Deciphering Truth and Lies by Tami Cinquemani

I love family traditions. I think one of the reasons this is my favorite time of year is because the holidays are steeped in tradition. Each family will enjoy their own special version of holiday rituals that will bond its members and celebrate the season. My family enjoys its own unique traditions – things like the family football game after Thanksgiving dinner, celebrating “Mikulas” by opening Christmas stockings on December 6, candlelight communion on Christmas Eve, and late nights playing “Mafia.”

For those unfamiliar with the game, “Mafia” begins when each player secretly selects a playing card from the Moderator. The card chosen identifies whether you are a mafia member, police officer, doctor, or townsperson. The game proceeds as the mafia members try to hide their identity by “knocking off” the other players, and the other players try to save their town by seeking out the truth and discovering whom they can trust. There are accusations, presumptions, pleadings, and debate –lively discussions and enthusiastic arguments. There is triumph when perpetrators are caught, and shocked bewilderment when trusted family members are found to be lying and deceitful gangsters. Nice family game, huh? Okay, so maybe you have to be Italian to appreciate the fun.

I was talking with my son-in-law the other day, and we were discussing the book of Hebrews. Though the authorship of this book of the Bible is debated, one thing is clear – whoever wrote the book was intent on people knowing the identity of Jesus. The letter was written to a group of first century Jews at the beginning of the persecution of Christians by the Roman Empire. This group most likely consisted of both believers and seekers of the Christian faith.

The Hebrews were in danger, and insecurity and fear can lead to bad decisions. They were beginning to doubt the truth that would save their lives. There were those who sought to deceive, trying their best to convince the new believers that their trust should be put in things that would only lead to death. When persecution began and hardship prevailed, things they knew were not true seemed reasonable and became very enticing. Hebrews was written as a witness to the truth that the only hope, the only possibility of security, and the only path to salvation is in Jesus.

Is this any different than what we confront today? Even during a season when we are surrounded by the startling and astounding truth that God sent his Son to save our world, we so easily get distracted. There are many deceiving messages to sort through: God can’t be trusted; We have to save ourselves; I’m too sinful to save. The list is long. The lie is clear: Jesus isn’t enough.

The message in Hebrews is as relevant to us today as it was to the Jews of the first century:

“We have a great high priest, who has gone into heaven, and he is Jesus the Son of God. That is why we must hold on to what we have said about him. Jesus understands every weakness of ours, because he was tempted in every way that we are. But he did not sin! So whenever we are in need, we should come bravely before the throne of our merciful God. There we will be treated with undeserved kindness, and we will find help. Hebrews 4:14-16 (CEV)

The truth is clear. Jesus’ identity is revealed, and He not only saves the town . . but the whole world.

Tami Cinquemani

Changes in the Air by Greg Creek

In the last few months of living in Florida, I’ve had opportunities to venture outside the state. At some point during my trips away, I stop, notice the foliage, and think, “Oh yea, it’s Fall.” Living in Orlando, I don’t get to experience the seasons like I have grown accustomed to in different parts of the country. In fact, I’m pretty sure I’ll be welcoming Christmas in a pair of shorts . . . which is just weird.

When living in a less tropical area, the first clue that Fall is upon me is usually the changing colors in the trees. Then I get confirmation of the season’s change by a blast of cold air when stepping outside. Trees that are always green and weather that is warm all the time has me thinking that nothing is really changing.

I was talking with a friend of mine a few weeks ago, and he was explaining to me the different growing seasons for fruits and vegetables in Florida. Until that point, I just assumed you could grow just about anything at any time in a tropical climate. That conversation made me realize that, despite what I thought, there were changes happening around me. Even though I was still walking around in shorts, it was cooler now than it was a few months ago.

The truth is, change is always happening, but I’m not always noticing. When I broaden that idea from the seasons to my life, it makes me wonder how much I’m missing around me because I’m not taking the time to notice. There’s an old saying that encourages us to “stop and smell the roses.” It makes me wonder if there are other important things happening around me that I may be missing because I’m too caught up in what I expect to see. Perhaps I need to stop and notice the foliage, even if its shades are more subtle and nuanced.

