

1 Comment

Filed under animals, current events, General Observations, Life Lessons, wisdom

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

by | October 22, 2013 · 7:00 pm

Should We Pay the Preacher?

Preacher ‘Preesheeashun

Pastor Appreciation DayOctober is “Pastor Appreciation Month” here in America. Churches all over the place are planning different ways to show their pastors how much they care. Thankfully, Riverside (my church) is no exception: this Sunday, after the morning worship, a covered dish luncheon has been planned. Even though I don’t think anyone is planning on giving me the keys to a new Cadillac, Mexican cornbread would be nice.

The Reason for This Post. Because of all this ‘preecheeashun talk, I feel it is appropriate to address something rarely discussed: pastoral compensation.

In a recent edition (Aug. 16) of the Sword of the Lord newspaper, the editor ripped some comments historian David Barton made during an interview with Glenn Beck. The issue being debated was whether or not a pastor should receive an income from the church.

Should pastors be paid to be pastors? Should they earn their living elsewhere? What does the Bible say? Barton and the Sword of the Lord stand in opposition on this subject. I wonder where my opinion will fall?

Barton’s Belief

In June of 2013, ChristianPost.com discussed an interview historian David Barton had with conservative radio personality Glenn Beck. In that interview Barton spoke of the need for pastors to be more like Paul and become “bivocational.” Anything else he considered “church welfare.”

david barton

David Barton, Wallbuilders.com

“What they (pastors) believe is that they can’t survive without it. Now, I’m a big believer in the way Paul did it. Paul was bivocational. He had his own income so that he wasn’t dependent on a church…Right now what happens is so many ministers depend on their church, and I’m sorry, I often call it church welfare. These are guys that get their check from the church and they don’t want to mess with their check, don’t want to jeopardize that.”

“It’s time for more pastors to become bivocational so that nobody can tell them what to do with their money. They own their own money…If the church money dries up, great, they are still ministers and they can still preach because they’ve got an income. So I’m really into that mold. And until we get out of the church welfare mold, the church takes care of me and I can’t afford to lose my check from the church. It’s going to be really tough to get the guys in a different direction.” – from ChristianPost.com

Essentially, Barton believes that a pastor should get a job outside of ministry so that he (the pastor) can better perform the work of ministry. In other words, a self-funded pastor is better than a fully-funded pastor.

Note: someone should inform David Barton of the statistics…most pastors are already bivocational. The economy and declining church attendance has made sure of that.

The Sword’s Swipe

In response to David Barton, the Sword of the Lord editor, Dr. Shelton Smith, wrote the following:

dr-shelton-smith-bio

Dr. Shelton Smith, editor of Sword of the Lord

“Barton is ill advised on this. First of all, it is totally scriptural for pastors to be paid and paid well (1 Tim. 5:17,18).

Secondly, if a pastor hesitates to “take a stand” because he is “taking a salary,” he needs to get a backbone and use it. If he can’t figure out something so simple as how to “take a stand and a salary” without flinching, then your church doesn’t need him as pastor.

Third, any church that would hold the salary over the pastor’s head in an attempt to throttle his voice is not a church where I want to be a member.

Fourth, pastors need to be fully funded so that they can invest themselves fully in prayer, preaching, teaching, soul winning, administering the work, and shepherding the flock. If a man does well with all his responsibilities as pastor, he won’t have a lot of time left to make his living elsewhere.”

Booyah! In your face, Mr. Barton! Seriously, this was a good response, but I do have some minor issues with it.

My Perspective

in old office

My study before I built my new book cases. I was making final notes before a Sunday service. Preparation time is more limited when you’re bivocational.

If you are still reading, I would like to make a few observations. If you are not still reading, then you won’t mind that this piece is a little longer than the average blog post.

First, just in case you don’t understand the difference, bivocational pastors are not necessarily “part-time” pastors; they do full-time work for part-time pay. “Part-time” is a misnomer. Bivocational guys need to have other sources of income because the congregations they serve cannot afford to “fully fund” them. The amount of responsibility is often the same.

Also, what we are talking about here are pastors of congregational-type churches, not ones who are paid regardless of where or how they perform the duties of their calling.

Second, I would love to be fully funded (“full time”), but the compensation my congregation can afford is not enough to provide for of a family of four (in this culture), especially when my wife cannot do any regular work. If I were able to walk away from my other jobs (driving a bus, etc.) to spend more time in study, prayer, and other aspects of ministry, that would be wonderful. However, I must deal with the cards I am dealt, and God holds the deck.

Third, regarding David Barton’s thoughts, it would be great if every preacher could be like Paul, but we are not. It is unwise to use Paul as the sole template for pastors, for even though Paul was a tent maker, he spoke several times about the appropriateness of meeting the temporal needs of ministers (1 Timothy 5:17; Romans 15:27; 1 Corinthians 9:9-14; Galatians 6:6).

pastors praying

Bivocational pastors praying for each other at a conference in Pigeon Forge, TN. Small churches; big men.

