Five Reasons to Say "No" to a Church Covenant

"But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all ... All you need to say is
simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one."
Jesus

 

 

 





Village Church in Dallas, Texas recently placed a member named Karen Root  under church discipline because she annulled her marriage with a confessed child pornographer.  A letter Village Church elders sent to members last Saturday (May 23, 2015) gave their logic for placing Karen under church discipline. The elders believed they had no choice because Karen violated the church covenant that she signed when she joined Village Church. Specifically, Karen violated the covenant by not getting church leaders' permission to file for an annulment. The elders wrote:    

"...Karen filed for an immediate annulment of her marriage to Jordan apart from the counsel of the church... (by) signing the Membership Covenant, a member agrees ... to receive our care..."

Karen had respectfully requested withdrawal of membership from Village Church, but the elders wouldn't allow it because she had not sought their counsel. She refused to come "under their care," so they put Karen under discipline. No Village Church member under discipline, wrote Village church authorities, can "withdraw" from membership. Therefore, Village pastors/elders "refused to accept" Karen's request to withdraw from Village membership.

This is an ugly situation all the way around. Village Church leaders--regardless of the vocal criticism they receive--believe they are men of integrity. They are, in their minds, fulfilling their pastoral role and abiding by the church covenant they demanded everyone sign before they became members. Some who are not members of Village are blaming Karen for signing a church covenant. Nobody should blame Karen. She, like other evangelicals, probably had no idea of the ultimate consequences of signing church covenants. The guilt lies with church authorities who demanded signatures from prospective members that turned their spiritual formation and maturation over to mere men instead of the Holy Spirit.

Read Village's Church Covenant. It's chilling when it comes to the authority of elders and church leaders. Here are some of the phrases that the prospective member must read and then sign, vowing their allegiance to obey:

• I understand the importance of submission to church leadership
• I will submit to the elders and other appointed leaders of the church
• I will agree to walk through the steps of marriage reconciliation at The Village Church before pursuing divorce from my spouse

I've written several articles stating that the major problem in modern evangelical Christianity is the authoritarianism of evangelical leaders. I have sought to explain how pastors/elders "twist the Scriptures" and demand "obedience and submission" to this alleged authority. Jesus tells us that that true 'spiritual leaders' are only servants, never masters. Yet, evangelical leaders seem not to be listening to Jesus.

With this in mind, I would like to give you five reasons why I would never sign a church membership covenant in order to become a member.

(1). A church covenant makes the Holy Spirit irrelevant in my life.

We are called in Scripture to be led "by the Spirit." Though there is counsel in the wisdom of many, when I sign a church covenant I abdicate my right to hear from the Spirit myself. When Karen Root resigned her membership from Village, she stated "I have sought the Lord diligently and several godly people I trust..." That wasn't good enough for Village elders; Karen didn't seek them out. A church covenant fetters one's ability to seek the Spirit's wisdom and advice from godly people other than the elders and pastors of the church that demanded you to sign.

 

(2). A church covenant replaces my one true Mediator with inferior mediators.

 

I have only One High Priest who stands between me and God - Jesus, the Son of God - and anyone who comes between me and Jesus as I walk by His counsel and His wisdom is a detriment to my growth. A true servant in the Kingdom will only and always point me  to Jesus Christ for my marching orders, and will never demand that I accept their orders as from God. When I sign a church covenant I'm in essence handing over the authority of Jesus Christ in my life to mere men.

 

(3). A church covenant makes the institutional church equivalent to the Kingdom of God.

  

 A 501c-3 non-profit institutional church plays an important role in the Kingdom of God, but the local church is not the kingdom of God.  Anyone who knows history understands that institutional churches who demand spiritual authority over individual believers have wrongly placed their institution on par with God's Kingdom. For example, the great 17th century Baptist hymn writer and theologian Benjamin Keach decided to write a book for children containing evangelical truth. Authorities of the Church of England sought to execute him for writing that infant baptism was not biblical. On what basis could the Church of England kill Benjamin Keach? Answer: The same basis Village Church can consign Karen Root to church discipline. Leaders of the 17th century Church of England and the 21st century Village Church both believe their institution is equivalent to the Kingdom of God. Their leaders falsely believe that they hold the keys of life and death and of heaven and hell. It isn't so. Don't sign a covenant and perpetuate this dangerous lie.

 

(4). A church covenant by its nature is designed to protect an authoritarian structure.

 

When a Christian signs a church covenant that demands submission to elders/pastors, he or she is enabling that institutional church to maintain an authoritarian structure. Rather than the weak and wounded sheep being the focus of attention within the church, most modern covenants are written with phrases that seem intent on bringing church members into "submission to church authorities." Quickly scan any church covenant, If "submission to church elders" is anywhere found, then know the covenant is designed to keep control of members and maintain the authority of the leaders. Paul Burleson points out that any institutional church more concerned with supporting their authoritarian system of control than healing their wounded members is sending signals of weak spiritual leadership. Jesus said that the world uses titles, positions of honor, and seeks to "exercise authority over those they rule," but "this should never be the case among His followers (Mark 10:35-45).

 

(5). A church covenant requires something more than a simple "Yes" or "No."

 

Jesus said that anything you have to do that goes beyond your simple words of "Yes" and "No" is from the "evil one" (Matthew 5:37).  When I join a church, I will forever refuse to sign any document, whether it be a "tithing card," or "a membership covenant," or any other document that requires a vow from me regarding my future performance or activity. In fact, if I ever attend a church that requires such a thing, I will refuse to join on the basis of principle. I will live freely, speak with integrity, and rest in the simplicity of following Jesus and living by the Spirit. I will not be fettered by written vows to a church that is seeking to protect their authority over me.

