Some of us have run from bees. Others of us have run from bullies. And lots of us have run from a friend’s house when we heard the voice of mom calling us in the house for supper.

I distinctly remember the call of my mother who would yell, “Ronnie and Johnny and Pat-riiiiiiiiiik!” to get her three sons home from a few blocks away. The last part of Patrick’s name was always drawn out in a falsetto voice. We could hear mom from five blocks away, and we would immediately stop what we were doing and run home for supper. And, unlike most kids today, we actually played outside, so, by the time we got home, we were sweaty, filthy, stinky, and starving; we were a mess!

As a pastor, I have heard, more times than I can count, about those who have run from their calling from God. There’s a story in an Old Testament book of the Bible about a guy who ran from his calling from God. “But Jonah ran away from the LORD and headed for Tarshish” (Jon 1:3a NIV). It’s interesting how many Jonah’s there are out there in the pastoral world. Every seminary and Bible College hears their fair share of those who have “ran away from the Lord”.

The point of Jonah’s tale is to let us know that it is dangerous to run from God.

What about running to God?

My wife recently used a fairly simple and well known object lesson to bring home the point that we must all work together in order to do God’s will. In other words, no one person can do the entire ministry required to bring others to the Good News.

She used a tablespoon-full of coffee grounds to point out how only one part of a recipe is not very appealing to the palate. After all, it’s not until the grounds are added to water and heated on a stove that something edible is produced.

When she scooped up the coffee grounds into the spoon, she asked if anyone would like to eat the grounds. Of course, one young boy who wanted more attention than he should have desired raised his hand with great urgency and said with earnest enthusiasm, “I’ll eat it! I’ll eat it!” So, my wife obliged him with a quick dunk of a heaping mound of dry coffee grounds right into his mouth.

Immediately, the boy stood up and ran for the closest faucet. With a look of horror on his face, he ran as fast as he could to the kitchen sink, while his mouth oozed dark brown slobber that ran down his chin and onto his nice, white shirt.

Some Christians, who are called to some form of ministry leadership, run with great passion away from God. While others, like the little boy with a penchant for punishment, run with equal eagerness toward what they think they will enjoy. Imagine their surprise when they learn that they have rushed into something they weren’t really expecting. In fact, they found that the ministry they ran to wasn’t really tasty to them at all.

Let’s not forget Paul’s warning in his first letter to Timothy: “[An overseer] must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil” (1Ti 3:6 NIV).

Sometimes, Christians are too eager to dive into their calling before their calling is ready to receive them. And when they rush to open their mouths and take it all in, they are horrified to discover that it tastes nothing like they imagined. Because of their impatience, they end up making a huge mess, when a few more ingredients and a little more cooking time could have given them a more palatable experience.

As Dr. Rod Cooper so wisely stated, “God is not in a rush to make you a leader. He is much more interested in what you look like when you do lead.”

So, whether I’m a Jonah 1:3 runner or a 1 Timothy 3:6 runner, the direction I’m going isn’t really the problem; sometimes it’s the running itself that makes the mess, no matter which way I am headed.

In His dust,
Johnny

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

 

We have all heard of people who raise their children as a single parent, people who have dropped out of high school or college, people who have quit their well-paying job to try the music scene, and people who have abandoned their dog or cat in the woods. Some of us are these people, and some of us know these people. Quitting is so popular today that it’s a wonder anything gets finished.

Too many of us are holding out for management positions, looking for a better spouse than we already have, and switch college majors every time a new career idea catches our fancy. Too often, what we have is never good enough, the grass always looks greener in someone else’s yard, and the ice cream at the mall is always better than the ice cream at home.

Every one of us is tempted by dissatisfaction. We are all looking for a better job, a better car, a better life. Fortunately, some of us have learned that better doesn’t mean something, someone, or somewhere else. Some of us have learned (often by a really bad experience) that better is often found in one’s willingness to finally recognize the amazing and wonderful beauty and adventure of what he or she already has.

For Christian leaders, the challenge is to put away fantasies of greater positions, less pastoral problems, and more respect.

In Matthew’s gospel, there is a woman who is only known as the mother of Zebedee’s sons. And it is interesting to recognize that this woman is mentioned only twice in Matthew’s gospel. The first time she asks Jesus if he will place her two sons on his right and left, when he comes into his kingdom. Jesus responds by telling her that she doesn’t really understand what she is asking (s. 20:20-22). The second time we see her, she is there at the cross when Jesus dies, and on his right and left are two others being crucified (s. 27:50-56). Was this what the mother of these two sons expected to find on Jesus’ right and left?

Often we don’t really know what it is that we are asking for when we seek something different than we have. Too many Christian leaders, me included, live their lives looking for the next parish, appointment, or position, when what is really needed to develop his or her as a spiritually mature Christian leader is the opportunity to stay. Stay through the blessings and the horrors of ministry. Stay through the parties and the pressures, the times of popularity and struggles with congregational members, and stick it out through the easiest and most difficult moments of the pastoral call.

Eugene Peterson says in his book Under the Unpredictable Plant: An Exploration in Vocational Holiness, “Far too many pastors change parishes out of adolescent boredom, not as a consequence of mature wisdom. When this happens, neither pastors nor congregations have access to the conditions that are hospitable to maturity in the faith” (p. 29).

