Archive for March, 2009

Why should you go to church?

Church | Posted by Kent DelHousaye
Mar 25 2009

church-steepleA few years ago I decided to stop going to church for a while. Although I had been attending church my whole life up until then, I decided that it wasn’t worth going anymore. It was strange for a while because Sundays had always been so automatic…wake up, have breakfast, brush teeth, take shower, attend church, eat lunch, and watch football, or whatever sport was in season on the tube. In a rather abrupt course of events, I decided to pull the plug on the process and get away for a while.

The reason I had decided to disengage the church culture was because I was fed up with it. I was irritated with pastors who seemed insincere and ambitious about building their own kingdoms on earth. I was tired of the country club mentality of comfortable Christians holed up in Christian subculture. I was weary of getting handed another business card by those who see the church as a networking opportunity and I was still smarting over the fake smiles from cleverly deceptive people who had infiltrated the ranks in sheep’s clothing.

I came to a point in my life where I actually started to believe the cliches about the church, that she is corrupt from leadership on down, that she is full of judgmental, self-righteous finger-pointing pharisees, that she is no different than any other consumer driven business in offering felt needs goods and services in exchange for “free-will” offerings, and that she is fundamentally hypocritical because her underbelly is as dark as her face is light.

I basically concluded that the church was a hopelessly misguided institution that had somehow moved across the ocean from where it had started. As I studied the book of Acts and saw how the church once was, how it was organized, how it was governed and how it was connected, I realized that the American church was starkly different. What once seemed to be a supernaturally pure, relationally honest body of believers now looked disappointingly flawed and hopelessly disconnected from its origins. So, I decided that I would find a way to thrive as a Christian without the church. I figured that perhaps people were right about their assertions that we do not need to go to church to live the Christian life.

However, my experience during my time away proved otherwise. It seemed that the moment that I chose to fundamentally change my Sunday schedule by substituting sleep or a brunch or even the lake for corporate worship that my spiritual life immediately began to take a tumble. After only a few weeks away from the church I grew more pessimistic and cynical toward God’s people. I began to dwell on all the inherent problems that had precipitated my departure and began to resent the church more for pushing me away. I started to blame my feelings of spiritual isolation on the church by holding her responsible for my difficult choice to stay away.

But, the longer I stayed away the more I realized that the church was not going to change and that it was just going to move on without me. Though I still resented her faults I began to figure that my staying away was not going to make those faults go away. And then one day I concluded that I could either spend my life criticizing all that is seemingly wrong with the church or I could help to remedy those problems. In other words, either I could lament all that the church was not or I could consider all that the church could be.

After plumbing the depths of my heart and mind during that difficult season, I noticed that my heart began to soften. As I began to ponder what I wanted the church to be, I actually began to miss her. Strangely, I began to miss the off-center sermons from insecure pastors, the pitchy and sometimes stale worship, the plastic smiles from sinfully challenged people, and I even missed the weird and often isolated Christian subculture with all its religious consumables. Even though I could still see and even dislike all these obvious flaws in the church, I began to see how even her flaws could be lovable.

What I began to understand for the very first time is that Jesus knows all his bride’s faults, her imperfections and oddities. He knew when he died for her what she would become, even in 21st century America, and He loved her all the same. I guess we would call that unconditional love…the capacity to love something or someone in spite of obvious and latent flaws. The truth is that Jesus loves the church the way she is. Even though I am quite sure that He wants to make her pure, I am also resolved that He will love her even if she isn’t.

For me, this was the epiphany. I realized finally that if Jesus could love the church the way she is, then certainly I could too. I don’t think that my expectations are any higher for her than his are, so I have no justified reason to hold anything against her anymore. This monumental revelation gave me the heart to try to love the church all over again, warts and all. And, I not only returned to her imperfect gatherings but now even pastor one as well.