 

I need no covenant to guarantee that God will finish the work He's begun in me.

It Takes a Village Covenant to Raise a Bitter Root

Village Church Pastor, Matt Chandler

Every pastor's worst nightmare is to have to deal with a staff member or church supported missionary who abuses trust through immoral sexual activity. Village Church in Dallas, Texas has been going through such a time as this.

Jordan Root and his wife Karen Root have been missionaries from Village Church, working with SIM (Serving in Mission) in East Asia. Jordan Root confessed to extensive viewing of child pornography, a crime in the United States and most nations of the world. Jordan was terminated by SIM and sent back to the United States. Jordan Root denies he ever sexually molested any young girls, but his extensive ministry and personal involvement with pre-puberty teens caused his wife concern that he had not fully confessed the depths of his involvement in either child sexual abuse or child pornography. In reading through the source documents and a statement from Karen Root herself, it seems Village Church pastors and staff attempted--in the beginning--to perform their diligence in giving pastoral care to both Jordan and Karen. However, unless you've been the partner in a marriage where your spouse has been involved in child pornography for years, it's difficult to understand the pain, fear, and distrust present in the heart and mind of Karen Root.

After returning to the United States, Karen Root filed for an annulment of her marriage to Jordan Root. In the State of Texas, if it is proven that a spouse deceived a partner prior to marriage, an annulment can be granted. An annulment is a state's declaration that a covenant of marriage never took place (void) due to deception. The State of Texas approved the annulment and Karen Root changed her name back to Karen Hinckley. Karen then resigned her membership from Village Church, preferring to attend church at a place other than where Jordan attended. I'm glad the state of Texas granted the annulment, but in my opinion, even if they had not, Karen had grounds for divorce.

Here's where it gets weird.

Village Church elders sent a letter to Karen Hinckley. In that letter, they informed Karen of three things:

(1). The church officers are perplexed as to why Karen "filed for an annulment."
(2). Karen is "now under discipline" for violating the "church covenant."
(3). The church officers "cannot, therefore, accept Karen's resignation."

Sigh.

I normally do not write about issues involving other churches, however, I've broken my normal pattern to throw a lifeline to Village Church. Karen Hinckley seems to be reasonable, smart, and I would even say 'classy' in her Christian faith. You can sense it in her letters to her pastors and elders.

Village Church pastors/elders have made a huge mistake. The 1989 Guinn v. Church of Christ Collinsville is an infamous legal case where a woman 'resigned her membership' from her home church. It has similarities and a few dissimilarities with Village Church versus Hinckley, which is not yet--and hopefully won't be--a legal case. The Church of Christ in Collinsville (Oklahoma) told an adulterous woman in their church that they  "could not accept her resignation because she was under church discipline." The adulterous woman then sued her church. In the end, the woman was awarded a settlement in the hundreds of thousands of dollars because the church refused to accept her resignation. Though the verdict was overturned in the appellate court, the appellate judges based their decision to overturn on the fact the adulterous woman was already under church discipline.

Village Church, this is where you may be in trouble. You've gone after the victim, not the offender. Karen Hinckley was not "in sin." Your only argument that she could have been in sin and in need of "discipline" is that she filed for "an annulment" for her marriage, an act in opposition to your counsel. Her refusal to abide by pastoral counsel in terms of restoring her relationship with Jordan, a confessed child pornographer, is a big issue to you elders. However, it has led you to make an even bigger mistake. A big, BIG, mistake. The State of Texas has already agreed with Karen.

I'd like to offer you some unsolicited advice, that if taken, might protect you from litigation that every attorney with a shingle on his window would love to take against you. It seems to me  that Karen doesn't want to harm Village Church or anyone else. She just wants people to take child sexual abuse seriously. Here's my advice.

(1). Write an immediate letter of apology--and I mean immediate-- to Karen Hinckley, retracting the earlier letter, and informing Karen that you are indeed accepting Karen's resignation from your church.

(2). Never speak on behalf of Karen Hinckley again--to anyone--including the members of your congregation.  

(3). Realize that your 501c-3 called Village Church is not equivalent to the Kingdom of God. Yes, you play a huge and vital role in His Kingdom, but your non-profit and His Kingdom are not synonymous. Therefore, next time anyone decides they wish to leave your non-profit, let them go.

As a side note, I do wish to encourage you in your continued ministry to Jordan Root. Unlike some, I believe you have an interest in the victims of his abuse. My friends have a hard time believing that you are as concerned for the victims because you've taken one of his victims -- his wife -- to the proverbial gates of hell because she dared disagree with the manner in which you were progressing in your ministry toward her and her former husband.

Prove everyone wrong and apologize to Karen Hinckley. Accept her resignation of membership. And then stop viewing your office as pastor/elder of Village Church as the ultimate authority in the Kingdom of God.

Jesus Christ is Karen Hinckley's ultimate authority, and He has led her to resign her membership.

Don't argue with Jesus. :)

Introducing Emmanuel Media: Videos for Worship

Our staff at Emmanuel Enid is a constant search mode for worship videos, 1 to 2 minutes in length, that are appropriate to play during a Sunday morning worship service. Beginning about two years ago we began to produce our own videos. We have made the decision to begin offering these videos to other churches as well.

