Archive for 'faq' Tag

Q: I just finished reading the book "The Hole in our Gospel" by Richard Stearns. This was the most impactful book that I can remember reading; it has such an incredibly convicting call to action that I cannot do it justice describing it. What do you think about it?

A: There is a couple things about David Stearns book (and sorry, it seems I wrote a book in reply). First, yes, yes yes, Christians should be doing something about the worlds problems. I talk about this all the time, so please don't misunderstand my reply. David Stearns is a great guy with strong calling, I think World Vision is doing an excellent job; they are worth while to support…

But there are problems with what is called the 'Social Gospel.' Many times, in order to get into countries World Vision will partner with a government and agree to never talk about the gospel of Jesus (like in India).

They have followed secular humanist priorities which view injustice and physical need as man's primary problem when, as Christians, we are to understand these as symptoms of a much deeper spiritual crisis that exists in communities unable/unwilling to care for their own people. With so much emphasis in the media on the issues of poverty & injustice it is certainly easier to follow their lead rather than stand as a prophetic voice and point to the spiritual crisis that is the deeper issue and offer the solution of Jesus.

In many cases getting the money out has caused World Vision to neglect the local church in many countries. The church on the ground should be trained and led so they can begin to meet these needs AND the people have a place to learn about Christ.

Today there seems to be a relationship between Christian aid organizations and the American Christian donor that is not good. The donor get's to sacrifice a bit of their wealth and lifestyle and feel better about themselves because they are staying in line with a humanistic, yet biblically uninformed conviction that poverty and injustice are mankind's worst enemies and can be solved without the God of the Trinity.

In turn, the Christian aid organization gets to receive the donor’s dollars with few questions asked...and even takes pot shots at the Church and claims it's being prophetic in doing so!

Neither seems interested in each other's transformation. Neither seems interested in transforming communities with the gospel of Jesus Christ and thereby truly helping the communities solve their own problems for the long term. Transforming communities through the Gospel takes time and involves face-to-face relationships based on human interaction that results in discipling people.

It's a lot easier all around for Christians in America to simply throw money at the world's immediate problems rather than be prophetic and involved sacrificially in addressing the spiritual roots.

Many books like this are basically an extended argument for supporting an organization that is doing a job that the church should be doing (it’s a pretty veneer that wreaks of poor ecclesiology).

Yes the book could be great reading for motivation but it is only HALF of what people need to understand in terms of helping change the world. We need to be involved with local people on the ground, who love Jesus, so not only are people fed…but they are also FED.

If that makes sense.

We support clean drinking water to Indonesia, giving aid and training to get girls out of prostitution in Thailand, getting medical supplies and education to orphans in Haiti, and are looking at how to expand into helping get clean water to some remote tribes in Central America.

I don't want to sound callous in what I am writing to you. I mean, it really does no good to say to a starving kid, "you need Jesus" because they don't care when they can't see past their hunger. But on the other side if you feed them and never teach them how to provide for themselves and, in the end, never introduce them to Jesus, we just did the biggest disservice to them.

So, I think, we support local ministries on the ground (like Element does)...ministries that do both of those things. That is where a church should be able to be trusted with money. That they are seeking the best way to give that money away to those in need in the best way possible.

Many churches don't look for the best way to do that...but I think Element does. Could we do better, of course we could, but I think we are heading in the right direction.

That's my 2 cents.

PS...To give you a better idea of what I am saying (and so you don't think I am hating on World Vision). There is an excellent section from the Desiring God 2010 Conference led by Kevin DeYoung about mission/missional...and the world that I would like to share with you.
http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/conference-messages/rethinking-missional-reconciling-the-mission-of-god-and-the-mission-of-the-church#/watch/full

Q: Is the writer of Hebrews addressing those who are born again, but are not? There was a time in my life from the age of 13 to 15 where I believed I was a Christian but left the church/God and started believing and even arguing with other Christians about the bible. A couple years later I asked God to save me and to take control of my life. Hebrews 6:4-6 should I come to the conclusion that I am not saved and hope for salvation is impossible for me?

A: How about a short answer (for once).

If you are worried about it, then I believe you are saved, regenerated, redeemed. Those who weren’t would not care either way.

At Element we do not believe a person can lose their salvation because our salvation is based in the person and work of Christ, not in the person and work of ourselves. If He is an eternal God (which He is), and He has forgiven all of your sins (past present and future), then your future is secure.

We believe in what is called the "perseverance of the saints." This is a simple way of saying that those who God calls, He brings home. The fact that you ran off like a crazy child into traffic, thinking you were doing your own thing, thinking you were so smart in your arguments...but are now WHERE YOU ARE simply shows that your Father in heaven was seeking you, chasing you down, and bringing you home.

Hebrews 6:4-6 must be understood in context. All the verses that people use to say a believer can lose their salvation actually teach the opposite in context of the surrounding passages and the Greek text.

So, rest at ease, serve God more fervently, love those around you more closely, because God holds you in His hands...and as Jesus says in John 10:28-30 "I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I and the Father are one.” You are not stronger than Jesus...so rejoice that He brought you home (like the prodigal son).

