Should Christians Be Tolerant?

Our lead team is reading through a book by Dallas Willard called "Knowing Christ Today." It's a pretty technical book and has some parts that are hard to wade through but he had a statement that really put words to what we have been experiencing here in California.

We have been meeting a lot of people that have alternative lifestyles and behaviors from us and I have enjoyed meeting them and fostering a relationship with them. However, there seems to be an attitude within the church that says, "certain individuals and behaviors are not welcome here." An attitude I find unacceptable and unbiblical.

I pray that Ridgeline never has that attitude! I want Ridgeline to be a tolerate church. I know that very statement has to make many Christians cringe with disgust. Should it? I don't think it should and here's why...

Willard defines tolerance in a wonderful way...a way I want to memorize. "Tolerance is not indifference, but a generous regard and even provision for those who differ from us on points we deeply care about. To support tolerance--which is not the same as lacking intolerance--more is required than just a lack of certainty concerning differences at issue. We must also care about people."

In other words, just because we say we are tolerant does not mean that we are indifferent on issues or we think anything goes (the idea that truth is relative and subjective)...that is not at all what we mean. We do have a stance and opinion on abortion, sexuality, etc.

However, we simply want to provide an atmosphere where people can come and feel welcome and loved and enter in a dialogue with us for why we believe what we do. Is this not what Jesus examplified? Did he exclude and condemn the outcast, "sinners," etc.? They only people Jesus openly criticised was the religious leaders of his day.

Life with God

The lead team has been reading through Richard Foster's book called "Life with God" and he has some very insightful and refreshing remarks. Definitely worth reading if you are interested.

One of the things we discussed today was his comment, "Do we truly want life with God?" I think most people (including myself at times) don't want life with God, BUT instead they want death with God. Most have the impression that God doesn't seem to have anything to offer me here and now and if He does it isn't going to be "beneficial" to me. He'll probably make me do or go somewhere I don't want to do or go.

Foster does a great job does a superb job at describing how rich life can be when we position ourselves in the right spot for God to move and act.

But this comes at a cost. Life with God takes movement. Intention has to move to action. When this occurs life with God "is an on-going, ever-changing, relational adventure!"

BBQ and technology

How cool is it that we can now blog from our phones? Jen & I are having some new friends over for a BBQ. There's really no point to this blog except that I can now learn to blog about things that happen throughout my day...for those that really care about what we are doing on a daily basis.

Why is that people don't hang out with other people? What I mean...or what I have seen hear in so. Cal. Is that people live in places for years and they don't know their neighbors...nor do they have any meaningful relationships. People are desperate for community & I want to be a part of people deepening their relationships w others as well as people exploring a relationship w God.

Off to grill!

Thought Concerning Jesus Part 2

This post stems from an interesting conversation we had in our small group a couple weeks ago. One individual in our group was discussings his concerns and frustrations about what God did in some of the stories of the Old Testament. One cannot (in my opinion) read the OT and not come across some stories where God commands his people to wipe out everything that breathes (including small infants) and stop and think why God is acting this way. Therefore, I sympathize with his question and frustration. I think this is a good thing to ask and wrestle with. The book of Joshua can be a tough book for people to swallow and people need to take some time and study it...including myself.

The last post I asked the qustion, "What's the purpose of Jesus" or "Why did Jesus Come?" I think there's another profound reason Jesus (i.e. God) took on human flesh. I believe he came to show that there really is a God. Granted most individuals in the days of Jesus were not struggling with the philosophical arguments of the existence of God. However, there are several individuals today that are and I find it comforting to know that I believe there is a God because he made himself known to us in a very physical manner and he demonstrated this to be true (that he is God) through miracles, signs, and wonders. Now I have to take this on faith since I personally wasn't present when these miracles happened (which leads to another argument or post for why I believe the Bible is an accurate, authoritative, God inspired book).

I also think there's another reason why Jesus came. I think he came to clarify what type of God he really is. One could read the OT and come to a false conclusion that he's harsh and little over the top on how he responds and interacts with people. When you read about Jesus one cannot help to see that he loves and cares for people. He came not be served but to serve and lay down his life (Mark 10:45). He came to smash our paradigm of a God who finds pleasure in judgement and pain. Read for yourself and see if you come to the same conclusion.

(Why then did God command certain events like the Canaanite destruction? Well, I can't presume to know all the answers (because they aren't given to us), but a few days ago as I was reading through my daily reading and I just happened to come across Deuteronomy 12 and this is what verse 31 states, "You must not worship the LORD your God in their way (i.e. the Canaanite way) because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of detestable things the LORD hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in the fire as sacrifices to their gods."

One thing we need to realize is that the people of Canaan were not the Brady bunch. These individuals were extremely wicked and they practiced some very grotesque things that can be seen in more detail in Leviticus 18. One thing they did (as shown in Deuteronomy 12) on a regular basis was child sacrifice. They would heat the arms of their god, Moloch and place their babies on them as a sacrifice to their god. Bystanders would beat drums in order to drown out the cries of the babies that were being set on fire. This was the group God told his people to remove from the earth because he knew that they would corrupt and influence them if they did not. Is this act warranted...that's for you to decide).

Thoughts Concerning Jesus

What is the purpose of Jesus? Or to say it a little differently, "Why did he come?" If this was a game of family fued, the number one answer (as far as the Church would say) to this question would be that Jesus came to die on the cross in order that our sins might be forgiven. Of course this is true and beautiful, but I think it's helpful to think through why I believe it's such an important truth.