The site, www.emmanuelmedia.org, is being launched today. It will take time to add various videos that our staff produces, but it is our desire to provide--at a very low cost--videos that are well done visually, sound theologically, and contribute to the worship experience on Sunday morning. We perform the music ourselves (or purchase the commercial copyrights), write the scripts, and produce the videos internally.

Our first video on the newly launched website is one available for Father's Day (June 21). Go to www.emmanuelmedia.org and preview the video free of charge. If you purchase the $4.99 video, you will be sent a link to the HD quality video that can be downloaded for use. All proceeds from the sales of these videos will go into an earmarked fund for video equipment at Emmanuel Enid.

From Tragedy to Triumph: The IMB Reverses Itself

Last week trustees of the International Mission Board (IMB) of the Southern Baptist Convention reversed two decade old doctrinal policies it implemented in 2005. Those two policies  revolved around (a). a prospective SBC missionary's baptism; and (b). a prospective SBC missionary's private prayer life.

A decade ago, over my objections as a trustee of the IMB, my fellow trustees went beyond the Baptist Faith and Message and restricted the appointment of Southern Baptist missionaries to only those who had been baptized in a Southern Baptist Church and to only those who had never "prayed in tongues" in their prayer closet.

The belief that proper authority and doctrinal orthodoxy of the baptizer is necessary for a valid baptism is historically a Landmark position. The Baptist Faith and Message is not a Landmark document, and the Southern Baptist Convention is not a Landmark denomination. In addition, the Baptist Faith and Message is absolutely silent on the subject of a believer praying in tongues.

I discovered that a few of the IMB trustees who were pushing the "new doctrinal policies" were actually attempting to press IMB President Jerry Rankin to resign because it was known he had a "private prayer language." The politics of trustees (and others) forcing Dr. Rankin's removal, using "doctrinal purity" as a cover, disgusted me.

I also learned that a few other IMB trustees were avowed Landmark Baptists (they told me) and they wished to make Southern Baptists into a Landmark convention of churches. It was a matter of 'doctrinal purity" they said. I was of the belief that no agency which represented the entire Southern Baptist Convention (as the IMB does) has the authority or right to change the doctrinal standards by which the agency will operate without the approval of the entire Southern Baptist Convention.

I decided that Southern Baptists needed to hear about the International Mission Board doctrinal policy changes. I started a blog, and used it to make Southern Baptists aware of the impact of the doctrinal changes. Dr. Morris Chapman proofed a couple of the more important blog posts, offering both suggestions and encouragement before his retirement. Both Dr. Chapman and Dr. Rankin understood the "behind-the-scenes" politics taking place, but were unable--because of their denominational positions--to say anything publicly. My writing infuriated IMB trustee leadership. Other trustees, unfamiliar with SBC politics, were told by trustee leadership that I (Wade Burleson) was the problem and I had to be removed from the board.

I'll not rehearse all that happened from 2005 to 2008, but anyone interested can read the book Hard Ball Religion. The IMB trustees failed in their attempt to remove me as a trustee, not realizing at the time that the entire Southern Baptist Convention had to approve my removal. IMB trustee leadership rescinded their recommendation for my removal prior to the vote at the 2006 Southern Baptist Convention. However, IMB trustee leadership later censured me for violating their newly revised trustee "standard of conduct" which stated, "an IMB trustee must publicly affirm board approved policy even if he cannot privately support it."  Of course, I voted against the new trustee standard of conduct and continued to speak out against the new doctrinal policies.

Punishing the person who opposes authoritative rules--rather than allowing respectful and principled dissent--is an axiom of dysfunctional leadership. I was censured for continuing to speak out against the policies. I was often flabbergasted at the tactics used against me, as was my wife (who later told me "Wade, I wouldn't have believed it unless I saw it with my own eyes"), but I persisted in seeking to express my principled dissent. In January 2008, after less than three years of service on the International Mission Board, a position I neither sought nor desired, I resigned as a trustee.

Southern Baptists Are Smarter than Most Think

Before my resignation, two things occurred that seemed to set the stage for what happened last week in the reversal of the IMB polices.

First, in 2006 Frank Page was surprisingly elected President of the Southern Baptist Convention. I promoted him and predicted his election, which shocked the leadership of both the IMB and many in the Southern Baptist Convention. The President of the Southern Baptist Convention holds all the power. He appoints the Committee on Committees that recommends the trustees. The process of replacing trustees who wished to exceed the convention-approved Baptist Faith and Message began.

Second, in the summer of 2007 the Southern Baptist Convention passed the Garner Motion. To say my fellow trustees were upset with the passage of this motion would be an understatement. However, of all the experiences I enjoyed during my tenure at the IMB, the passing of the Garner Motion was by far the most significant.

I will let David Rogers explain the practical effect of the Garner Motion. David's words come from a recent comment at SBC Voices, but they succinctly and accurately portray the meaning behind the Garner Motion, and they are a perfect explanation for understanding why the IMB trustees reversed the 2005 doctrinal policies last week.

"If you are familiar with the regulative and normative principles of worship, perhaps this explanation will make sense. Some take the“regulative” approach to the Baptist Faith and Message. Most Southern Baptists take the “normative” approach. In other words, a person who takes the regulative approach to the BFM believes what is not specifically permitted is inherently forbidden. Most Southern Baptists' take the "normative" perspective of the BFM and believe what is not specifically forbidden is generally permitted. The Baptist Faith and Message, by it's very design, is meant to be applied in a normative, not regulative, way."

Bingo.