The reason I share this story with you is because I believe that many of you have taken the same path but you may not have yet returned. Perhaps you have not yet learned to love the church the way that Jesus does and to love her simply because Jesus does. If she is his bride, then she is precious to him and ought to be to us. To love the husband but hate his bride is quite frankly a betrayal of monumental proportions. If you think that staying away from the church because of her imperfections is a viable option for you, then you are wrong. You are also wrong if you think that you will be able to sufficiently feed your own soul without the guidance, accountability and relationship found in and only within the local church. I can tell you from personal experience that staying away from her will only shrink your soul and harden your heart. And, if you stay away too long, you will simply wither away altogether.

Chances are, there is an imperfect church near you that you can attend. And, it is entirely possible that it is full of insecure, self-righteous and sinful consumers, but perhaps you can learn to love flawed people all the same because it is likely that you are flawed too. I now know that I am.

Tags: ,
12 Comments »

Politically Incorrect

political correctness | Posted by Kent DelHousaye
Mar 21 2009

24162111President Obama did something that no sitting president before him has done ever before this week…he appeared on a late night talk show! Whoopee! Not sure how much that little trip cost us the taxpayers but I’m betting the President is regretting that appearance not because of the waste of our tax dollars but because of his big faux paux.

Although he managed to navigate the serious issues surrounding the economy pretty well with his usual steady handed poise and eloquence, he fumbled when he left the script and talked about his bowling highlights, or shall we say, lowlights. Apparently, President Obama has been working on his bowling game and recently broke 120 for the first time! Yes, he really is that bad at a game that most less than average athletes are good at. 

Well, his score or lack thereof was not really the problem. The faux paux in question was his ad lib remark about how his game was akin to “the Special Olympics or something”. Now, up to that point in the interview, most were notably tuned out during the same old hum drum political conversation, but that comment got everyone’s attention, for sure.

It appears that the only memorable comment of the night that is getting promulgated and dissected throughout every media outlet is his comment on his bowling score. Everyone from Maria Shriver on the left to Sarah Palin on the right from every end of the political spectrum is lambasting the President for the supposedly offensive comment.

Now, I think no reasonably compassionate person would disagree that the offhand remark was callous and insensitive, but I’m disappointed that people so quickly call it outrageous and offensive. Abrasive? Yes. Outrageous? No. I don’t think so. And here’s why.

As a professional communicator as a pastor and teacher, I know very well the relentless pressure and expectation placed upon every word that I utter either in the pulpit or out of it. I understand the weight of my words and the implications for good or bad. And, knowing this, I carefully consider what I say and how I say it, especially when I am being watched and listened to.

However, I also know that if I purposed to avoid ever saying anything possibly controversial or potentially insensitive, then I would either probably be a monotonous bore or I just wouldn’t say anything at all. Even the most compassionate people say things in cursory conversations that can be callous or abrasive, depending on the context and the listener. I know of no one single person in the public eye who never errs in his or her communication at all.

Now, I think we should have enormous expectations upon our President to carefully consider his words and expressions whether on the record or off, but I also think we should have the grace to permit him to err and still believe the best.

Now, I admittedly am not a big fan of President Obama the person or politician, but I do think we are holding him to a ridiculous standard if he cannot joke about even his own bowling skills without suffering the wrath of the masses. We really should be grateful that he even has a sense of humor and is willing to use it as many before him didn’t even try. Our politically correct system usually keeps its politicians in line but also keeps them in expressionless boredom, in the doldrums of ho-humness.

Now, I don’t want to live in a world where people can’t find the humor in anything anymore because no one looks for it. This is the world we’re creating today in pc America because we take everything far too seriously.

Now, that being said. I don’t think anyone can seriously think that President Obama was mocking the Special Olympics in his comment. Nor do reasonable people believe that his seeming slight was an intentional jab at the physically challenged. That doesn’t even register in the context of everything we already know about him. It is plainly obvious that he was not taking a shot at the abilities of Special Olympics athletes…he was taking a shot in jest at himself!  

So, in light of this much ado about nothing, let’s all just take a deep breath and remember that we are far too uptight and need to relax. We need to lighten up and laugh a little, even if that means taking a risk that someone might choose to be offended by something we say. Let’s just pretend for a moment that we are gracious enough to be able to forbear with one another by choosing to believe the best in each other. Even a cynic like me wants to live in a world like that!

