Fine Prints: June, 2005

Get Their Hearts; Their Actions Will Follow June 4

Getting God on the Right Track June 11

Is It OK to Say I'm Better Than Osama Bin Laden? June 18

Postmoderns and That Ol' Time Religion June 25

Get Their Hearts; Their Actions Will Follow

Recently syndicated radio talk-show host Dennis Prager engaged listeners in a discussion about "the thing God most wants from us humans." There were only two options: humility or ethical goodness. A listener with whom I’ve engaged in some email discussions asked what I thought.

Never one to pass up an opportunity to pontificate, I took a few moments to ponder. And in a flash of Solomon-like wisdom, I decided that both characteristics are vital. And I base this on words from the prophet Micah: "He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God" (Micah 6:8).

If I read that passage correctly, it calls for both: ethical goodness and humility.

But is there perhaps more to the picture? Having only two options is a little like taking a mere slice of history and trying to analyze it. If I don’t look at the entire picture, it’s easy to come away with a wrong—or at least an incomplete—conclusion.

Crucial though ethical goodness and humility are, I would suggest that there’s something even more foundational. In fact, I would argue that ethical goodness and humility are actually byproducts rather than primary goals—in much the same way that Jesus urged us to seek the kingdom of heaven first, promising that a lot of secondary things would naturally follow (Matthew 6:33).

Proverbs 23:26 puts it into perspective nicely: "My son, give me your heart and let your eyes keep to my ways . . . ." The behavioral imperative is clearly present, but it’s preceded by the relationship. The relationship with God–loyalty, commitment, trust, respect–is the bedrock on which ethical behavior and humility rest.

The spiritual leaders at the time of Jesus–commendably, I hasten to add–understood the importance of correct moral/ethical behavior. What they didn’t understand was relationships–both with God and their fellow humans.

And humility is equally misunderstood. It’s not mere self-denigration as some assume. Rather–as J.B. Phillips so effectively portrays it in his rendering of Romans 12:3–it’s having "a sane estimate of your capabilities." It’s a realistic appreciation of both our mind-boggling potential and the inherent limitations of humanity. It’s an understanding of the relative roles of the Creator and the created. Such balanced perspective comes only from a relationship with God.

Christians talk a lot about "being born again." What Jesus meant by this, I would suggest, is a dramatic clarification of the relationship between God and humanity. It’s the discovery that God is loving. It’s knowing that my sins are forgiven. It’s the realization that God’s commands aren’t arbitrary tests to see how spiritually adept I am; rather, they’re descriptions of what I need to do to experience life in its fullness.

It has to do with believing that God is who He says He is and will do what He says He will do. It’s the confidence that God is my friend. It’s the realization that all humans are God’s children and deserve to be treated with respect and dignity.

This, I would suggest, is the thing God most wants from us humans. Ethical goodness and humility will follow.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

Getting God on the Right Track

Recently, syndicated radio talk-show host Dennis Prager asked: Would God consider it "good" for me to pray for Him to immediately (and humanely) kill the top 1 percent of the world’s worst evildoers? Yes or no? Why or why not?

My gut reaction? Yes! Absolutely! Off with their heads! Zap ‘em with lightning bolts!

But . . . on second thought . . .

Are we talking 1 percent of the worst evildoers—as in: If we determined that there were 100,000 unmitigated rat bags, we’d be asking God to kill just 1,000 of them? Why not the lot?

Or are we talking about the worst 1 percent of all evildoers?

Granted that the Bible says that "we all, like sheep, have gone astray" (Isaiah 53:6) and "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23), we could be looking at 1 percent of the entire world population—more than 60 million people!

Hmmm. Such a hard question.

Assuming that there’s a continuum from "not quite spotless" to "totally debased," would an entire 1 percent fall into the latter category? I mean, wouldn’t it be unfortunate if God granted my request for 1 percent to be annihilated when only one fourth of 1 percent are actually incorrigibles? The other three quarters of a percent would be collateral damage, so to speak.

There’s another problem: Whose evil causes the greatest overall suffering in the world? The capital crimes of a few? Or the accumulated "peccadilloes" of the multitude? I mean, which actually has inflicted more total pain? The murder of three thousand people at the World Trade Center by a handful of hate-filled terrorists? Or tens of millions of marriages destroyed by old-fashioned selfishness?

Or do we know?

Ah, there’s the rub. Granted our limited knowledge—our inability to look behind the scenes to see what’s really going on—aren’t we being presumptuous to provide God with a specific percentage? Aren’t we being presumptuous in suggesting the method to be employed?

Then there’s the question of God’s wisdom and sovereignty. If God thinks that zapping the worst 1 percent of the world’s evildoers is a great idea, must He wait for permission and encouragement from humans before proceeding? Does the fact that God seemingly hasn’t yet launched a surgical strike against evildoers suggest that maybe He prefers another approach?

