Final Thoughts on May 21

With the hoopla of Harold Camping's May 21 predictions now finally beginning to wane, I want to share some final thoughts--at least until October when Camping predicts the world will end. Just to be clear, according to his written tracts and information on his radio station websites, May 21 was supposed to be the date of the rapture and October 21, the day of destruction. October 21 is not a revised prophecy. It was part of the original all along.

I am not a prophet in the predictive sense, but I did predict what Camping would do on May 22 in light of a failed prophecy. He did what other false prophets have done in the past, spiritualized his vision. Camping, like Charles Russell (Jehovah's Witness) before him, believes now that the judgment has occurred but it did not play out in a physical rapture the way he thought it would.

While Camping continues to err in trying to calculate and set dates that are reserved for the wisdom and sovereignty of God, he does get one thing right. Jesus will return to establish His kingdom. In His first appearance on earth, Jesus came as the Suffering Servant to inaugurate a kingdom that would be offered to those who believe. When all who will believe have believed, Jesus will come again, this time, not as a Suffering Servant but a Conquering King. The Bible says that he will come in all His glory and that everything that is anti-Christ (captured in the term Babylon in Revelation) will be judged. His judgment will be final, physical, and quick.

What I noticed about my own attitude towards Camping is that while I (rather unfortunately) stated several opinions that were not constructive, I realized that I thought differently on May 21. Even in the midst of mocking his theology, he had me thinking about certain actions and attitudes that I would want to avoid should that day or any day for that matter be the last day. In hindsight, I think we too often feel that Christ's return could be immediate, but we file it away in the recesses of our minds so that we are not forced to consider our lives in light of His imminent return.

I hope that between now and October 21 and beyond, should the Lord grant us that much time, that I will learn to live each day thinking intentionally about my actions and attitudes, my pursuit of holiness, and my service to the kingdom through His church. Are there thoughts that I don't want to be thinking when Christ comes? Are there conversations that I don't want to be having when Christ comes? Are there places I don't want to be when Christ comes? The return of Christ should not paralyze us with fear, but should serve to motivate us with the urgency that gospel deserves. In embracing this gospel, we escape the judgment that awaits those who continue to reject the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This gospel is God's plan of salvation and deliverance to all who believe.

The Death of Bin Laden: A Victorious Battle in a Just War

The news of the death of Usama bin Laden spread like a wildfire through news outlets, social media, baseball parks, and New York City streets. National pride gripped Americans’ hearts and souls and the nation seemed to shout a unified and harmonious, “Hallelujah,” reminiscent of the voices of the citizens of Oz upon hearing that the Wicked Witch was dead.

While we rightly consider that some amount of justice has been served, we should exercise caution in our celebration. The Bible says in Ezekiel 33:11, “Say to them, ‘As I live,’ says the Lord God, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live.’” God’s desire for anyone, no matter how evil, is for faith and repentance to eventually grip their hearts and to turn towards Him for life. We must make sure that our motive or cause for celebration is not vindictiveness towards bin Laden, but gladness towards the families who have suffered because of his work. These families get to experience some semblance of justice and closure.

Before the din of American nationalism could subside, critics were already questioning the justification of such an act, questioning the right of the United States to be in Afghanistan and Pakistan, much less the right to use such force in going after one man. The answer to such critics can be found in Scripture and in a theological/philosophical worldview of what has been labeled, “just war.” I know that for many people, there is no such thing as a just war, but the reality of the human condition and inclination towards war necessitates a mediating position between pacifism and imperialism.

The just war theory was formulated by Augustine in the midst of the Christianization of the Roman Empire under Constantine. Prior to Christianity becoming the dominant belief system, Christians were in such minority that they were able to ignore any imperial claims made upon them by the Empire. As Christianity spread, it became more difficult for Christians to maintain a pacifist position as increasing pressure was placed on them to serve in the armed forces. Augustine adapted the rules of warfare developed by classical thinkers like Plato and Cicero to Christian thought. He taught that war should be fought in order to secure justice and reestablish peace. He also taught that war must be conducted under the direction of proper ruling authorities and characterized by an attitude of love for the enemy (the opposing forces theoretically serving in the same frame of mind, in loyalty to their ruler.) Any promises made to the opposition should be honored such as a clearly defined mission and the parameters of the mission. (R.G. Clouse, “War,” Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd Ed. Walter E. Elwell, ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001)

The Bible says in Romans 13:3-4, “For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good and you will receive praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.” The pursuit of Usama bin Laden was not the pursuit of a person who may have been guilty of crimes against humanity. Bin Laden was proud to acknowledge his role in the attacks that killed over three thousand civilians and led to a war that has killed thousands more, civilians and servicemen. As limited as human justice is, it was served in the death of Usama bin Laden.

