Not Wild About Wild at Heart

Eldredge, John. Wild at Heart.Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001, 222 pp.

Some time ago I read Wild at Heart, by John Eldredge.  I was excited about reading the book because so many copies have been sold and many evangelical leaders have spoken so highly of the book. Charles Swindoll said that it was the best book he had read in five years.

The book reminded me of a song I heard at a church  Christmas program called All the World Was Waiting. There was a line in the song that said, “Truth was in His [Jesus'] teaching.” To say that truth was in his teaching implies that there was non-truth in his teaching as well. Wild at Heart was kind of like that. There was some truth in the book but there was a lot of other material in the book that was simply not biblically accurate. Here is one example.

“The Big Lie in the church today is that you are nothing more than “a sinner saved by grace.” You are a lot more than that. You are a new creation in Christ. The New Testament calls you a saint, a holy one, a son of God. In the core of your being you are a good man.” (144)

Are we good beings at the core? I don’t know what Bible he has been reading but that does not square up with the Holy Scriptures. I am not going to attempt to write a critical book review here but Randy Stinson, Executive Director of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, has reviewed the book. If you would like to read it, the review can be found here. Stinson basically concludes that the problem with Wild at Heart is that it presents an unbiblical view of God and of the believer. Let me just say that there were threads of biblically inaccurate statements throughout the book.

I do not want to be completely negative about the book, although that would be very easy to do. There was a paragraph in the book that I thought was very insightful and shed light on a fundamental problem of evangelical thinking today. It has to do with how “we” try to duplicate success of certain ministries by copying their methodology. Here it is.

“There’s Gideon and his army reduced from thirty-two thousand to three-hundred. What’s their plan of attack? Torches and water pots. It also works splendidly and it also never happens again. You recall Jesus healing the blind – he never does it the same way twice. I hope you’re getting the idea because the church has really been taken in by the world on this one. The Modern Era hated mystery; we desperately wanted a means of controlling our own lives and we seemed to find the ultimateTowerofBabelin the scientific method. Don’t get me wrong – science has given us many wonderful advances in sanitation, medicine, transportation. But we’ve tried to use those methods to tame the wildness of the spiritual frontier. We take the latest marketing methods, the newest business management fad, and we apply it to ministry. The problem with modern Christianity’s obsession with principles is that it removed any real conversation with God. Find the principle, apply the principle – what do you need God for? So Oswald Chambers warns us, “Never make a principle out of your experience; let God be as original with other people as he is with you.” (210)

Why do so many evangelical ministers want to copy the methods of Saddleback and Willow Creek? Why do we want to copy methods used by the latest fast growing church or ministry hoping to duplicate their success? I don’t think we should be trying to copy methods of others but rather be obedient to God and do what He commands. As Eldredge says, “it [has] removed any real conversation with God.” However, this is really just a footnote and is not the emphasis of the book.

If you want to know what evangelical men are filling their minds with, I highly recommend this book. I suspect that many evangelicals love what Eldredge says. This is confirmed by the number of copies this book has sold and by ringing endorsements by leaders such as Swindoll and Dobson. However, if you are looking for a book that will feed you spiritually or help you to grow this is not the book for you to read. Let me save you about $20. Don’t buy the book. You can have my copy.

When Adoption Fails, the Gospel is Not Necessarily Denied

Some time ago Al Mohler wrote a blog in response to Torry Hansen putting her 7 year old adopted son on plane and sending him back to Russia, the land of his birth.  I agree with him that this is a reprehensible thing to do to a child.  I sure Torry Hansen was at the end of her rope and felt she had nowhere she could turn for help.  However, her response to the situation was not the appropriate Christian response.  Dr. Mohler interacted with this news story in his blog post which he concluded with the remark, “When adoption fails — whatever the reason — the Gospel is denied.”

