It’s not the same kinds of things I blogged about here… but if you need a little inspiration here and there you can check out my weekly Emmaus blog!

Much love, Michael

The conversation you hear goes a little something like this, “How much do we really want to be like the Early Church? How much do we really want to commit to the Kingdom of God? Do we really want what God wants for us, even if it looks nothing like what we want for ourselves?”

The silent conversation, the one going on in our heads, sounds a little something like this, “Can we really be like the Early Church? Can I really completely commit to the Kingdom? Can I really live the adventure God has created for me? How much of an adventure do I want really want to live?”

I literally watched the question shift from “How?” and “Do I?” to “Is it really even possible?” And God answered that question loud and clear for the Emmaus Church this past weekend. It can be… and if we can bring ourselves to commit to it, it will be!

So… you’re thinking, “I’ve heard that before…” And I know what you mean, but before you jump there consider a couple of things. 1) You haven’t heard it from the Emmaus Church before. We’re only 6 months old, we haven’t had time to lose interest in a commitment this big. And 2) While as individuals, the Emmaus Community has lost interest in the Kingdom in the past… this time it’s different.

And now you’re thinking, “I’ve heard that before too!” Lol… but it is different this time. It is so different. It was a watershed for the Emmaus Community… Actually, our first watershed as a community… and the Emmaus Community has already begun the hard work of refocusing and all that involves.

Callings are becoming clear and my head is spinning just trying to figure out how to equip, serve and hold the Emmaus Community accountable for what God is calling them to. For maybe the first time at Emmaus, I really believe that things no longer exist as we know them. Our norms are obsolete because they cannot fully account for the transformation that occurred and the transformation that is coming.

The church as we know it is changing! We are seeing it happen now and we are a part of it at its most base level.

The adventure is about to be thrust upon you and I… and I can’t wait!

The Apostles and the thousands of people who comprised the Early Church (the first church we read about in scripture) were freakin’ communists!

I thought, “How did I miss this in all my years of study?” Really, I’ve read the Book of Acts probably a hundred times or more by now, and it never jumped off the page at me like it did the other night. So I grabbed several Bibles and read it again and again , and it’s in there… plain as day!

Don’t believe me… check it out:

Acts 4:32-35 KJV

And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need.

And from The Message paraphrase:

The whole congregation of believers was united as one – one heart, one mind! They didn’t even claim ownership of their own possessions. No one said, “That’s mine; you can’t have it.” They shared everything. The apostles gave powerful witness to the resurrection of the Master Jesus, and grace was on all of them. And so it turned out that not a person among them was needy. Those who owned fields or houses sold them and brought the price of the sale to the apostles and made an offering of it. The apostles then distributed it according to each person’s need.

And from my translation of choice, the NCV:

The group of believers were united in their hearts and spirit. All those in the group acted as though their private property belonged to everyone in the group. In fact, they shared everything. With great power the apostles were telling people that the Lord Jesus was truly raised from the dead. And God blessed all the believers very much. No one in the group needed anything. From time to time those who owned fields or houses sold them, brought the money, and gave it to the apostles. Then the money was given to anyone who needed it.

So you wanna be like the Early Church, huh? You want to… how did my professor at Bible college put it… let me get this right… “Do what they did, they way they did what they did.” Yeah right! No we don’t! Not this part at least… not the whole “communism” part!

But are we supposed to be endeavoring to be just like the Early Church? I mean, we are a far cry from that “Book of Acts” church, but can we just do everything but this thing the way they did it and call it a night?

I know that Communism as we know it wasn’t the same system that the Early Church employed, but it looked a lot more like communism than it did capitalism.  Here’s my question… If we are supposed to be endeavoring to be just like them, to do what they did the way they did what they did… are we supposed to be “holding all things in common?” Are we supposed to be selling our house and land and giving it to the church to divvy up as it sees fit?

Your first response (like mine was) will probably be… “HELL NO!” (Or something close to it, lol!) But think about it for a bit, really consider if we’re supposed to emulating them, and then weigh in! I wanna hear from you!

Alcohol and the Church… mortal enemies, right? Maybe not. When i was in my early twenties I taught a Sunday School class for High School students. I used to get in trouble for responding to questions about “drinking” by saying that Biblically I couldn’t find anything wrong with it, and that I even felt like it was encouraged. So let’s settle the issue once and for all… lemme know what you think about the following issues:

Issue 1: Was the wine in the days of Jesus’ earthly ministry and the early church fermented?