Greg Creek

Christ's Low Standards by John Monday

Occasionally things happen that cause us to reevaluate, or perhaps just more deeply consider, what we or the organizations we are associated with stand for. Just such an event has recently captured my attention and created no small amount of conversation around the subject of the doctrines that we hold dear. It’s not a new conversation, but it has received renewed vigor as of late and raised the question, “What can or should a church require of its members?”

Churches exist. This might seem a simplistic place to start, but it really is fundamental to the conversation. As organizations, churches, associations of churches, denominations, and many other religious organizations exist and have the right to define themselves. This right certainly isn’t restricted to religious institutions. If you want to join the Rotary, the PTA, or become a board certified lawyer or surgeon, you will be expected to meet the minimum standards of that organization.

Likewise, churches define what membership in their organizations means and what is required for entrance. The requirements vary widely but seem to have a common point of contact. Almost invariably, churches have some body of doctrine that must be intellectually acceded to in some public forum before a person can be accepted into membership. This in itself is not a bad thing. I believe that Christ himself established this pattern.

Good churches that desire to honor Christ and protect his people believe this and strive to understand what a “good” christian should be. As a result, churches codify expanding lists of doctrine that the potential member needs to understand and accept. Elders and theologians gain some new insight, and a few decades later it’s a required belief for all members. The administrators and gatekeepers of the organization observe a weakness or abuse, and another “fundamental” teaching is defined and codified. The church organization becomes involved in preserving and protecting the institution of the church with ever-enlarging circles of protective doctrines. And that’s our right.

In fact, our government protects and defends that right. The problem is that, while we have every legal right to define the human institution known as the church, that organization is not Christ’s Church. Christ’s Church is the body of Christ that has Christ as its head and every believer in Christ as a part of the body, and we have no heavenly right to exercise our legal rights in Christ’s Church.

Christ has defined what it means to be a part of his Church and has defined a criteria for entrance. On our best days we try to organize our human churches to honor the standards that Christ established; some days we do better than others. But when we claim the right to define what is required, we move into extraordinarily dangerous waters. And when our requirements for entrance exceed Christ’s we move from danger to peril and quickly arrive at the place where our church organizations can no longer claim part in Christ’s Church.

We must understand that there is a standard; in fact, there is a double standard. God’s requirements for entrance into his kingdom are so high and exacting, and we are so flawed and depraved, that we have no hope of ever crossing the bar. We do, however, have an advocate in Christ. He has cleared the hurdle and removed it. Having accomplished the work of the law and completed the work of salvation, he has reset the bar and this is it . . .

Believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God,

and receive eternal life.

All those who believe in Christ and receive his free gift of eternal life are brothers and sisters in Christ’s Church and, by God’s grace, I want them to be accepted in my church.

May our church organizations and denominations always remember that we’re not here to preserve and purify the church. We’re here to walk with people and to love them into a life-long friendship with God.

Amen

John Monday

He's Watchin' You by Chad Hess

My two-year-old son has a stuffed frog that he loves. When I get him up in the morning, he brings it with him as comfort as he wakes up. A month or two ago when I sat him down for breakfast, he didn't want to let go of Froggy. So I put Froggy on the table next to him. He looked at Froggy with a grin and said, "Froggy's watchin' you.” Since then, we have done it every morning, and he loves it. The thought of his Froggy watching him gives him great delight and pleasure; it's comforting to him.

I find this an interesting juxtaposition to the way we typically react to the idea of God watching us. When I hear people say, "God is watching you," it is usually done in the context of judgment and "Be careful what you do or say." But it doesn't have to be this way. If we have a loving and committed relationship with God, we should be happy that God is watching us because it means God is with us. It means that he is watching over and protecting us. He is not a God of whom we have to be afraid. He is a God who loves us and wants to spend time with us. So I can be happy that God is with me – and I am comforted that he is watching over me.

Chad Hess

Music and Change in the Christian Church by Richard Hickam

Change has always been a problem in the religious community. For centuries, theological differences have splintered Christians into camps that have become Catholics and Protestants, new denominations, and even sub-groups within denominations.

