Vacation Deprivation

I have the solution for our countries woes! I heard it on the radio just this morning. According to a survey put out by Expedia.com America suffers from Vacation deprivation. Unlike our European counterparts, who get on average at least 30 days vacation per year and then both use all of their days a relish in the memories and tales of those vacation days, Americans only get on average, 14 days of vacation per year, generally only take half of them and seldom speak about their vacation once they are home. And, again according to the Expedia.com report, the reason we suffer from this deprivation is because we also suffer from a "Protestant work ethic." There it is. Our problem is that we work like Christians and not like Europeans.

I have a number of issues with this radio report:
First, who wants to be like Europe?
There is a reason our forefathers hazarded their lives to begin again in this new land. There is a reason our forefather's children once again hazarded their lives to forge out a brand new system of government separated and completely different from their European monarchies. The European economy is in the dumps. With the exception, I think, of Germany, the whole place is about to collapse financially. Who wants to imitate that? Oh, wait! We already have. Our economy is also in the trash. Could it be the result of too much European imitation already?

And then there is the whole idea of the term "vacation deprivation."
Sounds like a disease doesn't it? That's it. Let's diagnose a person's lack of vacation as a disease. That will give them an entitlement. Then our already near bankrupt government will have an excuse to tax our already overtaxed population to pay for the prescription. Better yet, let's have our government step up to the aide our afflicted by requiring those businesses, who are already taxed to the gills, to pay more taxes for exposing their helpless workers to this dread disease. And once we have punished them sufficiently for their negligence, let's have our government force them to pay for the poor souls whose sorry hap in life has been to work for these companies to have sufficient vacation time to reverse the symptoms of their obviously now incurable disease.

And how about that other American disease, the "Protestant Work Ethic"?
I do not believe that true Christians are Protestants, but let's leave that alone for today. There we go, blame every problem the world has on the Christian mentality. The world was, after all, so much better off before Jesus Christ came from heaven and dwelt among us. I can see it now; Christ's real trouble was vacation deprivation. He could have lived to a ripe old age if He had only taken more time off. He did, after all, only get to work for three and a half years before He died. And then there are the apostles. The Apostle Paul's real problem was vacation deprivation. Can you imagine how badly he must have suffered from this horrible illness after planting churches all over the Middle East and into the regions of the west, writing half of the New Testament and turning the world upside down with his doctrine? He probably thought being beheaded was a break!



Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Religion versus Theology

The issue of same sex marriage is heating up again in Washington state. A group is pushing Washington to become the seventh state in the country to legalize same sex marriages. Proponents claim the this is not a religious issue. They said yesterday, on the Ken Schram radio show, that they freely respect the rights of those who are opposed upon religious grounds to abstain from practicing same sex marriages. The example I heard on the radio show was from Schram's guest who said that he was Roman Catholic and completely understood that his priest would be unwilling to perform his wedding. Speaking of Ken Schram, (himself a professing Catholic) he chided his audience not to send him emails claiming that "God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve," calling that "trite."
So I began to think about the difference between a religious argument against homosexual marriage and a theological one. It is obvious that religious arguments are powerless in our day. Very few people these days care what any church thinks about any thing. Here were two Catholics aggressively opposed to the message of their own religion. They weren't even bothered that their religion comes out on the opposite side of a position they are passionate about. The position of their religion, though still their religion, just does not matter to them. Therefore a religious argument is a hopeless argument. But what about a theological one? What if we argued that God Himself is opposed to homosexuality?
I realize most people would not see the difference. For most people religion has replaced God. They do not know God, they only know their religion and they have come to see their religion as fallible. Their own opions are as good as any opinion of their church. So, in order for my proposal to have any effect, two things would have to happen:
First, religions would have to get out of the way of God. We would need some honest to goodness real believers who meet with the Lord and hear from Him day by day. We would have to find some Christians who worship the Lord when they assemble rather than merely practicing their church form.
Second we would need a message from God so we know His views on issues such as homosexuality and etc..
Oh yea, I have heard about some Christians like that. These were those that refused to join up with Constantine when first he proposed to put religion above God. These have been a hated and persecuted people since the crucifixion of Christ. But they have also been a tenacious people, persisting through flame and flood.
• They have worshiped God in barns and meat-houses.
• They have preached in cathedrals not built by human hands.
• They have met in secret places and heard their preacher in hushed tones.
• They would not enter into the established churches knowing that those places only smothered out the heart for God.
They are the Baptists.
Not those who like to use the Baptist name but are really just Protestants who immerse; I am speaking of those Baptists who have, through the ages, lived and died by this one rule; their faith was in a resurrected Saviour and not a system of religion.
Hey, and that same people did have a message from God. Their Bibles gave us a family of Biblical manuscripts that were untainted by the perversions of Romanism. They saw the Bible as more than an instrument to control the masses for their purposes, but as indeed the very word of God. That message has been faithfully preserved and passed down to in the King James Version of the Bible.
The Baptist people have the message Washington State needs to hear. It is not that our church that opposes homosexual marriages; it is that God Himself is offended when His creation defiles the order He created. He has clearly said so, not in a religious document that has been written and re-written by men, but in the breath of God, recorded and supernaturally preserved.
The state of Washington may very well legalize homosexual marriages. But they will do so in defiance, not of a church, but of the very God of heaven.
And God have mercy if they do.