I’ve heard all kinds of arguments on both sides of this question. Here’s my take on it… The Bible refers to many people, on many occasions being “drunk.” In fact, when the Holy Ghost fell on the day of Pentecost, the people on the street thought the people in the upper room were drunk (probably ’cause they were acting strange). If the wine they were drinking wasn’t fermented, and therefore not alcoholic, then how in the world did people get drunk and act crazy?

Some people cite how the fermenting process in that time was much different than it is today, which as far as I know is correct. From what I can tell, the catalyst of the fermenting process is yeast, and yeast actually grows on the skin of grapes. Today’s process involves washing the yeast off of the grapes (for health reasons) and then introducing a “clean” yeast back into the mix. The process in Biblical times simply used the yeast that was on the grape skin, they didn’t wash them first.

Was the wine is Jesus’ day fermented? I can’t see how anyone could believe otherwise.

Issue 2: Did Jesus ever drink himself?

Uhhhhmmm… yeah. He even made a toast at the last supper and promised never to drink wine again until he drank it new with his disciples in his coming Kingdom. (A toast we honor when we take part in communion celebrations at Emmaus.) The implication is, if he’s not going to drink wine again until… that he’s been drinking wine in the past.

Issue 3: Scripture

I can clearly see and agree that scripture warns against “drunkenness,” or being drunk, but it seems to me that at the same time absolutely legitimizes (and in some cases encourages) the consumption of wine. Based on quite a bit of study, here’s what I believe as of this writing:

1 – Drunkenness as a condition is condemned.

2 – The vast majority of scripture give no moral advice one way or the other.

3 – Moderate consumption is not condemned, except within the context of certain persons and certain times.

That should get the conversation started, I’m sure more issue’s will surface as we dialogue. Here’s all I ask, make sure your comments are well-thought-out and intelligent. Don’t say, “Well my Bible says…” Please list references when referencing scripture or other sources. Start your comment by writing the Issue number so we all know which specific issue you’re addressing. Remember, we are dialoguing about an issue that has split the church down the middle for a very long time, there are intelligent people on both sides of the issue and WE WILL NOT ARGUE… period.

All that said, let the unfiltered dialogue begin!

Last night several friends and I went to “The Great Porn Debate” in Indianapolis. Evidentally a couple of other venues had decided they didn’t want the debate at their location and so they cancelled, and the event ended up in a rundown, “artsy” old building on the old North side of Indy. There was no air conditioning in the entire building, and yesterday was the hottest day of the year in Indy, yeah… it was hot!

I was half expecting the debate to be at least a little extraneous on both sides; that Ron Jeremy would be a nasty old pervert who just loves porn and was on this tour simply for a little publicity, and that Craig Gross would say some stupid things in the heat of the moment and make us look like uninteligent, fantatical idiots. Neither was the case.

Ron and Craig actually defended each other on several occassions, Ron saying that he “liked what Craig did for a living,” that “not everyone should be involved in porn, and he [Gross] helps them get out.” Craig talked about the time he and his family had spent with Ron on the tour bus, and how he believed that Ron wasn’t actually “for” a lot of the things he was arguing against, that he simply “represented the industry.”

While I was really impressed with the intelligent arguments Jeremy made, (Who knew that Ron has two Bachelors degrees, one in theater and one in education, and a Masters in special education?) I did disagree on what I feel may be the most important issue regarding pornography. Ron disagreed that pornography is progressive, that what gets you off today won’t get you off tomorrow… I disagree because know this to be true… Pornography, at least for me, was absolutely progressive.

My question is, if it is progressive for everyone else, where does that progerssion end? How far does it go? I believe that progression will always take you further than you want to go and make you stay longer than you want to stay. Do I believe that it should be outlawed altogether? No, we live in a country that still has at least some similance of free speech. I do believe it will ultimately drive you to lie to and hurt the people you love the most because it is progressively destructive.

I think the message to the church is very close to what Craig has been “preaching” for several years now, the church needs to be a safe place to talk about and get REAL help for sex addictions… and in most churches, it’s not.

Is it just me, or is anybody else sick to death of the cute little messages that just about every little church on a rural route puts on their church sign?