Like the mother of Zebedee’s sons, every one of us is tempted to be placed in positions of honor and prestige. And perhaps, by having our eyes so fixed on future “kingdoms”, we are missing the blessings of where and who we already are, and what we already have.

In His dust,
Johnny

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

when the bus came to Capernaum, the thrill of walking on the ground where Jesus considered home was truly exhilarating. This was another place that had taken up much of my personal study time back home. I knew of the basalt rock that was prevalent in this area. And I also knew that the olive presses and other tools used for processing food were made in Capernaum and used throughout Israel. And I was there, gazing and walking upon  Jesus’ old stomping grounds. And it was really happening. I was really in Jesus’ hometown.

As we walked through the town of Capernaum, I looked around at the many millstones and olive presses that I had only seen in videos and pictures, and I wanted to take so many pictures, while, at the same time, I wanted to put away the camera and simply enjoy the moments. But I continued to take pictures so that I and others could enjoy them in the future. And there were moments when I handed the camera to my wife so that I could look at everything with my naked eyes. It was an awesome experience. One of the tools that I wanted to see for myself was the Γεθσημανὶ (Eng. Gethsemane meaning “olive press”), a large, heavy, stone pillar that was placed upon bags of broken, ripe olives and used to squeeze out the precious olive oil.

When we came up to a gethsemane in Capernaum, our guide pointed it out, but I was surprised that he was unaware of its significance in the story of Jesus. It is in the gospels of Matthew and Mark that the story of Jesus going to a place called “Olive Press” is told. And it is in the garden of the Olive Press where Jesus feels the heavy burden of our sins placed upon him like a giant gethsemane, and has his very precious blood squeezed from his body as his sweat was laced with drops of blood due to the stress of his impending Passion.

It was in the garden of the olive press where the priceless oil of our Savior was literally pressed from his body by the weight of our sins, which he bore for us all. How could that have been missed by our guide? I was saddened that more of us were not privileged to the metaphor of Jesus’ night in the garden of the Olive Press. I continued to look around at all of the ancient millstones and seas used by those who processed olives in Capernaum during the time of Jesus. Perhaps Jesus himself had used or even built some of the olive presses that were found in this ancient place. After all, Jesus was a τέκτων (Eng. Tekton), a construction worker. And though tekton is usually translated as “carpenter” in the New Testament, it actually means “construction worker”, which could also refer to a stone worker. Looking around at Capernaum, and all of its stone work, along with the fact that Capernaum was “the” city where these important tools were purchased, helped me to see that it is very possible that Jesus probably did much more work with stone than he did with wood.

This was indeed a life-changing, eye-opening occasion, even more than I had hoped for. It was here in Capernaum that the story of Matthew 17:24ff speaks of Jesus teaching his disciples a powerful message about humility and “littleness”. While they are in Capernaum, Jesus has children come to him, and he tells those who want to enter the Kingdom of Heaven that they must be like little children. And he goes on to tell them that if anyone causes a child to sin, then that person would be better off having a millstone hung around his neck and then be thrown into the sea. That story became so vivid as I stood there in Capernaum looking at the many millstones which must have been there as Jesus told this story. And then to look over my shoulder at the sea of Galilee, which was believed to be the Abyss, where the power of evil lurked beneath the waves, brings the entire teaching moment into full perspective. Jesus used that which was around him to teach a powerful message to those who were listening to him. With a child on his knee, a millstone beside him and the sea of Galilee in full view, his message must have left a significant picture on the minds of all who heard.

In His dust,

Johnny

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

Jesus being God has always been a topic of discussion in the world after Jesus. It’s interesting to note that, as a Jewish rabbi, Jesus was accepted as an exceptional teacher by his fellow-Jews. But even those closest to him, including his closest disciples did not fully understand him. This helps us to understand how this subject could be one of serious debate three hundred years after his death and resurrection.

In the fourth century A.D., after Constantine gained power and allowed for Christians to assemble and work out their beliefs, they began to debate the nature of Jesus, his identity, and his connection to God the Father.

There were apposing views and beliefs about the deity of Jesus that actually brought Christians to the point of verbal and physical fights among one another.

To the Jew, the Messiah would not have to be God, but only a person anointed and chosen to lead God’s people. For Jews, King Saul and King David were two messiahs, for they were anointed and chosen to lead God’s people. This should help us to understand why this issue was not a topic of debate until Christianity was firmly in the depths of Western thought (modern scholars are discovering that the deity of Christ was actually accepted even in th first century A.D.).

As differing opinions of who Jesus was as the son of God began to surface, the universal church knew that there was a need to bring a systemized understanding among believers; this task was accomplished through councils. The first council was the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325, the second was the Council of Constantinople in A.D. 381, the third was the Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431, and finally the Council of Chalcedon was held in A.D. 451.

The major subjects of discussion among these councils included their understandings of the Trinity and Christology.

Christ’s deity was a matter of many discussions as some thought Jesus to be subordinate to the Father, while others thought of him as only appearing to be a man. Still others believed that the Christ came upon Jesus at his birth and left him before his death.

In the end, it was decided that God is One in those distinct and separate persons as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

God revealing himself to the world in the form of His son gave the world an opportunity to experience His word clarified through Jesus; God’s ways and will were exemplified as God himself called the world to follow him here on earth.