Finally, do we even know who’s on God’s Who’s Who of Worst Evildoers? I mean, when Jesus was here, He chose to hang out with raw, unsavory sorts while denouncing those who seemed to have it together. Jesus got particularly upset about pride and selfishness and hypocrisy. That scares me—because it could mean that if I prayed for God to kill 1 percent of the worst evildoers on His list, I’d be praying for my own death.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

Is It OK to Say I'm Better Than Osama Bin Laden?

I had that question thrown at me recently. So I want you to think about it, too.

Just for the Rip Van Winkles in our midst, let me say that Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian Islamic fundamentalist radical who allegedly masterminded the attacks on New York’s World Trade Center and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The attacks resulted in the deaths of more than three thousand people.

The last I heard, there was a $50 million bounty on his head–so, obviously, someone thinks he’s a pretty bad guy. And I’m inclined to agree. At least, I don’t think I’d turn up if he invited me for crumpets and tea.

So is it OK to say I’m better than Osama?

I’m not so sure.

My main claim to fame is that I’m the son of my father who was the son of his father who was the son of . . . and . . . ultimately we get back to Adam, who the Bible says was "the son of God" (Luke 3:37). So humans have a pretty impressive pedigree. And all of us share the same lineage. Including Osama.

There’s a second great equalizer that we sometimes lose sight of: The Bible says that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). Which means that, barring some kind of divine intervention, we’re all–Osama and me included–on the fast track to eternal destruction.

So is there any basis for saying that I’m better than Osama?

Christians believe there’s only one universal category of human: sinners. That group is subdivided into two clusters: sinners who are saved and sinners who are lost.

From my limited perspective, I’d have to admit that, if I were playing the odds, I’d put my money on Osama’s being in the latter category. But I don’t know that. It’s just a hunch. I’m not the judge.

What I do know is that the Bible says that those sinners who are saved are saved by grace, which means "unmerited [think about the implications of that word] favor." Further, the text goes on to say that salvation is not based on our good deeds, lest we should be tempted to boast (Ephesians 2:8). Would the prohibition against boasting include my saying that I’m better than Osama?

I also know that arguably the most revered Christian preacher and writer of all time had a modus operandi almost identical to Osama’s–in that he had an unmitigated hatred for a group of people with whom he disagreed, and he was the mastermind in inflicting pain and death on his enemies. Had I lived back then, I would never have thought it possible that Saul of Tarsus would one day become Paul, Christ ’s greatest proponent.

Instead of trying to determine which humans are highest in the kingdom of heaven or lowest in the kingdom of hell, I probably should simply thank God that the light of His grace has broken through for me. And I should pray that it will break through for all the other sinners who haven’t yet experienced it.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor

Postmoderns and That Ol' Time Religion

If we were playing word association games, it’s unlikely that you’d think of the phrase "that ol’ time religion" in response to the word "postmodern." But the two may be more closely associated than you’d think.

Now I’m not suggesting that today’s postmoderns would be attracted to the approach the church used in the 1850s–or the 1950s, for that matter! In fact, I know of only one old-time era that would have attracted postmoderns for sure.

Nearly 2000 years ago, when Jesus was giving His disciples last-minute instructions before handing over leadership of the movement He had recently started, He said: "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another" (John 13:34).

Jesus was the world’s best long-term motivator. He knew what worked. He knew what didn’t. And He knew that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. You love more people into the kingdom than you’ll scare into it. So His command wasn’t just the airy-fairy pronouncement of the guru du jour. He was outlining the best method ever. God’s method.

Image counts. Just ask Andre Agassi. And Jesus, the world’s best marketer, knew that the image of the church–particularly when backed by substance–would determine whether the church attracted or repelled potential adherents. The image He sought could be written with just four letters: L-O-V-E. "By this all men will know that you are my disciples," He said, "if you love one another" (John 13:35).

If by "that ol’ time religion" we’re talking about the approach Jesus called for 2000 years ago, then I suggest that it’s still the best approach we can use today. Even with secular and postmodern people. Or perhaps I should say, especially with secular and postmodern people.

I wish Adventist congregations everywhere would gain an understanding of how postmoderns think. What they like; what they dislike. What attracts; what repels. That’s why Global Mission has established the Center for Secular/Postmodern Mission (at Markham Woods Church). That’s why we have a website (www.secularpostmodern.org). Educated, understanding and committed-to-the-task congregations are going to be more effective. Dramatically so.

But if I had to choose between a congregation that has the skills described in the preceding paragraph or a congregation that merely has come to grips with what Jesus called for in John 13:34, 35, I’d opt for the latter. All the academic knowledge in the world about postmoderns is going to be essentially wasted if the congregation doesn’t exude an atmosphere of love and care and concern. Conversely, if genuine love prevails, a multitude of faux pas can be overcome.

The best of all possibilities, of course, is a loving congregation that intelligently and intentionally targets its ministry toward the secular and postmodern.

Jim Coffin, Senior Pastor