Too many Christians have been taught too many clichés. I will tell what truth is...2 Cor 7:10 For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death. Stop living in regret, that is not GODLY GRIEF it is worldly grief and will never lead to life. Jesus left your sin at the cross, you should as well.

You are called to now to live and walk in new life.

What’s the deal with the ending of Mark, and where do you think the ending actually is? Is after verse 8 or 20 in Chapter 16? And what would the reason be that there is a discrepancy where the end of the book is? It just doesn't seem the appropriate place to not be too sure. I guess I would think that with something as important as the bible, there would not be anything that would leave room for "personal interpretation" or "guessing."

There is a short and a long answer to your question; I will try to land somewhere in the middle.

Most of the complaints about the verses in Mark 16:9-20 start in the 19th century because the critics believe that Mark should stop after 16:8. The added verses are NOT arbitrary and are not added simply because someone felt like it. Many of our current manuscripts from Mark contain the ending you have in your bible but the style is a bit different from the rest of Mark (which some suggest makes the ending not part of the original).

From the oldest manuscripts we have found, (“we” meaning the church as whole and biblical scholars specifically) the last twelve verses are missing.  There are even a handful of manuscripts that include a shorter ending before the current longer one in your bible today (this exists in the oldest Latin Codex in existence).

What you have to understand is that the current ending of Mark is consistent with the gospel accounts, there is nothing out of place with it. What the note tries to give you is simple honesty: SOME (not all) early manuscripts have it missing. This could be scribal error, the addition could be tacked on because a scribe somewhere didn't like the abrupt ending, or the original ending could have been lost (which is not uncommon with ancient scrolls due to their wearing patterns), or the gospel may have been unfinished, due to death or some form of persecution.

There is also evidence that it was part of the original though. Justin Martyr (one of the original church fathers) wrote a famous work called the Apology (Defense of the Gospel) in AD 160; he states that Ps. 110:2 was fulfilled when Jesus' disciples, going forth from Jerusalem, preached everywhere. His wording is remarkably similar to the wording of Mk. 16:20. Justin's student Tatian (AD 172) incorporated the "Longer Ending" into his Diatessaron (this was a blended narrative consisting of material from all four canonical Gospels – I have a copy you can read if you want). Irenaeus (in AD 180) quoted from the verses 9-20 specifically as part of Mark's gospel.

Critics are divided over whether the original ending at 16:8 was intentional, or whether it resulted from accidental loss, or even the author's death.

To give you more food for thought (and not meant to confuse you at all), in some of our earliest manuscripts there is a shorter ending, which is then followed by the current ending. These appear together in 6 Greek manuscripts, and in dozens of Ethiopic copies. I know you are wondering “what does the shorter ending say,” because I know you want to know, this is it (with slight variations): “But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation."

There is huge disagreement among scholars as to whether Mark originally stopped writing at 16:8 -- and if he did so, if it was deliberate or not—or if he continued writing an ending which is now lost. Allusions to a future meeting in Galilee between Jesus and the disciples (in Mark 14:28 and 16:7) seem to suggest that whether what we have the real ending or not, Mark intended to write beyond 16:8.

Some interpreters have concluded that Mark's intended readers already knew the traditions of Jesus' appearances, and that Mark brings the story to a close at 16:8 to highlight the resurrection and leave anticipation of His return.

Either way, whether it belongs or not, nothing about it is arbitrary. It has been thoroughly thought out, researched, and placed in scripture. They give you the footnote for honesty’s sake. It is their way of letting you know what we have and what we don’t, so you as the reader have nothing hidden from and are fully infirmed.

And whichever way you see it, it is all good news, the tomb is empty and He is risen.

Question: My brother (who is in jail) told me that he is following in the Asatru Religion.  Know anything?  I'm getting ready to write to him and trying to think about how Jesus would respond.

A: Do you remember Norse mythology? Odin, Thor, and all the Norse gods? Asatru is German Paganism (sometimes called Odinism or Norse Tradition). There were believed to be 2 families of gods...1 was called Æsir the other was Vanir. Asatru literally means "Æsir's Faith."

This is the religion that was practiced before Christianity reached the Germanic peoples. They believe in multiple gods and have strong leanings toward animism. They believe elves (or land spirits) can inhabit inanimate objects and these objects can have a fate all their own.

For your brother to use the word Asatru is very odd because it is pretty specific. He is being influenced somewhere because this is not some THING some ONE finds just wandering around. If he is actually in jail (I think that is what you said) he is probably embracing it so he can join a gang. Odinism in the US has VERY strong ties to the American Neo-Nazi scene. I have a friend in jail right now and he says YOU HAVE TO be a part of a gang inside or you are essentially dead. I would think he is probably following it so he can keep his butt safe and really has no idea what it truly believes. He probably is told "it's a religion for white guys."

In talking to him maybe you could ask if he knows why many of these people in pre-Christian Europe decided to follow Christ. I think you need to approach it from the standpoint that your brother is looking for some security…and yet only Jesus can truly offer that. Not trying to be too harsh, but when Jesus’ disciples were worried about Jesus’ safety he responded in Matt 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.

