Author Archives: MzEllen

• 7 Comments

•

I was reading another blog (I'm not going to name it) the other day and couldn't resist commenting. I generally try to not go to other people's blogs just to disagree with them (if there's an ongoing debate, I will participate - but I don't want to just be disagreeable).

But...this just kind of upset me (due to a couple of other things that have come up in my (real) life.

(Questions do follow the main post, but here they are now)
1) Do stupid choices in your past exclude you from a ministry today?
2) Can some stupid choices in your past actually equip you for a ministry today?
3) (for some of us) Can our lack of (certain) stupid choices keep us from getting close to those who made those certain stupid choices?
4) Can our attitude toward those who did make those choices impair our credibility to others who made the same stupid choices?

The short story is that a Christian radio host had an ex-prostitute and porn "actress" on for an interview and the host asked a lot of "what was it like" questions.

The blogger lamented that she just didn't understand how a person could take a Christian heritage and throw it away. (I listened to the radio interview and although the guest said that she had been brought up in a Christian home, she also said that she had been sexually abused at age 9, that she had dressed up as a playboy bunny at - and her mom thought it was "cute" and took photos; at age 8 her parents "drifted away" from God and she was not close to her parents or encouraged to be close to God. As a teenager she was rebellious and at 18 she was asked to leave home.)

The blogger further stated that she is "sick and tired" of testimonies of those who were "just plain stupid and disobedient towards God". She ended the post with "Who says that one has to go through such trauma to be used of God in order to glorify God’s healing and love."

In the comments (replying to me) she said, "She deserves her STD’s. She deserves the hardships of single parenthood and she deserves every other thing that comes with her stupid choices, and to say that God is happy with her stupid choices and chooses to use her now for a ministry is insane."

The attitude bothered me. Yes, what the woman did was sin. Yes, a Christian upbringing is a gift (although one could question if that was what this guest had). No, you do not have to be a prostitute in order to have a ministry to prostitutes. I get all that.

But the attitude. I have this vision of an "I lived a better life than you" club. We see it all the time. In my co-worker who doesn't want single women to hang out with married couples. The church who doesn't allow divorced people in. The "group" that excludes single moms.

That last sentence in particular. I can say that God is very unhappy with her stupid choices, yet still believe that He could choose to use her now for a ministry. Stupid choices in your past should not exclude you from ministry today.

Even though my past hardships were not choices that I made (miscarriages, a marriage with rough spots, early widowhood, etc.) I can easily minister to people who have those things going on in their lives right now.

  • Can a person who made stupid mistakes minister to others who have made the same mistakes?
  • Do stupid choices in your past exclude you from a ministry today?
  • Can some stupid choices in your past actually equip you for a ministry today?
  • (for some of us) Can our lack of (certain) stupid choices keep us from getting close to those who made those certain stupid choices?
  • Can our attitude toward those who did make those choices impair our credibility to others who made the same stupid choices?

•

I'm proud of my daughter (although the spelling is a little "off")

Both my kids have blogs and this was posted on Manda's last Wednesday:

I hope all goes well for my mom tonight. She has a meeting with Pastor Bryan. A couple weeks ago we had dome people from new oraleans come to preach at our church. It was so wrong ... just wrong! The chick was calling herself profetess, and the guy was calling himself apostle. Like i said ... wrong. We are a Christian Reformed church. Not an apostic church. What did they think they were doing ... and the chick spent more time at the polpet then the pastor did it seemed like ... she said 5 minutes and went on for half an hour. and then she "imparted" the gift of profecy onto our pastors wives. Only God can gives us our gifts. And Pastor Dave is going down the same path they are. oh and "Apostle" Sherman L. Shelton told us something along the lines of God put our Pastors in authority we should submit to their authority and follow them even if they're leading us in the wrong direction. Thats the dumbest (i dont think thats even a word) thing i've ever heard! but my mom is going tonight to talk to Pastor Bryan about it, i really do hope all goes well and he understands and acts on her complaints ... GO MOM!

•

Blogging on Sunday's Sermon, the Lord's Prayer. I'm not one to see the real value on "formulizing" everything, but here goes...

From Luke 11:1-13

Let's "formulize" the Lord's Prayer into six "C's".

"Connect" - Father...
- tells us that we are close to the Father, but He is over us as a Provider who lavishes love on His family.

"Confess" - Hallowed be Your Name...
- tells us that God is holy and just (using the Biblical definition of "confess" - say the same as)

"Command" - Your kingdom come...
- Here's where it seems a little "word of faith-ish". I was at my dad's church just before a hurricane hit and the pastor "claimed authority over the storm and commanded it to change course.