Jesus says to us,”Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them” (Matthew 5:17). In this passage Jesus uses the terms “abolish” and “fulfill”, which are used idiomatically in Hebrew as words meaning to “misinterpret” and “clearly interpret”. Jesus came to “clearly interpret” the Word of God, according to the Kingdom of Heaven. There is no clearer interpretation of God’s word lived out than for God himself to live it out before us in the form of his son Jesus.

The four councils from A.D. 325-451 allowed for the leaders of God’s people to articulate the truth of Jesus’ divinity for all of the ecclesia, which was justified by Jesus himself when he gave Peter the “Keys to the Kingdom” and the ability to “bind” and “lose”, more rabbinic idioms, which mean the leaders of the Church have Christ’s support in how they define the rights and wrongs of the Church (see Matthew 16:19). To “bind” and “lose” is literally translated, “to forbid and permit”. The leaders of the Church were given the authority to choose what would be forbidden and permitted as practices of believers; this would include the decision to form a canon (the books that would be included in the Bible).

Understanding that Jesus is God, just as the Father and the Holy Spirit are persons of God, gives us an understanding that the Messiah was more than just a Jewish man anointed and chosen to lead God’s people, as many had been before. But Jesus is God personified, calling himself to the task of leading His people into His Kingdom.

During the councils there were those who relegated Jesus to being less than God or a part of God, as Dr. Garth Rosell says, somewhat like an egg with three distinct parts, which are all part of an egg, but under close scrutiny the different parts of an egg are very different. Jesus is exactly God; He is the perfect image and form of God, not simply a part or portion of God.

He is God incarnate.

In His dust,
Johnny

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

Different generations express their loyalties in different ways and to different entities. Generations of the past were loyal to organizations and corporate entities. It is more common today to see people more loyal to people than to corporate structures. For example, decades ago, people were more likely to lift up the organization and insist that others do the same for the good of the organizations survival, which, in turn, will benefit the individuals. Today people are more likely to encourage an individual to leave an organization, if leaving will be more beneficial for the individual, even if the organization will lose a great employee or member.

For example, John Maxwell said that when he goes to many dying companies to help them grow, one of the focuses of his research is on how much the company invests in the education of its employees. Many who do not place an emphasis on education will respond, “We don’t want to invest in their education only to have them leave after they are educated.” To which John responds, “Would you prefer your employees not get educated and stay?”

Organizational loyalty also happens within denominations, where the members of a denomination prefer to lift up the denomination and preserve its traditions rather than place an emphasis on the benefits of people and their effective walk with Christ, even at the expense of denominational traditions and values. This is one reason why denominations are on a rapid decline all over the Western world.

Paul urged the believers in Philippi to stand firm together for their faith. They lived in a Roman city with citizens who were fiercely loyal to their citizenship and their emperor. In a city whose patriotism considered Jesus to be a traitor and Paul to be a threat worthy of imprisonment, the Philippian Christians were finding themselves in the midst of a horrifying reality—they may also be beaten, imprisoned, and even killed for their loyalty to another Lord, and another nation (see Philippians 3:20).

And what does Paul call them to do? Does he call them to stand up for their denomination? No. He calls them to stand together as citizens of heaven and for Christ.

It is not the “churches” that Paul left as a legacy to his faithfulness, but his devotion to building strong disciples. Whether they remained in Philippi or went off to become powerful teachers in Rome or Corinth, and whether they joined an existing congregation or began a brand new movement of faithful Christians, was not an interest of Paul. Paul was concerned with their faithfulness to Christ and to one another as believers, not as a denomination.

In order for believers to build strong and lasting Christian communities, the first order must be to invest in strong, lasting believers. If the organization is valued above the organizers, then the temptation will be to honor the structures and traditions above the believers. This will always end in confused loyalties and weakened values.

“Your exclusive concern should be to live as citizens worthy of the gospel of Christ” (Phi 1:27 MIT)

In His dust,
Johnny

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

 

The Conversation begins.

(HER)
January 29, 2010

John,

I want to thank you for having this website, [if] I interpreted your writings on homosexuals as genuine. I have long felt hated and abused by Christians and have grown to resent them in some ways because of their constant admonitions, however through your words and seeming willingness to allow me to own my orientation while you own your valid opinion, both of us without judgment, I am feeling some healing and connection in regards to Jesus and Christians. Thank you again!

(HER)
February 15, 2010

Hi Johnny,

My name is _______ and several weeks ago I found and responded to your post on the above topic and have been checking almost daily for your comment. I can hold my breath no more! I am so interested in your feedback.
Thanks

(ME)
Feb 15, 2010

Hello,

I am so glad that you wrote me.

The subject of homosexuality is such a sensitive one that it is difficult to talk about without someone becoming too impassioned. I had the unique situation of spending lots of time with homosexual males when I was a child, because my mother had to take my brothers and me to work with her during the summer, where a lot of gay men worked.

I believe that experience caused me to be much less homophobic than I may have been otherwise.

The fact that I struggle with my own sinful propensities makes me no less a sinner than a racist or a rapist, and I try to remain humble in my opinion of the sins of others. With that said, I also believe that propensities make us subject to specific sins, but they are sins none-the-less.

Some of us deal with more debilitating sins, some with more socially repulsive sins, and others with somewhat acceptable sins. It is up to the individual to discover God’s view of how we handle our unique sinful desires. But I don’t believe that it is my role to right the wrongs, only to help those (who want help) to recognize their sins and how God views them, according to my best understanding [of the Bible’s teachings] (with the help of scholars) of what a sin actually is.