In 1611 as the King James Bible was about to be published, Dr. Hugh Broughton, a seventeenth-century British scholar in Greek and Hebrew, wrote the following review: “[The Authorized Version] was sent to me to censure: which bred in me a sadness which will grieve me while I breath, it is so ill done. Tell his Majesty that I would rather be rent in pieces by wild horses, then that any such translation by my consent would be urged upon the poor churches . . . .The cockles of the seashores, and the leaves of the forest, and the grains of the poppy may as well be numbered as the gross errors of this Bible.”

The King James Version . . . really? I thought that was the supreme sacred version?

Music within the church is no exception to this problem and has been a difficult subject for worshippers and worship leaders. Consider how German churches in the time of Johann Sebastian Bach reacted when new instruments were introduced in their worship services. Here, the incident happened within the sphere of classical music in a church setting: “When in a large town [Bach’s] Passion Music was done for the first time, with 12 violins, many oboes, bassoons, and other instruments, many people were astonished and did not know what to make of it. In the pew of a noble family in church, many Ministers and Noble Ladies were present, who sang the first Passion Chorale out of their books with great devotion. But when this theatrical music began, all these people were thrown into the greatest bewilderment, looked at each other and said: ‘God save us, my children! It’s just as if one were at an Opera Comedy.’ But everyone was genuinely displeased by it and voiced just complaints against it.”

Upset about J.S. Bach in church? Really? Wow!

One last story: A nineteenth-century Protestant Church was considering acquiring an organ for the worship services. At that time, most churches did not accept the use of instruments in worship. Even organs were not allowed since they were commonly used in theaters for entertainment. But one progressive church went against the established tradition: “Though the demand for better music was becoming increasingly insistent, the non-Episcopal Churches were very reluctant to admit organs. An English gentleman made an offer of 500 pounds to the first ‘dissenting’ church that would venture on the innovation . . . Finally the Brattle Street Church surrendered to the inevitable and decided to have an organ, but even after the order had been sent to England and the instrument was on its way, the congregation was torn with bitter strife. One wealthy member besought with tears that the house of God be not desecrated, promising to refund the entire cost of the organ if the evil thing might be thrown to the bottom of Boston Harbor. But gradually opposition subsided.”

Opposition to organs in church!?! The humanity!

The examples presented here illustrate the concept that, at one time, everything is new, then it becomes tradition, then it becomes old. The guiding force presented in the New Testament should be our litmus test when it comes to such things. The examples and theme here is taken directly from Lilianne Doukhan’s book “In Tune with God.” I would close with her illustration of a passage from Romans where she substitutes music-related terms for some of Paul’s expressions:

“One man’s faith allows him to [listen to] everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, [listens only to a particular style]. The man who [listens to] everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not [listen to] everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. Who are you to judge someone else’s servant?” (Romans 14:2-4).

Richard Hickam

A Great Epitaph by Andy McDonald

It may not be something you spend much time pondering, but when your loved ones are trying to decide what epitaph should be inscribed on your grave marker, what would you suggest?

Over the years I’ve had the privilege of working with families as they plan for funerals and burials. The whole process, no matter how honest and fair the funeral director, always leaves me with the same sort of feeling that I have after buying a car - maybe pleased, but always wondering just how much better I should have done in my dealings.

Part of the grave marker selection process is the opportunity to cast in bronze or carve in granite an appropriate epitaph, which the dictionary defines as: “an inscription in memory of the dead person.” Cemetery sales people make suggestions, which may work well for some families, but not for ours.

When my Dad was dying, he actually picked out his own epitaph! On his grave marker it says, “Napping till the resurrection.” That was what he wanted, and we made sure it was what he received. He was confident in his belief that death was like a sleep, and he was confident that, because of Jesus, he will one day rise on the resurrection day. Dad enjoyed a good nap, and the concept of thinking of death as napping until the resurrection brought him comfort as he faced death.

I don’t ever remember having any conversations with my father-in-law about grave stone epitaphs. So when my mother-in-law and I met with the cemetery representative, we weren’t really prepared when we were asked what the epitaph should say. All the “helpful” suggestions from the cemetery personnel weren’t that helpful.