I saw this article when it was orginally posted and have been meaning to interact with it for almost a year and half.  I went back to re-read his post and noticed that he added an addendem four days after the original post in which he retracted his comment, “When adoption fails — whatever the reason — the Gospel is denied.”  I would like to tip my hat to Dr. Mohler for retracting what I consider to be a dangerous comment.  I commend him for writing the addendum to explain why he needed to retract his remark.

The Excogitating Engineer is an adoptive parent and knows many other adoptive parents.  There are many situations where adoptions fail due to the choices the child makes.  Being adopted is a legal state in which the child becomes part of a new family.  However, noboday can force a child to emotionally join the family.  When the adopted child refuses to join the family and manifests behaviors that are dangerous to the rest of the family, sometime that child has to be removed.  In this situation, the gospel is not denied.  In this situation the gospel is actually rejected by the child for the child is offered the opportunity to join the family but he rejects it.  It is more a picture of the condition of the hardened human heart that rejects the grace and forgiveness offered by Christ.

So adoption is not the gospel.  Adoption is a picture of the gospel.  It is offerely freely to some children who accept it and freely join the new family God gives them.  Sometimes children reject the adoptive family God gives them.  This is a picture of the natural human condition such as the rich young ruler who rejected the offer of the gospel.  The Gospel is only denied if the parents deny the child the forever family offered during the adoption process.  I would love to hear your thoughts.

November is National Adoption Month

Are you an adoptive parent? This month is National Adoption Month. What are you personally doing to promote this emphasis on the calendar? Here are some ways that Adoptive Families recommends you raise awareness at your child’s school, assuming that your child is school age. Please read them and consider trying some of them at your child’s school.

1. Write a letter to your child’s teacher.
This is a good way to explain your family situation and inform your teacher about what kind of language to use when talking about adoption in the classroom.

2. Read an adoption storybook to the class during story time.
Some books Adoptive Families recommends for this are All About Adoption by Marc Nemiroff (ages 4-8), How I Was Adopted by Joanna Cole (ages 4-8), A Mother for Choco by Keiko Kasza (ages 3-6), and Tell Me Again About the Night I Was Born by Jamie Lee Curtis (ages 4-10). To keep adoption stories on the radar year-round consider donating some adoption books to your child’s classroom.

3. Give an adoption presentation in first or second grade.
This is a good way to explain adoption to your child’s peers. Don’t use your child’s story specifically. Tell a story using dolls and props. For more information on presenting adoption to students visit adoptivefamilies.com/school.

4. Educate other parents.
You can do this by sending home “Helping Classmates Understand Adoption” with your child’s classmates. This is available at adoptivefamilies.com/pdf/Classmates.pdf.

5. Suggest a community service project around National Adoption Day.
National Adoption Day is the Saturday before Thanksgiving. Your child’s class might give goods and clothing to foster families or make thank you notes for foster parents or donate gifts to foster kids.

6. Let your child’s teacher know you are an ally.
Offer your help to the teacher for when adoption issues may come up. Be proactive and ask if there is going to be a family tree project and discuss how the teacher should handle adopted children in that project. If the teacher hasn’t had much experience with adoption she may be happy to know that you are willing to be on call to answer any questions that may come up.

7. Introduce the topic of racial differences around the world.
Some children’s books on this topic are We’re Different, We’re the Same by Bobbi Kates (ages 3-8) and Children Just Like Me by Anabel Kindersley (ages 8-12)

8. Help teachers rethink sticky assignments.
Projects designed to explore the child’s past can be difficult for adopted kids. Encourage the teacher to present some options to the entire class. Here are some examples.
- Family Tree: Students can draw themselves on the trunk of a tree and whom they love on each branch, regardless of biological or adoptive relationships.
- Timeline: Instead of starting with their birthdates children can cite memorable events from each calendar year they’ve been alive. Older students could create a timeline that includes a national or world event from each year they’ve been alive.

