My Friend, So Long -- Part 1

News broke three weeks ago, in an interview, that celebrated Christian music artist Jennifer Knapp had come out. She announced that she'd been in a long-term same-sex relationship. The most conflicting element of this admission was that she still considers herself a follower of Jesus and a person of faith.

There have been all sorts of reactions. Mean-spirited comments have been broadcast where some believers have denounced her for using Christian music as a platform to make a name for herself. People outside the Christian faith have risen to her cause, no doubt seeing her as a political football to trounce the Evangelical movement. Both types of people not seeing a person I'd say; rather, seeing an icon that they could impersonally use to raise up their particular brand of vitriol.

Mostly the reaction has been sadness. From the people I've spoken with, to the blogs I've perused, to the buzz I've seen on Twitter, the general feedback has been grief. Not bitterness. Not ill will. Not even resentment or spitefulness. Just sadness. Some disappointment that such a high-profile believer would let people down. But mostly just grief at her decision.

I was proud of the Church at large in seeing that. I find it appropriate.

---

An endless amount of questions are raised with such a revelation. Larry King asked some of them when Jennifer appeared on his show. BTW, you can watch that interview in full RIGHT HERE (it is in a series of 4 videos on YouTube. You can catch the link to the next part of the interview at the end of each video.).

A sampling of the most salient questions:

- Is this her choice?
- Was she born this way?
- Does Jennifer still call herself a Christian artist?
- What does it mean to be homosexual? Are you already in sin if you're just attracted to someone of the same sex?
- Can you be both Christian and gay?
- Written in Greek, is the New Testament all that clear that homosexuality is a sin?
- Why highlight this issue over other issues? Scripture says so little about it, compared to other issues. Why make so much about it?
- What does it mean for kingdom people to dwell with Jennifer Knapp? (raised by Scot McKnight)

To me, the latter questions are the most interesting, and the ones I want to spend the most time with here. I can't answer the questions about Jennifer's sexual nature. I don't believe Scripture speaks clearly enough about it. What is there might tilt in favor of one perspective, but it doesn't give us definitive answers on this issue. So I'm not going to pretend to have them.

But what is in Scripture always provides a way forward. So I hope I can point in that direction for the questions that are most important.

---

First, why make so much of this issue? Jennifer said it this way in the Larry King interview:

"If I am a sinner and homosexuality is a sin -- let's go on that premise for a moment -- then what separates that sin from maybe, I'm angry, or mad, or I cheat....what separates that as so grievous to you that we have to sit here and have this conversation?"

There are so many different sins in the Bible. There are so many other verses in the Bible talking about so many other issues. Why do Evangelical Christians put a magnifying glass on this one?

The questions are accusatory in nature, and they are two-fold. First, that we're making a mountain out of a mole-hill. And second, that we're being selective about who/what we show contempt for.

If I may, allow me to start with 1st Corinthians 6:9-10...

Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.

This is just one list, among other lists and other passages, that highlight lifestyle choices that are incompatible with life in the kingdom of God.

On this list are sins that get a lot of social attention (e.g. sexual immmorality, homosexuality, greed, etc.) and some that don't get as much (e.g. idolaters, slanderers, etc.). And all of them should get attention. Paul spoke about how he strove to deliver "the whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:27). And so should we. We should not shrink back from declaring how we fall prey to idolatry even in the 21st century, or how we slander public officials when we forward along E-mails rife with lies & mis-truths. Every single one of those issues should be given attention by people of faith.

But that doesn't mean that each of them should get the same amount of attention. Because we unfortunately don't live in a vacuum. We live in a culture. And that culture intersects with our faith in ways that are sometimes uncomfortable. And because of those intersections, some topics require more attention than others. Even if Scripture doesn't treat such issues as often as it treats topics like love or faith or money, the context of this world warrants their consideration. I happen to think homosexuality is one of those topics.

And of the sins on that list, there aren't a lot of them that a person of faith would succumb to and still maintain that they were sinless in the sight of God. Maybe greed. Greed is one of those sneaky sins that you can justify with words like, "Well I'm just good with money." So maybe people pass off greed; and we need to speak louder about that. I'll grant that. But I'd say that not even the greedy brush it off as matter-of-factly as Jennifer did in her various interviews.