Do I believe homosexual acts are sin? Yes, I do. But I don’t believe that my belief means that those who suffer or enjoy that sin should be ostracized by the Church. I believe that we all deal with our own sinfulness and must come to a place of repentance at some point, no matter how painful it is to give up [that which we discover to be] acceptable, enjoyable, and normal to ourselves, but sinful to God.

Some from all sides will argue with me, I’m sure, because as much as we know of God’s opinion of sin, we will only know according to our very limited view of His will.

Please don’t think I am judging you. That is God’s role, just as it is His role to judge me.

May God richly bless you as you continue to search and discover the grace of God.

In His dust,
Johnny

(HER)
February 16, 2010

Quite to the contrary to feeling judged by you, I feel like a child of God and accepted by you because you view me as a child of God, someone worthy of building my own relationship with Him and able to exercise my rights as a human being to free choice, while at the same time rowing in this boat of life with another brother. Live and let live…

Thank you for that.

(HER)
February 16, 2010

Hi again, John,

I am curious to know if you had a chance to read my response to the dialogue that was occurring last June or July?

(ME)
February 16, 2010

I’m not sure which article you responded to. Could you tell me the title, and I will be able to go right to it?

Thanks.

Johnny

(HER)
February 16, 2010

The article was ‘Acting Like Animals.’ Let me know what you think.

The comment:

January 29th, 2010 at 11:31 am e
I am in Sociology 101, and at the time of this writing, I have told 2 friends that next week’s assignment is to come dressed to give an oral presentation on a subculture that I am a part of. The 1st said (paraphrasing). “Be a lesbian, wear your rainbow earrings and necklace.” The 2nd said (paraphrasing) “Wow, that’s a hard one.” I told her no, I’m going as a lesbian. She said “No, that’s too easy for you. Maybe you can go as a football mom?” My mouth dropped (she may not agree with homosexuality, but she loves me regardless (live and let live). I was momentarily taken aback at her suggestion that presenting the subculture of football mom was somehow more challenging or less valid than presenting the LGBT subculture, because just as I am a lesbian (making the presentation too easy, in her opinion), I am also a football mom, a great football mom. In fact (unintended and personally unperceived homophobia?), I feed my boys, all 37 of them (the entire frosh f-ball team). My friend and I cheer for them when they are running down the field with the ball or when we hear the ‘thinking’ sound their helmets and pads make as the players slam against each other in a tackle.

At the end of a winning game we take pictures, provide a tailgate party and a lot of ‘you rock!’ ‘Great job!’ comments. At the end of a losing game, we offered comfort with just a “Hey man, you looked good out there, you played hard”, then quietly and without words, we feed them. I have carpooled these boys to weights at 6:30 in the morning-rain, shine, now and dense fog-3 days a week for the entire calendar year including summer vacation and all the breaks. I have driven hundreds of miles (through Phoenix (a place I go to get lost and confused) so as to offer support for these boys. I also get to experience the ‘joy’ of intense fundraising, enabling the program to be free to the players.

As a football mom, I am well taken care of by the boys and their parents (who all know I am gay and most are Christian) in the form of trust, appreciation and acceptance. I am RESPECTED because of what I do for the boys and the parents who can’t be there for their boys. I do what I do as a football mom because of who I intrinsically am, and non of who I am changes when someone (even myself) becomes aware of my orientation. In other words, my value and content remain the same. My second friend was wrong, as it would be far easier (and socially acceptable) to present the subculture of football mom -v- LGBT. However, it is the members of the LGBT community that desperately need a voice and exposure, so as to encourage desensitization of those who somehow find it socially and religously acceptable to engage in bigotry and abuse of homosexuals, resulting in the destruction not of their beliefs, but of the (generalizing) unjust sense of entitlement they have to judge, then condemn LGBT to reduced civil and human rights.

Homophobia, to whatever degree a person suffers, is born of religion and passed down from religious leaders and their followers without always being fully thought through (ignorance). That ignorance perpetuates homophobia and the resulting indignant, arrogant, social, civil and human injustices imposed upon other human beings (LGBT), and they feel justified and entitled to do so based mostly on religion. I am specifically addressing Christians here, because although there are a few references in the old and new (through Paul, not Jesus) that can be interpreted as admonishing homosexuality, what is FAR TOO often ignored is the 2 greatest commandments of Jesus (paraphrasing) Love God above all else, and your neighbors as yourself. I interpret that as live and let live.

Own your Christianity and live it to the best of your ability, and allow everyone else to do the same. Nowhere does Jesus encourage abuse, judgment or punishment. He preached love and social justice for all. He wanted his disciples to spread the Word, and if they came upon those who did not want to hear it or abide by it to shake the dust off their shoes and go to the next village (paraphrasing), he never said to impose judgment. How someone feels about me being with another woman is of no personal relevance to me, just as it is none of my business and of no personal relevance to another how I feel about their significant other or how they live (unless harm and abuse is occurring). It is sadly, however, of legal and civil relevance to me.