Tags: , ,
2 Comments »

Evangelism in a Postmodern World

Evangelism | Posted by Kent DelHousaye
Mar 17 2009

The following is an article I wrote for a Phoenix Seminary publication that deals with how to present the gospel in postmodern America:

 

I knew I was living in a different world when I met her. She was a young woman in her late 20s who seemed to be anything but unusual. She walked into the church reception area seeking some spiritual guidance, and the next thing I knew we were sharing a conversation in my office. Early on I asked her if she was a Christian, and she enthusiastically replied, “Yes!” There was a slight pause, and she added, “And I’m also a Buddhist.”

I panicked for a moment as I searched my mind for the right response, but it wasn’t coming to me. I froze because I didn’t know what to say next. I mean, I had a lot of things to say to a Christian who was sliding back in their faith, and I had a lot of things to say to a Buddhist who was reaching out for spiritual answers, but I didn’t know what to say to a “Buddhist Christian.”

Since that conversation, I’ve had many more of the same. What I encountered that day and many times since is a rudimentary blending of different religious faiths, and that blending is becoming more common today in a world that lampoons the notion of absolute truth and champions the humanist ideal that you can believe whatever you want as long as you’re not hurting anyone else.

When people really do begin to adopt the popular idea that all roads lead to God, then they begin to pave their own spiritual path with whatever seems to be expedient for them. The end result is a world in which religious faith is personalized like a workout routine or a personal diet program. What’s most intriguing is that it doesn’t seem to matter to the person if the traditions they draw from contradict or even deny each other as long as their personal faith suits their own tastes, styles, and preferences.

Ready or not, this is the world we find ourselves living in today. Currently, we are seeing a fundamental shift in how people view the world—a shift away from objective understanding toward subjective experience—and this fundamental shift is forcing us to rethink how we communicate to and share the gospel with people in this new world.

In this new world we live in, spiritual interest is up, but church attendance is down. In light of this trend, we’re going to have to find a way to communicate the gospel in a meaningful way to the emerging generations of people in our culture or else we face the dire risk of becoming marginalized or even obsolete in a progressively humanistic culture—as is already the case in much of Europe today.

If we’re going to survive in and reach out to a relativistic world, then we’re going to have to make a fundamental change in how we present to gospel. Namely, we’re going to have to present the old truth about Jesus in a new way. For the last few hundred years in the modern world, we have emphasized the supernatural power and position of Jesus as Lord in our presentation of the gospel, and in the past those impassioned presentations have persuaded many people to believe, but today people are less impressed by power and position than they are by character and compassion.

We live in a culture that in general distrusts those who are in positions of power and authority, and their distrust has been fueled with all of the recent displays of scandal and corruption in the marketplace and in the church. So, if we’re going to communicate the truth about Jesus in a world that is suspicious of authority and resistant to objective truth, then we aren’t going to effectively win them over with impressive homilies and seasoned apologetics but rather with genuine explanations and demonstrations of Jesus’ character. In other words, in today’s world we need to emphasize and imitate the person of Jesus even more than His position. That doesn’t imply by any means that we don’t passionately communicate the truth about His divinity; it simply means that we must emphasize His humanity.

Interestingly, in today’s world people seem to be drawn more to the character of Jesus than to His power. In my own experience as a pastor in postmodern America, I have found that the more I have tried to convince people with declarations of truth about the power of Jesus, the less responsive they have been. At the same time, the more have I tried to explain and show people the character of Jesus, the more responsive they became. In fact, I used to think that the most convincing proof of the living Christ was in the presentation of the empty tomb, yet I’ve come to believe that the most convincing proof is actually in the personal testimonies of real people. Nothing moves the hearts of people today like a personal story of real life change.

The reason, I believe, that people respond so positively to the person of Jesus is that His character strikes a chord deep inside. Facts about Jesus touch their minds, but His displays of compassion and grace touch their hearts. Today, I have found that people are more impressed by how Jesus fed the 5000, healed the bleeding woman and forgave his killers than they are by how He walked on the water or calmed the storm on Galilee.