The 2005 IMB trustee leadership sought to regulate the doctrinal practices of all Southern Baptist churches who wished to place missionaries on the field by forbidding certain practices (private prayer language, baptism by immersion in churches other than Southern Baptist, etc...), practices that the BFM does not specifically forbid. The IMB trustees last week abided by the will of the Southern Baptist Convention in its passage of the 2007 Garner Motion) and reversed the ill-advised policies of 2005 that exceeded the BFM in forbidding private prayer language and baptisms by immersion in churches other than Southern Baptist.

President David Platt and the Future of the Southern Baptist Convention

By August of 2014, there were enough like-minded normative trustees in place at the International Mission Board to elect David Platt as President. There would have been a greater chance of a snow ball remaining frozen in hell than David Platt being elected President of the IMB in 2005. Leadership has changed during the past ten years.

The Southern Baptist Convention is returning to her normative roots.

I'm as uninterested in the politics of the Southern Baptist Convention in 2015 as I was in 2005. I have recently read that some Southern Baptists are wishing to "pull out" of the Southern Baptist Convention because the recent change of policies at the IMB. I hope they don't. I've stayed a Southern Baptist. We've continued to support missions.  I hope those who don't like the changes from last week take the same approach and support SBC missions.  In addition,  those of you who oppose the action of the IMB trustees last week should voice your dissent. Write and publicize your disapproval. Make known your opinion! That's the Southern Baptist way.

Only the weak stifle dissent.

I Feel as David When Told of the Death of Absalom

Benjamin Helm

At 9:30 am on September 20, 1863, Confederate Brigadier General Benjamin Hardin Helm fell from his horse on the Chickamauga (Georgia) battlefield,  mortally wounded by a Union marksman's bullet to the chest. General Helm commanded the 1st Kentucky Brigade, which after the Civil War became known as The Orphans Brigade. Most people believe the post-war "Orphan" tag came from the painful loss of their beloved "father" figure, General Helm.

My son Boe and I were on the battlefields of Chickamauga last week, looking for--and finding--the precise locations where our maternal great-grandfather FTD Cherry and his brother, Cutler Cherry, were captured by the Union army. The helpful Federal Park Ranger told us he never before had met a family who had two family members captured at Chickamauga. During our day at Chickamauga we came across the moving story of General Helm.

Benjamin Helm graduated from West Point in 1851, just shy of his 20th birthday. He ranked 9th in his class of 42 cadets. He became a second lieutenant in the 2nd U.S. Dragoons (Cavalry) and then served as an instructor at the cavalry school in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. He served in the U.S. Army for a little over a year before he was diagnosed with inflammatory rheumatism and forced to resign his commission.

Helm then studied law at the University of Louisville and Harvard University, graduating in 1853. In 1855 he was elected to serve in the Kentucky House of Representatives  and then was later appointed Kentucky's state attorney. At the outbreak of the Civil War--in spite of his rheumatism--Helm was offered a commission with the Union army. Helm declined the appointment, and instead chose to serve as a field army officer in the Confederate States of America. He began his CSA army career as a colonel, but after two years of brilliant battlefield leadership, he was promoted to general and given charge of the 1st Kentucky Brigade. General Helm died at Chickamauga at the age of 32.


When President Lincoln received the news of General Helm's death, he went into an intense period of private grief. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who was present when Lincoln received the news of Helm's death, reported that the President proclaimed, "I feel as David of old when he was told of the death of Absalom."

General Helm was President Lincoln's brother-in-law.

It was President Lincoln who had offered Helm the position of postmaster for the Union army at the beginning of the Civil War, which Helm declined in order to serve in the Confederacy. Mary Todd Lincoln's niece would later recall the dilemma of the Lincoln's: "A single tear shed for a dead enemy would bring torrents of scorn and bitter abuse on both the President and Mary Todd Lincoln" - even if those Presidential tears were shed for family.

That's why the President and Mary Todd Lincoln grieved in private. The President granted his widowed sister-in-law, Emilie Todd Helm, safe passage to the White House to receive condolences from her family. CSA General Breckinridge informed Helm's widow by letter that her husband "commanded the men of the Orphan brigade like a thorough soldier. He loved them, they loved him, and he died at their head, a patriot and a hero."

No Longer Slaves: Emmanuel Enid's Refuge Band

Last Sunday morning our Refuge Worship team sang a song entitled No Longer Slaves. During the second verse of that song the words are: "From my mother's womb You have chosen me. Love has called my name." Standing across the aisle from me was a young man whose first memories in life are being in an orphan's home run by Catholic nuns. He knows nothing of his earthly father; he knows nothing of his lineage or heritage before his mother's womb. I reached across and put my arm around him and said, "This song's about you." I could see in his eyes the encouragement No Longer Slaves gave to him. I hope it will you too. Here's a recording of that moment.

Yemen and American Ignorance of the Middle East

The other night I was listening to a national news broadcast when a reporter made a mistake in her reporting on  Yemen. She mentioned Iranian ships had been sent to the Persian Gulf and a possible confrontation with American ships was developing. "Iran," said the reporter, "sent the ships to support the rebels in Yemen, a hot-bed for Al-Qaida terrorism."

It was obvious the reporter believed Iran sent ships and troops to support al-Qaida in Yemen. Little did she know that Iran is about the only country in the Middle East, other than Syria, who is fighting al-Qaida. Al-Qaida is Sunni Muslim. Iran is Shia Muslim. Read previous my previous post for background in the differences between Sunni and Shia Muslims.

No terrorist group has killed more Americans than Sunni al-Qaida. They brought down the Twin Towers in New York. They've kidnapped, maimed, and killed more Americans around the world than any other terrorist group. Yet--now get this--some Sunni terrorists believe al-Qaida is too soft toward America. Americans know these harder-line Sunni terrorists as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria); or IS (Islamic State); or--as President Obama prefers to call them--ISIL.