"Collection" - Give us each day our daily bread...
Like the Israelites in the desert with their manna each day. Manna means "What is it?" and when we trust God for our needs, sometimes we get something that is not exactly what we're familiar with; but God does provide our needs.

"Cancelling" - Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us...
- keep a short accounts of debts.

"Conquering" - And lead us not into temptation...
we all have habits to change and sin/old nature to leave behind.

There you have it - the "formula" of the Lord's Prayer.

The rest of the passage deals with "Midnight Methods" - the persistent "bothering" of the neighbor for food. The sermons notes:
- when faced with an unexpected situation
- pray with boldness and persistence
- prevail over resistance
- be bold with shameless audacity
- and press through (be a pitfall)

The third point of the sermon is to know the character of the God to Whom we come.

God is the giver of good gifts, the One who provides, God my healer, the source of my faith and salvation.

That part is right...

• 2 Comments

•

It's official...I cannot write a one-page paper. At least I don't have any sense of "completion".

The assignment: Did the Buddha establish a new religion? Why or why not? The papers (10 in a semester) are to be no more than one page and are not graded - you either turn them in and get full credit or you don't.

Here is mine:

The answer is no…and yes. The Buddha did not…and did…institute a new religion. It all depends on what definition of “religion” you use. Even Buddhists say that Buddhism can be either a religion or a philosophy: “We believe that for those who observe and follow the ceremonies of Buddhism, then it is a religion. For those who observe and follow the morality of Buddhism, then it is a philosophy of life”. http://www.fundamentalbuddhism.com/buddhist.htm#FAQ00001

The first definition of “religion” is: “Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe” (http://dictionary.com). Using this definition, the Buddha did not institute a new religion since the Buddha did not teach about a supernatural power. Buddhism is about ceremony and morality, not about worshipping the Creator. The end of life brings “nirvana” (“extinction” – the soteriological goal of Buddhism; the final cessation of rebirth into suffering existence.”; http://www.trimondi.de/SDLE/Glossary.htm), not eternity in the presence of the Creator.

The other main definitions of “religion” are: “A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader” and “A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.” Using these definitions, the Buddha did institute a new religion, since he was a spiritual leader who taught beliefs, values and practices with zeal and conscientious devotion. However, since these beliefs and values can be applied to most world religions, it is hard to promote Buddhism as “the way”.

In short, depending on what definitions you prefer and how you use Buddhist teachings, Buddhism can be a philosophy, a religion or both.

• 4 Comments

•

Yes, I know that McLaren and Driscoll are on "Out of Ur" but that's not what I'm writing about.

I firmly believe that homosexualty actions are wrong - sin. Of course, so are a lot of other things that are right out in the open at church. How homosexuals should be treated should very much depend on whether or not they are in the church (professing Christians).

Wherever they are at, whatever they are doing, our motive should be love.

But on to the real topic.
...and my struggle with gentleness...I'm going to be writing a letter to the editor and need to focus on gentleness and respect. My first letter "went away" when somebody rebooted the computer before I saved it and I think God's hand was in that.

I got my February copy of "The Banner" and read a couple of things that kind of mystified me.

The First Christian Reformed Church in Toronto, Ontario announced three years ago that it would allow its members living in committed gay and lesbian relationships to be nominated as elders and deacons.

In December 2005, after being on the brink of being disaffiliated, "The Council of First Christian Reformed Church, Toronto...resolved[s] to acknowledge the CRC guidelines with respect to homosexuality and agrees to tailor its ministry accordingly."

So far so good. Next up: First CRC plans ask the synod to revisit the CRC's position on homosexuality. So, they're going to go through the normal channels to get gays and lesbians into the formal leadership of their church. (Here's where I start to lose the "gentleness" thing.

I'm not mystified by this; I'm glad that the denomination's structure brought enough pressure to bring the church into line. The structure did its job.

What mystifies me is another article on "General and Special Revelation in Conversation" by Dr. Donald Oppewal at Calvin College (words from the article in blue. Special revelation is the Bible and general revelation is:
- an embodiment of the divine thought in the phenomona of nature;
- the general composition of the human mind and
- the facts of experience or history.

Oppewal maintains that special revelation alone is inadequate; the two sources are interdependent and...that general revelation promotes a proper understanding of special revelation."