It is incredulous that my fellow Americans would allow, insist even, my civil rights to ever find their way onto a ballot. I as in what other instance would the general American public ever support legislation to block the civil liberties of any person or group, something they would never do against themselves? It is inconceivable and unjust that the religious have any power to force me to abide by the rules born of their religion, a religion whose practices of entitlement and bigotry I personally don’t believe in, especially when we in the LGBT community don’t demand that you own and live by our beliefs. Neither should Christians, Jews, and Muslims DEMAND that we own theirs.

We can both own our own beliefs, and really in the end, it is God who will judge and punish. Do the Christians who do condemn others really have such little faith in God that they won’t allow him to perform his function? Where is their compassion? I have decided to do my presentation on the subculture of LGBT, not because it is easier, but to encourage the desensitization process through exposure resulting in, hopefully, compassion through Christ. Thank you for letting me state my position. This website is now on my favorites list.

(ME)
February 16, 2010

I absolutely remember your words from that article. I hear your heart and empathize with you.

I don’t believe the problem is really bigotry, but insecurity. The struggle is about “what if” more than anything. “What if” homosexuals start coming to worship? How will we deal with this? We don’t want our children exposed to their behavior, and we will not allow such an overt sin to permeate our place of faith expression.

It may be that both sides have very little understanding of the other. Both want God to be pleased, and both have a different idea of how to accomplish that aim, so they simply ostracize the other. Those who live contrary to the Way of the Kingdom are expected to correct their erroneous ways, and if they don’t, then the congregation who accepts the prostitutes, the racists, the drug addicts, and the homosexuals fears that they will be left to witness the failure of their ministry.

Christianity is the Kingdom of the righteous whose lives have changed, no matter how powerful the sin that gripped them before meeting Christ. In some ways it’s like a military training camp where the recruits are expected to be marksman, but they are all apposed to firing a weapon. If the recruits refuse to learn to shoot, but continue to wear the uniform, the real purpose of the training has been voided, and the military branch has failed its goal.

If homosexuals, racists, and alcoholics come to meet Christ while continuing in their sin, then the true power of the Gospel has not been experienced. Also, unless a people can recognize what sin is and agree upon whether or not a particular behavior is sinful, then there will never be unity within that people as far as the Church is concerned.

The subject that we are discussing is not as simple as deciding whether murder or stealing is wrong, because homosexuality is not a matter of hurting another to gain one’s own desires. Instead, not to oversimplify, it is more like whether or not we should drink soda. Soda is destructive in many ways, yet it is acceptable in almost all cultures, even the Church. But should we drink it? If destroying the body is sinful, then the answer is [no], it is sinful. But homosexuality does not destroy; instead it allows people to love one another. [And] then there is the issue of the biblical stance on homosexuality, which tells us that we should not indulge. Until the Church begins to view homosexuality like soda, “It’s not the best thing for us, but drinking it is not like killing someone, so let’s just let people drink if they want”, there will continue to be the unfriendly debate.

In the end, I believe that we will find that drinking soda and homosexuality are both not what God planned for us to please ourselves with, but that will be God’s role to judge. With that said, it should also be our role to search the Scriptures to understand what God expects, no matter where it takes us.

We must be open to the idea that our behavior may not be pleasing to God, and then we must decide whether we want to please Him or not. If we do, then we must be willing to give up whatever we are asked, no matter how much we love whatever that is. Here lies the situation with the rich man who went away sad, because Jesus told him that he would have to sell all he had and give it to the poor in order to follow him (see Matthew 19:16-22).

Many of us will learn that we were unable to give up our treasure, and we will go away sad. And some of us will gladly put down our nets and follow him.

But that is up to each of us to decide, without judgment or prejudice [from each other].

Please know that you are loved.

May God richly bless you.

Johnny

(HER)
February 17, 2010

Hi Johnny,
 
I am not trying to offend, that is why I am so grateful to be able to have this open dialogue with you.
 
I think I told you that I am in college to obtain a Master’s degree with a major in Psychology and a minor in law. In doing research for the seemingly countless essays and reports I must write, I come across a lot of different theories. What follows is one or two I have come across, and I am just passing on. It gives me food for thought that’s all. In fact, that is how I came upon the Flocks Diner. There is the first time I’ve ever come across the theory that homosexual could be natures way of controlling the population. What I can add to that is, if true, I would assume that God is Nature, and what a gift to control the population using love, not abortion, hatred, murder or some sort of honor or otherwise justified killing, not through famine and disease, but through LOVE! Perhaps seemingly unnatural because it is so uncommon, but a totally Natural Gift from God! How creative. Yes, these theories give me much to think about, and I would hope it does the same for all.
 
I agree with you that the problem is insecurity and that bigotry is the symptom. The psychological perspective of Carl Jung was the first with a humanistic approach. He started as a student of Freud’s, but came to opposing conclusions; such as we are all born bi-sexual and are taught to choose heterosexuality; we are intrinsically good; aggression and sex are not his primary focus. Let’s for a second say that is true. If we are all born with the ability to love across gender and we are part of a belief system that is actively oppositional to that possibility with horrible consequences, then a defense mechanism could be to crush ‘loving across gender’ and make it a horrible, unacceptable thing that must never be acknowledged.
 