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Toward a Humble Orthodoxy

A recent blog entitled Updating and Refining the 1689 Baptist Confession: Toward a Humble Orthodoxy struck a chord with me, especially in consideration of my blog posted October 2. In the more recent blog the author, Bob Gonzales, a self professed Reformed Baptist, claims that those of his persuasion, "sometimes give the impression that we view ourselves as closer to historical Christian faith and practice than others in every respect." He goes on to state that, "Revising our Confession is a good opportunity to show our evangelical brothers that we don’t believe the illumination of the Holy Spirit ended with our Particular Baptist forefathers in the 17th century." And that, "…borrowing language or insights from their creeds where appropriate demonstrates a teachable and humble spirit on our part."
For my part I suggest that those who claim the Reformed position just admit that they are evangelicals rather than Baptist at all. To remind you of my previous blog, I quoted a missionary:
“… our English Baptist forefathers left their original position of "local church" proclaimed in their declaration of 1644 to embrace the reformation idea of the universal church to be "politically correct" in the second London Confession of 1689. They felt the need to be accepted as orthodox in their doctrine in order to be included in the Act of Toleration of 1689. From that time on we find Baptists struggling with this issue. On one hand we have the clear Bible teaching of the "ekklesia" and on the other hand the insatiable desire to be accepted by the protestant/evangelical community. May God help us to be faithful to Him and not to men.”
The last thing a Baptist needs to be as deemed "orthodox" by the Protestant powers that be. Just as Amos disavowed identification with the prophets of his day, the Baptist identification is one that is separate and distinct from those accepted orthodoxies of any age. We follow the Lord as He is revealed in the Word of God, not the orthodox standards of whichever age a Baptist may find himself. If a Baptist has a reason to exist it is as salt and light against the culture of our world, including those forms of Christianity that have morphed with the world.
Humility yes; but not before Protestant hierarchies. Our doctrine stands or falls in "the eyes of him with whom we have to do."

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Is Teaching Obedience Bad?

I just finished reading Darin Hufford's blog condemning the last church his family attended. He said that the service was fine - nothing new, but nothing wrong. Until he and his wife picked up the kids from the children's church area. They were wired on sugar, excited about the services and toting a coloring page encouraging obedience. He and his wife shook their heads in disappointment. After all, Christians shouldn't have to be obedient, he intimates, they should just be.

The only real test whether this is simply Mr. Hufford's opinion or a truth churches ought to get hold of is the Bible. I doubt that Mr. Hufford would accept any of the myriad of Old Testament passages concerning obedience so I will stick with the New Testament and just one passage there; Hebrews 5:8. Jesus the Son of God, learned obedience.

There you have it. Unless Mr. Hufford and his family are something more than is our Savior, I would suggest that if Christ learned obedience it would behoove the Hufford's and it would behoove the rest of us?

It isn't difficult to understand why that simple Sunday school coloring sheet would offend the Hufford's. After all obedience smacks of submission. Obedience implies that there is someone over us. Obedience insists that we are not gods. To be sure there are some who force obedience upon us who are no better than us. And I will readily admit it happens too often in church. But this in no way negates the Christian's submission to the Lord or our responsibility to obey.

Mr. Hufford; you write about God's love. Love is to be a two way street and Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments."

Your children would do well to learn obedience.

Couldn't hurt you either.

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Why Young Baptists are in Love with Modern Reformed Theology

A trend which seems to be increasingly popular among young independent Baptist preachers is to embrace, or at least flirt with the modern reformed theology of the likes of Mark Driscoll. I see at least three reasons why this may be the case:

1. It is popular and growing large congregations; that appeals to the flesh


2. It emphasizes precise theology; that appeals to the intellect, or the flesh


3. It is without standards of worldly separation; that appeals to the flesh.

I received a recent post from a missionary which read,
“… our English Baptist forefathers left their original position of "local church" proclaimed in their declaration of 1644 to embrace the reformation idea of the universal church to be "politically correct" in the second London Confession of 1689. They felt the need to be accepted as orthodox in their doctrine in order to be included in the Act of Toleration of 1689. From that time on we find Baptists struggling with this issue. On one hand we have the clear Bible teaching of the "ekklesia" and on the other hand the insatiable desire to be accepted by the protestant/evangelical community. May God help us to be faithful to Him and not to men.”

Amen...

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

The "Weaning" Process of American Faith

I have been weaning my mother goat from her kids. It is a process that is emotionally painful for both mother and kids. It is at least for them what they instinctively feel is unnatural. The kids want the milk and the mother wants to give it to them. Goats are heard animals and carry in their genes a high level of (emotional) dependence upon the whole.

It has set me to thinking about the separation of a parent from his or her children. The child sees it as natural and normal to wean from the care of their parents. But I don't think a parent ever gets fully weaned from their children. I am not even sure it is really God's will for them to be "weaned" in the sense that American culture insists upon. The American family, and especially the Christian family in America, would be much better off if family members not only loved each other but stayed physically together through generations. The American model of moving families around the continent has served to disband the fabric of family and effectively kill the faith of their fathers within one or two generations.

In much the same way American Christianity accepts a sort of weaning of its offspring that is unhealthy to the cause of Christ. I have, for instance, several men who have been trained under me in the ministry but believe they have outgrown me and my doctrine. Though they seem perfectly comfortable with the separation that is the result of their adventures into doctrines and practices I preach and taught them against, I still pine for them in a fashion similar to my emptiness for my children. My sons in the faith have forgotten me, but I cannot forget them.

And this laissez-faire attitude towards making their own way at the abandon of that which I preached contributes to the downhill slide of true faith. They think they have found something I (and preachers like me) were not aware of. In fact what they have found is the error we stood opposed to. And rather than humbling themselves and submitting to their fathers in the faith, they have let slip those things we hold so dear.

Marvin McKenzie
In the fields

Bible Wines

Dr. Rick Shrader has written a piece in response to John Macarthur's article, written to the Young, Restless and Reformed crowd warning them against encouraging the drinking of alcoholic wine.  Dr. Shrader's piece is researched, balanced and scholarly. I would recommend you read it here.

Bible Wines

Marvin McKenzie

In the fields