As glad as I am to hear that there is one less terrorist in the world today, I am saddened by the fact that the news came too late for the American service men and women who have already given their lives for this cause, who were not able to celebrate with us the victory of this particular battle—a victory that comes in the context of the much larger war they have been fighting for a decade. Of course, they have already seen firsthand the true justice that comes to those who reject God and the gospel of His Son, Jesus.

A Sad Day for Freedom of Speech

The headline in an article on USA Today online reads, “Supreme Court rules in favor of church that pickets funerals.” The story behind the headline is that of the activities of Topeka-based Westboro Baptist Church led by “fundamentalist” pastor Fred Phelps. Phelps and his followers stage picket protests at the funerals of soldiers who have died in combat presumably to send a message of judgment on the United States for its acceptance of and policies toward homosexual behavior. This particular ruling came in the context of a lawsuit filed against Westboro by a family of a Marine whose funeral was the target of a protest. The reason I believe this is a sad day for freedom of speech is not because the Supreme Court’s decision to protect their speech wasn’t right, but because this kind of speech exists in the first place by a group that claims to be believers in Jesus Christ.

What does a Christian response to this story look like? How should we frame our opinion as to right and wrong in this case? First, we need to be careful in supporting any attempt to restrict Westboro’s right to voice an opinion. As disagreeable as their words might be and as dishonoring to God’s Word as their actions are, we must support their right to voice their views if we have any chance of continuing to voice our own. I hope that the actions of the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) are successful in diminishing the effect of the protests. The VFW has vowed to screen the funeral processions from the protesters using busses and other means so that the families can mourn their losses in private.

With that said, we need to distance our belief system from that of Westboro Baptist Church. Ed Stetzer rightly said on a twitter post, “The only correct part in the name of “Westboro Baptist Church” is that it is in Westboro.” Its actions demonstrate that it is not Baptist and it is not a Church. I am saddened that the idea of fundamentalism is now vastly different from what the term meant in the early 1900s. In the midst of theological liberalism, fundamentalism embraced the inerrancy of God’s Word and the theology of orthodox Christianity. Now, the word is used to describe fringe, radicals in all kinds of religious systems. So we must distance ourselves from the labels that have changed meanings over the years.

We must also remain on mission, knowing the true church proclaims the gospel of Jesus Christ, not Moral Deism (a belief that defines God according to a certain set of moral standards). It is obvious that Westboro has no regard for the Great Commission (Mt. 28:19-20). While God raised up prophets in the Old Testament to call His people back into obedient fellowship, Jesus has commissioned His church in the New Testament to “make disciples of all nations.” The centrality of our preaching is Christ crucified and risen, neither of which are present on the signs being held at these various protests. To substitute this message for the priority of any other message is to be disobedient to the commands of Christ at multiple levels. Westboro’s message truly is one of hate rather than love and they somehow think that unspiritual people can be manipulated and guilted into thinking spiritually without being born again (1 Cor. 2:14).

Personally, I hope this is the last story about Westboro Baptist Church to ever make the news. I hope that media outlets will not give them the attention they seek. In the meantime, we must love Lake City in such a way, that they will see the good in our name Parkview Baptist Church and understand truly that we are really both, “Baptist” and “Church.”

Is May 21 really the end?

The pamphlets are being distributed and the busses are rolling through Lake City, FL. and many other cities around our nation announcing May 21, 2011 as the Judgment Day. Some receive the pamphlets out of curiosity. Some receive them out of politeness. My fear is that some will receive them looking for answers and in the end will be deceived and view all Christianity as just another religious scam. If anything good can come from the message of this group, it is that believers must be fully informed and passionate about pursuing the truth of God’s Word and the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The source of the pamphlets being distributed and the organizers of the various caravans that are moving from city to city is Family Radio. Family Radio was founded by Harold Camping in 1988 with the acquisition of a radio station in San Francisco. It began as an open-forum talk radio station that allowed callers to ask Camping questions about various verses in Scripture and he would in turn give an interpretation.

In 1988, Camping separated himself from any denominational affiliation claiming that the church age had ended. He began leading followers to leave their churches. He believes that churches do not employ the Bible as their sole means of authority and that church doctrine and hermeneutic dictate how the Bible is understood in the context of that church. Of course the assumption made by Camping in such a statement is that his doctrine and hermeneutic are correct. He ignores the fact that every interpretation of Scripture (including his) is driven by some methodology. The key to biblical interpretation is consistency. The hermeneutic that the Reformers employed (and that we employ) is based on the historical, theological, and grammatical context of each verse. Camping denies that this is the best way to understand Scripture opting instead to switch between literal and allegorical readings of Scripture. Again consistency is the key and a brief survey of his interpretations show that he is not consistent in his exegesis (technical understanding of a text) or his hermeneutic (interpretation of a text.)