At a later point, I would like to tell you my story as you seem overwhelmingly compassionate enough, without thinking for one second I am asking you or you may have to own my beliefs. It is a harrowing tale filled with struggle, pain and rejection, the worst rejection being from me. Christianity is indeed the kingdom of the righteous and I swear to you Johnny, I feel righteous where I’m at, for myself, after my life’s experience (I’m 39 yo). As I’ve said before I really do believe I have a healthy relationship with God and Jesus, I know they love me no matter what, even if I am doing something they may not want. You wouldn’t believe what I love my kids through.
 
I feel like overcoming my denial of my orientation and at the same time believing that my Father in Heaven still loved me and believed in me was an place that Jesus would have me come to. What I really don’t understand is how ‘homosexuality’ became the awful social stigma that it is, given far more attention than the stealing or adultery, whose admonishments are actually written into stone by God Himself! Why such a big deal? Why is that the sole focus and why do people think it is ok to humiliate me or treat me like the child of Satan instead of God, deserving of nothing good? How is that more Christian than my love for another woman? We are all just people doing the best we can.
 
Loved your soda analogy and so did my 14 yo son! And again, thanks for letting me be honest and respectful. Thank you for letting God, who will take all into consideration, do the judging while we walk the path together for a bit.
 

(ME)
February 17, 1010

Hi again,
I really appreciate this conversation, and I am glad to hear from you again. Many people are reading our dialogue, and are being blessed by the gentle and peaceful nature of it. I have spoken with others who are dealing with homosexuality who have not at all been kind to me, assuming the worst because of my Christian identity. But I have prayed that God would give me the ability and opportunity to have such a conversation, and here we are. 

It’s interesting that you have a son. I am wondering how this orientation of his mother is impacting him, but it’s really none of my business. I haven’t read enough or experienced enough of homosexual sociology and culture to really know the outcome of such things.  I have no opinion, based on scientific knowledge of my own to speak of, but I know that God does love you as much as he loves me. And I know that God is powerful and can answer prayers.

I also know that God is a God of unimaginable grace and mercy as well.

I agree that there are many philosophical and psychological theories surrounding homosexuality, but I can’t imagine, for myself, being attracted to the same sex. Therefore it’s difficult for me to agree that, simply based on my upbringing, I chose to be attracted to the opposite sex.  

For the Church (Christians) to learn how to welcome and love the homosexual as easily as the alcoholic, the bigot, and the divorced would be a wonderful witness of the power of God’s love. And I’m sure that if that kind of compassion was shown from those who are supposed to be “known by their love” that healing would come in powerful ways, even beyond our own expectations. 

Keep praying and knowing that God hears you and cares for you. 

In His dust,
Johnny

(HER)
February 18, 2010

Johnny,
 
I can appreciate being mistreated because of a label (mine just happens to be different than yours) and I am sorry for that, especially since you have what I would assum is a genuine Christian heart. I’m grateful that I did not let a sweeping generalization or label detract the conversation we are having.
 
Due to the nature of our conversation, I am OK with filling you in on my kids. I have 2, a 14 yo son and a 9 yo daughter. My son seems very well adjusted, he was 11 when I came out. He is on the local high school football team and has an active at school social life and sports life. I made the decision not to ‘out’ him, so in his interest I stayed in the closet around the games. HE outed me! He had some sort of a sense of pride and acceptance because he told everyone on the football team…I would have thought that would be a difficult crowd to be out to. However, they all still love me, mostly because I still feed them and cheer for them. Whether they think its gross, sinful, whatever…they are still able to love me and appreciate me because I am still who I am. With that, my assumption is that he is adjusting beautifully. I don’t believe that having an openly gay mom gives him greater propensity to be gay, just as your compassion towards LGBT does not make you attracted to men.
 
And I agree with you…when the Church begins to accept all, then the awesome Power and Love of God will be swept over the world.  No one should be treated, especially by the Christian community, as anything less than a child of the Most High. I think when and if they ever change their acceptance policy that God will be more able to see His Plan for His Peace and Love to envelope the world, and those that had been living in ignorance, fear or superiority will be able to experience His love in ways they could never before comprehend.
 
Where exactly is this conversation being posted, I would love to take a peek.

(ME)
February 18, 2010

Hi. It’s posted at www.flocksdiner.com. I have to do some traveling today, so I don’t have time to fully respond right now.Thanks for writing again.I am being blessed by our converstation.

Johnny

(HER)
February 18, 2010

Drive safely during your travels today.
 
I am being blessed by our conversation as well, how could I not be? A Pastor and a Lesbian walking this path together with what I would call Christian love and compassion.

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

St. Patrick’s ministry was considered an outreach to “barbarians” by the Roman Church leaders of his time. To be worthy of receiving the Christian faith, a people first had to be considered civilized to some degree, and upon receiving the faith, they had to be willing to accept “the Roman way” (Hunter, The Celtic Way, p. 17).

The ability to be welcomed into the Kingdom was expected only of the non-barbarians of the world. The Irish who were believed to be uncivilized by the Roman wing of Christianity were considered, to coin a phrase, “Un-Christianable.”

Most established denominations come from Roman or European roots, and most have trouble reaching today’s barbarians. There continues to be a lack of willingness to welcome those who are considered uncivilized and not willing to take on “the Way of the Church.” To be sure, there are some denominations who boast that they are different, and provide a home to those who have no church that will accept them, but in my opinion, that is more lip-service than reality.

Most denominations have trouble welcoming homosexuals (who would come to Church with their ‘mates’), prostitutes (who have no plans of quitting their night job), couples who live together (and have no plans to get married), and, let’s not forget those who come for no other reason than they like the practical teaching of Christianity (but have no plans to “join” the Church).

