Since my body is the temple of the Holy Spirit...

Today's Guest Post is part of the "I Wish I Knew" forum and is written by Eric Erickson, Associate Pastor at LakeView Church

"It says that our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. How do I know what I can and can't do to my body?"

Our human nature wants to have a list of the forbidden and the allowed. The amazing thing about that is even the earliest evidence demonstrated that man could not adhere to that type of relationship with God. (See Genesis 3) We'll jump back to that in a bit but for now...

This question we received as part of "I Wish I Knew" references a verse in 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, "Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God. You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore, honor God with your bodies." (BTW, in 1 Corinthians 3 Paul uses almost the identical wording "Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that the Spirit of God is living in you?" but is using it in a collective manner, ie, the Church in Corinth was God's temple)  Whenever we look at any verse like this we must always remember these three things: CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT. Why was Paul saying this? Who was he saying it to? What prompted the statement? Paul was addressing a church (a collective of Christ-followers) in the city of Corinth who had embraced the message of the Gospel but who also had significant issues. If you read the entire letter, I personally think Paul was beside himself and was trying to carry thoughts so quickly and intensely, that he occasionally would jump around a bit. Two issues that Corinth was dealing with were: unity and sexual immorality. In this particular passage, Paul is addressing a bit of both. Early in chapter 6 he rebukes them for not seeking wise godly counsel to handle their disputes but rather a worldly and perhaps corrupt justice system. The Corinthian city culture and mindset were sensual and pleasure-seeking. Paul asks "why would you look to them for answers?" He then describes some of their behaviors and, in fact, points it out to the readers that they were at one time those types of people too. Paul was telling the readers, "in Christ, that is not who you are" (see verses 11 and 15).

One of the arguments that Paul was addressing was the apparent license that the Corinthians were feeling they had to do anything. But Paul says that while all things are lawful they are neither beneficial nor are Believers to be consumed by or flaunting of them. There may have been some confusion because Paul had made it clear to them that they were no longer subject to the law but the Corinthians began to flaunt, abuse and exploit that freedom.

So, I think the person asking this question may have been wanting to know something like: Can I get my ears pierced? Can I smoke? How much is too much to drink? Is it ok to drink alcohol? How far is too far sexually? Is a tattoo ok? When have I eaten too much? (ouch, were those my own toes?) In any of these questions we must first realize that if we have truly accepted the fact that Jesus has redeemed us, justified us and sanctified us then we have the Holy Spirit living in us. The very presence of God indwells us (see Romans 8:9). That Spirit desires for us the things that bring eternal satisfaction not temporal. So the question becomes what is the motive for the things we do. Clearly there are things to avoid (Galatians 5:16-21, 2 Corinthians 12:20, 1 John 2:15-17, Romans 1:29-31, Romans 13:12-14), but the motive behind behavior or action is the root of the matter.

If Scripture gave clear standards or rules on the things we can and cannot do -- both to our bodies and otherwise -- it would eliminate the need for us to be in a relationship with our heavenly Father. This was what happened in the Old Testament. The Law was given to demonstrate both man's inability to follow rules in order to be right with God and also to point to the full satisfaction that Christ was able to fulfill when he went to the cross on our behalf. That's the wonder of the Christian faith. We don't follow a list of rules, we live in a loving relationship. Our desire for any action should be to bring Him glory through that.

So for any question that asks about "what we can or cannot do as followers of Christ," ask yourself, "does this demonstrate the Spirit who lives in me?" We should also surrender consistently to the Spirit and the fruit he wishes to demonstrate will shine through (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, gentleness, faithfulness and self control).

This week while I drove my kids to school, they asked why Deb and I don't want them saying, "Oh my gosh." Mckenzie my 10 year old soon to be lawyer and debater gave her compelling arguments why OMG was not "swearing."  I said that I agreed, but that I was more concerned that she and her younger brother learn that God's name is holy and it would be unfitting for us to use His name casually or carelessly. It would not allow us to understand the honor His name should have in our lives. She said, "But gosh isn't his name". I said, "You're right, but for our family we would rather not even come close to dishonoring or carelessly using God's name. So, rather than see how close to the edge we can get, let's stay back a safe distance." The question then becomes, "How can I honor God the BEST with the things I do with/to my body?"

Surprised by Sandusky

I have an innocent and unspoiled son, who has just turned thirteen.

And so I have been startled from my almost month-long blogging malaise by the sordid Sandusky scandal. Every blogger and his mother has been opining about the many evils of Jerry, and with good reason. I mean, the guy clearly needs chemical castration, if not castration by a rusty spoon (as some of my more out-spoken acqaintances would put it).

The case is cut and dried. Right? Or is it? Surely the whole world can't be wrong. Can it?

I'd like to (humbly) suggest it can.

I'm not talking about Sandusky's innocence. The investigation by the Grand Jury leaves little to the imagination (though imagining such evils is the last thing most of us want to do).