Would it be possible for another human to die for our sins? For me the answer would have to be no since they themselves have the same problem I have. They are sinful and a sinful individual cannot cure what they themselves are plagued with. The beauty of Jesus is that we believe he is without sin and he alone can die on our behalf. (The beauty of Christianity is not simply that Jesus dies for our sins, but the fact that something deeper occurs as well. Jesus gives, imputes, or reckons to us his perfection as well. He doesn't simply cancel our debt...he also makes a deposit and that deposit is his righteousness or perfection).

This however begs the question, "Could an angel die for us instead of Jesus?" Virtually everyone would agree that angels are perfect, but even if they aren't let's just say they are for argument's sake. Could God use an angel to die for our sins?

Again, I would have to say no and the primary reason is due to the fact that if an angel died for us then we would spend our time worshiping and praising this angel and not God. Is this not the case? If the angel, Michael died for me then I would always be thinking of Michael and what he did for me. As I wrote in a post prior, God desires us to praise him because he's the best thing to be praised. This would not be the case if an angel died for us. Michael would be the best thing for us because he was the remedy to our problem. Why would God forfeit this right by sending an angel and allow us to worship another when he himself could willingly come and die in our place? Obviously, there's more that could be said concerning this issue, but I think this is sufficient for now.

Purpose of God!?

Our small group has started discussing some different topics (which I think can be pretty difficult to understand, but healthy to discuss) so here's a little glimpse on where I stand on certain topics. I'll try to do this more often (and I apologize in advance for spelling and grammar errors. I don't have a lot of time to devote to this).


The last discussion was over this question. What is the chief end or purpose of God? Or to phrase the question a little differently...what does God desire or long for more than any other thing? Historically the church has stated that God longs to glorify himself. But what the heck does that really mean? I would say that it means...God longs to display himself as infinitely valuable....or God longs to show his all-satisfying beauty and greatness.


The second quesion: What's the chief end or purpure of man? It makes sense that if God's purpose is to display is glory (i.e. beauty and greatness) to humanity, than man's goal is to make much of God and to enjoy him forever. In other words, we should long to show others how valuable God is to us.


However, several people have a problem with both these purposes. C.S. Lewis (the guy who wrote the Chronicles of Narnia) prior to his conversion to Christianity stated that one of the reasons he was opposed to the Christian faith was due to the fact that he had a problem with God's demand for praise. Lewis said the Psalms made God look extremely vain...like an old woman constantly looking for compliments.

Isn't that true in some sense? Nobody likes to be around someone who always "toots their own horn!" or brags about how good there at "x." Why then is it ok (dare I say, "fundamentally necessasry") for God to command praise or to glorify himself by displaying his worth and value to us?

How then did Lewis reconcile this problem? The more he thought about God's desire to be praised the more he realized how necessary this was for God. Why? Lewis stated that God is the only being where if he didn't command others to worship and adore him he would be denying himself (i.e. commiting idolatry). We don't like other people bragging about themself because we know that no matter how talented they are...they aren't that much better than us. God on the otherhand is infinitely greater than we are...or any other thing/being for that matter. There is nothing outside of himself that deserves more recognition, honor, praise, etc. So, He MUST (i.e. fundamentally necessary) demand praise because there's nothing greater than himelf.

Thoughts on Romans 5:1

“Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God.”

What a notion. We have been released or acquitted from the hostility that was once against us. Personally it’s hard for my mind to comprehend and my heart to feel the glorious reality of this truth. I was once destined for wrath because I was “darkened in understanding and separated from the life of God because of the ignorance that was in me, due to the hardening of my heart” (Eph. 4:18).

This truth shows me how corrupt my human nature still is. I take for granted the truth that I am no longer condemned before a holy and just God. It’s almost as if I think that I deserve to be vindicated or made right in God’s eyes…as if I were something special in and of myself.

Another reality that I think is funny and mysterious is the idea that since I am justified by God. I think it’s necessary to recognize that my justification does not originate with me. In other words, justification is done to us and not us primarily doing it. I use “primarily” because we do have a role in this salvific process, but it is God working and willing our desires so that we do what he desires (Phil. 2:12-13). Some scholars have used statements like, "God's work is decisive and our work is dependent," but that probably doesn't help the majority of people so feel free to ignore what I just wrote.

Yet one may argue, “Hold on Jay. The verse states that we are justified by faith. Isn’t your faith the mechanism that justifies you and since you are the one that exercises this faith then you are the one responsible for your justification?” I would respond with an emphatic no and here are a couple reasons why.

First, the text seems to reject this line of reasoning (even if this arguments seems logical). Paul uses a passive participle (“having been justified”) which isn’t easily seen in our English translation. The passive voice of the participle tells us that this action of being justified is not something we do or produce or earn (that would make it an active participle), but this action of justification is done for us by God.

This is a strong reason why learning English grammar is so important. People need to know the difference between active and passive verbs. If people think they do something (like justifying themselves) when in fact it is being done to them…they strongly dishonor God and rob him of what he has performed.

Secondly, we see this elsewhere in Paul’s writings. Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For it is by grace you have been saved through faith and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God not by works so that no one can boast.” I believe Paul has both “salvation” and “faith” in mind when he begins talking about God’s grace. God’s grace produces or brings about our salvation and our faith. See also Rom. 12:3, 1 Cor. 27-31, Phil. 1:29.