Now here is the important question Americans should be asking: Which country is most fiercely fighting America's enemies known as al-Qaida and ISIS in the Middle East?

Is it Saudi Arabia? The Gulf Arab states (Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, etc...)? Does our NATO ally Turkey lead out in the fight against ISIS? No. Not even close. In fact, all these  Sunni countries have aided ISIS in its attempt to pull down Assad's Shia government in Syria. Sunni-led Muslim countries in the Middle East have been dragging their feet in helping America fight al-Qaida and ISIS for years.

Yet there are some people (and countries) in the Middle East who are fighting ISIS toe-to-toe.

The rebels in Yemen are an example. They are the Shias and the press calls them Houthis. These rebels in Yemen successfully pulled down the Sunni government of Yemen on January 22, 2015 - just three months ago. The Shias of Yemen are sick and tired of ISIS brutality. ISIS blew up two of the most revered Shia mosques in Yemen, killing 135 Shia Muslims and wounding nearly 400 others. The Houthis are fighting ISIS. Iran was moving its ships to the Persian Gulf to support the Houthis in this fight. So, contrary to what the reporter was saying on national television, the Iranians were in the Persian Gulf to fight ISIS, not to support ISIS.

There are at least five other groups of people or countries fighting ISIS toe-to-toe as well - the Kurds of northern Iraq (who may soon become an independent country), Baghdad's Shia-led government, Iran, Syria, and Russia. But right now, the rebels in Yemen are in the middle of the biggest fight with ISIS.

 

What is happening in the country of Yemen illustrates American confusion and ignorance of the Middle East. In an outstanding article today by Pat Buchanan, he asks the question Why Is Yemen Our War? Buchannan points out that since the fall of Yemen to Houthi rebels on January 22, 2015, Saudi Arabia--with the aid of America--has attacked Yemen with 1,000 bombing missions. Read Buchannan's penetrating questions:

"What did the Houthis ever do to us? The Houthis' main enemy, AQAP (Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula), is America's worst enemy. Why are we then making ourselves de facto allies of al-Qaida?

Excellent questions, Pat.

For a moment, jump forward several weeks or months in your imagination and think what it might be like in the Middle East if the Saudis defeat the Shia rebels in Yemen. What's next? According to reports from Saudi Arabia, the Saudis are ecstatic with the victories of the Saudi Air Force in Yemen. The Saudis may wish to help the ISIS rebels in Syria as well.

Ask the question how Iran, Iraq, and Russia might respond to a Saudi-led war to overthrow their long-time ally in Syria? Ask yourself what happens in Syria if Bashar Assad and his Shia government falls? Who comes to power?

ISIS.

The Middle East is messed up.

Shia Happens: Differences in Muslim Terrorism

Christians are routinely being beheaded in Lebanon by Sunni Muslim terrorists. President Obama is making a deal with the Shia Muslim government of Iran. Sunni Muslims are executing Shia Muslims in Africa. Sunni Muslim rebels are attacking the Shia Muslim government of President Assad in Syria. Egyptian Sunni Muslim terrorists (i.e. the Muslim Brotherhood) attack their own Sunni government in Egypt. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls the Shia government of Iran "today's Nazis," and says the west is "comatose to the threat." Russia and China are aligning with Shia Iran and Shia Syria; the United States has historically aligned itself with Sunni Saudi Arabia and Sunni Egypt. Yet now, President Obama is making a treaty with Shia Iran over the objections of Israel. What's going on? How can you begin to understand current events without knowing the differences between Sunni and Shia Islam?

You can't.

Since the average American's attention span is shorter than most, I will summarize the five major differences between Sunni and Shia Islam, but urge those who wish to know more to read the article from the Council on Foreign Relations entitled The Sunni - Shia Divide.

Never forget this fact: To be a Muslim is a matter of faith, not ethnicity.

One can be born an Arab, or a Persian, or an African, or an American, or a Chinese - and become a Muslim, for Islam is a matter of faith, not race. A Muslim believes that "Islam is the only acceptable faith to God" and therefore, it will make the world a better place if everyone would "submit" to God and become a Muslim. Islam means "submission" in Arabic.

There are five pillars of the Islamic faith. After acquiescing to the first pillar (see below), one is deemed to be a Muslim convert.

Pillar One: Recite "There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet (or Messenger)." This statement is called the Shahada. Once you say this aloud--with conviction and understanding -- then you are declared to be a Muslim. 
Pillar Two: Pray "five times daily facing Mecca." This is the daily worship of a Muslim.
Pillar Three: Give 2.5% of your wealth ("alms") to the poor and needy.
Pillar Four: Fast during Ramadan, a religious festival that occurs during the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, a month which also goes by the name Ramadan. Since the Islamic calendar is lunar and eleven days shorter than the solar calendar - with no catch-up lunar months like in the Hebrew calendar - Ramadan migrates through the seasons (summer/fall/winter/spring) from year to year.
Pillar Five: Go to Mecca (Saudi Arabia), the birthplace of Islam, on a personal pilgrimage at some point in your life.

Worth remembering: Not all Muslims are terrorists. Terrorism is defined as "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political or religious purposes." An example of a Sunni Muslim leader who is not a terrorist is former army general and current Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi. He recently called for a reformation within Islam to stamp out "violence and aggression." Sadly, our American President supported the Islamic Sunni terrorist group called the Muslim Brotherhood during the Arab spring of 2010 to 2012. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah ultimately executed the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood for their violence against Egyptian Christians.