9. Arm your child with answers to questions he may be asked in class or on the playground.
Here are some examples from Adoptive Families of questions and some potential answers to teach your child:

Q – Where do you come from?
A – What do you mean? Are you asking where I was born or where I live?
or
A – New York

Q – Is that your real mother?
A – Yes. She dropped me off at school today.
or
A – Do you mean my birthmother? I don’t live with my birthmother.

Q – Why didn’t your real mother want you?
A – Are you asking why I was placed for adoption?
or
A – My birthmother couldn’t take care of me, but she made sure I was adopted by my parents.
or
A – That’s private.

Q – Why don’t you speak Chinese?
A – I am American like you, so I speak English.

10. Celebrate your child’s adoption day at school.
Just as many children celebrate birthdays at school, you may want to plan some festivities for your child’s class around his adoption day. You can visit your child’s class and read a book such as We Adopted You, Benjamin Koo by Linda Walvoord Girard (ages 4-8) or Happy Adoption Day by John McCutheon (ages 2-6). You can cap off the occasion with some treats.

11. Teach the teachers.
Write to the principal or Parent Teacher Association to suggest a professional training session about adoption for the faculty. Here are some points that education professionals need to understand.
- Adoption is an open and natural topic in your family.
- Children born in a different country are not experts on the language or culture of that country. – There are neither real families nor fake families. Adoptive parents are parents like any others.
- Genetics and immigration can be taught without requiring students to trace their nuclear family’s roots.

12. Help the teacher blend adoption into the curriculum.
Mentioning adoption from time to time in a matter-of-fact way helps kids see that adoption is a normal life experience for many families.

13. Give the teacher ready-made answers for common classroom questions.

Q – Where are Ben’s real parents?
A – Ben’s real parents are the parents who are raising him. John and Kathy, who pick him up from school each day. He also has birthparents who gave birth to him.

Q – Why didn’t Ben’s first family want him?
A – They probably wanted him very much but couldn’t take care of any baby at that time. They wanted him to have a family to love him and take care of him forever.

Q – Where is Ben from?
A – He’s from Ohio . He was born in Russia, but now he’s a U.S. citizen, like you.

Q – Does he speak Russian?
A – No. Ben came to the U.S. when he was a baby. He was not speaking any language at that time! Children speak the language of the country they are raised in, just as you speak English and not the language of your grandparents spoke before they immigrated to the U.S.

14. Donate a packet of educator materials to the school.
Provide your child’s teacher with:
- Adoption and the Schools (fairfamilies.org)
- An Educator’s Guide to Adoption (adoptioninformationinstitute.org)
- S.A.F.E. at School (adoptionsupport.org)

15. Celebrate the many cultures of the world.
Volunteer to make dishes from all cultures of origin in your family. A good resource for celebrating other cultures is Children Just Like Me: Celebrations by Anabel Kindersley. Your child’s classmates will enjoy hearing the Cinderella tale as it’s told in his birth culture.

Russ Moore’s “Don’t Adopt” and His Rhetorical Flourish

There are few leaders within Evangelicalism who have been calling for churches and families to care for orphans as Russ Moore has.  He and a handful of others have encouraged Christians to foster and adopt children pointing to James 1:27, “Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.”  Moore has been able to use his influential position as a theologian, author and educator with a large audience to champion this cause.  For this I am truly grateful.  However, being a theologian and an adoptive parent does not make one an authority on all issues surrounding adoption.  He has and should speak with authority on what the Bible teaches regarding adoption but that is where it should stop for a theologian.  Theologians and Bible scholars should teach God’s Word and stop where the Scriptures stop.  They should not teach their opinions on adoption as if they are authoritative and come from God’s Word.  Neither do I speak as an authority.  I speak as one who has experienced multiple adoptions and has some first-hand knowledge of trauma related behavior disorders in adopted children but I am not an expert.