There are many “barbarians” in our world today, who are not civilized enough, nor are they willing to become “Denominationized” and make themselves able to fit in with the predictable behavior of those to whom the Church finds easiest to minister.

So what to do?

Recognizing that we are all “barbarians” is probably a good beginning (s. Romans 3:23). Secondly, the Church would do well to remember who Jesus spent much of his time with—the twelve not-good-enough’s that no other rabbi would take the time to teach (disciples), and people whom very few, in his time, would even consider inviting to worship (barbarians).

“While Jesus was having dinner at Levi’s house, many tax collectors and “sinners” were eating with him and his disciples, for there were many who followed him. When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the ‘sinners’ and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: ‘Why does he eat with tax collectors and ’sinners’?’ On hearing this, Jesus said to them, ‘It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners’” (Mark 2:15-17 NIV).

Denominational leaders are expected to spend the majority of their time with the “church folk”, as if he or she is the matradee of the civilized and churchized, while the barbarians are ostracized until they are ready to be assimilated into “the Denomination way”, like good little boys and girls.

I know my words may come across as a bit negative, and my intention is not to offend the establishment, but to bring recognition to the truth that many Christians could stand to hear God’s warning and promise in Ezekiel 34:4: “You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally” (NIV).

As George Hunter says so clearly, “…as in the case of the ancient Roman wing of the Church, denominations are still substantially in the hands of the less apostolic wing of the Church, which works overtime to gain and retain institutional control; which assumes it knows best; and which works persistently to impose Roman, European, or other culturally alien forms upon the more indigenous and growing movements within the denomination. This pathology is observed today, for example, in most of the denominations in the United States that were ‘imported from Europe’” (pp. 95-96).

In His dust,

Johnny

Works Cited:

George G. Hunter III The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach the West… Again (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2000).

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

Christianity in the Western world is increasingly vanishing. The decline is partly due to a deep-seated, chronic denial by entrenched “Church culture” survivors, who live in the present, while heading into the future with their hearts stuck in the past.

We all wish that every congregation was healthy, boasting thousands, or at least hundreds of passionate believers. But some congregations just aren’t willing to recognize the chronic state of their branch of the body. The difference between those very few congregations that actually see such growth and spiritual vitality, and the majority of congregations that are in a constant decline or, at best, remain temporarily stagnant, is partially due to a willingness to recognize that people have changed. What leaders of strong congregations see is that which George Hunter III recognizes:

“These populations are increasingly ‘postmodern’; they have graduated from Enlightenment ideology and are more peer driven, feeling driven, and ‘right-brained’ than their forbearers. These populations are increasingly ‘neo-barbarian’; they lack ‘refinement’ or ‘class,’ and their lives are often out of control.”

Until we are willing to admit and respond to the fact that younger generations are unable to recognize the language, habits, and values of those of us who grew up in the Church culture, we will continue to see a decline in Western Christianity.

I believe that the decision which we will have to decide upon is whether we care more about our own values, or reaching the West for Christ.

As a songwriter in Nashville, one of the cultural axioms that I picked up rather quickly was that of calling a songwriter’s song his “baby.” I learned that, when a writer performed his song, he was not just trying to sell a product, but he was showing off his “baby.” And if someone didn’t like his “baby,” the writer took the dislike very personally. Rewriting the song was like giving the song up for adoption; something many young or new songwriters were unwilling to do. “This is ‘my’ baby, and I’d rather it never be heard by anyone than see it change!”

The mature songwriter learned that, as beautiful as his baby was to himself, if he wanted it to be recorded and have a chance at being played on the radio, he would have to learn how to make the baby loveable to others, even if the baby would no longer be his. If he was unwilling to give the baby away, it would almost certainly die with the songwriter.

Most congregations and Church leaders are not willing to give the baby away in order for it to be loved. In other words, many of us would rather see our congregation die than see it change.

It is written in the Scriptures that King Solomon had the opportunity to express his great wisdom, when two prostitutes brought in a baby that both claimed as their own. One prostitute’s baby had died during the night, because she suffocated it by sleeping on the baby, so she stole the child of the other prostitute during the night, and left her dead child with the mother of the living child.

Solomon’s suggestion to the two who fought over the child was to have the baby cut in half and each of the women were to be given a part of the baby. Of course the true mother was willing to “give the baby away” so that it would not die, rather than have her baby killed (see 1 Kings 3:16-30).

It seems that many believers would rather have our congregations die a slow death than make it something that another would be willing to love. Even in the face of certain death, many Christian leaders and congregants make no effort to change so that others will be able to love the Church.

Are our traditions and paradigms so valuable to us that we would rather see our baby cut in half than rewrite the song?

In His dust,
Johnny

George G. Hunter III The Celtic Way of Evangelism: How Christianity Can Reach the West… Again (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2000), p. 9.

© 2010 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

The King James Version! Some have ignorantly stated, “It was good enough for Paul, and it’s good enough for me!” I have even heard a preacher say to his congregation, “I hope none of you brought that New Idiots Version into this church today,” speaking negatively of the NIV. Why does the KJV of the Bible cause so much dissension among Christians?