Jesus is NOT telling us that fear should be our motivator…but if you are going to live in fear, there is really only ONE that needs to be feared (and it is not people). Jesus goes on to say in Verse 32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven.

You mentioned before that he wanted to follow Jesus; maybe he needs to realize that now is time…and even in jail…that is the place.

Why can't a person believe and give their life to Christ after death?

I have been trying to put into words how to answer your question about Salvation AFTER death in a way that makes sense.

What you were talking about, by a person trusting Christ after salvation, is a form of what is known as Universalism. Universalism teaches ALL people will come saving faith…no matter what they believe or how they have lived (it is considered a heresy).  Seriously, why would Jesus hold the Gospel and its proclamation in such importance if NONE OF IT MATTERED.

First, there is a vast difference between life and death (right?)…The difference between a death bed conversion and an after death conversion is that the person on their death bed is STILL ALIVE. Sin brings death; Jesus in John 8:23-24 is talking to the religious leaders and tells them plainly, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world. I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins." Jesus wasn’t confused on what happens after death.

If someone dies in their sins they are DEAD in their sins, separated from the life of God.

In Jewish thought, which would have been prevalent for Jesus, everything was thought of in terms of life. A house wasn’t a home unless someone was living in it…if no one lived there it was just sticks and mortar. This is why EVERYTHING has to deal with life. Romans 6:22 "But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life." No Jew, especially Jesus, would argue about people changing their minds after death.

From a Calvinistic perspective if someone is not redeemed in this life it is not going to happen…period; but I am trying to give you a broader perspective just in case you don’t hold to a reformed point of view (which I am guessing you don’t if you think people can change their mind after death).

One of the most amazing things about God is that NOT ALL PEOPLE go to heaven. He doesn’t force those who disbelieve to live in His presence forever. Most people want to live without God in their lives, so why not simply get your wish for all eternity? Is it that living without God for eternity is not pleasant enough so they would want a change from hell they currently participate in? That would seem to indicate that God then tortures people after death into believing…something I am sure He does not do.

This is why God gives us THIS life and THIS time... 2 Cor 6:1-2 As God's fellow workers we urge you not to receive God's grace in vain. For he says,
"In the time of my favor I heard you,
and in the day of salvation I helped you."

I tell you, now is the time of God's favor, now is the day of salvation.

Many people have gone off the rails because they want things done differently than God does them. We think we are smarter, kinder, more loving, more gracious…but we are not. We must trust that God knows what He is doing better than any of us.

I guess I should end with the most important verse on this: Hebrews 9:27-28 "Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him."

Hope that helps,
Aaron

Please explain the meaning of the "element" symbol. Thank you.

The symbol came out of the name. One definition for Element is "the surroundings necessary for life." We believe that everything comes down to Jesus. Redemption, hope, life...all Jesus. We believe that out of our relationship with Christ God has called us as a people glorify Him above all else. We believe we do that by living how He calls us to live...part of that is by living in community. By being a place that lifts up Christ and fosters gospel community Element will be a place that is "the surrounding necessary for life." Hence, the name...

The symbol, well...We have a couple graphic artists who attend and they all worked together to come up with the logo. I could feed you drivel about how the X in the center of the element's represent the cross how it was first shown in the Chi-Rho (the first cross used by Christianity) but really, the logo is just a logo. If one day we change it, its no big deal...because the logo is not Jesus.

In the Catholic Bible, the Old Testament contains extra books called the Apocrypha (some have called them "LOST BOOKS"). A lady from Element is in a Bible study with some Catholic ladies, she sent in a question and asked why our scriptures do not include the additions to Esther that the Catholic scriptures do. So, here is my not so short answer for all of you.The verses in question are Esther 10:4-16:24...This is a whole can of worms so bear with me.

I'll give you a short answer and then a long one - the short one is this: The  Additions to Esther is most likely the work of an Egyptian Jew, writing around 170 BC, who sought to give the book a more religious tone, and to suggest that the Jews were saved from destruction because of their piety. The additions completely change the tone of the book from what was originally intended from the Hebrew Manuscripts...and the additions were NEVER in the Hebrew scriptures.

Now for the long answer:

I'd like to know the church policy on taking communion at the service. Can anyone take communion? Any restrictions etc?

I'll answer and then give some explanation...

The only restriction to communion is that someone must be a believer to take communion (if someone doesn't believe it would be pointless to them anyway, right?)

We do communion after the message because it is an act of worship and should be a response to what God has done in us first. Scripture tells us that we are to take communion whenever we gather AND in remembrance of Christ. (1 Cor 11).

Scripture talks about taking communion in an "unworthy manner." An "unworthy manner" would be in a way that doesn't honor Jesus. Some in the early church, when they gathered, would eat and get drunk at communion (or the Agape - or love feast). It was originally a meal shared with an entire church body...people became selfish and made it about getting their own needs met rather than meeting others needs and lifting up Christ (hence an "unworthy manner).

We do communion weekly because it is when we gather...and, as I said, should be in worship and remembrance of all Jesus has done. It resets our hearts and minds to remember that true life is one lived with Christ, and that our lives are a gift graciously given to us by our great God. We lay our burdens down at His feet in remembrance of what He has done for us.