Idols that lie and Psalm 63:5

This will be great, just what you're looking for - you've never experienced satisfaction like this will bring ... this is what the idol will tell you. Problem - it's not a totem pole, it's not a little bronze statue or a trinket or any other form of primitive idol worship. It's modern. It's actually enticing. And it probably plays on an area of your heart that has a legitimate desire for some aspect of what is being offered. Food is good and is to be received as a gift from God with thanksgiving. Gluttony is idolatry. A home is a good thing, something God provides for protection and a place to love and serve others. Materialism is idolatry. Married sex is good, something God has given to bring intimacy and pleasure, a stronger connection to the one who is flesh of your flesh. It's good. Pornography is idolatry.

There's another problem - these idols are backed by a multi-billion dollar marketing industry that professionally convinces you that you are not ok ... but you could be. The prophets of modern idolatry are experts in cultivating discontent within us. And too often we buy it. Sometimes literally.

Then there's Psalm 63:5. David says "My soul will be satisfied as with the richest of foods." How do you feel after eating really rich foods? ... satisfied. You don't want anything else, the rich food is enough. The loving relationship that God offers is enough, you don't want anything else when you understand how fully He loves and accepts you. He satisfies. Idols lie.

Swaying to the Music

My kids love to dance. Is that weird? I love to dance ... that might be weird. I saw Justin Beiber dance on the Ellen Degeneres Show today, that was weird. Anyway, there's something about music, a good beat, a feel good song, and just moving. It's so easy (for some of us) to just move to the music. And that's great, in the right context ... surrounded by friends at a wedding, with your kids in their pajamas in the living room.

But when the music isn't really music and the movements are habits of life, it can be bad, depending on what song is playing. I'm talking about moving to the rhythms of our culture, the patterns and perspectives we are surrounded by. It's far too easy to move to those rhythms without thinking about the song, listening to the words, recognizing the meaning.

Here's where my head is ... we are a church which has grown so apathetic to the one thing Jesus so clearly commissioned us to do when He left - make disciples. Why? Is it because we've overtly said we don't care? Is it because we weren't clear on the instructions? I don't think so. No, I think we heard the song He was singing but the song of our culture is a lot louder ... and easier to move to.

Here are some of the ways I think we have begun to dance to the wrong tune, and why that prohibits us from making disciples...

Individualism/Isolationism - in the past several decades people have become more individualistic. Institutions and authority are instantly suspect, I'm the authority in my own life, I make my own decisions based on my own agenda. Clearly those goes against making Jesus Lord of your life, and therefore doing the things He modeled and commanded. Isolationism sort of comes out of this one - since I'm the Lord of my life I don't need anyone else, community is devalued, IPod is kept in ear at all times, relationships are developed over Facebook ... in the isolation of one's own home. Both of these make it extremely hard to live on mission.

Comfort/Convenience - Your Way. Right Away. Burger King knew what buttons to push. We have microwaves, drive-thrus, pay at pump, smart phones, online shopping ... why? To make life easier. To be inconvenienced in our culture is an outrage. Yet, when Jesus was on his way to rest after hearing about the death of his cousin ... he saw a crowd, his heart went out to them, and he changed his plans. (Matt. 14) He allowed himself to be inconvenienced - for the mission. Mission requires inconvenience.

Consumerism - what can I get? What cool stuff am I missing? And where do I go to find it? This is a culture that buys stuff for the sake of having more ... stuff. This is a culture that buys new stuff not because the old wore out, but because the new came out. This consumerism is ingrained in our Christianity - we want the right songs, the right preaching, and the right coffee at the coffee bar. And what's sadder than the fact that people in the pew want it, is the fact that the people in the staff meeting on Tuesday are doing all they can to make sure they provide it, often instead of praying and seeking God's wisdom and direction for how to make disciples.

Fear of Exclusive Truth Claims - the world has shrunk. You can be half way around the world with the click of a mouse. Or you can just drive down the street to the local asian mart. The nations are all around us. And they believe different stuff than us. And our culture has convinced us that we are intolerant and cruel to even think that what they think is incorrect. It's hard to be on mission if you're not convinced of the urgency of the mission.

I love to dance, but I don't want to dance around the issue ... self-centered worldly living is disobedience. Not making disciples is disobedience.

Therefore I urge you brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices ... do not conform to the patterns of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. (Rom 12:2)

The Attractional Force of Community

If you're involved in any gospel-community-mission type conversations then this is probably not a new thought for you. Lots of discussions have surfaced in the past decade or so as the church's strategy to reach the lost has seen a shift in focus - from the attractional/seeker-sensitive model to a more missional and sometimes more organic model. We've seen the rise of leaders like Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, cool trendy quirky Australian guys (Alan Hirsch), and others who have challenged us to think differently and move the conversations about Jesus outside the walls of a church building and into the workplaces/neighborhoods/hobbies of those who claim to love and follow Him.