Then, in a moment of genius, my mother-in-law suggested just three words. When I heard her, I laughed and agreed it was the perfect answer. He was a great man, a good father, and a loving husband, but giving him all the honors due him doesn’t honor him as well as the epitaph. Any other accolade would only champion a single side or individual trait that marked his life. How could we capture, in just three of four words, his lifelong journey? He had jumped into some youthful rebellion, spent time in the armed services, worked for some good and bad bosses, finally developed his own business, and did well for himself. Life transitioned him from stubborn to determined, from competitive to cooperative, from controlling to relaxed, and from demanding to accepting.

So on his marker you’ll find this three-word epitaph: “Improved with age.” What a compliment. While his health deteriorated, and his freedoms became restricted, and his ability to control disappeared, it is such a compliment to note how he faced all that life brought his way, and he “Improved with age.”

So what about you? Improving with age? And at the risk of being accused of being morbid—What would you choose as your epitaph?

Andy McDonald

Rediscovering the High Road by Tami Cinquemani

I have friends who are of a variety of faiths or no faith at all. I have friends who are sold out to their political party – to the Right, the Left, and those in between – as well as friends who want nothing to do with politics. I have friends who have been hurt by prejudice and racism and others who struggle with judging others based on their culture, gender, or ethnicity. I have friends who are pet lovers and others who find life much happier without a feathered or furry friend. I have friends who are married and others who are single – either by divorce or loss of a spouse. I have friends who are straight and others who are gay. I have friends who have had children, grandchildren, and even great-grandchildren and others who have decided not to have children at all.

I am both blessed and challenged by these relationships. They force me to think outside of the box and understand that I live in a world where there is beauty in variety and richness in knowing others unlike myself. There is a kaleidoscope of people whom I appreciate, welcome, and admire – people with whom I enjoy sharing life and its diversity.

Facebook has become a wonderful “place” to gather with all of my friends in one place. It is because of this reality that I sometimes find deep frustration when viewing what fellow Christians post on Facebook.

As Christians, we profess a desire to follow Jesus – the epitome of grace and mercy. We treasure scriptures filled with direction to “Love your neighbor as yourself . . . Honor one another above yourselves . . . Clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.” These are faithful and regular church attenders who post comments, cartoons, and essays without any concern given to those who may be wounded. It’s not a respectful and thoughtful exchange – it is an aggressive and careless offering without regard for someone struggling with and finding identity with the very issues they flippantly malign.

Politics, sexuality, race, religion . . . the list goes on. I personally believe these topics can and should be discussed in a positive and respectful manner – even when there is a difference of opinion. This is where learning, understanding, and tolerance take place. However, most of what I see has no resemblance to honest and respectful thought. It is generally a cheap shot taken to smack someone down.

I know the standard response: “Can’t you take a joke?” “Come on, lighten up.” “If you don’t like it, just don’t read it.” Really?

Or there’s another attempt at justification: righteous discipline. After all, Jesus didn’t tread gently when clearing the temple. Well, here’s the thing: (1) We’re not Jesus, and (2) Jesus’ anger was directed at those who were misrepresenting who He is to those who needed Him.

It is so easy to throw stones and cast judgment from our computers. I wonder if these same comments would be made face-to-face, or if personal contact might cause pause before those hurtful words and thoughts are flung. I would like to think the eagerness to “share wisdom,” by offering scorching opinion and making snap judgments might be stalled when it is seen first-hand how they cut and hurt.

At the 2009 Willowcreek Leadership Summit, Gary Hamel stated that “Church has become a weekly convocation for the converted and the content.” How sad . . . and how true. If what we are hearing and experiencing at church does not challenge us and demand that we behave differently when we leave, why do we bother attending? If we put on a “Jesus face” and shake hands with our fellow believers then turn around and behave with unconcerned ugliness to our world, we are defaming and defacing the name of the God we claim to serve.

I believe our world is richer because of the variety of thought and opinion found on this journey of life. My hope is that, as we make the trip, those who profess Christianity rediscover their directions to the “high road.”

Tami Cinquemani