Russ Moore has recently written a blog called Don’t Adopt.  Many times authors will employ rhetorical flourish in their writings to make their point of view sound convincing by mischaracterizing the opposing point of view to the extent that the author’s view becomes the only tenable or reasonable position.  Russ Moore skillfully uses this tactic in his article and it must be pointed out.

In Don’t Adopt, Moore argues that people should not adopt if they just want to get their “dream baby.”  According to Moore too many Christian parents adopt children “without a commitment to fidelity no matter what.”  This results in “rejection of [the adopted child] by failing to live up to the expectations of parents who had no business imposing such expectations in the first place.”  He says that there are some who see adoption as a way of finding that perfect child but children are fallen human beings and none of them will live up to the desires of their parents.  As he puts it, the adopted child will not live up to the parent’s “specifications.”  The kinds of adoptive parents he describes that should not adopt are extremely superficial and do not see the child in the way that they should as coming from a shattered home or the absence of a family.  These kinds of parents, Moore says, should just “buy a cat and make believe” that it is a child.

Moore goes on to explain the kind of attitude adoptive parents should have when adopting.  Adoptive parents need to understand that there is no such thing as an adoption that is not special needs because all adopted children come from some sort of trauma in their background.  All adopted children have special needs but you may just not know what those needs are on the front end of the adoption.  He calls on adoptive parents to count the cost of the adoption just as a king would measure his troops before a war.  Don’t go into the adoption without knowing what you are getting into.  He goes on to say that this is what the church needs in caring for the fatherless.

We need a battalion of Christians ready to adopt, foster, and minister to orphans. But that means we need Christians ready to care for real orphans, with all the brokenness and risk that comes with it. We need Christians who can reflect the adopting power of the gospel, which didn’t seek out a boutique nursery but a household of ex-orphans who were found wallowing in our own blood, with Satan’s genes in our bloodstreams.

However, if you are one of those wanting that “dream baby,” Moore has the following words for you.

If what you like is the idea of a baby who fulfills your needs and meets your expectations, just buy a cat. Decorate the nursery, if you’d like. Dress it up in pink or blue, and take pictures. And be sure to have it declawed.

I admit that Russ Moore makes some great points in this article.  It is his rhetorical flourish with which he paints with broad strokes a picture of those that should not adopt that really bothers me.  What is the rhetorical flourish?  He starts out the article talking about the “dream baby” and that adopting a child is not the same thing as “ordering a consumer item.”  Well of course not!  What adult in their right mind would equate buying a consumer item with adopting a child?  And who wants a dream baby?  I have never heard of such.  I know many adoptive parents and have NEVER heard any prospective parents make mention of their child having to be an athletic and academic All-American while winning all of the beauty pageants and being the student body president.  How ridiculous is that?  Please give prospective adoptive parents and little more credit and respect than that.  They are not adopting to get a “dream baby.”  He paints a picture of some adoptive parents which sounds ridiculous on purpose to stress a point that Moore believes which is that adoptive parents should not have specifications or limitations when adopting a child and anyone who does wants a “dream child” is a ridiculous person who shouldn’t adopt.  This is the rhetorical flourish.

If you have never adopted, you may not know what specifications he is referring to.  When you adopt a child you will be asked about what kind of child you are willing to adopt.  Do you require a specific hair color or skin color?  Are you open to any age or do you have age requirements?  Are you open to a child with serious medical conditions?  Are you open to a child with fetal alcohol syndrome, HIV, or brain damage?  Are you open to a child who might need multiple heart surgeries in order to survive?  Are you open to any ethnicities or do you want a child who is of the same ethnic background as you?  These are some of the types of questions you have to answer.  The way I read Moore, if you have any limitations or requirements you have specifications and consequently you want a dream baby.  This is a self-refuting position because you always have specifications.  You may be open to any and all health conditions but if you are adopting from China your specification is that the child will be Chinese.  If you are adopting from Russia then your expectation is that it will be a white child with fair skin, unless you adopt an ethnic minority from Russia.  You may not have the financial resources to give a child multiple surgeries but you may have the resources to give an orphan a family.  In that case, you might place some limits on the health conditions of the child and that may not be entirely unreasonable.  If you have decided that it is not a good idea to interrupt the birth order of your home, you may have some age requirements.  While some of these requirements (or specifications) are superficial most of them are serious questions potential adoptive parents need to consider.  Considering these questions does not make you a person who is after a dream baby.