Once people are drawn to the character of Jesus, then they begin to investigate His supernatural power. It used to be the other way around. One interesting insight about many people today is that they don’t necessarily need to understand something to believe it. There was a time when people needed to see the logical, argumentative proof for faith to believe, but now people, especially younger people, are able to live with the tension of mystery. In fact, it’s the mystery of the Christian faith that tends to draw people to it. People are not so much looking for an explanation of the trinity or the hypostatic union in order to believe. They are looking for the movement of God in real people’s lives.

Furthermore, if we’re going to present the person of Jesus in a new way, then we are also going to need to present His message in a new way. In the past we have presented Jesus as the Savior who has come to save lost people from their sins. Throughout the last several decades, that message rang true for those who had an understanding of sin and a sense of their own rebellion against God. There was a general ethical code that seemed to govern society, and people knew when they were in violation of it. Today, however, there is little awareness of or even concern about personal sin. People need to feel lost in order to want a savior, and people today do not feel lost.

J.R.R. Tolkien penned the popular phrase: “Not all who wander are lost,” and this phrase has been used to describe a generation of people today who are wandering but don’t feel lost. How can we expect people to want a savior if they don’t realize they are drowning? Gone are the days when we could expect people to turn to Jesus out of personal guilt because guilt has virtually evaporated in our contemporary world. Instead, we need to capitalize on the message of reconciliation in order to reach people today.

In 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 Paul writes: “All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And He has committed to us the message of reconciliation.” This is the message we need to spread today about Jesus. As Paul said, we have a message of reconciliation to bring to the world, and this message is meaningful to a world of people who above all else cherish healthy relationships. People today are relationally focused, and they understand clearly what it means to seek reconciliation in a fractured relationship. To present the gospel as the opportunity to restore a broken relationship with the living God through a relationship with Jesus is the message we want to communicate.

Going back to the beginning and explaining how that fracture occurred and then fast-forwarding to our present condition is an effective way to present the gospel. Tell people that Jesus came to the earth to mend a fractured relationship between us and God by dying on the cross and that He proved He was qualified to do that by rising from the dead. People are genuinely interested in hearing that they can live life today in relationship with a holy God because of Jesus’ death and resurrection.

People want to know that Jesus came to make life different for them today, and they need to know that their eternal life in Jesus does not begin after they die. Jesus came to bring His kingdom to this earth, and that means that we can experience aspects of that kingdom even now. This all means that Jesus came not just to save us from death but to save us for life! The truth is that the opportunity to experience the supernatural wonders of the kingdom here on earth is simply too appealing for today’s generation to resist.

Tags: ,
1 Comment »

Gay Marriage

Gay Marriage | Posted by Kent DelHousaye
Mar 13 2009

gay-marriageWhen I was a pastor in Santa Cruz, CA a few years ago, the mayor of San Francisco started handing out marriage licenses illegally and our church was pulled headfirst into that debate when a lesbian couple who had recently received a license stood up and asked to be recognized during one of our worship services. When we declined to do so, the couple went to the media and a firestorm erupted of vehement slandering against not only the church but against me personally. 

During that period I was slandered on the news and radio, mocked by the local newspapers and received hate mail and even death threats from people in the community. More painfully, I was castigated and shunned by other pastors and churches in our city for speaking up at all. This time in my life was probably the most tormented and lonely season that I have ever experienced, and I do not share this to illicit sympathy or to air out my complaints but only to make the point that I have a personal vested interest in this issue as I have bled and wept over it many times. Therefore, my take on the ever controversial issue of gay marriage is anything but ignorant or detached, so please don’t take it that way. It is only after several years of reflecting on the series of events that occurred that I am now ready to express what I have to say about it.