Fourth, I believe the Sword of the Lord comment is perpetuating a tendency to think of bivocational pastors as second-class ministers. The editor starts off his fourth point by saying “pastors need to be fully funded so that they can…” Can? Are we to understand that pastors who are not fully funded are not able to do what they are called to do? Intentional or not, the Sword is implying that if you want to find a good pastor, you must first look for ones who are paid well. Essentially, if the part-time guy was a better preacher he might have a bigger pay check.

Let me be clear about this. God is the one who ultimately chooses the fields in which His undershepherds are to minister.

“And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.” – Jeremiah 3:15

“And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:” – Ephesians 4:11-12

Many great men of God faithfully serve smaller congregations, while there are some real heathen leading churches running in the thousands. A man who has a jet is not automatically a man who spends more time in prayer and study. Where one serves should not be an automatic indication of ability.

Finally, it is true that a pastor should faithfully expound the Word without fear. However, without question there are those who fear saying anything to offend the one “holding the purse strings.” But on the other hand, knowing where one’s paycheck comes from can be a useful check on ones ego, brashness, and tendency to run off at the mouth without thinking. Nevertheless, a pastor who muzzles the Spirit for fear of losing his income is no worse than a pastor who’s in the ministry to get rich, and there are a lot of wealthy preachers who fit that bill.

bible“Preach the word of God. Be prepared, whether the time [or pay] is favorable or not. Patiently correct, rebuke, and encourage your people with good teaching [despite your income or other obligations]. For a time is coming when people will no longer listen to sound and wholesome teaching. They will follow their own desires and will look for teachers who will tell them whatever their itching ears want to hear. They will reject the truth and chase after myths. [So, at that point they’re gonna fire you, anyway.]” – 2 Timothy 4:2-4 NLT

To my fellow pastors, keep up the good work and finish well. Our reward is yet to come.

Related articles

15 Comments

Filed under baptist, General Observations, ministry, Preaching

Tagged as , , , , , ,

by | October 18, 2013 · 1:46 pm

?Moral

Which Is It?

You may be asking, “So, Anthony, what’s with the crazy title?” Well, I’m glad you asked. I will get to that in a moment, but first you have to hear the story.

Angry Bunnies

In a recent news story, a former Playboy model was defending a more recent Playboy model for getting buck naked before she became a school teacher. To be more specific, the former lust promoter was defending the recent lust promoter after the recently undressed exhibitionist was fired from her teaching job.

Here, just read the opening part of this story for yourself…

Students and parents at a Dallas, Texas high school were up in arms after their Spanish teacher, Cristy Nicole Deweese, was reportedly fired because she posed nude for Playboy.

And they’re not alone. We talked to Deweese’s friend, Liz Ashley, another Texas resident who has posed for Playboy, and who has also started a Facebook support page for Deweese called Support Cristy Nicole Deweese.

“Her modeling nude was not a crime and was in no way illegal,” Ashley told FOX411.

Essentially, Liz supports Cristy (bunny advocacy) and has no problem with Cristy’s self-exposure, and she furthermore thinks the school should have never fired the newbie bunny, because “modeling nude was not a crime.”

But Liz the bunny buddy goes on to say something else that was quite intriguing. Unless she was misquoted by Fox411, or unless there was an error in editing, the older Texas tart told reporters…

 “She committed no crimes with her students or did anything amoral [emphasis added] with her students while on the job, so why is her previous modeling career relevant?

Really? Did you catch that? Let me repeat the key part: “She…did [nothing] amoral with her students…”

Word Choice

Now, I am not going to sit here at my computer and judge the intelligence of a boob-flashing Hefner stooge. She may have misspoke when she used the word “amoral” in her description of young Cristy’s teaching career. Maybe she was just confused over the definition of the word and meant to use another, like “immoral,” or “moral.” Which was it?

According to Lay-me-down Liz, the defrocked Deweese did nothing “amoral,” so that only leaves moral or immoral, right? The truth is that there’s little taught that is void of a moral context of some sort (which would include one’s worldview).

Distracted

Liz Ashley asked, “…why is her previous modeling career relevant?” The answer is simple: boys will be boys.

The reason for the firing of bunny-turned-educator Cristy Nicole Deweese was not the fact that she posed nude, which is legal, just after she turned 18 (her parents must have been proud). The reason for her firing was that boys in her class, after finding out what she had done (who told them?), were [G]oogling her “spread” on their smartphones while in class!

It seems that school officials determined a teacher is to provide an education, but only in the field for which she is hired. On top of that, it may have been that too many hormonal young men were wanting to stay after class far too often.

So, Liz was correct in her choice of words, after all. Cristy was responsible for nothing “amoral” going on while she taught. Good job, Ms. Deweese!

Related articles

Leave a comment

Filed under America, Culture Wars, current events, General Observations, World View

Tagged as , , , , ,