I'm talking about the monster we've made him.

Don't misunderstand me. He is a pedophile rapist. And as the father of three sons, myself, he makes my blood boil. He makes me want to vomit. He makes me want to direct all my anger and hatred at sin towards him. He makes me want to monsterize him. To dismiss him as the lowest of the low. To demonize him.

Only one problem. I'm not that much different. And nor are you.

That's the point we seem to have missed in all of our pontificating.

Now I'm not, for a minute, minimizing the horror of what those boys (and their families) have gone through, or will go through. It's not as if all sin is the same or that any other sin equates to the hell they've experienced.

What I am saying is that we are more like Sandusky than we'd like to think. That we are more like him than unlike him. At least, from God's perspective.

When I think of the revulsion I feel towards Sandusky's vile behavior, I perhaps get a little glimpse into how God views my sin. I mean, as a fallen human being like Sandusky, I am a whole lot more like him than I am like God.

God, who is utterly holy, other, and infinite is as unlike me as it is possible to be. My similarities to Sandusky, however, are many more than I want to admit. I, too, am a sinner. The difference is simply type and degree.

Put Sandusky on this line, and he is on furthest-left stroke of the 'P' that starts the sentence.
Put the infinite, holy God on the line above, and he is as far from Sandusky as possible--the period on the far right. So, where am I on the continuum? You? We are with Sandusky, somewhere on that 'P.' Maybe we're a little to the right of him, but the distance that separates us and God remains gargantuan. We have no absolutely no basis for pride. From God's vantage point, we're a lot closer to Sandusky than we think.

That is what I believe has gotten lost in this whole tragedy. Our shock and horror and revulsion at Sandusky has allowed us to demonize him and canonize ourselves. Our disdain for him has so easily morphed into pride in ourselves. Rather than thinking, "there, but for the grace of God, go I," we think, "I would never do something like that." Rather than trembling at his particular display of human evil, and searching our souls deeply to see what we might be capable of, and repenting of our own wickedness, we ask, "How could any one possibly do that?"

Sure, let's go after Sandusky and his ilk to the nth degree of the law. Let's put him in the slammer and even throw away the key.

But may we never forget that the evil which consumed him also crouches at our door desiring to master us (Genesis 4:6-7). That the devil prowls around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour (1 Peter 5:8). And that the heart--yours and mine--is so desperately wicked, who can possibly understand it? (Jeremiah 17:9).

Don't Canonize Steve Jobs

Yeah, I've confessed to wishing I had some Apple products (all donations gladly accepted!). So it might sound like sour grapes (or apples) to point you to this very excellent article from Gawker.com titled, What Everyone is Too Polite to Say About Steve Jobs. It provides enough realism to temper our sadness, our adulation, and our near-deification of this remarkable, but deeply-flawed man. I think it's well worth a read, so here's an excerpt with the link afterwards:

It's the dream of any entrepreneur to effect change in one industry. Jobs transformed half a dozen of them forever, from personal computers to phones to animation to music to publishing to video games. He was a polymath, a skilled motivator, a decisive judge, a farsighted tastemaker, an excellent showman, and a gifted strategist. 

One thing he wasn't, though, was perfect. Indeed there were things Jobs did while at Apple that were deeply disturbing. Rude, dismissive, hostile, spiteful: Apple employees—the ones not bound by confidentiality agreements—have had a different story to tell over the years about Jobs and the bullying, manipulation and fear that followed him around Apple. Jobs contributed to global problems, too. Apple's success has been built literally on the backs of Chinese workers, many of them children and all of them enduring long shifts and the specter of brutal penalties for mistakes. And, for all his talk of enabling individual expression, Jobs imposed paranoid rules that centralized control of who could say what on his devices and in his company.

The article (perhaps unintentionally) raises a very important question for all of us: What price are we willing to pay for success? What virtues or relationships or principles are we prepared to incinerate on the altar of achievement? Jobs was uniquely successful. He's been compared to Edison and Einstein and called the greatest innovator of the last century. But as this article demonstrates, the cost was exceptionally high.

Here's where you can read more:
 http://gawker.com/5847344/what-everyone-is-too-polite-to-say-about-steve-jobs

Church Aint What It Used to Be

Pastor Tased, Woman Stabbed After Church Service
(ST. ELMO, Ala.) - The Mobile County Sheriff's Office is investigating a bizarre case out of St. Elmo, after a church pastor was tased, and a woman was stabbed during a fight.
It happened at the New Welcome Baptist Church after Sunday service.
Simone Moore is a self proclaimed R&B artist, he ran unsuccessfully for the US Senate, and he's a teacher in Mobile County. Now, Moore is wanted by the Mobile County Sheriff's Office after authorities say he tased Rev. Daryl Riley.
Deputies say it all started when Moore, who worked as the Minister of Music was handed his last paycheck, and told by Rev. Riley that his services were no longer needed. Investigators say that's when Moore tased the pastor.
A fight ensued, and deputies say Harvey Hunt, a deacon at the church, pulled out a pocket knife and began stabbing Moore's mother, Agolia, in the arm.
Six people were injured in the fight, all have been released from the hospital.
Lashea Gray lives near the church, she told us, "It was unbelievable for it to be at that church, a lot of people go there, never heard of any problems. That was shocking to me to see that going on."
Warrants have been signed for both Moore and Hunt.


