Ed Young's Lifestyle Debacle

Ed Young is in more trouble about his lifestyle and company… ahem, church expenses. WFAA in DFW is reporting about his lavish lifestyle and company expenses. He has issued a response through his public relations firm – no, not a joke – denying any wrongdoing and shifting the blame and focus from himself to WFAA.

If Ed cared about transparency, he would disclose everything. Instead, he is playing the PR game to transfer attention from himself to WFAA. In his public response during a Saturday night church service, he talked about his salary and home as if it was all proper. He never disclosed his salaries (church + $ generated from work for the church + royalties + etc.). His lifestyle is ridiculous and he could/should learn a bunch from Francis Chan about giving to the need. Instead, he lives a lifestyle of extravagance (7,820 sq. ft. home, 1.1 million dollar condo, 8 million dollar leased jet).

Many argue the point, but I agree that his lifestyle is a detrimental issue to his legacy and immediate influence. The problem is that money is a root of all kinds of evil. This situation is sad for The Church, and can undo so much good Fellowship Church has accomplished.

If he is innocent of any wrong doing and is truly above reproach, transparency is his option. If he is guilty, repentance and transparency are his options. Either way, he should man-up and let the truth of the situation set him free… after all, what should a role model for such a huge church have to hide?

The natural response is to ask me if I do the same thing as an associate pastor of a much smaller church; which I do not. However, my family still lives in a starter home, we drive Hondas, and thus avoid question generated from a lifestyle of extravagance. Also, the information about my salary (and any other staff member at my church) is fully and readily available to any church member who requests it.

Here is another post on the subject.

Book Review: Forgotten God by Chan

I thought Crazy Love was crazy good, so my expectation was high for Forgotten God… it did not live up to that expectation for me. While I think Chan is a great man with admirable passion, this book simply did not do it for me.

With that being said, there were some good points in the book. Starting off he throws down intense exegesis (letting the text speak for itself) verse eisegesis (making the text say what you want it to say) explanation which is not only relevant, it is needed. He is dead on accurate with his statements that we tend to leave out the Holy Spirit and rely on what we can do as well. His work has some great thought provoking points as well.

Chapter 6 was my favorite chapter, although the title is a bit abrasive for some in my opinion. So in short, if you want a contemporary view of the Holy Spirit, read this book… Just enter into the pages with a different mindset than that of Crazy Love.

Francis Chan on Taking Jesus Literally

Francis Chan of Cornerstone Church (Simi Valley, CA) discussed taking Jesus literally during Verge Conference’s 1st session (This was reposeted directly from Kent Shaffer and churchrelevance). Here is what he said:

In Exodus 33:15, Moses tells God how much he needs God’s presence to be with him in every moment. If God’s presence wasn’t in it, Moses did not want to be a part of it. The more things God entrusts you with, the harder it gets to focus wanting the presence of God in everything. We get sidetracked by details and our own motives. We get distracted by what others are doing.

If I planned a church based on Scripture, I wouldn’t even think about the gathering. I’d think about the mission. I would look at the Great Commission literally.

It is so weird how we change everything in church. We don’t take Jesus’ words literally. We act like if Jesus says it, we don’t have to actually do it but just memorize it. How many churches are actually making disciples?

If I tell my daughter to go clean her room, she knows better than to come back later with her room still messy and say:

"I memorized what you said.
I can say it in Greek.
A group of friends and I are going to get together and study what you said."

We need to take Jesus literally and do what He says.

I am like a Lego piece. There is nothing great about me, but together we catch people’s attention. No one has ever seen God, but if we as the Body of Christ love each other then people will catch a glimpse of it. It is by our unity and the way we love one another that we will reach people.

I think about the power of Jesus that I would believe in if I just read the Scriptures. Are you sure that you have experienced the Holy Spirit this past year? The early church wasn’t a plan by the disciples. It was the Holy Spirit.

What are the things that Jesus wants? These are the things that we should be confident about. What does it take for us to make disciples and love others? Go on mission. Live like mission.

Liberal and Conservative Worldviews

This week a post of mine garnered much attention on Facebook. While it was about Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts, it turned into more of a conversation (err… debate) on the role of the Bible in determining one’s worldview – specifically in regards to politics. It has been my observation that conservatives use the Bible to define their worldview, values, decision-making, etc.. Conversely, liberals use the Bible when it's not inconvenient to their own personal agenda, at which point they discard it as "out of date" or "culturally irrelevant".

As one might expect, my liberal friends do not agree with my observation. In fact, one of my friends went so far as to say, “conservatives use Scripture to support things that aren't in scripture at all (such as their arguments against abortion) and ignore it in terms of sex education (not just abstinence-only education, which has proven to be ineffectual in greatly reducing unwanted pregnancies).” It is obvious that what is being ignored is any and all teaching on the sanctity of life and the institution of marriage, and God’s provisions for sexual relations.

This leads to the question of how to interpret Scripture, of which there are 2: Exegesis and Eisegesis. Francis Chan explains the two:

Exegesis is an attempt to discover the meaning of the text objectively, starting with the text and moving out from there.
Eisegesis is to import a subjective, preconceived meaning into the text.

I was taught to interpret the Scripture through exegesis alone. Start with God’s Word; pray that the Spirit give you clarity; then study to see what the text actually says.

To me these two means of interpreting Scripture explain the difference between being conservative and liberal… in regards to how we live our lives and view the world.

Thus, for Christians, the Bible, properly interpreted through exegesis, should be the starting point and foundation for your political worldview, and not the other way around or cherry picked to support a particular political policy. Let me also add this is not just about politics, but for the Christian’s worldview in general.