As a pastor who has been personally affected by this incendiary issue, what bothers me the most about the gay marriage debate is that it has become an issue of “personal rights”. What gay marriage proponents continue to do is liken their struggle for acceptance and legality to the civil rights struggle for equality. Though I have heard this argument ad nauseum, I still cannot see how this is a civil rights issue on par with the African Americans struggle for equality. First of all, are gay people prohibited from using the same restrooms as straight people? Are gay students segregated out from the straight at our schools? Are they denied the right to vote, to earn an equal wage at their job or even to fight and die for their country? The “right” that advocates are fighting for is the supposed “right” to get married. I don’t recall African Americans even in the height of the civil rights movement ever being denied the right to marry each other. Though the gay marriage lobby wants us to liken these movements to each other, they are starkly different. And, I have often wondered why African Americans aren’t deeply offended by these attempts to liken their struggle with the movement for gay marriage today.

Though we often hear the contrary, the truth is that there is no convincing evidence that homosexuality is genetically inherited and all the evidence suggests that nurture is much more profoundly influential on shaping who we become than nature. African Americans do not choose to be black but human beings do choose their orientation, and that’s the simple, undressed truth.

Now, that being said, here’s the rub. There is an ever increasing pressure on and relentless intimidation toward the church to “get with the times” and start accepting homosexuality as a viable orientation for living and gay marriage as an acceptable relationship. Though the heat keeps turning up on pastors and churches to capitulate to this pressure and vitriolic anger, the simple fact is that it won’t work. You see, the Church is not our own and pastors are not without authority. What gay marriage advocates must realize is that the Church and its pastors are under the authority of Jesus Christ. And, we are bound to His commands for the Church. So, even if a rogue church or pastor does cave in to the pressure, the fact is that the true Church won’t, ever. The Church has a long, long legacy of martyrdom and that is because we would always rather lay our lives down in death than turn our backs on the One we serve.

As a pastor, I have made the choice that I will not fear mankind but only God. And, I know that I am not alone in this. The Scriptures that we are obligated to uphold clearly dictate that the practice of homosexuality is a sin, and there is no way to get around that simple obvi0us truth. Those who say the Bible does not prohibit or condemn homosexuality do not know the Bible or the One who gave it. Therefore, as one of the underpastors to Jesus who has authority over His Church, let it be known clearly that we will NEVER compromise  or capitulate on this issue! This onslaught against the Church by outspoken gay marriage advocates simply will not prevail. No matter how much harm we suffer for this, we will not roll over. It’s just as simple as that, and it’s time to make that clear.

Now, since we have established that there is clearly an insurmountable impasse between gay marriage advocates and opponents on this issue, it’s time we really consider how to best live at peace with each other. The fact is that the pressure for gay marriage is not going to go away and that the backlash against it isn’t either, so what can we do? The solution, I believe, is rather simple. The fact of that matter is that gay marriage advocates are pushing for the “right” to marry primarily for the legal recognition with its inherent legal advantages that include tax, health and estate planning benefits.

Today we live in a separated state and church country, where the secular is separated from the sacred. The central problem with the gay marriage issue is that it is trying to “marry” the secular with the sacred. Marriage is not a secular insitution and really never has been. Though our government recognizes it as a legal relationship, the truth is that marriage is a sacred institution. God created marriage and it belongs to Him, not to the state. Therefore, if the state wants to create a similar secular institution and call it something else, then that perhaps would be an acceptable alternative. Though Christians may not be comfortable with a secular version of marriage, at least we can be satisfied that we have protected the sacred version of it.

Given this, in my estimation, the best solution to this impasse is for the state to leave marriage as sacred and belonging to the Church and instead establish a comparative secular institution or “civil union” for two people so that they can enjoy legal benefits similar to marriage but leave the sacred institution for and the biblical definition of marriage to the Church.

On a final note, let me just say this. If gay marriage advocates are singularly interested in marriage and continue to press for the “right” to marry and are not satisfied with civil recognition, then we are left with the impression that their real intention is to somehow undermine the institution of marriage, both sacred and secular versions, for everyone. This would be like the child throwing a tantrum and declaring that if he can’t have something, then no one will. This could very well be the case and we will see in days to come if it is indeed true. The litmus test will be if the gay marriage advocates are satisfied with civil recognition.