Not only are the overwhelming majority of these messages completely irrelevant and altogether retarded, but they may just be the catalyst of the demise of the temperament and atmosphere of the Christian church in Western culture. Okay, so maybe that’s a little far, but maybe not as far as you might think.

My experience has been that many of these messages contain poor grammar, poor spelling, poor theology and a lot of them even make light of hell and other very serious faith issues… it’s all just one more mark on an already crowded tally of “Ways Some of Us Make All of Us Look Stupid.”

In addition, maybe these churches are pushing the part of the population they are trying to reach further and further from their doors by reducing the life changing message of Jesus Christ to a bunch of banner lines and catch phrases written in “christianese.” Could it be that a nonbeliever, heck even a believer, who is facing real problems, real addictions, and real life drives by, sees the sign and thinks, “‘Free trip to heaven, details in side?’ I can barely get through a day in this world without blowing my effin’ brains out… This church has nothing relevant to say to my situation.”

Maybe there’s some truth there… Maybe I’m just ranting because I really hate those signs… In any case, ATTENTION churches with signs: if you have nothing relevant to say, please, in the name of all that’s good and holy, don’t write it on you stupid little sign!

So I was thinking about what the leaders of the early church might say about our “new millennial, post-modern, emergent, western-culture” version of “church.” I can hear Peter now, “What the hell are these guys doing?” And Paul, in response to both the state of the Christian church and to Peter’s “profanity,” “Easy Peter! But I get what you’re saying, a ‘New Testament, Book of Our Acts’ church they ain’t.”

So let’s dialogue a little. Let’s start with, “What I love about the early church…”

Wait for it, wait for it… GO! Let me hear from you! When you read the book of Acts, the only record we have of the early church (aside from what we can deduce from the letters of Paul), what stands out to you?

Building the Emmaus Church has been, hands down, the most profound experience of my life. It has also been, hands down, the hardest thing I’ve ever done.

The tough part wasn’t finding a place to meet, that was and continues to be a complete “God thing.” The hard part hasn’t been finding money to fund ministry with, God has lead a lot of people to support us with a little here and there, and a few people to support us in some really big ways… again, a complete “God thing” for us.

The hard part hasn’t been to be a church that does church differently than most churches. Granted it’s been a learning process, and like we have said from the beginning, we don’t claim to have all of the answers, heck, we don’t claim to have very many answers at all. We just know we’re called (some days that’s about all we’re sure of, lol) and we’re doing our very best to keep up with what God is leading us to do.

The hard part hasn’t been finding compassionate, talented, gifted people to be a part of the Emmaus community. We’re finding more and more everyday that God is a master planner, when we come across a need, we’re finding that someone with a heart for that need or a talent in the area of that need is already a part of the community.

While all of those things have at times been challenging, I don’t consider any of them “the hardest thing I’ve ever done.” No the hardest part of this entire process has been learning the difference between my friends and the people who genuinely, truly love me. I used to think they were the same thing, but they’re not, and take it from me, the sooner a person learns the difference between the two, the better.

I knew that my decision to do what I feel like Gad has called me to do would make waves in the culture I was a part of, but I had no idea that I would lose so many friends. And the truth is, if I had known it may have given me cause to reconsider what I was getting ready to do. Like Garth said, “If I’d only known, how the king would fall, then who’s to say, you know I might have changed it all.”

So, I’m glad I didn’t know, because this has been the most profound experience with God that I’ve ever had, it is absolutely what my whole life has been building towards and if I had to do it all over I would “lose” those friends again in less than a heartbeat, because I’ve begun to realize the difference in friends, and the people who love me. Again in the words of Mr. Brooks, “I’m glad I didn’t know the way it would end, the way it all would go; I could’ve missed the pain, but I’d have had to miss the dance.”

Friends come and go but the few people who love you, truly love you, those few people here and there who believe in you… those are the ties that bind. So I raise my glass (pinot grigio) to those friends who’ve gone, and wish them well. But to those who love me, I raise my heart and offer my sincerest gratitude, you have given me hope. Much love, always.

But if there is a problem, how do we fix it?

Do we start to target the cultures or people groups that are not represented in our particular congregation with slick marketing or heartfelt appeals? And if either of those is the answer, why would we target those groups or cultures? Just for the sake of being multicultural? I have to say that many of the “multicultural” churches I’m aware of use the fact that they are “multicultural” as a bragging point; which, to me, makes them seem even less relevant than if they were mono-cultural.