Why is this sin of Jennifer's capturing our attention? Because it's not often that one of our own turns against what is written. It is not ordinary for a lifestyle choice that is clearly outlined as being unacceptable when under the reign of God to be shoved upon the Church to be accepted. It isn't run-of-the-mill for someone to be open about sin and yet staunchly maintain that she is in fact still in communion with God. I'd call this issue unique enough to be deserving of the attention it has raised.

---

But what about those words there in 1st Corinthians 6? Is it really homosexuality, or some other 1st century practices, that Paul was condemning when he originally wrote in Greek?

Jennifer raised this question in her Larry King interview. It's a question that has garnered more scrutiny in the last half-century as homosexuality has sought social acceptance.

The first word is malakoi, or malakos in it's singular form. The second word is arsenokoitai, or arsenokoitns in it's singular form. Paul chose two expressive & explicit words when he chose them, as they are descriptive of the dominant and passive roles in a same-sex engagement. Exactly what sort of same-sex engagement is what is at issue. "Both terms have received intense lexicographical scrutiny," says Anthony Thiselton. Some argue that Paul might have referred to male prostitution in general, or sacred male prostitution in religious service at Corinth. Or perhaps Paul was referring to the the practice of pedophilia when young boys were forced into temple service in Corinth.

On one side, we have the argument of the late Michael Vasey, who cautions that (in the society of imperial Rome) 1st century Jews & Christians saw a "form of homosexuality [which] was strongly associated with idolatry, slavery and social dominance. It was often the assertion of the strong over the bodies of the weak." On the other side, we have the argument of Richard Oster, who insists, "The historical record is quite clear that homoerotic activity was not confined only to pederasty in the classical world."

That's just a glimpse, but deeper and deeper the debate burrows into scholarship. And I suspect most of my readers will side with the their teacher from Harding Grad School. I do, too. In the words of Richard Hays, "The New Testament will not permit us to condone homosexual behavior."

(BTW, I fully endorse that book by Hays. If you're looking for a full, comprehensive, and compassionate treatment of the subject, I can't imagine anything out there beats his chapter on homosexuality in that book. The whole chapter is framed around his homosexual friend Gary. For that matter, the whole book is excellent for figuring out how to engage all sorts of social hot-button topics & be faithful to Scripture. Just buy the book.)

The substance of an argument against malakoi and arsenokoitai is frankly weak. In her Larry King interview, even Jennifer's mention of the alleged ambiguity in terms is weak. She can't bring herself to say that the Bible accepts the behavior; the strongest thing she can say is, "I don't know." That's a pretty flimsy fulcrum on which to rest one's faith.

What disturbs me is that, by all appearances, it wasn't Jennifer's study that led her to doubt the weight of scholarship-accredited Scripture. She leaves the overwhelming impression that it was her own feelings and personal passions that swayed her thinking. Certainly experience enriches our perspective on Scripture and life. But personal experience doesn't re-write the text.

---

To be continued...

Why Everything (Stinks)

One of the more awkward subjects (for me, at least) to bring up in Church is the Old Testament subject of idolatry. It's just weird. You melt all your collective jewelry together in the shape of an animal, and then you bow & pray to it? It makes the people of the days of yore sound like morons.

And so the first two of the Ten Commandments are designed to offset this apparently considerable temptation:

#1 - You shall have no other gods before me
#2 - Do not fashion any graven image & bow down or worship it

...which, the phrasing of the first commandment sort of begs the question: ARE there any actual other gods, or deities, that are out there to be worshiped? Well, 1st Cor. 8:4-7 would seem to answer a strong "No" when Paul says, "We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one."

But even he confesses a few sentences later, "But not everyone knows this." Aha! And a few chapters later, in 1st Cor. 10:19-20, Paul teaches that sacrifices to idols are received by demons. Which seems to indicate that they are essentially puppet-masters. And we of course know, from Paul in Eph. 6:10-12, that our struggle is against the forces of that world.