Another one of his implications is that if the adoption is disrupted it is entirely the fault of the parents who had unrealistic expectations.  He implies that in the case of a failed adoption, the adoptive parents did not consider the brokenness and risk that comes from adoption and that disruptions are the result of children not living up to parents’ expectations.  This idea is clearly naïve and uninformed view of adoption.  It is my hope and prayer that all adoptions work out.  Disruptions are sad but the truth of the matter is that not all adoptions work out.  You should not blame the adoptions that do not work out completely on the parents.  Being adopted is a legal condition of being put under the authority and care of responsible adults.  The legal position of having been adopted has nothing to do with whether or not the child emotionally ever decides to submit to the parents through trust and obedience.  They may legally be adopted children in a family but they may emotionally never join the family.  Many adopted children have outlandish behaviors.  Some sexually assault their siblings.  Some do physical violence to their parents, siblings, and peers.  Some threaten to kill their parents.  Some burn the house down.  These are just a few examples of what some legally adopted children who never actually emotionally allow themselves to be adopted do in order to not join their adopted families.  The Excogitating Engineer knows of several families who have been dealing with similar issues for years.  You can read about one of them here.  Many adoptive parents have multiple children.  Parents have responsibilities to all of their children.  If an adopted child with severe trauma issues endangers other family members, parents have the obligation to decide whether or not the dangerous child should be removed from the home because parents’ obligation to their entire family includes all of their children; not just the adopted ones.  Ultimately, it is usually the behavior of the adopted child who tries to traumatize her adoptive family that causes her removal from the home.  The adoptive parents want the child to become part of the family rather than just sharing a roof.  It is not due to unrealistic expectations as Russ Moore postulates.  More often than not, it is due to violent and outlandish behaviors of the child.  Moore is way off base in suggesting that adoptions that end in children being removed from the home are a result of unrealistic expectations of the parents.  I realize that I, too, am making generalizations here but they are based on what I have read about adoption.  I do not say these things as if my words are supported by Scripture.  What I am writing is my understanding of the ways things are in general regarding adoptive families.

Adoptive parents do not expect to have a perfect child.  Moore suggests that those who expect a perfect child should adopt a cat instead.  Having been in the adoption community for 10 years I have never met a single adoptive parent or potential adoptive parent who expected a perfect child or a dream baby.  In fact, all of the adoptive parents I know understand that they would be rescuing a damaged and hurt child from a seemingly hopeless situation by opening up their family to the child through adoption.  As far as I know countries involved in international adoption and part of The Hague Convention require prospective adoptive parents to go through training about adoption and the risks involved.  Moore trivializes these risks by suggesting that those who end up dealing trauma related behavior disorders simply were expecting a perfect child.  Nobody expects a perfect child.  Nobody.  Neither biological nor adoptive parents.  To suggest otherwise is insulting.