Source: http://www.local15tv.com/mostpopular/story/Pastor-Tased-Woman-Stabbed-after-Church-Service/Em_GtXEWUEqdvmdx0jlAmQ.cspx

Of Sharks and Faith

The Real Bethany Hamilton

I've learned to be cautious about recommending movies. One time I saw one on the plane (majorly edited), recommended it, then had to apologize profusely to a co-worker who watched it with her family.

But I think I'm pretty safe with this one. I think.
Watched "Soul Surfer" last night with the family. Inspirational true story of Bethany Hamilton, a young surfer in Hawaii, whose arm is chomped off by a shark.

Admittedly this is about as close to Baywatch as Christians get, but there's not too much to cringe at in this movie. In fact, it's nice to see some Christians portrayed for once as rather normal and attractive people--not the maladjusted, ugly, nerdy or just weird caricatures that Hollywood usually engages in.

Even has some star appeal: Carrie Underwood, Dennis Quaid, Helen Hunt and AnnaSophia Robb.

It's been toned down for a wider distribution to a secular audience, but still has an identifiable Christian thrust centering around Philippians 4:13.

Here's the official trailer.

In case I offend anyone recommending this movie, be warned:

• Disclaimer #1: It's a PG
• Disclaimer #2: A shark bites off a girl's arm. The ketchup looks like real blood.
• Disclaimer #3: The girls in this movie are attractive and wear bikinis.

A Darn Good Read

I've been reading some great books lately and each one says something about me. Because, it is all about me.

* Jane Eyre shows that I really am quite the romantic, despite rumors or appearances to the contrary.

* Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream shows that I never read it in highschool and felt deprived, or perhaps that I'm just longing for summer to arrive in Wisconsin, which it finally did today.

* Paul Yonggi Cho's Successful Home Cell Groups shows that I harbor a secret wish to pastor his church of hundreds of thousands (though not even Rosetta Stone Deluxe could teach this brain Korean). Alternately, it shows that I have some required reading for an upcoming course I'm taking at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.

* And Sticky Teams (along with Sticky Church) shows that the professor is shamelessly requiring us to read his books for the class--a brazen conflict of interest. Or, a brilliant ploy to convince us in advance that he really does have something to say. In Larry Osborne's case, it is clearly the latter.

Confession time: one of the things I really enjoy about each of Larry's books that I have read (all in hard copy and none on Kindle or Braille), is the combination of wisdom and sarcasm. This gives me hope that one day God might use my gift of sarcasm to publish something. But lacking wisdom, it would likely be short and shallow with a title like See Graham Run. The text: "Run Graham, run. The end." But the graphics would be incredible. Holographic, even.

Ok, it's Friday. And I'm brain-dead from sermon prep. And I'm doing the very thing I'm going to caution the congregation concerning: running on at the mouth, including on the internet. "Be quick to hear and slow to speak," cautions the letter from James.

So, to my point in this post. This, below, is just vintage Larry:

In many churches, the primary spiritual qualification for serving on the board or church leadership team seems to be a willing heart. Anyone who faithfully supports the church and works hard eventually finds himself or herself rewarded with a place on the team. While I know of no church that claims this as their method of selection, I know of plenty where that is exactly the way things are done.


But passages such as Acts 6, 1 Timothy 3, Titus 1, and 1 Peter 5 make it clear that a willing heart is not enough. While not everyone will agree on the exact interpretation and application of each passage, one thing is certain: the New Testament church considered spiritual maturity to be a minimum qualification for leadership.


By spiritual maturity, I mean a life that consistently exhibits the character of Jesus Christ. You'll also notice that all of these passages describe qualifications that focus on character--not giftedness, not biblical knowledge, not zeal. And that shouldn't surprise us, since some of the most divisive and self-centered people in our churches are those who are highly gifted, know the Bible inside out, and exhibit a zeal that puts the rest of us to shame. They just happen to also be jerks.
                                                - Larry Osborne, Sticky Teams. Zondervan, 2010, p. 54.

Humility: True Greatness

A small, but convicting book I've been working through. It dovetails well with our vision of making God famous. We become more consumed with him the less we are consumed with ourselves. And the less we are consumed with ourselves, the more we want to see Him center-stage.

"It is evident that a man never attains to a true self-knowledge until he has previously contemplated the face of God, and comes down after such contemplation to look into himself."  
                                                     - John Calvin.