So it would seem that the answer to my question is "Yes" and "No." No in that there is no God but Jehovah. But yes in that there are other powers that prey on the ignorance of humans apart from Christ. And in their ignorance about the truth of the one God -- whether they realize it or not -- people surrender to the realm of demonic-pupeteered idols. And as they pay homage to these spirits, they allow them to exercise power over their lives. And, in doing so, such realities gain for those who acknowledge them actual, objective existence.

Have I lost you yet? I hope not.

All of that serves as a preface for this:



We have a whole industry of magazines & networks that glorify beautiful, young, dumb people in trendy places. Paris Hilton. MTV reality stars. Vampire movie stars. Disney's latest pre-pubescent cash cows. The whole lot of them. They're all part of the deification of youth.

And we don't stop there. We idolize athletes. What is more youthful than young phenoms achieving great athletic feats? We idolize the brands they market that make us feel young with them. It's a whole system integrated into our society.

The part that gets me is how people mutilate their bodies. All to appeal to the expectations of the great god of youth.

So maybe those people in the Old Testament weren't morons at all. Maybe we're even more blockheaded. And maybe the reason everything sucks -- as Craig Ferguson put it -- is because we've been duped into worshipping the wrong god.

My Favorite Prodigal Son Story

The shame of a really great story or sermon illustration is that you only really get to use them once. This is maybe the best story I've ever run across. I can't take credit for it. I heard it presented by a preacher named Ronnie White from Midland, TX. It made an impression on me, as well as others when I've shared it in the past.

---

G.W. Ravensbury was an itinerant preacher back many years ago. That's how he made his living: preaching off of trains. He'd ride a train to one town, preach, get back on the train, and head to another town.

Ravensbury tells the story of a train ride he took that was more strange than many of the others. Ravensbury was sitting at the back of his train car, and he noticed that there was this young gentleman who was sitting a few rows ahead of him. He had this cardboard suitcase stuffed real tight up underneath his seat. And he appeared very anxious. This man would get up, pace the car for a bit, and then sit back down. He did this every 10 minutes or so.

Finally Ravensbury decided that he would go have a chat with the young man. So he got up, asked if he could have a seat next to him, and introduced himself.

"Son, my name's Ravensbury, and I'm a preacher. You seem like you've got a lot on your mind. Would you like to talk?"

Ravensbury said it was like opening up a spigot. The young man's life story just came pouring out.

"Me and my pa didn't get along well at all when I was coming up. We'd fuss & fight. Shoot, we'd get into it over nuthin'.

"One day we were getting after each other real hard -- I can't even remember what about -- when I said something like, 'Well why don't I just LEAVE!' And my Daddy said, 'Son, there's the door, don't let it hit you on the backside on the way out.' I didn't really want to go, but I was so angry that I went to my room & packed everything I could fit into my cardboard suitcase. As I went to leave, my Daddy yelled back at me & said, 'SON... if YOU WALK OUT THAT DOOR... don't you EVER come back.' I was so mad I just left.

"Things didn't go too well for me after that. I kept wandering from one po'dunk town to another working one piddlin' job after another, and I wasn't doing too good. One night I was out drinking with some buddies, and we got this idea to try to rob this liquor store. When we got caught, I got sentenced to prison.

"But before I got out, I decided to write home to Mom and Dad. I told them I was in prison, and about to get out. I said I was sorry for how I left and for what I did. That I'd understand if they never wanted to see me again, but I'd be passing through town. You see, my house is just off the tracks here about 10 miles ahead. I told them that if they wanted to see me to tie something white out in the tree. That if there wasn't anything white, I'd just go on through to the next town & they'd never have to hear from me again.

"Mr. Ravensbury, if there's nothing white hanging out in that tree, I don't know what I'm gonna do. I'm at the end of my rope. I just don't know what I'm gonna do."

Ravensbury said that as they grew closer, the young man became even more nervous. Finally, the young man nudged Ravensbury and said, "My house is right up around this bend. Do you think you could see if there's anything white tied there for me? I just can't look."