In the pamphlet, The End of the World Is almost Here!, Camping attempts to prove biblically that the Rapture will take place on May 21, 2011. For Camping, the Rapture is the time when Jesus will save His followers from His wrath, a series of plagues that will bring about the ultimate destruction of the universe by October of 2011. He claims to be able to calculate the date based upon two verses in the Bible: 2 Peter 3:8 and Genesis 7:4. In Genesis 7:4 the Bible says:
For after seven more days, I will cause it to rain on the earth forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the earth all living things that I have made. (NKJV)
In 2 Peter 3:8 the Bible says: But beloved do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. (NKJV)

Camping’s math tells him that May 21, 2011, is exactly seven thousand years from the date of the flood. Two assumptions based on biblical interpretation drive this calculation. One assumption is that 4990 B.C. is the exact year of the flood. The second assumption ignores the simile (a poetic device used for comparison) of 2 Pt. 3:8 and says that the day of Gen. 7:4 is a literal and an allegorical period of time. “Therefore, with the correct understanding that the seven days referred to in Genesis 7:4 can be understood as 7,000 years, we learn that when God told Noah there were seven days to escape worldwide destruction, He was also telling the world there would be exactly 7,000 years to escape the wrath of God …” There is no possible reading, casual or technical that could possibly tie these two verses together this way. Furthermore, Camping misses the point of the 2 Pt. 3:8 passage.

The point of 2 Pt. 3:8 is to disclose the patience of an infinitely merciful God even when His people are being persecuted. In other words, God is patiently waiting for all who will be saved to be saved even though His people must suffer in the meantime. I do not believe that God contradicts himself. When Jesus told Peter and the rest of the disciples, “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only,” he would not later in the power of the Holy Spirit reveal this information to Peter in some code that only a few would be able to understand. The Bible was not written in order to hide the mysteries of God but to reveal them and to do so plainly.

Camping’s call for repentance and reliance on the mercy of God is admirable. He is accurate when he says that only the Bible should be considered the Word of God. He says to, “Turn away from your sins and humbly beg, beseech, and implore God for forgiveness.” Unfortunately, his presentation is void of any true gospel presentation. Instead, he implies that the mercy of God is not bestowed based on faith in Jesus Christ but on the fact that one has embraced the warning of May 21, 2011 as the Day of Judgment. He says, “And thank God that in His great mercy He has given you this warning of destruction that is almost here, and the great hope that you, too, might be one whom God will bring to heaven to be with God…” It is the great mercy of God displayed in the gospel of Jesus that we must embrace. A proper understanding of the gospel is what saves us, not an accurate prediction of the end of the world. We believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and in that belief we have life in His name (John 20:31).

Camping’s message in his book 1994 was that the end of the world would come in 1994. This 2011 message by Camping and his followers is equally wrong and deceitful. Any attempt to set a date for the return of Christ is futile and only compounds and empowers the fulfillment of 2 Pt. 3:3, “That scoffers will come in the last days…saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming?’” In other words, Camping promotes a “Christianity” that will be subject to scrutiny on May 22, 2011, and those of us who believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ and are called to proclaim it until he returns will simply continue to proclaim that gospel in light of heretics such Harold Camping.

Thanks Ida--for the message we didn't hear

I find it amazing the number of emotions one can experience in such a short period of time during a denominational convention. I have experienced the joy of worship, the anxiety of business, the disappointment of apathy, and the amazement at the number of opinions that are out there—one of which will expressed here.

We do not often think in terms of that which did not happen. Tropical Storm Ida changed the convention program for us. Ed Young, Jr. was scheduled to bring a message, but because of the weather, had to cancel. I was disappointed because I love the creativity that Ed Young brings to the pulpit. I subscribe to his newsletter. However, I was curious as to why he would have been invited to speak at our convention in the first place for two reasons.

First, I find it interesting that Ed Young would be scheduled in a time slot labeled “Biblical Message.” I tend to think of expository preaching when I hear these terms--not something Ed Young is known to practice on a regular basis.

Second, I think it is interesting that the Florida Baptist Convention would schedule a keynote speaker who does not believe in the concept of the cooperative program. Several years ago I heard Ed Young make a statement about not being willing to use his resources to cross oceans to share the gospel when people in his own backyard need the gospel. I understand his concern and agree that our churches need to be missional agencies in their cities. Not long after that statement, Fellowship Church crossed the gulf and established a pastor-by-DVD church when it took over the ailing First Baptist Church of South Miami.

I have appreciated the messages that we have heard thus far. The Pastor’s Conference speakers have been extremely encouraging and John Cross’s message left us with a challenge that we must all seriously consider and set up perfectly the ideas that will be considered today. This morning, I want to do the unusual and thank God for the message we didn’t hear.