I was in a Christian bookstore today and an entire wall was devoted to the King James Version of the Bible as if somehow that particular seventeenth century translation is the pinnacle of holy scholarship.

The KJV is the most difficult to read, much less understand, and comes from a translation of what F. H. A. Scrivener called “…the most faulty book I know,” which was the Textus Receptus of the Greek New Testament. The Textus Reseptus is a highly unreliable compilation of varied Greek texts hastily put together by Desiderius Erasmus in 1516 A. D.

Erasmus used very few manuscripts, most of which were very unreliable and dating only to the twelfth century. And, where verses were missing, Erasmus simply translated the Latin Vulgate into Greek, translations that neither then nor now match any other Greek manuscripts ever discovered. One example, which is given attention by Metzger and Ehrman is the KJV of Acts 9:6. The KJV is the only translation that adds the words, “And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” These words exist in no other version, because they were assumed by Erasmus’ own interpolation of the verse in the Latin Vulgate.

What Erasmus did in five months, when compared to the latest scholarly work, is quite scary. And how someone could not listen to the wisdom and scholarship of modern scriptural translations is nothing less than frightening.

When studying our most sacred texts, including how they began and how they have developed to the forms we read today, it is of great importance to know that some of our most reliable manuscripts evaded us for centuries. It is also important to know that many of the most unreliable manuscripts have dominated churches for close to four hundred years, thanks to Erasmus.

An example of true biblical scholarship can be seen in a strange and true story of how some of our most important manuscripts came to be found.

At a time of great economic difficulty, the cost of the writing material known as vellum was so expensive that the parchment of older biblical texts were actually scraped of their ink and used by writers who needed some more writing materials.

Imagine someone today taking a fifth century Greek writing of almost the entire Bible, scraping all of the ink off of the sheepskin, and writing something completely different on the pages. These scraped manuscripts were called palimpsests, meaning “rescraped.” One of the most important manuscripts used by scholars to translate portions of every book of the Bible except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John is a palimpsest called Codex Ephraemi rescriptus. The 209 pages of manuscript were erased in the twelfth century to record 38 sermons of a fourth century Syrian Church father by the name of St. Ephraem.

Thanks to the creation of chemical reagents and ultraviolet rays, the original fifth century writing on the vellum of Codex Ephraemi rescriptus was painstakingly rediscovered by Constantin von Tischendorf.

New translations of the Old and New Testament are made because older and more reliable manuscipts have been discovered in recent history. There are more manuscripts of even higher reliability which have not yet been released for use, because the textual scholars are not finished working with them.

Christians should not be discouraged by new translations; they should be encouraged to know that real work is being done to perfect the inerrant Word of God, which has been carelessly handled by the pens of some men.

In His dust,
Johnny

Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament (2nd ed., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989 pp. 21-22, 142-145).

Bruce M. Metzger and Bart D. Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament (4th ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 2005 p. 12).

© 2009 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved

 

Numbers 21:4-9 is a story of snake biting and snake healing. Strange as it sounds, the story is part of the history of God’s people.

The Israelites became impatient and spoke against God and Moses; they complained that God and Moses brought them out into the desert to die of starvation and thirst. The Scriptures tell us that God sent poisonous snakes which caused the death of many of the Israelites. After this, the Israelites repented of their sins and God told Moses, “Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live” (v.8). Moses did just as God told him, and when those who were bitten looked at the bronze snake, they would not die of their snake bite.

Beyond the theology of using a symbol of that which caused death to bring healing, there is also the message of relying on an image for healing.

We are told to place our hands upon one another to heal the sick (s. Mark 16:18b) and even to give the Holy Spirit (s. Acts 8:19). As images of God, somewhat like the bronze snake on a pole, we can be used to provide God’s healing power for the sick and dying.

Another form or image that has been used to give hope to the hurting is the physical building that is used for worship. Safety and comfort have been found in the doors of the sanctuary.

Nurture has been claimed during the 11 O’clock hour of worship and through the programmatic ministries presented to and for youth and adults. Friendships have been formed and lifelong bonds have been created through the structures and ministries provided through Christianity.

Knowing that we can find solace, peace, and friendship during those predictable hours and in those places we call church has given many believers and non-believers a sense of strength and feeling of positive anticipation. Much like the bronze snake in the desert, the church and its programs have offered God’s healing powers to many.

Later in Israel’s history, a problem arose concerning the bronze snake that Moses made. No longer did they look upon it to receive healing from God; they looked upon it to receive healing from the snake. The image which was to be used as a reminder of God’s power, had become their god.

King Hezekiah came along and destroyed the bronze snake that Moses had made, because the Israelites had been burning incense to it; they were worshiping the snake, instead of the God who ordered the construction of the snake (2 Kings 18:4b).

The entire Israelite nation had lost their faith in the true source of their healing and hope. For Israel, the image had replaced the original.

Christianity is fading quickly in the Western hemisphere. No longer do the buildings and programs enjoy the same responses of the sick and dying in our world. The bronze snake has lost its luster and is beginning to break down.

Is the demise of Western Christianity due to a lack of evangelism, effective programming, powerful preaching, stewardship, and building maintenance? Or has the bronze snake replaced the original in the eyes of worshipers, and God has decided to break it into pieces so that we will return to the true source of healing and hope?

In His dust,
Johnny

© 2009 Jonathan P. Gainey and Flock’s Diner.
All Rights Reserved