As I mentioned earlier, Moore suggests that there are adoptions that are not special needs.  He supports this notion by pointing out that all adoptions are a result of a tragedy that caused separation between the child and his or her biological parents.  At some point, the child experienced some separation anxiety from the biological mother.  In this sense, yes, all adoptions are special needs.  All adopted children have special needs and have special pain that needs to be dealt with that most children who are living with their biological children will never experience.  However, to say that there are no adoptions that are not special needs places all of the special needs in the same category.  For example a child adopted from Guatemala who was cared for by a caregiver until the adoptive parents came to adopt her did experience a low level of trauma when she was separated from her parents.  By contrast, however, her level of trauma is going to pale in comparison to a child adopted from Russia whose mother drank vodka all throughout the pregnancy, was not nurtured as an infant, and was physically and sexually abused as a child.  The child that was abused is likely going to have much greater trauma and much greater special needs.  To put both children in the same special needs category diminishes the needs of the abused child.  If we are going to take Moore’s position that all adoptive children are special needs, we should go ahead and take it a step further.  All children all special needs!  We cannot say that there are any children who are not special needs because all children are born with original sin inherited from Adam.  We are all born with the natural inclination towards evil and away from God.  We are all special needs.  NO!  You cannot put all children in the same category.  Some children, adopted and not adopted, have special needs that other children do not have.  Many children have been through horrific experiences that no child should.  Traumatic experiences or lack of nurture and love during critical stages of childhood result in some children having special needs.  The corollary is also true.  The lack of such abuse and trauma results in some children not having special needs.  So no, not all adopted children are special needs children.

As I continue to evaluate Moore’s article his rhetorical flourish, I noticed that he employs another self-refuting argument.  He says, “Jesus tells us we ought to know that a king going into battle must measure his troops, a tower-builder must count the expenses of the project.”  He goes on that say that you may not know the special needs of a child on the front end of adoption.  Well, how are you supposed to “count the cost” without knowing the cost?  In other words, if you don’t know what the special needs are on the front end you cannot consider the costs since it is unknown.  Besides this contradiction, I do not believe that love is something that requires counting the cost.  Love is giving your life to another and reflecting the truths of the gospel through that love.  By loving someone you are completely giving yourself to them.  This is not something where you can count the cost.  You give all of yourself.  It is a self-sacrificing kind of love.  You make a decision to love regardless of what happens.  When you marry someone, do you count the cost?  No!  You completely commit yourself to them and decide to be joined together.  Adoption is similar in the sense that you commit yourselves, as parents, to the child for life because you are now their forever family.  You don’t count the cost.  You just do what you have to do.

Russ Moore has done a great deal to promote adoption and encourage Christians to consider the practical implications of James 1:27.  Adoptions and foster parenting have become popular in large part due to his teaching and writing.  Orphan care is now on many people’s radar when it wasn’t before.  Moore has a large audience who is eager to hear what he has to say.  This has helped tremendously in getting the adoption message out.  However, many times such as in this article he has overstepped his bounds.  I would like to call on him to do the following.

1. Please limit your comments on orphan care and adoption to the Scriptures.  As far as I know, you are an adoptive father and a theologian.  That does not make you an expert on adoption in general or adoption trauma related behavior disorders.  Feel free to give your opinion on adoption but please don’t state your non-biblical opinions as fact.
2. Please do not use rhetorical flourish to make a point.  As Christians we must be precise and accurate in our language.  Please do not use broad strokes of the brush of language in order to make a point.
3. Please understand that not everyone has a perfect adoption experience.  Remember that every adoption situation is different.  The fact that you may have not experienced trauma related difficulties is not a result of your great commitment or parenting but is a result of God’s grace.  As you promote adoption please remember that there are those who struggle with many disorders related to past trauma.  It is easy to sit in an ivory tower of theological education and look through rose colored lenses but remember that not everyone has an adoption experience like yours.
4. Lastly, please remember that all children and people are made in the image of God.  You, as a theologian, understand this greater than the rest of us.  Telling prospective adoptive parents to adopt a declawed cat is not humorous but insulting.  Through your analogy you have placed non-human animal life on the same level as humanity into whom the very creator of the universe breathed life.  This is insulting to adoptive parents as it places the adoption of children on the same level as going to the Humane Society and adopting a cat.  May it never be!

Thank you, Russ Moore, for your contribution to adoption and orphan care.  However, please exercise greater discretion as your write and teach on the issue.  I pray and trust that God will continue to use you in a great way to open up more Christian homes to the fatherless and that in the process that your words would be seasoned with His grace.  Soli Deo Gloria!