Also worth remembering: Muslims who are terrorists believe they represent the true Islamic faith. These 'radical, fundamentalists' of the Islam faith believe that when they "take the sword" and kill infidels, they are fulfilling the will of Allah and are obedient to the Quran. The Sunni and Shia Islamic terrorists who are killing, maiming, subjugating, and ritualistically beheading "idolaters and infidels" are fighting a religious war against encroaching western corruption.  Whether you believe "Islam is a peaceful religion" is not the issue; those who cut the throats of the idolaters and infidels believe they represent true Islam. For an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist his behavior is grounded in his faith.

Now to the important subject of being able to identify the differences between Muslims who identify themselves as Shias and those who identify themselves as Sunnis.

The FIVE MAJOR DIFFERENCES Between Shia and Sunni Muslims

(1). LEADERSHIP - Sunni and Shiite terrorists differ on who should have succeeded Muhammad after his death in 632 AD and who should lead them now. 

After Muhammad died, some of his followers--later known as Sunnis--elected Abu Bakr to lead them. The Arabic word Sunni means "people of the tradition." Sunnis believe that Islamic leaders should be elected by the popular vote of the people because only the traditions of the Quaran and the prophets are important, not the leaders themselves. .

However, some followers of Muhammad immediately objected to the election of Abu Bakr, believing that Islam should only have leaders (i.e. Prophets) who directly descend from the great prophet Muhammad himself. These followers -- later called Shias - followed the son-in-law of Muhammad, Ali ibn Abi Talib, and Ali's sons (that's why most Muslims named "Ali" are Shia Muslims). Shia is the Arabic word which means "follower."  Most Shia Muslims believe that the 12th Prophet after Muhammad went into hiding in 939 AD,  but will ultimately return at what they call "The Second Coming" when he will restore peace to a chaotic and destructive world. Until then, all authority and power has been invested in "ayatollahs" who are the chief clerics of true Islam (think Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran).

Sunnis and Shias historically lived together and intermarried. However, the friction and divide between Sunnis and Shias has escalated violence toward one another. A similar comparison would be the Catholic/Protestant wars in Ireland during the 1980's and 1990's.  The newly declared Islamic State (IS or ISIS) is a Sunni group and its stated goals are to create a territory run by a caliph and sharia, or Islamic law. Shias do not believe that a true Islamic state or caliph can be created without a Prophet or ayatollah. So Shias reject ISIS. In return, ISIS warriors are rounding up and killing Shia Muslims in ISIS held territory.

(2). NUMBERS - There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. 85 percent (1.3 billion) of these Muslims are Sunni.

Only 250 million Muslims are Shia. The identity of Shia Muslims is rooted in victimization by the majority Sunnis. Only two countries--Iran and Iraq--have a majority Muslim population that is Shia. Though Syria is a majority-Sunni country, the regime of President Assad is a close ally of Shiite-dominated Iran. And though Iraq is majority Shia (also called Shiite) the northern portion of Iraq has a lot of Sunnis. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has made increasing inroads into Shia-dominated Iraq. Neighboring Iran is majority Shiite, while next-door Saudi Arabia is majority Sunni. Yemen, Bahrain, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Lebanon have significant Shiite minorities, but are majority Sunni. Turkey is a majority Sunni country.

Sunni Muslim radio and television broadcasters in Arabic countries area now claiming President Obama's family of origin is Shia Muslim and this explains his empathy toward Iran.

(3). TERRORISM - Sunni terrorists will fight their own governments. Since Sunnis believe in "elected leadership," they are always seeking the most qualified candidates to lead Muslims in the one true faith. If these radical Sunnis believe current government leaders are "unfaithful to the Prophet or the Quran" they will revolt from within. This is what happened in Egypt when the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood attacked the Sunni government in 2012, and it is what happened throughout the Arab spring in other Sunni-led countries. It's also why Sunni-led governments (like Egypt and Saudi Arabia) will fight against Sunni-led terrorism (like ISIS). ISIS wishes to disband all state governments and coalesce around a pure, Sharia-law state where Islam is practiced with purity and without the taint of western influence.

On the other hand, Shia terrorists are typically government sponsored. For example, Shia Hezbollah-- the terrorist group stationed in southern Lebanon that has historically attacked Israel--is supported by Iran and Syria, two of the three governments led by Shia Muslims (the other government being Iraq). This is the reason why Israeli Prime Minister is so vocal against Iran. Iran sponsors state-run terrorism. Israel believes Iran is ever expanding its influence and power in the Middle East, and is now pulling Iraq into its sphere of influence, supporting Syria in its war against Sunni rebels, and is now trading oil with China and Russia. Israel believes Iran is the greater terrorist threat.

However, now that Sunni ISIS is taking territory for itself in a bid for power--all the while beheading Christians and Shias, enslaving women and girls as sexual property of ISIS warriors, and recruiting Sunni Muslims from all over the world in its bid for a Muslim Caliphate that rules the world--one wonders if the pendulum has swung and the greater threat in this world is Sunni terrorism?

It could be argued that the Muslim Middle East is about to explode in war with Shia-led Iran (backed by China and Russia) go to war against Sunni-led Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt. Speaking as a pro-Israel supporter, I'm not nearly as convinced that Iran is the greater threat to western civilization as is the Sunni-led terrorism of ISIS, and I realize this opinion is in opposition to Israel Prime Minister's views.