EDGE in the Beulah Baptist Association Newsletter

In August 2008, Parkview Baptist Church launched a worship service for college-age people called EDGE. The purpose of EDGE was to provide a bridge that would help young people transition from church involvement through a youth group to kingdom involvement through the church. Now in its second season, EDGE continues to help young people identify their role in the kingdom and pursue God’s plan and purpose for them.

The concept and inspiration for EDGE came primarily from a book written by Leonard Sweet called The Gospel according to Starbucks. Sweet uses the acronym EPIC to describe worship that is larger than life. EPIC continues to be the driving force behind EDGE worship—a worship that serves a purpose bigger than any of our own individual agendas. EPIC worship stands for experiential, participatory, image-rich, and community. None of these concepts are new to the established church. They simply manifest themselves in different ways according to the culture and personalities of each congregation. We happen to use various forms of multimedia, dialogue, and music to experience and proclaim the gospel. EDGE worshippers experience community while proclaiming the gospel through the observance of communion each week.

While EDGE takes on the characteristics of its own congregation, the purpose is not to be a stand alone church. Instead, EDGE worshippers are challenged to use the experience to make their Sunday worship more meaningful, regardless of the church in which it occurs. While research has shown that 18-25 year olds tend to drop out of church at a faster rate than most age groups, several young people from EDGE are plugged faithfully into Sunday morning worship experiences and engage in activities that many authors say are antiquated and no longer relevant to this generation such as a choir that still wears robes. For instance, six EDGE worshippers sing in the Parkview choir every Sunday.

EDGE meets in the basement of Parkview Baptist Church on Thursday nights. As we try to find ways of helping other people in this generation find their place in the kingdom, the time may change, but for now the doors open at 8:30 for cappuccino and worship begins at 9:00 pm. EDGE has taken on a coffee-house atmosphere. The great thing about working with young people is that if the Lord decides to morph EDGE into a high-energy concert atmosphere, then that will be fine. Parkview’s pastor, Mike Tatem, leads the preaching/teaching portion of EDGE. Josh Smith, Nikolai Lee, Cynthia Roman, and Travis Crosby (all LCCC students) make up the rest of the worship leadership team. You can find us on facebook under Parkview Edge or on google at parkviewedge.blogspot.com. We hope you will stop by on line or in person and join us as we pursue EPIC worship and a larger than life faith.

Health Care Reform and the Public Option

On September 21 at the SBC Executive Committee, Guidestone Financial Resources president O. S. Hawkins announced that he and leaders from a coalition of 32 denomination-backed health insurance programs are concerned about the impact of President Obama’s proposals for health care reform (Baptist Press, http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=31316). With all of the partisan political rhetoric, the President’s incessant public appearances, and lobbyist commercials about health care reform between the news stories about health care reform, how are we to process the abundance of information?

The controversy stems from the inclusion in the proposal of a public option health insurance. So far, many of the opinion articles that I have read that support the president’s proposal have argued that health care costs are out of control and something must be done. I think many if not most people would agree that this is true. The problem is that a public option does not address health care costs; it addresses health insurance costs.

A public option might provide insurance at a lower premium, but in reality, it will be subject to the same market pressures that private insurance companies face. A public option will charge a lower premium and pay the same high prices that other insurance companies have to pay for treatments and prescriptions. Hawkins rightly stated, “You can’t compete with somebody else who doesn’t have to not just make a profit, but doesn’t even have to break even [and] can print money and support it with your tax dollars.” As with any government interference in the free market, a public option has an unfair advantage and inevitably inflates costs as markets try to compensate for their disadvantage.

A public option will have to establish a structure similar to private companies in order to determine what will or will not be covered. Currently, doctors determine how many patients they will see and which insurance companies they will accept. The proposal has no authority to force doctors to see patients that carry public insurance. In other words, the public option offers no real change to the system and only superficial cost saving to people who will use it.

These factors fuel the scare about “socialized medicine.” Because of these competitive disadvantages, the public option could end up being the only option, as private insurance companies choose to move out of the health care industry and focus on more profitable and competitive markets such as life, home, and auto insurance.

The real solutions to health care reform will only be found when legislators begin to focus on the market forces that drive health care costs. Tort (law that defines what constitutes legal injury and establishes liability) reform directly addresses the cost of doing business for doctors—costs that are directly passed on to patients (and subsequently their insurance carriers.) Legislation that provides incentives to good doctors to accept more patients and more private insurances may possibly force bad doctors out of business. The assumption is that bad doctors stay in business out of the leftover patients and insurance coverage that good doctors refuse to accept.

I am not an expert in economics or the medical industry. I admit that my solutions may not be solutions at all. I do believe that if we are going to argue in support of an idea, our arguments should actually support the idea. If we are going to propose a solution to a problem, the solution should address the problem.