One With Them

Jesus said, “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:12)  Those who are in pursuit of the kingdom of heaven will be able to persevere through persecution to obtain the reward of the kingdom of heaven.  In Philippians 1:29 Paul says, “For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake” because Christians will face persecution.  We don’t hear about it on the news and we rarely hear about it in our churches.  However, there are parts of the body of Christ around the world that are experiencing persecution and the church in America, as a whole, sleeps and is oblivious to it.  Thankfully there are some organizations that are involved in ministering to the persecuted church.  One such organization is Open Doors.

 

 

If you desire to pray for the persecuted church but have a hard time remembering, Open Doors has a program called One With Them.  It is based on 1 Corinthians 12:26 which teaches us that when one member of the body suffers, all of the members suffer with it.  If you go to the One With Them website, you can request a free bracelet to remind you to pray for those members of our body who are suffering.  It is shaped like a crown of thorns so you will easily be reminded to pray for and to be an advocate for our brothers and sisters in Christ who are suffering persecution for the sake of righteousness.  Get your bracelet and pray for the persecuted church!

The Part Cannot Tell the Gauge, “You’re Wrong!”

I am an engineer and I work in manufacturing.  My company manufactures parts for automobiles and trucks.  Our goal is to manufacture quality parts that meet the requirements on the customer drawings.  How do we know that the part meets the customer requirements?  We know this by various testing criteria and by taking dimensional measurements.  Dimensional measurements are taken by means of some sort of gauge such as a caliper, micrometer, CMM, or some other specialized measurement tool.

It is interesting that when there is a change in the manufacturing process or a mistake made by a machine or operator, the gauge always picks up the difference which has resulted in a non-conforming or bad part.  The gauge that is used for measuring the part tell you that the part is out of specification by telling you what the measurement of the part is.  The gauge does not change but the manufactured part changes from time to time.  It is the responsibility of the gauge to pick up on that change so that our company can know that we have a problem and we need to modify our process to bring it back into control or, said another way, to start making good parts again.  When the gauge picks up on the fact that bad parts are being made, the part cannot say to the gauge, “you’re wrong!”  Those with the technical know-how have to figure out how to change the process so that what the gauge is measuring within spec again.

How ridiculous would it be for an engineer to throw away a gauge rather than fixing the manufacturing process that is making a bad part?  The gauge does not change.  The gauge is calibrated to a master standard that is traceable to a universal standard.  The gauge is the benchmark by which all parts are measured.  If the part changes, it has  no authority over the gauge.  The part must be reworked or scrapped.  The parts or process may change but the gauge and specification requirements stay the same.

Similarly, we have another standard which is a benchmark.  The particular benchmark I have in mind is the canon of Scripture.  How often do people say that times have changed and people have changed so must the requirements in the Bible?  Get with the times, society has changed.  I say, NO!  The standard does not change.  The Bible is timeless and the requirements of us therein have not changed.  We cannot tell the Bible that it is wrong just because society accepts certain immoral and ungodly behavior any more than a bad manufactured part can say to the gauge, “you’re wrong!”  No, the standards found in God’s Word do not change.  Indeed, people have changed but the standard by which we are measured is still the same.

This is where there is really bad news.  The bad news is that nobody can measure up to that standard.  Using the analogy of manufactured parts, we are all bad and out of spec!  None of us measure up to God’s standard.  The Bible says that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23).  There is worse news yet.  The worse news is that we are all scrap parts.  The penalty for us falling short of God’s standard by our own sin is death (Romans 6:23).  We are all destined for the scrap bin, or to be eternally separated from God in an awful place called hell.  Ah, but there is good news that follows that bad news.  The good news is that God sent His own Son to pay the price for our sin by living a sinless life, dying on a cross, and being resurrected to give us new life.  We must repent of our sins and put our faith in Christ that he will forgive us of our sins and cleanse us of all unrsighteouness (1 John 1:9).