(4). PRACTICE - As radical Sunnis (ISIS) target and kill Shia (or Shiite) Muslims, the question must be asked "How can anyone tell the difference between a Shia and a Sunni?" Remember, there's nothing ethnic about being a Sunni or a Shia. It's a matter of faith. The answer to how to tell the difference between a Shia and Sunni in practice is four-fold: (a). Ask for their name. As mentioned earlier, Shias have names such as Ali (or Hussein, Assan, or Abbas). Cassius Clay changed his name to Muhammad Ali (b). Ask how they pray. Sunnis fold their hands or cross their arms on their stomachs while praying. Shias are taught to pray with palms resting up on their thighs. (c). Ask what music they enjoy. Just as Catholics and Protestants sing different songs, Shias and Sunnis sing and enjoy different music. (d). Ask where they live. Due to growing animosity, in Muslim countries, Shias live in enclaves (neighborhoods) where they can worship, shop, and work together. Similar to the divisions that occurred in Ireland during the Protestant/Catholic wars of the late 20th century.

(5). OTHER TRADITIONS - Shia Muslims feel animosity towards some of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad, based on their positions and actions during the early years of discord about leadership in the community. Many of these companions (Abu Bakr, Umar ibn Al Khattab, Aisha, etc.) have narrated traditions about the Prophet's life and spiritual practice that Sunnis regard as 'holy writings.' Shia Muslims reject these traditions (called the hadith) and do not base any of their religious practices on the testimony of these individuals. This naturally gives rise to some differences in religious traditions between the two groups which touch on all aspects of Islamic traditions, including prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, etc...

These are the fundamental differences between Shia Muslims and Sunni Muslims. The only way Sunni-led ISIS or Shia-led Iran will ever be stopped in their aggressive grab of land, power and people is for people to recognize that this is a religious war, and its not east versus west, but east versus east and the west better think long and hard before choosing a side.

Patriots' Day, April 19, and the Need for Caution

The difference between treason and patriotism is only a matter of dates.

Alexander Dumas, The Count of Monte Christo.

 

 

This Sunday, April 19, 2015, is the 20th anniversary of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. At 9:03 am that morning, a two-ton fertilizer bomb loaded in the back of a Ryder truck parked in front of the Murrah building exploded, killing 168 people and injuring nearly 700 others.  The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings within a 16-block radius, destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings, causing three-quarters of a billion dollars in damage. The Murrah bombing was the deadliest and most costly terrorism act in the history of the United States, only surpassed by the 9/11 New York World Trade Center bombing.

 

Timothy McVeigh (April 23, 1968 – June 11, 2001) was charged and convicted with the bombing. The United States federal government executed McVeigh for his crime. In the book American Terrorist, the only biography of his life that McVeigh authorized, authors Lew Michel and Dan Herbeck spent 75 hours interview McVeigh in prison. The portrait they paint of the 26-year-old who bombed the Murrah building--according to Salon Magazine--might fit any number of right-wing radicals today.

"He hates and fears the federal government, worships guns, fetishizes "liberty" (defined in almost purely negative terms, as freedom from external interference of any kind), embraces survivalism and sees himself as having acted in a proud American tradition of resistance to tyranny that goes back to the Founders. Throw in belief in the gold standard, certainty that a U.N.-run "New World Order" is poised to take over the world, racial resentment and an obsessive fixation on Ruby Ridge and Waco as proof that federal agents are jackbooted thugs waiting to make their final move, and the ... portrait is complete" Gary Kimaya, Salon

April 19 is Patriots' Day.

McVeigh's choice of that day to bomb the federal building is no accident. Patriots' Day
commemorates the date of the 1775 Battles of Lexington and Concord which featured "the shot heard round the world" and the beginning of the American Revolution. Patriots' Day is also the date in which first bloodshed of the American Civil War occurred, in the Baltimore riot of 1861, When Patriots' Day was established in 1894, Massachusetts Governor Frederic Greenhalge proclaimed it as "the anniversary of the birth of liberty and union."  The original date of April 19 for Patriots' Day was eventually switched to 'the third Monday of April" to prevent celebrating the holiday on different days of the year. The Boston Marathon has been run on Patriots' Day ever since April 19, 1897, but moved to Marathon Monday when celebrating Patriots' Day was moved to the third Monday of April. Of course, Marathon is the infamous name of the battle in 490 BC when the Greeks defeated Persia and marked the beginning of western civilization and its emphasis on individual liberty and political democracy.

It seems the date April 19 is rapidly becoming the date of choice to attack the United States government, more so than even September 11. Anyone with hostility toward the US government-- including right-wing terrorist groups, IS terror cells, and others who would desire to see the United States government collapse, will choose April 19 or Patriots' Day as their preferential date to attack.

McVeigh chose the federal building in OKC in retaliation for the federal law enforcements' attack and destruction of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas on April 19, 1993. The Murrah Building housed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), or the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), three of the agencies that attacked the Davidian Compound in Waco on April 19, 1993. McVeigh regarded the presence of additional law-enforcement agencies at the Murrah Building, such as the Secret Service or the U.S. Marshals Service, as a bonus.

I worked the morgue after the Murrah Bombing and became one of the liaisons between family members gathering at a Christian church north of the bombing, waiting for word about their family members. I will never forget the devastating impact of April 19, 1995 on Oklahoma City and the state of Oklahoma.As we reflect on the 20th anniversary of the bombing, it's a good time for all of us who love the United States to recognize those who hate our country/government care little for the collateral damage they cause through their attacks. This week and next week are both a time for all Americans to be familiar with their surroundings, just as we are on September 11 every year.