(This is where I really start to lose my gentleness - not with sinners, but with the denomination)

Oppewal's final paragraph reads: "The Spirit moves most surely among us when Christians read the "facts of experience or history" as well as when we read the Bible. Christian thinkers in the vaeious disciplines, including theology, can give us counsel as we try to walk together toward that day when we shall all see more clearly the will of God for our communal lives, both in church and in society."

(Here's where I have to work to stay focused on gentleness)

Apply that final paragraph to Oppewal's final point.

"It remains to be seen how the question of homosexuality as a lifestyle comports with a Christian view of sexuality. But we can hope that the church will examine the evidence from general revelation just as seriously as it does the evidence from special revelation.

"Without also considering the evidence from biology concerning how sexuality is shaped, and without turning to the actual sociological evidence about same-sex relations, we'll end up doing only half our homework as Reformed Christians."

What Oppewal appears to be saying is that we have to look at God's Word through the lens of "sociological evidence" - not the other way around.

My desire is (with gentleness and respect) state clearly that we should be looking at the world through God's lens - not looking at God's Word through the lens of the world.

•

Let's see...

Thanks to all the readers that stopped by!

Now for "life's tidbits"

I have to get a new copy of "Paedofaith" - I gave mine to my pastor. He tells me that there are compelling reasons to invite small children who have been baptized into covenant families to the table of God.

Our professor was out sick today - so no test (way cool). This means I can watch the show that I shouldn't watch, but like anyway...CSI.

A package arrived - a memory card reader from my dear friend. The camera and card will arrive tomorrow!

My February copy of "The Banner" arrived today. Page 36: "General and Special Revelation in Conversation."

My son can play "Happy Birthday" on his new Manolin. This is significant because my dad turned 71 yesterday and Tom played for him.

My other class has a writing assignment: "Do you believe that the Bhudda started a new religion? Why or why not?" These writing assignments (weekly) are going to be hard for me - because there is a one-page limit. Double spaced.

I'm a couple of days behind on my Bible reading. My sleep cycle gets messed up very easily and it got messed up a couple of days ago. I'm not as far behind as my sidebar says - I just haven't updated my sidebar.

Right now, I'm heading to my room - with a writing tablet (philosophy assignment and grocery list), my "Banner" and a beer.

Last - I tried a new beer - "Bar Harbor Blueberry Ale" - not my favorite; I'll stick to my "Young's Double Chocolate Stout" or Guiness Extra Stout.

😉 Ellen

• 6 Comments

•

The meeting went very well. There are still some concerns on my part, but I'm content with the general direction the church is headed.

I asked if I were the only one who had brought forward concerns - the answer is no, there were a lot of concerns brought up in small groups that Sunday and they were addressed in church the week that we were out of town.

I asked the pastor if he had looked at the Firehouse Family Ministries website and he told me that he didn't even know they had a website. I explained what I had found and gave him a printout of my post from here. Ok...

He also told me that our church did not know, when the work team headed for New Orleans, who they would be helping. The context of the work team was that they were working through another evangelical disater relief organization. The "hookup" with Firehouse was not planned ahead of time.

He could somewhat anticipate my questions because of all the concerns brought up by others.

No, we are not "going all Pentecostal"
No, we are not going "word faith"
No, we are not going "Five fold ministry"

Parts of the service were not expected - the Shelton's had come to give a "thank you" message.

Yes, the pastors are, at their core, very reformed (I ate dinner at the "all church supper" with Pastor Brian with a couple who is new to the church - they decided that there were things in Roman Catholic teaching that are not in the Bible so they left that religion - and we talked about "election" for about 45 minutes)

We went over what I discovered by just poking around and he agrees with what I found, other than his take on "language barriers" - sometimes the words that we use "sound like" what other people are using, but we don't mean the same thing. Yeah. Then don't use the words that have been co-opted by heretics.

There are big plans for our church and they are definitely talking about a singles ministry! Brian asked me what I thought would be the best route to take - a ministry that targets specific needs, or a general social group? I told him, why not both? with our small group system in place, a single person could have their social needs met, while addressing specific needs in a small group setting that targets their circumstance.

Anyway, there were a couple of other things (minor) that we talked about and I left feeling pretty good about the whole thing.

😉

•

I'm going to post a "Carnival Reminder" and then for the next few days (at least) my time blogging will be devoted (unless something really major comes up) to the events at my church.

My heart is hurting and I don't know what is going to happen. I meet with one of my pastors tomorrow afternoon and I don't expect that I will be effectual. I do know that God's will will be done.

There will be a new post on MzEllenWrites (a writing assignment for my Tuesday night class), but other than that, this blog will be devoted to Sunshine news.

thanks all - I covet your prayers and support.