Thank God!  We are all non-conforming parts (sinners) destined for the scrap bin (hell).  But God has made a way for us to be reworked (saved) in order to be brought into specification (through the person and work of Jesus Christ).  As parts that God has brought into specification through the blood of His Son, we are now parts that can be used for His glory.  Thanks be to God!

Daddy, Are we going to big church?

Some time ago on Sunday morning after Sunday School my 7 year old asked, “Daddy, are we going to big church?”  He was referring to whether or not he was going to worship with the adults or going to ‘children’s church.’ 

It is interesting to note that at the church where we are currently members there is no children’s church.  However, until we joined the church November my son had been accustomed to going to children’s church on Sunday morning.  Sunday night was the only time he would go to ‘big church.’  Although we had been at our new church for almost 6 months I guess my son had forgotten that there is no children’s church.

When he asked me the question, “are we going to big church?” I answered and reminded him that there is only one worship service at this church and everyone (except for those in the nursery) worships together.  At the same time I was thinking to myself how thankful I am to be in a church where families worship together and how glad I am that there is no children’s church.  I am a big proponent of families worshipping together with children even as young as my 5 year old who is in worship with us every week.  Here are my reasons.

1. By being in worship with their parents, children can observe their parents singing praises to God and can listen to the exposition of God’s Word.  Children learn by watching Mom and Dad and observing that they enjoy praising God.  They learn that Mom and Dad value and honor God’s Word by listening attentively to the preaching of the Bible.

2. By being in worship with their parents, children lose the opportunity to play and not pay attention.  Of course children are children and they cannot focus and understand all that is being said.  However, in children’s church there is typically a handfull (at best) of adults with a roomfull of children.  Children fidget, whisper, and laugh and do not have to pay attention.  By sitting in worship with their parents the opporunity for playing and goofing off is curtailed greatly.  This is probably why children’s churches so often utilize videos to keep the children’s attention.  This brings me to my third point.

3. By being in worship with their parents, children are taught that God’s Word and the exposition of it is the most central part of worship.  I am sure that not all children’s church programs use videos.  However, the use of videos does not teach that God’s Word is central.  Discussion about what the children think about a particular passage or talking about their upcoming family vacation does not teach them that the Word is a central part of worship either.  I do believe that talking about family events and discussing Bible stories is good but Sunday School is the more appropriate context for this to take place.

4. By being in worship with their parents, children are taught great hymns and worship songs of the faith.  I am not saying that children do not learn good songs in children’s church because they do.  However, the songs that can be sung in children’s church are greatly limited by the fact that children of that age have not learned to read yet.  By being in worship with Mom and Dad children are exposed to a greater variety of songs and although the children may not be able to read yet, they learn the words by repetition and hearing the songs sung over and over.  My 5 year old knows words to many songs just because she has heard them so many times.  A by-product of this is that this is a good opportunity for children to develop their reading skills by following along in the song book.

5. By being in worship together, parents are better able to develop teachable moments using the sermon from Sunday morning.  Since Mom and Dad are not in children’s church with their children they do not know what their children were taught.  All they have to go on is what their children say they learned.  By being in worship together, parents know what was taught in the message that their child heard.  Parents can draw on the sermon’s teaching throughout the week as they teach their children obedience to God’s Word.  Mom and Dad can say during the week, “do you remember what the pastor said on Sunday morning about what the Bible teaches about this?”  This becomes a teachable moment where the parent can draw on the Word and the worship experience to teach the child about God’s character, our obedience, etc.

I am so thankful to be in a church where the pastor believes in expository preaching and the children are in worship with us.

Here is a side note.  One Sunday each year the children help lead in worship.  My 9 year old was an usher and helped collect the offering.  He told his Sunday School teacher that collecting the offering was his favorite part of the service.  To that comment his teacher responded, “I hope the preaching will be your favorite part one day.”  Amen to that!