Furthermore, if they continue to press for marriage status, then that could also suggest that what they are really seeking is not the equality of marriage but actually the symbolic blessing upon their union. In a way then, they would effectively be trying to get not only the country’s approval but the Church’s as well. As we have already established, they may get the former but will not get the latter.

Whatever the outcome of this angry debate, my hope and prayer is that the vitriolic exchanges would be put aside and that both sides would come to the table to discuss viable solutions to this impasse. And, even if we can’t have agreement, then at least we can have peace.

Tags: , , ,
10 Comments »

Stem Cell Research

Bio Ethics | Posted by Kent
Mar 11 2009

stem-cell1This week President Obama reversed President Bush’s policy on federal funding of stem cell research and the nation is divided once again over this new president’s decision. What is not surprising is that the President would take this action given his track record and campaign promise to alter the course of funding for this kind of research.

The reason that he and so many others seem to desire this type of research is because they hope that there are latent medical remedies for ravaging diseases like cancer, Parkinson’s Disease, Multiple Sclerosis as well as spinal cord injuries and muscle damage yet to be discovered through the testing and destruction of embryonic stem cells. What so many fail to realize, though, is that private research of embryonic cells has been going on for years and not one cure for any of the aforementioned diseases or afflictions has yet been discovered. The so called “ban” on stem cell research is only a restriction on the use of federal funds for the most controversial form of stem cell research, which involves the creation of embryonic stem cells for the purpose of testing and simultaneous destruction. For the record, stem cell research has never been banned in this country, and the politicians and pundits who use this kind of inflamatory language are simply deceiving people. Interestingly, while no single cure or treatment for these devastating ailments has been discovered through the testing of embryonic stem cells, scientists have determined that there is much more promise and proven results in the study of adult stem cells, which are taken from existing tissues of all kinds rather than from develping human embryos.

The point being that it doesn’t make any sense in any universe to purposely create and destroy human embryonic cells when there is a limitless availability of more promising adult cells at our disposal. There is absolutely nothing available to us in embryonic cells that we cannot obtain through adult stem cells, so why in the world should we pursue this destructive course? As a pastor, many ask me what my perspective is on the stem cell issue, and I can tell you with absolute conviction that it is an obvious and offensive violation of life to create human embryos for the purpose of testing and destruction. The practice is not only illogical and ridiculous, it is also careless and reckless.

I am no scientist but as a pastor, I am more than shocked that so many “scientists” and politicians drink the coolade so easily and advocate the mindless and heartless practice of automatous science. Now, I am a pastor and not a politician, but I am reasonably sure that spending our tax dollars on funding for spurios research like this is just about the worst idea I’ve heard. To me, it’s akin to investing billions of dollars into the exploration of coal energy rather than into nuclear or hydroelectric technology. Why would anyone with half a brain invest our tax dollars into dead end research when there is an incredibly promising alternative? And why, for that matter, would we pursue an obviously immoral course of research when there is a perfectly moral alternative? Just something I’ve been thinking about lately.

Tags: , ,
2 Comments »

Sound of Truth

Sound of Truth | Posted by Kent
Mar 09 2009

So, we are launching a new radio broadcast ministry at Northwest Community Church called “Sound of Truth” starting in April, so if you live in the Phoenix area or even in Prescott, Payson or Casa Grande, you can tune in to KPXQ AM 1360 weekdays at 11:30 a.m. and 8 p.m. to hear the new broadcast featuring my teaching from the weekend services here at NCC. You can also hear live streaming through the station Website at kpxq1360.com if you live anywhere else and want to listen in. Tune in starting April 1 and let me know what you think about it.

Tags: , ,
No Comments »

First Post

General | Posted by Kent
Mar 09 2009

Welcome to my new blog. Since I am a journalist by trade, I like to write, so this will be a good outlet for me to tell you about what I am thinking and why I am thinking it. I am most interested in contemplating the intersection of faith and culture and hope to post many musings on various everyday issues that matter to people like you and me in the months and years to come. I don’t know where this journey will take us, but I’m glad to make the trip with you. Thanks for following along.

1 Comment »