What I want to discuss and see happen is this ... followers of Jesus finding ways to infuse Gospel conversations wisely (no Jesus Jukes) into everyday life and conversation ... backed by a supporting equipping community! So, how do we do that? Steve Timis and Tim Chester (Total Church dudes) really emphasize the importance of community in any evangelistic efforts. I want to see how that works ... in the life of a 9-5er, in the life of a full time mom, in the life of a CEO.

I know that because of the books I read and the conversations I'm in that I'm supposed to believe that genuine Christian community is attractive. And I know it is attractive to me. And I believe that it was attractive to the culture in Jerusalem centuries ago (Acts 2:44-47 "all the believers were together ... Lord added to their number"). How can it be displayed as attractive to our culture, here, today?

When I sit in my living room surrounded by people in my community group, ranging in age from 20s-50s, ranging in level of education, race, stage of life ... I feel the bond that we have and know that it comes from our common need for and acceptance of God's grace shown through Jesus. And I love it. But is it just my faith that gives me a category to appreciate the value of the community I experience? If so, then is it still attractive to someone without faith?

Something that has brought this discussion back to my mind is an article called Third Place. Basically, the idea that the worship gathering (Sunday) and the home group (mid weekish) both contain some amount of barriers for unchurched, and therefore, a third place is needed to interact with non-believers and allow them to interact with the Gospel Community. Something in me says there should be no need to program this ... our lifestyles should be infused (favorite word of the week possibly) with "third places" where we hang out with sinners. But ... this doesn't seem to be the case. So, if we have to program it to make it happen, so be it.

But how do you program it and keep it genuine?

As I discussed this idea with a group leader this morning I realized quickly that their plan would likely result in a fair amount of awkwardness and likely fall short of the kind of attractive community that we want to display to the world.

As I pitched the idea to the group that meets in our home I got some honest push-back. "If my friends want to hangout with people, they're going to hang out with their own friends, they don't have to join us to do that... if they are going to hang out with our community group it is going to be because they want to hear what we are saying about God and life." Hmm, interesting perspective. But guess what, they aren't coming to hear it.

Though we don't form community around affinity, I recognize that a third place is likely to be most effective if the setting makes sense to the people invited. The 20 somethings guy is gonna invite his buddies to a sports bar to eat wings, drink a be- soda, and watch a game. The mom with two kids is gonna invite her mom friends to the park or God's fast food restaurant (Chik-Fil-A).

My thoughts at this point: People should be hanging out with sinners on sinner territory regularly to be salt and light in the culture, but since they are not ... let's give ideas/tools/programs to be a catalyst for this lifestyle change to happen. The question that remains - what does it look like for inter-generational, non-affinity based Community Groups to do that together?

In a Stable?

Well, I've been celebrating Christmas for over 30 years now, most of which I remember. But it wasn't until this year that I realized that there is nothing in any biblical story that says Jesus was born in a stable. In fact the words in the original language may actually lead us to believe he was not. Whoa! What about all those nativity scenes? They can't all be wrong can they? I can see some of you know grabbing your Bible to check it out. Go for it, what you'll find in Luke 2 is two clues: "no room for them in the inn" and "manger." It is from these two descriptions that we have arrived at the standard nativity scene. But a closer look is needed.

Katalooma - The word that is translated "inn" in most Bibles is the word katalooma in Greek. And it doesn't necessarily mean inn. A more appropriate translation might be "guest room," or simply "a place for travelers to rest." (It's the same word used in Luke 22:11, translated "guest room.") In fact, Bethlehem was so small that it is unlikely there was even a public inn in town. So, let's go with guest room. If Joseph was traveling back to his hometown it is likely he still had family there. And it is likely he would not have been the only one traveling back home to register for the census. So perhaps they were staying with relatives, in a full house, where the guest room was already crowded, and not a suitable place to give birth (most prefer an element of privacy for this sort of occasion). So these cruel relatives kicked the so-called "virgin" out to the stable? Hmm, no, probably not, though it didn't occur to me til just now that the whole virgin thing may still have been a little sketchy to family members just hearing about it. It's funny, since I've had 30 years to process the story, I think Joseph's relatives have had that long too (wait, I didn't know what a virgin was 30 years ago ... ok, I've had 12 years to process that part of the story). Anyway, point is, we have to understand the structure of a home in that time/setting to get this. In that culture, for a poor simple family, the animals would have been kept inside at night in the lower floor of the house, whereas the bedrooms would have been upstairs. So Mary and Joseph probably went down to the first level of the home to have the baby (b/c there was no room for such an event in the guest room). Another clue is from Matthew's account: "when the wise men came to the house." (see

Manger - Suddenly the manger makes sense with the "guest room" translation. If there were animals inside, there was probably a feeding trough inside as well. And it would have been a convenient, safe place to put a newborn. Um, I guess that's all there is to say about the manger. A little less eventful than the katalooma discussion.

But what difference does any of that make? Stable? Inn? Guest room? What's really being said? That's the question we need to get at. Even if we could perfectly recreate the scene of Christ's birth, that wouldn't be as valuable to us as what we do have - the words that the Holy Spirit inspired the Biblical authors to write: "no room" ... "manger." What is being communicated by what Luke writes? That's the question. What is significant about the way Jesus comes into the world?