Ravensbury said he pressed his forehead up against the window hoping to see something -- ANYthing -- that was white tied up in a tree. And he said as they turned that corner, it was the most majestic sight he'd ever seen. Apparently that family had emptied their house of every towel, every wash cloth, every bed spread, every pillow case, even every piece of underwear -- EVERYTHING in that house was out there flapping in that tree. It was just a tree of white out there in that yard.

Ravensbury called to the boy, "Young man... LOOK!"

As soon as the young man caught a glimpse of the tree, he grabbed his suitcase, rushed out the door, & leaped off the train car as quick as he could. Ravensbury said that the last image he saw was of that young man dragging his cardboard suitcase up the hill, and an older couple bursting out of the house to come greet him.

And Ravensbury said that THAT is a picture of what God's grace is like. That the cross was God's way of emptying Heaven's linen closet of everything white so that it would be known for all-time that God wants us home. No matter what we've done, or where we've been -- for us please just to come home.

---

"If you'd like to respond to the invitation..." ;)

Good stuff, huh?

mmmmm... That's Good Stuff

I've got a buddy who, when he has a rich experience (e.g. quality time with one of his sons, a perfect surprise for his wife, wonderful worship with the saints, etc.), he calls it "delicious." I love teasing him about that. But mainly I love him because of that -- how he savors rich moments in life.

When I read the following, I thought it was delicious. Not because it describes something grand. But because it is as grand a description of human despair as I've read in a while. From Donald Miller's A Million Miles in a Thousand Years...

I clasped my hand over my heart and knelt between the bed and the television and rolled onto the floor and cried out to God a lamenting demand that he would come and save me from the sorrow that, for the immensity of it, I could only attribute to him in the first place. I didn't want to learn whatever it was he wanted to teach me. I cried out to him an angry petition for rescue. I doubted him and needed him at the same time. God seemed to me, in that moment, a cruel father burning a scar into my skin with his cigarette. And yet I knew he was the only one with the power to make the pain go away.

mmmmmmmm. Ever been there? I know a few of you have. I won't give it away, but Miller gives a keen insight on suffering I don't believe I've ever heard or considered. I assure you: it's much more than a cruel father burning a scar into your skin with a cigarette. It was so incisive that it made James 1:2 make actual sense for the first time in my life.

But it's not just about human suffering. If I were to sum it up, what Miller is trying to accomplish with the book is to make you bored of being bored. And I liked it. I think a lot of you blog readers would like it, too. Check it out.

Power 12: The Final Edition... Ever

"What?? No more Power 12's?" That's right. This is the final one. The last one you'll ever see. Never again will you see a poll on this blog that ranks the 12 best teams. The Power 12 is OVER.

Because starting next season, this will become THE POWER 13. As I said in the original edition of the power 12, the number 12 came from the number of Alabama National Championships. That number is now 13. So next year that's what the number will be.

1.) Alabama
2.) Florida
3.) Texas
4.) Boise State
5.) Texas Christian
6.) Cincinnati
7.) Ohio State
8.) Iowa
9.) Oregon
10.) Georgia Tech
11.) Virginia Tech
12.) Penn State

First Person Fanhood

It is a big game for "us" tomorrow.

Only I'm not part of the team.

It's a strange phenomenon in our culture that we can as fans identify so closely with the teams we favor that we speak of them and us together in the first person. It's not, "Alabama had a great season," but "We had a great season."

What is it? Is a measure of one's devotion and love to the great efforts of his favorite group of athletes? Or is it more a measure of a lack of self-esteem that people are moved to latch on to and identify with a group greater than themselves?

I don't suppose it to be either something to self-adulate over or to loathe, although I've heard both. I suspect it has more to do with the shared experiences of emotions over the course of the roller coaster ride of a season. When you're high, you're high together with the team. When you're low, you're low together with the team. So that whatever the final destination is, you sense that you've felt every emotion right along with the team to the extent that you feel a part of the team.

Looking back at the Tennessee game, Terrence Cody embodied on the field (just in this clip) every emotion we were feeling while watching on television at home: from the "we CANNOT let this happen" sense of urgency, to the unbridled outburst of happiness, to the feeling of "OMG, that was too close."