I think a community of believers that includes members from many cultures and nationalities would be a more correct representation of the Kingdom than one that isn’t. However, I also feel that people find strength in communing with other people who’ve faced the same struggles or come through similar adversity, whether they’re black, white, Hispanic or Asian (you can insert any nationality or culture group here, I didn’t leave any out on purpose, I promise).

The Emmaus Church is in a neighborhood that is predominantly a black community, and I’m about as white as they come. I believe that God is building the Emmaus Church and that he is building it right where he wants it, but I have no idea how to begin to call together a “multicultural” community of believers… But then again, we’re really not out to build a multicultural church, we’re out to meet needs and love people, whether they’re black, white, pink, tattooed, pierced, gay, straight, atheist, evolutionist, homeless… you get the point. My concern is that, if we are supposed to be building a multicultural community, this may or may not be the way to get there… at least, this method hasn’t built multicultural churches for a lot of other churches who claim to want the same things we want.

So many people try and define what the Bible is, including me. But where does the Bible talk about itself and clearly define for us what it is? In 2 Timothy 3:16 it says, “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” (NASB). That word, “inspiration,” is pivotal. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Bible is without contradiction and error. I personally believe that we find the voice of God and human beings in scripture. I believe the key is discerning which is which. John Calvin and other Reformers believed that the inner witness of the Holy Spirit is the key in discerning the Word of God.

You may ask how one can make the current translations of Bible less than perfect and yet then believe some of its claims? The answer is simple. Faith. By the way, we all do the same thing. How can you select scriptures and interpretations that support your position on a subject while interpretively explaining away other scriptures that challenge your position? I am talking about scriptures that impact positions like: gifts of the Holy Spirit, women’s roles, sex, tithing, doctrine of the Trinity, baptism, end times, predestination, free will, alcohol consumption, child discipline, musical instruments in church, environmentalism, politics, racism, etc.

There is no end of topics we can divide over and have divided over. It is so ironic that we divide over the Bible when the Bible was made to unite us. And I believe this is conclusive to our misunderstanding of scripture’s place within our traditions. Scripture is not relative, but it is elastic; its truths fit all cultures and all people. God by His Spirit uses the Bible to guide and direct us and reveal His love and purposes, but ultimately it is God’s people that must discern what God is saying today from the text just as Jesus did in His day.

I read this in an article at relevantmagazine.com last night, and I have to say, it makes me nervous. The Bible is inerrant, right? Not the translations we read, I understand that there could’ve been (and probably were) mistakes made when translating the original texts to (insert the name of your version of choice here), but the original texts are inerrant, right?

I believe that the Bible is a difficult book to understand, and that interpretation of scripture is up to us. Somebody, somewhere has to decide what it means and how to live it out… but, at best, it’s still somebody’s interpretation and therefore it’s not inerrant. I get that scripture can be (and has been by many, myself included) misinterpreted… but are we ready to say that the original texts contian errors?

Are we simply engaging an attitude of “realism” with regard to our view of the text? Are we just admitting with “authentic transparency (both trendy words amongst believers)” that the text we believe is “holy,” isn’t? Or that it may be “holy,” just not wholly holy? Or are we taking part in something altogether different and completely wrong by destroying the foundation of our faith, our purpose and even our very existence? And, are we doing it under the banner of “progress” because we want so badly to be accepted by a society who refuses to acknowledge us as legitimate?

Am I wrong or does the whole thing fall apart if the original texts have errors? Maybe I’m just over-reacting, maybe it all wouldn’t fall apart if there were errors in the original texts… I mean, I guess I already believe that there may be discrepancies between actual events and recorded events in scripture. But even that makes me uneasy. I’m not worried that my faith is going to fall apart because it’s been built on an erroneous ancient text, but it does make me a little nervous because… where do you draw the lines?

I don’t think I’m ready to believe that just yet, and it may be a while before I ever (if ever) I do. Don’t get me wrong, I want to know if it’s erroneous in some of it’s parts. I agree with Rob Bell that this is still the best way to live even if it’s not legit, but I believe it is legit… so that’s not a question I really have to answer truthfully.

There are more implications to scripture that isn’t inerrant than I can blog about today, I really wanna hear what everyone has to say about this topic. You can read the entire article @ relevantmagazine.com.