I think it is significant that they were out of place. They were away from home, and there was no room for them in the guest room. Jesus was out of place in this world; He was away from home. And he came to teach us that we are out of place in this world too. There was no special treatment for Jesus, no "hey everybody out of here, make room, this is the king of all creation being born here." No royal announcement, no gathering of big wigs. Oh, wait, there was an announcement ... to shepherds, nobodies in that culture ... humble faithful shepherds who took care of their sheep - just like Jesus would do.

God came into the world quietly, not forcefully, with social nobodies and pagans as his first worshippers. Jesus still invites nobodies and pagans, and he still does not force worshippers. But all who worship Him from the heart find the same joy the shepherds and wise men found.

Punch Line: it's the Pagans (continued from last post)

Yea, so you've got the pseudo-king who just ends up showing the depth of his insecurity, becomes super jealous, and murders even more people - he doesn't show up to honor baby Jesus. To him this "king of the Jews" was a threat, a threat to his power and control. Sadly, Jesus is still seen that way by many. Then you have the posers (religious leaders). And why do I call them posers? Because they thought they had it all together; they thought they had the corner on the religious tidiness market. They thought they knew the Scriptures, but they failed to see that what they thought they knew, really pointed to Jesus (John 5:39). They missed it. And even though they knew the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem, and even though they heard that he had possibly been born, and even though others were going to check it out... they did not go.

But the magi did; they went. In fact it says they were overjoyed to go. They found the child, and worshipped Him. These pagans, these star-gazers, these ... gentiles, they worshipped Jesus, the Savior of the world. But, wait, these guys didn't deserve to be there; they didn't have the credentials, the Bible knowledge, the right background! And yet they are welcomed, more than that - drawn, to this place, to worship this King. Reminds me of a verse from Isaiah - "I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth" (49:6). The light of the world began shining on gentiles early in His life. And I'm so thankful He did, because I realize that I am one.

Ya know, I'm glad the magi are in most Nativity scenes. I know, I realize it's not historically accurate, but I like seeing them there ... reminds me that I am also welcomed into the presence of Jesus, even though I don't deserve it.

Pagans, Posers, and a Pseudo-king (please pronounce the p in pseudo to make the aliteration work)

Picture this ... the most important religious leader of all time is being born. His birth has been foretold for hundreds of years. His influence will surpass that of any other human on earth til that time or since. His teachings will be recorded and taught for thousands of years after he's gone. What kind of people would be there to celebrate the birth of this special child? Of course the leader I'm talking about is Jesus. The predictions of his birth are the OT prophecies, and his influence is still seen around the world today. So, who showed up for the birth of Jesus? There are three sets of people presented in Matthew 2:1-12 ... pagans, posers, and a pseudo king.

The king, king Herod, is certifiably crazy. He has killed anyone who was even remotely a threat to his reign, including family members. Clearly this guy has some security issues. He wants nothing more than to be king, king of everything, in control, with no threat to his own sovereignty. The posers are the religious leaders. They knew the prophecies, knew where the Messiah was supposed be born. In fact they are the ones who told Herod that he was to be born in Bethlehem. They had the facts memorized, had their religious structures in place. But what about these pagans? The "magi" they're called. Where did they come from? And why of all people did they feel the need to come honor this child-king who had been born. We're given little detail, only that they came from the east, had an interest in stars, and had somehow heard about "one who was born king of the Jews." These were not Hebrews, not religious guys, not well respected in Jesus' culture. They were pagans, star-gazers, foreigners, gentiles. (by the way, all we know is that they followed a star, found their way to Jerusalem, and asked about a child-king ... let's not pretend that there aren't some pieces missing here - if all they saw was a star, how did they know to expect a king? did an angel visit them as well and we're not told about it? did word travel to their land about Jesus? did they somehow have copies of ancient Hebrew Scriptures that gave them clues? for all we know, they knew very little about what they were getting into)

So, the stage is set ... who's going to show up to honor this king? tbc...

A Royal Mess

So why does Matthew include these women? In a genealogy, which typically only has men, and which sometimes excluded men of questionable character? And in a genealogy of the Son of God ... seems like it would be easy to get left out of that one. And yet, there they are, scandalous women... but wait, we only mentioned four. Who is the fifth woman mentioned in the genealogy? Matthew 1:16 "...and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah." Woman number 5: Mary, the mother of Jesus, and no less scandalous if you think about it. Her story must have sounded crazy. I'm pregnant, but don't worry ... Yahweh is the father. What? Perhaps Matthew was showing that for those who were put off or taken back by her story, Jesus has descended from a long line of crazy stories. The royal line that brought Messiah into the world was a royal mess. Don't let Mary's scandal scare you ... it's nothing new, except this time, it was only apparent scandal. Perhaps Matthew was also reminding us that Jesus has descended from humans, very human humans, scandalous humans ... the very humans He came to save.