God Doesn't Always Do What I Ask, But He's Already Done Far More Than I'll Ever Grasp

There are few things more gut-wrenching than losing a child to death because of illness or accident. A comparable pain might be the sudden death or unexpected critical illness of a spouse. Losing a parent to death--regardless of age--also brings to us a great deal of emotional trauma.

Precisely because the loss of a loved one is so painful, many turn to God when they begin to "walk through the valley of the shadow of death." Even people unaccustomed to prayer often ask God to heal their loved ones. In some cases, prayer chains are started, all doubt is cast out, and by faith, people claim and believe that God is going to heal those they love.

And yet death still comes.

Often the greater pain becomes my disappointment with God. The hardest question is always "Why?" Why does God not do what I ask? Why does God not answer my heartfelt please and prayers?

There seems to be some encouragement for those of us who ask the "Why" questions from a story in Luke 7:11-15 that involves a widow, her dead son, and Jesus.

Soon afterwards He went to a city called Nain; and His disciples were going along with Him, accompanied by a large crowd. Now as He approached the gate of the city, a dead man was being carried out, the only son of his mother, and she was a widow; and a sizeable crowd from the city was with her. When the Lord saw her, He felt compassion for her, and said to her, "Do not weep.” And He came up and touched the coffin; and the bearers came to a halt. And He said, “Young man, I say to you, arise!” The dead man sat up and began to speak. And Jesus gave him back to his mother.

You might be thinking, "But I thought this text was supposed to encourage me when God doesn't do what I ask? It looks to me God did precisely what the widow desired--He healed her son. How is that a help to us for whom God doesn't respond with a miracle?"

Let me see if I can't show you something pretty incredible (in my opinion) about the widow from Nain and the resurrection of her only son.

The Parallelism with Christ's Death 

Jesus Christ raised three people from the dead during His earthly ministry--this son of the widow from Nain; the daughter of Jairus; and Lazarus. This resurrection of the widow's son was the first resurrection miracle Jesus performed. On many fronts, this miracle of the resurrected widow's son pictures and parallels God's compassion for us through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

(1). He was an only son. The Greek phrased used to describe this widow's son -- ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός literally "only begotten son"- is the same phrase used of Jesus in John 3:16. It is used only one other time in the New Testament, describing Abraham's son Isaac in Hebrews 11:17 when Abraham offered his "only begotten son" on the altar - a clear type of God the Father offering His Son as a sacrifice for us.

(2). He was outside the gate.  Both the widow's son and Jesus Christ are dead 'outside the gate' of the city (Hebrews 13:12). The Hebrew Day of Atonement called for two goats to be 'offered' during the ritual; one goat for a blood offering and the other as the scapegoat offering. Israel’s sins were laid upon the scape goat and expelled from the camp; the blood offering goat was sacrificed, the blood offered, and the body burned "outside the gate." (Leviticus 16:20-22).

(3). He was raised for others. There are two dead people in this Luke 7:11-15 story; the boy and his widowed mother. The boy was physically dead. The mother was emotionally and spiritually dead. Notice that Jesus 'felt compassion for her' (v. 13).  Jesus raised the dead son for the sake of his mother. So, too, God the Father gave us His only begotten Son for the sake of others. "God so loved us" (John 3:16). The Apostle Paul described it this way: "God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8).

(4). He was offered with a command. When Jesus raised the boy from the dead by the word of His power, He gave him back to his mother with this command (to the mother) - "Do not weep."  This word 'weep' means more than tears; its speaks of mourning, lamenting, despairing, and giving up. Why should the mother not weep? This is the key: "Jesus gave him to his mother."  To follow through fully with the type: "Do not mourn, God has raised His Son from the dead and given Him to us!"

Principle:
The only anecdote against despair during a trying time--including those occasions when our prayers seemingly go unanswered --is the growing comprehension of what God has already done for us in giving to us His resurrected Son.

"What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? But in everything we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us.  For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8:31-32; 37-39).

"But God, begin rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us - even when we were dead in trespasses and sins ... raised us up with His Son and seated us with Him in heavenly places, so that in the ages to come He might show us the surpasses riches of His grace in His kindness toward us." (Ephesians 2:4-7).

Application
(A) The greatest riches in my life are vertical, not horizontal. When I receive, comprehend, and enjoy the love of God for me in Christ Jesus, I no longer need or depend on the love of people in this life. So, even if those I love are gone (or turn against me) I rest in the love of Him who loves me eternally.
(B). To the degree I lack comprehension of the riches of God's kindness, favor, and love for me in Christ Jesus I will be tempted to measure God's love, favor and kindness for me by whether or not God always answers my prayers the way I ask rather than rejoicing in what He has already done for me.

Action
I will spend more time learning about the love of God for me in what He has already done for me through His Son than I will worrying about what God will do for me in the future through meeting a temporal need I have.

Conclusion:
Nain is a city in Israel that still exists. It's just to the southwest of Mt. Tabor in the Galilee region of Israel. The modernized spelling of Nain has switched to Nein. I've been there a few times in my trips to Israel, and I never pass through without thinking of "the widow of Nain" and what her story declares about God's compassion and love for me in giving me His Son.

Nein in German means "No.'

If I am praying for God to do something miraculous in my life, but the circumstances play out in such a way that God seems to say "Nein" to my request, I want to remember the widow of "Nein" and learn to "weep not" because God has already given to me His Son. If indeed, I am able by God's grace to remember this principle, I will be able to say with all the saints...

 "I love Nein"