As a Red Sox fan, it was the depth of the doldrums of 2003 that made 2004 so rich and satisfying. The '03 team, one of my favorite Boston teams, brawled with the Yankees like boxers. Those two teams stood toe to toe just exchanging blows. To the point where it went to a 7th game. And when Boston blew a lead in Game 7, and then ended up losing in extra innings, as a fan you took the heartache personally. And you felt the devastating emotions of losing for days. (To the point that, for me, THIS COLUMN still stands as maybe the greatest Simmons column he's ever published)

So, because of that, you take the joy of winning personally too. And obnoxiously so. I've begun to wonder if it's possible to celebrate anything without being perceived as obnoxious. Because celebration is just that: a wild joy that can only be perceived by non-participants as obnoxious. Hopefully you don't become that guy who acts like he's better than everyone just because his team does well. But it's a darn fine line!

So this phenomenon of shared experiences and emotions is such a powerful thing that people begin to refer to their team(s) in the first person.

My only hope for myself is that I keep a healthy perspective for the sake of the players and their accomplishments. Unlike the people in this story from Mark Ingram's hometown of Flint, MI who seemed to take more pride in Mark's Heisman award for themselves than for Mark. I was happier for Mark than I was even for Alabama that night he won the Heisman. He's had a lot of hurdles in his personal life. And also with Alabama having had no Heisman's, the pressure on him had to be immense. So I was glad for him that he wasn't burdened even further, but in fact rewarded.

As for tomorrow, I just hope we get to celebrate. I don't wanna go digging through those Simmons E-mails again.

Just Trying to Be Better People

It's never dull having conversations with folks who are interested in, or skeptical about, becoming part of your church family. The questions asked are usually pointed, and being the answer man means I'm under the microscope.

I had a fun one last week. This particular gentleman sounded like a regular viewer of FOX News. From the tone of his voice, it was easy to tell that he didn't harbor a lot of affection for the current governing party in Washington. His question for me didn't have anything to do with church programs, or doctrine, or even the Bible. He simply asked me a question about Washington liberals, then backed up a half step, raised an eyebrow, opened his eyes wide, and looked to pay close attention to how I answered his question.

I'm not a politician. So, rather than dodging the question & answering the question I wish had been asked, I answered the question he asked. It was an uncomfortable question, and I told him I couldn't speak for every family member at the Lynn Haven Church, but here's what I thought the Bible said & here's what I think about it. He seemed satisfied.

But then I went further. And I told him that from time to time we'll discuss big world matters like that in Bible Class. In fact, he was just a week late to a lively study over Romans 13 and Revelation 13. HOWEVER, by & large, we don't spend a whole lot of time discussing matters that are mostly out of our control. That we try to focus on what we can control, and that's ourselves.

And that, just looking at the various books of the Bible, they weren't written at government, or at the world. The world is going to be the world. Government is going to be the government. Scripture, however, is aimed at God's people. It's written to Israel, and it's written to the Church. It's addressing how they live, not how others should live and conduct themselves and enact public policy.

It's a simple notion, but one that's lost track of from time to time.

So I concluded with the thought that we're just trying to be better people. That God's provided us a way to do just that. And that we were a group committed to following that way.

It's like the parable of the talents. If you're able to read this, it's quite likely that you've been exorbitantly blessed. So are you using your blessings to be an even BETTER blessing? Are you allowing yourself to be sharpened to become a better person? As you look over the last 12 months, do you like who you've become more than who you were?

I do. I actually fell short for all three of my New Year's Resolutions for this year, but that doesn't mean that I didn't reap a better me through the struggle. And I'm encouraged to reset some goals, and maybe set a new one, knowing that it's a better, stronger Philip that's tackling 2010 than tackled 2009.

I love resolutions. If you hate that word, say goals. But set some. And start chipping away at them here in a couple weeks after the harried pace of the Holidays fades away & normalcy resumes. Resolutions or goals may nag you, but they make you better as long as you don't give up on them.

And being better is important. Because that's a big part of what life is all about.